| Author | Message | ||
     Ducxl |
Bianchi,Morini,And Tamburini have designed some great framesets to be sure.And the Resurrected Tesi is a work of art.But these things were not meant to be massed produced as Buells are. Mantel piecesAbsolutely.But with well chosen engines.As a committed Buell owner I have engine ENVY. | ||
| Indy_bueller |
}Why can't we evolve a stinking engine! Because it takes time to design, test, and prove an engine design. You don't just whip up a totally new engine in AutoCad, punch an example out on a 5 axis CnC machine, and throw it into production. No, I'm not an engineer, and I don't know EXACTLY what it takes. But common sense tells me it would take at least a couple of years, even if you have several people working on it full time. Now take into consideration that Buell is small by comparison to H/Y/S/K, and has much smaller budgets to work with. | ||
| 07xb12scg |
Who did Buell copy? ZTL in a production sport bike NEVER existed before Buell. As stated, the NAS showed up with ZTL around the same time as the original 9R, the difference is Buell's system was in production at that point and Honda was(is) still in the concept stage. I was talking perimeter brakes in general. Buell wasn't the first to use perimeter brakes so obviously they had to "copy" that idea from somebody else. ZTL is just Buell's type of a perimeter braking system. Just because this Honda has a perimeter brake doesn't mean they copied Buell. I heard Buell was the first to have inverted forks on a production motorcycle? Is this true, Court? Japanese dirt bikes have had inverted forks for a while. So maybe Buell was the first to put inverted forks on production street motorcycles, but they weren't the first to put them onto a production motorcycle. | ||
| Thepup |
The 1990 Suzuki GSXR750 had inverted forks,Buell and Yamaha had them on the 1991 model year.Suzuki had inverted forks first. | ||
| Court |
We had this discussion a while back and I **think** (working from memory) it was the 1989 GSXR model year. I could write everything I know about GXSR's on the inside of a matchpack with a can of spray paint. Altima02 - That'll teach you to ask a question on badweb!  (Message edited by court on July 03, 2007) | ||
| Spike |
Court either lives in a world of massive matchpacks, minuscule cans of spray paint, or gross exaggeration. I'm not sure which it is, but maybe he'll tell us about it in his book. | ||
| Teddagreek |
There are so many ways to to get around patents and still achieve the same results.. | ||
| Ducxl |
Ducati did it to Honda with the original 916 single sided swingarm.Honda lawyers came a knocking over their RC model's single sided swingarm.Ducati's lawyers pointed to their own version originally on their scooter. | ||
| Tommy_black_shark |
I spent a day on a Bimota exploring Mt. St. Helens. I'm curious, since Buell sells motorcycles for a living, how many other folks, here on badweb, have ridden more than 100 miles on a Bimota? You get my point . . . neat idea, fun bar talk . . . but Bimota has never been a viable contender beyond the mantel piece market. Please correct me if I am wrong. We're talking about innovation here, not the conglomerating of various parts . . . a discipline in which Bimota clearly exceled. I have a '91 Dieci. Talk about liter engine in a 600 frame, this was the first. Long before the Honda 900RR. You've already mentioned the Tesi's, so that system (unique in its own right, and) ahead of the Yamaha RADD front end doesn't need further discussion. I'm not a student of Bimota, but to imply that they are just a conglomeration of parts is to severely understate their impact on motorcycle design. Interestingly, I was going to mention Bimota in a response to a thread over the weekend about Buell developing its own engine. As we know, Bimota went from success to defunct as a result of the failed V-Due engine. Of course they didn't have the resources of mother Harley behind them so the analogy was not appropriate. Bimota was OK when they didn't worry about engines beyond tuning. They got engines from (mainly) the JPNese, the JPNese got ideas. Fortunately, many of them couldn't be implemented in the mass production atmosphere of JPN Inc. | ||
| Blake |
"ZTL as a concept existed way before Buell adapted them to motorcycles and patented it. Look at old racing bicycles with ultra light wheels and caliper brakes acting on the rim..." You are correct. But Buell invented the floating disk system that works and that is sufficient for a sporting motorcycle. If they had used a set of big rubber pads to squeeze the rim like a bicycle, you'd have a point. The Buell ZTL patent is ground breaking stuff, and Buell engineers did indeed invent it, develop it, and not just make it work, but make it work well. Can you imagine how light the front end will be with a forged wheel and ceramic disk? | ||
| M1combat |
Keep in mind that "ZTL" means "Zero Torsional Load". Other users of the system failed to recognize that there was no torsional load and didn't take advantage of it. The mounting system for the rotor is also part of the patent. The competitor will need to find a significantly different way to mount the rotor while still having it flex and until the patent runs out they cant actually take advantage of the reduced unsprung mass in the wheel. Their wheel will need to be able to handle the torque path of a conventional brake setup. Perimeter mounted rotors in brake systems have been around for some time for sure. ZTL has not. | ||
