| Author | Message | ||
     Aaron |
I'm missing something ... why does the cam in the valley force the exhaust to come out at any different place? I keep thinking of a sliced off domestic V8. Seems like putting the cam in the valley enables a small little rocker arm, versus our humongous jobs. But it doesn't force the port to be anywhere else. You just put the pushrod next to the port, like a Chevy. AW PS: why do you guys who want OHC so bad still ride Buells? There's bazillions of OHC bikes out there. | ||
| Court |
>>>PS: why do you guys who want OHC so bad still ride Buells? There's bazillions of OHC bikes out there. Hey...wait! You are starting to sound like Court. Why, Dear Lord of all that is wise and worldly.....does a person stand in Baskin-Robbins, cup in hand, griping that "it's not chocolate". Walk 3' and choose, I say, from 17 flavors of Chocolate. Look . . . you and I rank fairly well up the "devoted to Buell" list but you've not surrendered your beloved FXR nor I my coveted BMW or Kawasaki. Think some folks need a "why you ride" lecture as they suffer the agony of being FORCED to deal with.....dare I say it...PUSHRODS! Court | ||
| Lsr_Bbs |
Blake, Granted I'm not up on recent LeMans doings, but doesn't the vette just run against the viper...both pushrod, no OHC competition??? Regardless, so pushrods are doing well in one racing circumstance...what about the other, oh, couple hundred racing events dominated by OHC vehicles? Silly argument. ================== Aaron queries, "PS: why do you guys who want OHC so bad still ride Buells? There's bazillions of OHC bikes out there." Well, for me it really has nothing to do w/ whether it's pushrod or OHC except in relation to the over all product. That is, the blast engine and the related XB engine are new engines for Buell...require new tooling to pay for, etc... Why they constrained themselves w/ the blast design when designing a new engine I'll never see. There's plenty of ways to make a pushrod, aircooled motor w/ more hp...but he should of stepped out of the box on that one instead of fixing the sportsters problems in the blast (now that I've really looked at the blast design a bit - it is just a improved xl motor). Granted, 90hp is adequate for the street, but any marketing flunky can tell you big hp #'s sell bikes...esp. in America. Last I heard, EB still wants to be a large scale manufacturer of motorcycles? If so, he's got to sell lots of bikes. His products have great chassis but a mediocre engine (and that's being kind). If it had 110-120 rwhp and used pushrods, I could care less. He designed nice looking bikes, w/ inadequate and uninspired powerplants...why is he constraining himself? Personally, Cagiva, Bimota or Laverda's business models are a better one than BMC's current situation...let someone else who has the expertice and tooling build the engine...I'll do what I do best and design the great chassis to utilize that engine. BMC being tied to H-D ONLY is a bad thing when your trying to sell sportbikes. I personally don't care whether my next bike is air/oil/water cooled; pushrod/OHC/or friggin little gnomes...what I do want is gorgeous looks, great design, reliable, and at least competative hp w/ other sportbikes. EB has the first 2 down pat...reliability - time will tell...competative hp, not anywhere close. Bandit and ZREX have had 100+ rwhp for how many years? (and doesn't cost near 10K either). any off the shelf repli-racer (whether 600 or 1000cc) has 100+ rwhp. Yes, this has rambled but another point...Ducati's SS model range, around 90hp and a great chassis, and around 10k....they can't give 'em away. I know of at least 3 99-00 models still in the crate for a finally fair price. Neil Garretson X0.5 | ||
| Mikej |
"Why they constrained themselves w/ the blast design when designing a new engine I'll never see." Neil, My thoughts are that the MoCo is doing the economy of scale and reduced production cost game. The Blast rocker boxes are retrofitable to the current M2/X1/S3 from what I understand, and are apparently the same as used on the new XB. So for the rest of 2001 they only have to stock one style of rocker box assembly if they upgrade the M2/X1/S3 to the Blast box stack-up. Look beyond the end result and try to see what they are really doing behind the scenes. Consider what they have done to improve or increase production line productivity, inventory reduction by shared components, reduced engineering by using known components. Consider this just an outsider novice viewpoint, which I'm certain to get slammed for, but it's just what I see when I look at what they've done. Just your basic evolutionary design cycle, work in circles and push each segment of the design along to advance the entire end product bit by bit. What's the cylinder angle of the new water buffalo harley? I still believe they need to do something about the knife/fork pushrods just from talking to the race-engine builders. I really thought the newest engine was going to be 50°-55°, but they found a way to still work with the 45°. Could be "tradition", or