| Author |
Message |
    
Glitch
| | Posted on Saturday, September 20, 2008 - 11:44 pm: | 
|
Heck, the SV650's give XB12R's a run for their money on the track!
Must be a case of rider vs bike.
I've shredded more than a few SV650s.
Not doubting you, only the riders. |
Glitch
| | Posted on Saturday, September 20, 2008 - 11:50 pm: |
|
|
Jramsey
| | Posted on Saturday, September 20, 2008 - 11:58 pm: |
|
Glitch
I appreciate the link,but I like others ? on this forum were not raised/groomed in the computer generation, self inflicted or not.
14 months ago I bought my first PC and to this day still trying to teach myself to type.
I can set up and bore a set of cases for 88" in about the same amount of time it took me to type this reply.
Would gladly trade any of my Machine/Welding/Fab shop skills for pc skills.
Thanks
James |
Redbuelljunkie
| | Posted on Sunday, September 21, 2008 - 12:01 am: |
|
Glitch- you are correct, the XB is very limited by a low redline caused by the antiquated valve/head design. But it's also due to the inefficiency of being air-cooled and the limitations of heat generation/dissipation. Of all the air-cooled engines I've owned (Buell, Ducati, BMW) having pushrods, two valve, four valve, desmodromic, chain-driven cams, crank-driven cams, 7,100 redline, 9,500 redline to no redline at all- the highest crank horsepower was 122. The average was just over 100hp... that's with displacements of 992, 1170 and 1203. That's about on par with the average hp of a modern 600cc I-4 that's liquid cooled. I understand the reciprocating mass difference, but one cannot discount the limitations caused by air-cooling. |
Dc29
| | Posted on Sunday, September 21, 2008 - 12:15 am: |
|
I'm in the same boat with Jramsey. |
Ironken
| | Posted on Sunday, September 21, 2008 - 01:15 am: |
|
The revs are less because of the valve/head design.
piston velocity has a lot to do with redline as well, these things have a pretty long stroke compared to a Honda CBRXXXRRFI2 or whatever the hell the alphabet soup is this year |
Nik
| | Posted on Sunday, September 21, 2008 - 01:58 am: |
|
It's rather complicated, and I don't claim to be an engineer or a physics genius, but basically heat is wasted energy in a less efficient engine. Because of the differences in heat transfer to air and liquid, a liquid-cooled engine transfers heat more efficiently and therefore wastes less "power" dissipating heat than an air-cooled design. Air-cooled designs must have a large surface area for air to travel over in order to dissipate heat, and that presents several design limitations. This is why a 1203cc air-cooled v-twin has less power than a modern liduid-cooled 600cc I-4 at half the displacement (along with differences in reciprocating mass and other small details). I'm sure someone here can give you a better explanation than I'm capable of doing.
All engines are air cooled, all liquid cooling does is add an additional medium to transfer heat to a larger heat exchanger than a cylinder, which makes it less efficient. Direct Air cooling is actually more efficient in this regard, but liquid cooling can be designed to have greater heat capacity, and adapt to cooling demand and environmental changes better. I really think thermostat controlled forced air cooling like the XB is the best thing for street use. |
Domindart
| | Posted on Sunday, September 21, 2008 - 03:01 am: |
|
Alot of great info on the buell here guys, thnx!
Does the 2003 sv650 really have 72 hp?
And the 2002 has 68?
I wonder what year sv650 has the most hp, and what it is? |
Domindart
| | Posted on Sunday, September 21, 2008 - 03:14 am: |
|
Thought I already asked this but dont see it on the thread. ..which is the best, what is the difference, 9 or 12?
Ive read on the forum that the 9 revs a bit quicker? the 12 have a better top speed? |
Doubled
| | Posted on Sunday, September 21, 2008 - 04:20 am: |
|
The difference in performance comes from much more than air vs. water cooled and reciprocating mass.
One reason these smaller engines perform better is because they are using a 4 valve per cylinder design versus Buell's 2. The more valves you have, the more surface area you get, and thus, more flow. Engines are simply modified air pumps. The easier they breathe, the better they perform.
Looking into the valve train, the I-4s usually use a DOHC set up versus the Buell's OHV pushrod system. The DOHC, as has been mentioned previously, reduces the reciprocating mass, which in turn, reduces parasitic power loss. Now you may be thinking "Yes, but it has more rotating mass". This is true, but rotating mass (depending on the radius of rotation) is of much less concern than reciprocating mass. It is much easier to get something to spin than to get something to move up and down.