| Thepup |
M1,I could find nothing when I did a patent search of a patent that would not allow any other manufacturer to take advantage of a perimeter mounted brake.I found 2 patents for the Buell front wheel and they mention nothing about how loads are tranfered,they were basically about the look of the wheel.They do have a patent on the mounting of the disc,but there are ways around that. | ||
| Djkaplan |
"I spent a day on a Bimota exploring Mt. St. Helens." I was at the lodge at Mt. Hood last year, and saw an RG500 Suzuki Gamma parked there. It's the only one I've ever seen in person. | ||
| M1combat |
Then you can't read well or there are more . | ||
| Court |
saw an RG500 Suzuki Gamma Likely belongs to the guy on the right in the read and black leathers. . . SCARY BIKE to ride! Photo was taken the day I flew to Portland to ride it.  | ||
| Thepup |
M1,I know how to read just fine,how many times have I proven you wrong?I have most likely done it again.Just because you have read it on here doesn't mean it's true. | ||
| Imonabuss |
That's because you can't read a patent, pup. | ||
| Thepup |
"That's because you can't read a patent, pup." Erik,I can read a patent just fine,guess what so can those patent lawyers that find a way around other patents.Buells patents I read about torsional load have to do with 6 spoke wheels,guess what,5 spoke or 3 spoke or any number of spokes would not infringe on Buell's 6 spoke patent. (Message edited by thepup on July 04, 2007) (Message edited by thepup on July 04, 2007) | ||
| Blake |
"I can read a patent just fine" Reading is one thing. Actually understanding how carefully worded technical and legal language protect a particular intellectual property is quite another. Are you really qualified to analyze patents in the field of mechanical engineering? Is that what you are claiming? FYI: The man's name is "Harvey." See, you can't even properly understand a BadWeB user profile. "They do have a patent on the mounting of the disc,but there are ways around that." I'm eager to hear your idea of the various ways around the Buell ZTL patent(s) that would produce a good performing, full floating, perimeter mounted brake rotor. Can you do so? It seems unlikely. | ||
| Thepup |
Blake,show me a patent that would not allow another motorcycle company to build a 5 spoke front wheel using a perimeter mounted brake and use it's supposed benefits.Blake are you saying there is no other way to mount a perimeter brake,if you don't think so maybe you aren't the engineer you claim to be.I understand you think us common folk aren't as smart as yourself,guess what there has been a lot of things designed by engineers that were total crap and some things designed and built by everyday people that have been amazing. | ||
| Thepup |
Blake,he can put his name as Harvey in his profile all he wants,doesn't make that his real name. | ||
| Court |
| ||
| Blake |
So is BadWeB's posting space and bandwidth, but there's no stopping these people! You ask a guy to simply back up his claims, and you get something that sounds to me like... "blah, blah, me, me, me, blabbering, blahdeblah, you, you, you, so there!" I'll pose the same question to him again. Care to wager if he'll actually step up to the plate? Hey Pup, "They do have a patent on the mounting of the disc,but there are ways around that." I'm eager to hear your idea of the various ways around the Buell ZTL patent(s) that would produce a good performing, full floating, perimeter mounted brake rotor. Can you do so? It seems unlikely. It seems highly unlikely. Sure does sound simple though, huh. If you desire to turn the topic of discussion to me personally rather than to the point you raised, I can understand why you'd want to do that, but please start another thread for that. Fantasizing about talking to Erik may sour you on the Buell bikes though, might want to harness that before it gets too strange. | ||
| M1combat |
"M1,I know how to read just fine,how many times have I proven you wrong?I have most likely done it again." You'll have to give me a refresher... I don't remember. I vaguely remember once but I certainly don't remember the subject. I'm glad it's your crowning achievement though . I'm always willing to help a guy out you know. WRT the patent about not being able to take advantage of the unsprung mass in the wheel... Keep reading. You've most likely already read it but your blinders keep you from comprehending what it's actually saying. It's not exactly spelled out, but it is indeed iron clad as far as I can tell (but I'm not qualified as such to be a patent examiner... Heck... I didn't even sleep at a holiday inn last night so I'm most likely SOL). WRT the brakes... They may be able to engineer something that puts the rotor more outward of the wheel but keep in mind that they would then need to move the caliper... You'll need to do some pretty serious research into what braking torque actually does at the axle to find that solution to be a potentially problematic one. Then you'll need to apply that knowledge to a different vector anyway so good luck ;). | ||