by dictate from higher-ups. I like torque-focused engines, just like the big-block 1967 Chevelle I had once, it just feels better to me. As long as they keep making a twin-thumper with basic simple operation then I'll be happy. With H-D Corporate going to the new water cooled engine with the totally-non-traditional framework for a Harley, I think we may finally be seeing the Dinosaur mentality giving way. I think the new H-D is more significant than some realize, I think the XB is a stepping stone, I think the 45° V-Twin will be around for at least a few more design cycles, and I think Buell may be having an effect on the design efforts of the H-D team. Okay, I'm done, don't know if this is relevant to the discussion, don't matter. I was happy with my 45° M2 engine, and am wondering how hard it would be to convert an XB to utilize a carb. F.I. is fine, but I still like a basic carb setup, maybe I've got a little dinosaur in my blood as well.  Uh, one last thing, summer ain't over yet. With the insurance companies dragging their feet on my settlement, maybe that's not totally a bad thing. Who knows what the next few weeks will offer. I'm probably wrong, but the summer of 2001 ain't over yet, and they still have curtains up at the motor plants.  | ||
| Aaron |
I'm still confused ... I'm missing the fundamental point of all this. I mean, hey, if the bikes from one company don't have enough power for someone, and they believe they never will so long as they have "X" design attribute, why not just go buy something else? Why harp on the first company to build it a different way? I don't see the answer to that question anywhere. Don't manufacturers make a wide variety of products because we have a wide variety of tastes? Like Court said, you don't like vanilla, go buy chocolate! Wouldn't the world would be a very boring place if every company made vanilla only? I see this over and over and over, people complaining that the bikes aren't enough like some other bike, and I've never been able to understand it. Personally, I'm GRATEFUL for more choices in the marketplace, and I think we as consumers would lose something if everyone did it the same way. AW PS: the stockish 600cc repli-racers I've seen dyno'ed are generally mid 90's on rwhp. | ||
| Mikej |
Aaron, I think part of it is that people want a "brand X", but also want "brand-X" to build something they don't currently offer, or they want them to do something different with it. Like the Corvette owner (extreamly rare in this case) who just wishes that they'd come out with a mid-engine Corvette to be more competitive, ain't gonna happen. I think, sorry here Neil - nothing personal, people like Neil really want to ride the Buell, but also want some of what they see in other models, but they don't want the other models, they just want what the other models offer only in a Buell. If Buell came up with some totally whacky custom order option, like the paint scheme, only with engine choices as well, then they'd have something. Walk in and choose your paint color scheme, your seat configuration, your fairing option if any, and your engine option. Imagine if they had four engines to choose from, all interchangable with plug-n-play commonality. Just hang the engine of choice in the frame, connect up three wire harnesses, hook up the gas lines, slip the belt onto the pulley, and go ride. I don't see why this couldn't work, apart from a logistics and inventory point of view, and the fact that the dealerships would probably have heart attacks trying to deal with it. I could easily see a single 500cc, a single 600cc, a twin 984cc, and a twin 1187-1304cc engine, all with fairly-quick bolt-in common mount points. And if the "rumor" of the water-cooled engine bolting right into the XB is true then they could offer a 5th engine option. Why not? MikeJ (Okay, that enough fuel, now where's the match.) | ||
| Anonymous |
The Sputhe motor uses stock HD heads installed rotated 90 degrees in order to meet the pushrods in the valley. The heads can be two fronts or two rears or one of each. The selection will determine the location of the ports. | ||
| Aaron |
Mike: so you're saying it's brand loyalty that makes people scream for brand-X to build what they want instead of just going out and buying brand-Y? Hmmm, okay. Seems like a very emotion-based position, but then again, motorcycles are a very emotional thing. Ya'know, I like cruisers. Like'em a lot, in fact, I chose one this morning for ride-to-work day. But you know how I like Buell. Should I harp on Buell to make crusiers? Seems like if I'm brand loyal, I should. I dunno, I think Matt the college kid got it right. You want a repli-racer, sell your Buell and go buy a repli-racer. If Buell comes out with a repli-racer some day, then sure, compare it to the other repli-racers out there and buy it if it's the one you want. AW | ||
| Aaron |
Anon: thanks ... sounds to me like the funky exhaust exit location is a function of trying to re-use the HD head. And it seems like they lost some of the advantages of putting the pushrod in the valley by doing that ... in particular, they lost the ability to reduce the size of the rocker dramatically. | ||