And my final thought (I am getting sick of typing) has to do with the volume of the cylinder. Because of the lesser volume of the I-4s cylinders (9.09 in3 each on a Ninja 600) vs. the V-twin (36.68 in3 each on a Buell 1200) the air/fuel mixture burns faster and more completely (i.e. more efficiently). This is also why the I-4 is a quick revving, top end machine (think fast burn = less push, more snap) and the V-twin is a high torque, bottom end machine (think slow burn = more push, less snap).
Now this in no way explains it all as there are many different variables that lead to the performance differences between the two. I don't have the knowledge to further elaborate so instead of starting to make things up I am just going to stop here.
Hope this cleared some things up.
Cheers!! |
Glitch
| | Posted on Sunday, September 21, 2008 - 08:47 am: |
|
I was wrong (imagine that)
The main reason the XB can't rev as high is because the bottom end can't handle it.
In an XB the crank pin is shared and the cylinders are at 45o therefore you have a lot of mass moving up and down really hard causing much vibration.
A Ducati has a 90o engine and the formation cancels out a lot of the vibration.
The 1125 has a 75o degree and three counter balances canceling out a lot of the vibration.
Like was said before there's a lot more to it...
Ive read on the forum that the 9 revs a bit quicker?
Yes
the 12 have a better top speed?
Yes
The 9 revs higher, faster, and the 12 has more power over all, as well as torque.
The newer 12s rev even slower because they beefed up the bottom end so it could rev a little higher than the older ones.
Do not confuse quicker with faster, or higher.
Confused yet?
The best way to tell which bike is best for you is to go to your nearest or friendliest dealership and test ride both.
You'll need a license with motorcycle endorsement and your helmet.
I like the 9 best, but that's just me, there are others that feel rather passionate about their 12.
James and David, just do as I do, and practice. I wasn't raised with puter skills either. When it all started I was a ultra sonic welder tech, and an injection mold supervisor. Neither were very complicated, and took wrenches to adjust and set up.
Just read this
http://www.badweatherbikers.com/buell/board-instru ctions.html
Or wing it. BadWeB is a most helpful place, so feel free to ask questions, read and have fun. After all, we're all here to help one another, except for a very few. |
Werewulf
| | Posted on Sunday, September 21, 2008 - 03:30 pm: |
|
the 08 xb has a larger crank... why did the factory do this, as i never herd of buells having a fragile bottom end..or did it? |
Glitch
| | Posted on Sunday, September 21, 2008 - 06:54 pm: |
|
the 08 xb has a larger crank...
So it can rev higher than 6800 |
Dynamicpress
| | Posted on Sunday, September 21, 2008 - 08:00 pm: |
|
I have both a SV1000 Naked and Buell TT
I thought the SV was cool till I got the Buell.
The SV 1000N has a lot of power about 115 - 120 hp looks really cool , Handles OK.
The Buell Handles great, Has good fun power, sounds great with the race muffler
very unique bike. It's just a fun bike to have.
|
Xl1200r
| | Posted on Monday, September 22, 2008 - 09:42 am: |
|
Glitch- you are correct, the XB is very limited by a low redline caused by the antiquated valve/head design. But it's also due to the inefficiency of being air-cooled and the limitations of heat generation/dissipation. Of all the air-cooled engines I've owned (Buell, Ducati, BMW) having pushrods, two valve, four valve, desmodromic, chain-driven cams, crank-driven cams, 7,100 redline, 9,500 redline to no redline at all- the highest crank horsepower was 122. The average was just over 100hp... that's with displacements of 992, 1170 and 1203. That's about on par with the average hp of a modern 600cc I-4 that's liquid cooled. I understand the reciprocating mass difference, but one cannot discount the limitations caused by air-cooling.
It's kind of already been addressed, but the power limitations are because of the bore/stroke ratio, not the cooling method. The "antiquated" head design of the Buell is actually better matched to the rest of the engine than a DOHC 4 valve head would be.
Ever wonder why a Corvette still uses push rods and an "outdated" 2 valve head?
And as far as effeciency goes, yeah - more heat is wasted energy, but that doesn't translate to less energy put out to the wheel. Your physics are pretty far off. A liquid-cooled engine is trying to produce just as much "wasted heat" as an air-cooled engine, but it has a better way of maintaining a cooler temp. All the energy you're saving by not creating excess heat is used up by pushing coolant around an engine and bleeding that heat off to the atmosphere through the radiator.