| Ridrx |
I can't wait to see Pup's new superbike...you are building one , right? It is, after all, so very obvious you are worlds smarter than the guys who have actually designed, developed, patented and produced the ZTL when others could not. Perhaps Buell engineers should just let puppy design all the new stuff for'em, since East Troy doesn't have a clue....Please. Oh, and I doubt seriously that's Erik...I imagine days before the new model release he can find plenty to do without volleying jibba jabba with you about how smart you are and how incompetent Buell is. JMO | ||
| Djkaplan |
"Photo was taken the day I flew to Portland to ride it." What a coincidence, I was in Portland for the Blues Festival (saw Buddy Guy on the first day!). We were taking daytrips out to St Helens and Hood River when I saw the Gamma. I don't think that was the guy in the photo, though, but I bet they knew each other. | ||
| Dbird29 |
Everyone know that Harvey Mushman is Steve McQueen. The channeling from the world of the dead is the tricky part.   | ||
| Thepup |
Ridrx,just where did I say I was smarter than the engineers at Buell?I did say that if there was as much advantage as some on here claim with the ZTL,other manufacturers would find a different way to mount it.I believe just about anyone with a knowledge of motorcycles,could with enough money,build a sportbike.Would it be able to compete in Superbike,no,but neither does Buell.You can pretty much source any part you need to put a bike together,doubt it,see Fisher and Roehr,would these bikes be as refined as the XB line,no where near it,but what company started out with a bike that was great out of the box. | ||
| Thepup |
"You'll have to give me a refresher... I don't remember. I vaguely remember once but I certainly don't remember the subject. I'm glad it's your crowning achievement though : ). I'm always willing to help a guy out you know. " M1,proveing you wrong is really not that difficult,so no, I get no pleasure out of it. "WRT the patent about not being able to take advantage of the unsprung mass in the wheel... Keep reading. You've most likely already read it but your blinders keep you from comprehending what it's actually saying. It's not exactly spelled out, but it is indeed iron clad as far as I can tell (but I'm not qualified as such to be a patent examiner... Heck... I didn't even sleep at a holiday inn last night so I'm most likely SOL). " Since it is not exactly spelled out,then guess what,it's not there.A 5 spoke wheel would have completely different torsional values anyway,so there goes that patent problem." "They may be able to engineer something that puts the rotor more outward of the wheel but keep in mind that they would then need to move the caliper... You'll need to do some pretty serious research into what braking torque actually does at the axle to find that solution to be a potentially problematic one. Then you'll need to apply that knowledge to a different vector anyway so good luck ;)." If a company really seen the advantage it would already be on another bike.I notice a few bikes are using underslung mufflers,I thought there was a patent on that?Thats right,there are ways around that. | ||
| M1combat |
LOL . At least you could spell proving right... Anyway... It's spelled out for someone who can effing SEE AND COMPREHEND IT puppy. Keep ••••••• reading. It has nothing to do with the number of spokes bro... keep ••••••• reading. You might notice that the "under-slung mufflers" on other bikes seem to put everything BUT the actual muffler "under" the bike and the "muffler" is sort of out to the side. WHY? Because they can't put the effing muffler under the bike . They obviously want to though now don't they? Aright then puppy... Out of 8000 some posts on here you pointed out an error in my information once (I think about wet weight which most magazines can't even fricking agree on ). Keep up the good work. A 5 spoke wheel would have completely different torsional values? Splain that to me Lucy... "If a company really seen the advantage it would already be on another bike." Not if the patents are written well they wouldn't... That's the whole reason for a patent. "There are none so blind as those who refuse to see." I'm done with you. I'm not going to point out the statements in the patents that you are missing. If you can't see the advantages of the ZTL system that's on you. If you think there are ways around the ZTL patents and that the rest of the industry "just doesn't see the benefit" then that's on you too but I can promise you that once the patents expire you'll see the entire industry move to a ZTL type setup. There WEREN'T any advantages to it until Buell came along and realized what they were and took advantage of them. Now that the world sees them they will use them as soon as they can. They'll have to. It's better (IMO) and if you disagree... I don't give a flying shag. Whether I give a flying anything or not though... I will not let you hop around on this board spouting the baseless drivel that you do. I'm not saying that everything you say is BS but in my experience I'd say that a good 40% or more of it certainly is. I know you'll take this as an insult but... The fact that you disagree doesn't mean that you are right. |