| Mikej |
Yep, that's my take on it. I like "road bikes" based on my opinion of what a road bike is, and my M2 as I had it configured fit the bill very well. Worked great locally, and worked great to hop on and head 2,500 miles across the country. Only thing that would have made it better would have been a huge rear bumper (maybe I need to start towing a trailer on road trips?). My use of a cruiser would be met by anything from your FXR or a Dyna-glide or RoadKing or an S3T or a BMW or many others. Me, personally, I look at what I do with it, not at what it is. A bike's a bike, I just happened to prefer my M2. So, in summary, just like jobs, the grass is always greener in the other pasture, but the fence is better in yours. Home is home, I think people are just complaining because they don't like what's in the refrigerator. Or in this case, they like the XB or other Buell, they just want something more or different from the engine output. With the XL-based engine format being so configurable there are many people with the funds to do so who instead of complaining are just enhancing their engine into what they want out of it. The gentleman out in California is a prime example of this (Q's grandpa, forgot his name), tons of power in his bike if I remember right. In the last 3 weeks I've heard at least 40 different people being told by service department mechanics to keep their V-Twin idle set at 1000 rpm, regardless of the fact that the owners wanted it set lower to enhance the "sound". We live in a sphere of choices and preferences, and sometimes the closer we get to one region of the sphere (45° v-twin and high torque feel) the farther we get from other sometimes desired choices within the sphere (9,000+ rpm redline). I say decide what is important to one's self, then find what's available that best fits. Today you rode the FXR, tomorrow maybe the S2. Why? Just because you felt like it, no other reason necessary. A 9,000rpm 45° v-twin in an XL format engine case is possible, but at what cost, and what will the final dyno-curves look like. Matt's no dummy, but I was surprised to hear he was selling his Buell. But, as I said, he decided what he wanted and chose from what's available. | ||
| Lsr_Bbs |
Aaron, Let's see...this is MY point of view, have no idea what others think and will not speak for others. 1) The Blast and XB engine development and related new motorcycles (blast and firebolt) are obviously ground-up designs. I like the designs (as a whole - course there are nits to pick, but that's with any bike) but feel in this day and age that 90 crank hp is sub-par...no matter how it's cooled or what the valve geometry is! Your right, bringing up repli-racers as comparisons is wrong, which is also why I mentioned Bandit and ZREX as both are meant and designed as Street bikes...nothing else, and should be Buell's most-direct competitor. 2) To clarify a bit more, I really like Buell's chassis setup (tube perimeter frame especially). I like the looks. I think they're underpowered (and over priced but that's another debate). Many people think they're underpowered or else there wouldn't be the hop-up aftermarket that there is! 3) If people like me don't speak up, and it's only the Court's and Aarons (who are pro-Buell to a fault) that speak up and say the product is fine like it is...there will be no product improvement! I've yet to see either Court, or yourself, really criticise Buell - in any manner. Constructive criticism is good, and I try to offer my criticism as such...not stupid "Buell's suck" crap like others....otherwise I wouldn't spend the time typing these messages (I hope and pray the BMC folks troll these boards for customer feedback). 4) Again, I like Buells (as a whole) and think the firebolt/blast marks steps in the right direction - esp. for EB to fulfill his desire as a major mfgr. However, I feel that the engines are underpowered and show and distinct lack of "out of the box" thinking that he's known for. EB is a engineer, right? Does that necessarily mean he should design engines? One of the brilliant things behind EB designs is that his engine packaging allows him to hang the engine where he wants...which means he should have MUCH MORE FREEDOM in engine design. Yet, we're still seeing product evolution, not revolution like the rest of the bike. 5) Mikej is right and I agree 100% that some, if not the majority, of these engine desions are being made by accountants for various economic reasons....and it shows in an un-inspired, under performing engine choice in an otherwise innovative and inspired motorcycle. To each his/her own. I don't see where anyones suggesting that buell build bikes different from what they are...just more hp, maybe more engine refinement, more reliability, etc... A fairing is nothing but plastic hung on a bike, doesn't make the totality of the machine. Neil Garretson X0.5 | ||
| Ralph |