Harley has been building air-cooled V-Twins for a long time. The heat isn't an issue for them. |
Xb12mel
| | Posted on Monday, September 22, 2008 - 11:01 am: |
|
Adding my 2¢ worth, kinda "johnny come late", but as the proud owner of an Xb12 who commutes every chance I can on my bike, I don't think you can go wrong with choosing the Buell. This thing rips up commuter traffic and shines on the weekend ride too!
And if your worried about all your Zuki friends leaving you on the slab, just get a Drummer, K&N Filter and either a race ECM or get a race map. My ricer brothers were leaving me too until I added the goodies... now I don't have the *um* "stones" to keep it open much past 120 (so it ain't the bike)
Plus I get the added benefit of talking crap when they slow down the ride through the twisties (what little we have here)
In a place like GA you've got more then enough roads to punish them on if they really want to start giving you a hard time about the ride on I85!
As for the heat issue... once your fitted with a proper pair of Leather riding pants, you won't even notice it anymore.
Finally... go with your gut, there's nothing worse then making a decision with your head only to realize later that your gut choice would have been better. deep down, you know what you really want... you're just looking for justification. |
Hr_puffinstuff
| | Posted on Monday, September 22, 2008 - 11:32 am: |
|
i have worn out 3 suzukis (no SV), as well as a couple of Hondas, a Kawi and a Yamaha.
my 08 XB12Ss is a better bike than any of them. no valve adjustments, no belt adjustments, just make sure it's full of oil and air, and hit the road.
stable as a table, sexy as a drunken prom date, and enough torque to make me grin every time i see the other side of a corner.
my only regret is not buying one sooner |
45_degrees
| | Posted on Monday, September 22, 2008 - 07:12 pm: |
|
My first Buell was a 2003 XB9S. Loved it and thought I’d have it forever! Sold it to buy the 2006 XB12Ss... liked it at first but then I started to miss my 9. I sold the 9 to my friend so we were riding around a lot together and the 12 wasn’t much faster at all. The 12 jumped out just a little bit at first but the 9 stayed right on it’s tail. I liked the engine character of the 9 better and I hated the 12 Long’s extra wide bloated frame (I personally think a V-twin bike should have a narrow and slim look to it, which the SV does indeed have!). The Buell’s are reliable but if you decide to get one, first check to see if the dealer near you will support their customer.
That is the only thing about Buell that sucks... lousy dealer support. Good ones are rare and the nearest one to me (1.5 hour ride) are A-holes! That is the main reason I sold my XB to get what I'd been wanting ever since they came out... the SUZUKI SV1000S! I bought it just recently... a 2007 in blue... very sexy, especially with the twin mufflers... I know it’s against Buell philosophy, but they just look so nice! 2007... last of the Mohicans!
So... now I have good ground to make a comparison... I actually like the SV better and I love it more than my XB12Ss. I think I love it almost as much as my 9S, but the 9 had more of a sentimental and awe factor because it was so radical back then and it was so different feeling when I first got on it. I wish I still had the 9, but I don’t miss the 12 at all. I miss the belt drive and the hydraulic lifters on both of them, but I'll only have to check the SV’s valves at 15K or so and even then, a lot of people find they don’t need adjustment. I can deal with chains, but belts are better. With the SV, I will deal with a chain because I like the bike better overall. I think the SV is VERY good looking (especially the '07 blue). Believe it or not, more people have been asking about my SV then they ever did about my Buells... I mostly think because they just didn’t know what to think about the styling on the XBs... you really have to like motorcycles and appreciate them to understand and love the look of them, especially the Lightning and now in particular, the 1125 and CR models. The 1125 looks pretty good in red though I think. The STT was just ugly and a dump idea in my opinion... and now it's gone from the lineup!