Aaron, damn fine point. Why? (1) 'Cause I'm always spoiling for a fight (conversation, whatever) and what better way to pick one. (2) Great way to learn more stuff (you'll notice I titled this page "Strenghts and Weaknesses", not "Ralph picks on harmless motor". (3) Mr Buells bikes are so close to being my idea of perfect it drives me bonkers! The only thing missing is a rather key element. And that key is still missing. Power. Thanks 'nonymous for the info on Sputhes motor. Anything else to add? We're listening. Your Royal Blakeness, I can absolutly understand your point on vibration and am certain its totally valid. If I know nothing about cranks shaft design I know even less about vibration in motor design. However (yup, always a "however") I'm just as certain an answer could be found for problems rising from that. Just as certain as I am that there would be no problem positioning the exhaust in a better area on a purpose built head for a Sputhe type motor. Mikej, please take a shot it dark at the price of Quentins grand-dads motor. Or if you'd like, take a shot in the dark about the price of mine. I'll let you know if you come close. This is not about a manufacture making a product that can be upgraded at huge expense. bighairyralph | ||
| Mikej |
BHR, I'm going to guess it breaks down something like: Heads or headwork = $1,000 - $2,500 Cylinders = $900 - $1,500 Crank&Rods & balance work = $800 - $2,000 Engine case work = $500 - $2,000 Clutch, cams, other externally accessible parts = $500 - $1,500 Carb and intake parts and work = $500 - $1,500 Tranny upgrade and tweaks (Andrews anybody?) $500 - $2,500 ==== Grand total = $4,700 - $13,500 I'm probably way high in some of the estimates, but am basing on the shop doing the work also doing the labor and assembly. Also, I didn't cheat and do a search thru the archives. So, although that's a wide range, am I in the neighborhood? I do know that one place race engine builders focus is on the knife/fork rods. Them things look nasty when they get stretched and ovaled out. Which is why I'd really like to see the XB rods compared next to the 2001 Buell rods. MikeJ (remembering that a good motor build costs about the same as a second stock bike) | ||
| Aaron |
Neil: you seem to think my comments were directed at you ... not so, more to whole general clamor I hear over OHC and liquid cooling. Anyhoo ... so your view is that they dropped the ball with respect to power on this new bike? They had an opportunity and they blew it? The way I see it, they targeted 600 OHC multi class performance, and they chose to do it with a 1000c pushrod twin. Probably a whole bunch of reasons behind that decision. Personally, I'm reluctant to second guess the decision or the results, particularly since I haven't ridden the bike. Power is important to me, too. It's one of a whole bunch of things that are important to me. So is serviceability, and handling, and looks, and parts availability, and aftermarket support, and resale value, and sound, and the way the bike feels when I ride it, and about 50 other things. I try to look at the bikes on balance, and evaluate it as a whole as compared to the other offerings on the market. And their formula is succeeding with me. Fine like it is? When did I say that? With respect to the current bikes, I've been saying I want more top-end power since the day I got my first one. With respect to the new bike, like I said, I'll withhold judgement until I ride it. They won't improve the bikes without our criticism? Do you really believe that? You don't think they have a whole bunch of smart folks up there who are passionate about motorcycles and looking for ways to make better ones? You don't know them too well. Sure, I'll provide feedback about what I think could be better. But I sure as hell won't tell them to go clone some other bike. I hear that a lot, and it baffles me. Why not just go buy the other bike instead? I don't think anyone at Buell, not even Erik, would try to say these bikes are right for everyone. Final point: I think there will always be aftermarket go-fast parts available no matter how much power they give us ... hell, look at the MC Express kits on 'busas. AW | ||
| Lsr_Bbs |
They won't improve the bikes without our criticism? Do you really believe that? You don't think they have a whole bunch of smart folks up there who are passionate about motorcycles and looking for ways to make better ones? You don't know them too well. Nope, guess not. They don't send me groovy gifts and other •••• like you and Court. They don't bother to come to the SE for any events, even the ones they sponsor (with the exception of Daytona). Comparing models to 600cc supersports??? Jeez, for 10k, I'd want more performance than that...oh, here we go again. Hell, I was at least being realistic w/ comparos to Bandit/ZREX. If they don't listen to the consumers criticism they're destined to failure akin to IBM's in the 80's! It's that kind of narrow-minded arrogance that got under my skin w/ my first dealings w/ BMC corporate...maybe it's a yankee thing that just pisses off us southerners??? Neil Garretson X0.5 |