Power wise, the SV wins. I really think it makes the kind of power the 1125 does, that is, if the 1125 were a 1000. Give the SV more displacement and I think it’d compare well with the 1125 power wise. Many people love the Suzuki twin and think it’s a fantastic engine! I agree! After 2005 they got more power... almost 125 hp at the crank. The torque is very good down low, even compared to the 12. I’ve had mine up to 150+ mph and I’ve seen (not recommending this) kids on youtube getting up to 170+ mph... claiming stock. Mine was still pulling pretty hard after 150 so I think it might be able to get to 170... It got to 150 really fast too, where it takes a longer stretch for the XB to get to it’s top at around 135. I’m at ~4,600 ft. elevation by the way. I really don’t care about the top speed, but I think it gives a good reference to the power delivery. I think the sound of the SV is better (exhaust wise). It sounds like a mini V8 when I’m riding it, but the Buell sound is also awesome. Smoothness... SV. Handling is good on the SV, but I need to dial it in still. My 9 was better, but I think the SV could compare to the 12 long (after I get it dialed in). The SV has fully adjustable suspension and it’s not bad at all. Most people would not be able to tell the difference if they were to go to the trouble and expense to put USD forks on it. Afterall, it does have a thick 46 mm fork. It’s a street bike and I think it’s a damn good one, just like the XB is. It’s a shame the SV1000 got canned because I think it’s an awesome bike! I was looking forward to a second generation!
Fuel mileage... XB wins... I got about 52 with both XB’s and I get about 44-46 with the SV.
Headlights on the SV1000S rule! They are great! Both on at the same time too! The SV is just sexy looking. Very under-rated and under-appreciated bike the SV is... I’ve always thought they were cool.
Personally, I would recommend the SV if you find your local Buell dealer sucks. But if they’re cool, try the Buell. They are fun machines. I loved my XB’s and now I love my SV! There is one thing about the SV though... if you get an S version the riding position puts a lot of weight on your wrists. I got use to it after a while, but a put a Spiegler/LSL superbike handlebar conversion setup on it anyway... huge difference and the riding position is now very comfortable for long journeys.
BTW- My SV is my 30th motorcycle.
(Message edited by 45 degrees on September 22, 2008) |
Rpm4x4
| | Posted on Monday, September 22, 2008 - 08:41 pm: |
|
There is something about a Buell that any motorcyclist can see. You can see it in there eyes and the way they treat it. I still find it odd that when I ride in a group of mixed bikes, people tend to end up standing around the Buell. An SV1000 is a forgetable bike. The Buell is an iconic bike that no one forgets.
Don't let HP numbers fool you. The Buell is no slug. I have never been more than an arm lengths away from any rice bike in a straight line drag up to 100mph. After that I don't care, its unusable speed. All I currently have is an aftermarket exhaust. The Buell has the most usable power for real world riding. |
Glitch
| | Posted on Monday, September 22, 2008 - 09:17 pm: |
|
Good write up Mack. |
Wile_ecoyote
| | Posted on Tuesday, September 23, 2008 - 12:37 am: |
|
45_dgrees has said it best. Read and then reread his post. I have a 2002X1 and now a 2000 TL 1000. Yeah, not an SV but same motor. I will like to add however that the Buell out handles my TL any day any way anywhere. That said, the TL is a great bike. I love it almost as well as the Buell. Why do I have both? Good question, got a sweetheart deal on the TL and thought what the hell. Now, I find the TL way more comfortable than the X1 but that can be solved. Iam in the process of taking care of that 2x4 posing as a seat on the Buell. Okay, so its not an SV but close enough. Issues with quality have been nill as my X1 is rock solid so far. The Zook is also but only had it for a season now. Did I mention to read 45_degrees post? |
Wile_ecoyote
| | Posted on Tuesday, September 23, 2008 - 12:42 am: |
|
Oh yeah, dont hate a tuber guy for chiming in on an XB thread. I love them all, thats why I have six bikes. Ride hard be safe. |
Domindart
| | Posted on Tuesday, September 23, 2008 - 01:01 am: |
|
Having not ridden either bike yet, and having read all the posts in my couple of threads at different forums, I STILL want a buell more than a SV1000. Having NOT RIDDEN yet. |
Figitt
| | Posted on Tuesday, September 23, 2008 - 06:28 am: |
|
Ive owned both more than once over. Lets adress the real issues.
SV- lighter and normal clutch pull.
-reliability like no other. Parts dont fall off this bike.
-Rock solid performance with power that goes on and on. No scary low end flywheel torque like the Buell
-Parts shared with many other Suzuki models, forks, brakes, wheels, etc. Easy to find what you need and cheap.
Buell- personality against all odds.
-poor longevity under stress
-poor dealer support. poor parts avail
-engine heavy, slow, weak, but has personality.
-looks MUCH better than most bikes.
-great sound
-its a Harley after all.
So with all that said... you can see that liking the Buell is not about the numbers or the numbers of headaches. There is alot more to owning one than that. I always say, if you compare numbers then dont talk to me anymore, you just dont understand. If owning a reliable bike with a great warantee and service department is high on your list, then buy a Honda. |
Glitch
| | Posted on Tuesday, September 23, 2008 - 07:11 am: |
|
-poor dealer support. poor parts avail
Poor dealership support is not buell exclusive.
I've not had to look hard for poor support from any brand of bike.
But then again, I've only been riding for 35 plus years.
Poor parts availability?
I have no idea what you're talking about.
I've no issues what so ever finding any parts I need.
-engine heavy, slow, weak, but has personality.
Heavy, possibly, but add on the radiator and it's contents and you'll be close to the same. The radiator not part of the engine? Try doing without it.
Slow? Personal preference maybe, but they win races. They're is more than ample power for the street. They are after all street bikes.
Weak? see above.
-reliability like no other. Parts dont fall off this bike.
The XB is the most reliable bike ever. No parts falling off.
-Parts shared with many other Suzuki models, forks, brakes, wheels, etc. Easy to find what you need and cheap.
Why do you think they call the Buells Legos?
-its a Harley after all.
Nope, it's related though, and that also happens to be a good thing to most.
So you win on the clutch, but even if it's cable I have no issues with clutch pull or action. |
Packrat
| | Posted on Tuesday, September 23, 2008 - 09:32 am: |
|
Seems to me that there are a few folks here that honestly should find a good SV board,,to share their love of the suzuki's!!! I'm here cause I think Buells are great...not to talk about how much better the non-american bikes are...YMMV. |
Figitt
| | Posted on Tuesday, September 23, 2008 - 10:05 am: |
|
I suppose that various people here are quite competitive about thier Buells, and very opinionated on the same subject. It was stupid for someone to post here asking about a suzuki in the first place.... I do agree on this. I took the subject of the orignal message to request an unbiased opinion of the 2 bikes. Is there really such a thing as an unbiased opinion..? Certainly not when asked on here. Buell has been compared to other sport bikes for years, and it has rarely come out to the good in any comparison. (tho better now than years past)
My point was in the last lines of my previous message.... if you have to ask then you will never understand. If you compare by the numbers then you wont get the answer you are looking for.
I currently own an XB and various other sport and touring bikes, and felt i could offer some to the questions asked. The TL was one of my favorites as was my 96 Buell. |
Acejay
| | Posted on Tuesday, September 23, 2008 - 10:36 am: |
|
i love my buell, its great to ride when its running good. but if you want an honest answer, there is alot about it that pisses me off about a brought from new FI bike. mines just out of warranty and i'm currently thinking about whether i want to keep it around any more. something like an SV is on my list of bikes to look at.
- its had faulty brake pads that disintegrated and destroyed the rotor, dead fan, broken belt and a big oil leak.
- when the engine is cold it runs like poo, i live near a freeway, and for the first 10-15 minutes of riding i have to vary the rpm constantly or else it misfires and stumbles.
- when it rains it misfires.
- in the city on hot days (30+) it pings like a bitch. i thought it was going to explode on one particular day.
again, unreal bike to ride, but most of these are common problems and theres some chance you will experience them too. |
Rpm4x4
| | Posted on Tuesday, September 23, 2008 - 06:40 pm: |
|
- when the engine is cold it runs like poo, i live near a freeway, and for the first 10-15 minutes of riding i have to vary the rpm constantly or else it misfires and stumbles.
- when it rains it misfires.
- in the city on hot days (30+) it pings like a bitch. i thought it was going to explode on one particular day.
All of these things can be related to poor gas. Buells do require good high octane gas. I found a local station that sells 93 octane fuel without ethanol and my bike runs like a dream on it. For those times when I could'nt get the quality of fuel my bike desires I add an octane booster. Any time my bike has given me an attitude I did not like, I add a little octane booster and all is well again. |
Acejay
| | Posted on Wednesday, September 24, 2008 - 10:12 am: |
|
yeah i always run it on 98 octane BP ultimate, which has the consensus around these parts as being the best bike fuel. (which in the states is called 93 or 95 i think)
but if it ever has to have 91 octane in it, wow........ ping city. |
|
