| Author | Message | ||
     Blake |
I thought it was very surprising that Ducati dropped the under-tail exhaust. That's been a mainstay signature of theirs for some time. Dropping that in favor of the underslung muffler is a smart move performance wise on their part. | ||
| Bads1 |
Dropping that in favor of the underslung muffler is a smart move performance wise on their part. Give it a rest Blake. Yamaha won with it this year in AMA the year before last in WSB. And Ducati has been winning with several more times. | ||
| Xb984r |
"Ducati has followed Buell's lead in Sport bike innovation, as have many serious sport bike manufacturers. From inverted forks, to underslung mufflers, to offset shock mounting on a competition superbike repli-racer, Buell has been a leading implementor of innovation. " Inverted forks were used by Suzuki before Buell ,I will give you the exhaust although a conventional exaust did not seem to hurt a bunch of bikes that beat the 1190 on the track, offset shock is nothing new and is simply a packaging issue because of a V-twin engine. (Message edited by xb984r on November 15, 2011) | ||
| Ferris_von_bueller |
Some of the people here ought to work as spin doctors in politics | ||
| Rocketsprink |
I think Blake is hoping to get a free 1190 out of this. I can't believe he actually believe some of the crap he's written here. Inverted forks were first used by Buell? Really? You may as well give them credit for inventing the internal combustion engine. | ||
| Trojan |
The rear shock on both Buell's and Ducati's case is achieve better chassis geometry overall combined with good rear suspension geometry. It allows a shorter wheelbase and tighter integration while retaining excellent rear suspension geometry. Better "packaging" (not the word I'd use), meaning better overall chassis design integration, meaning lighter, more compact (mass centralization) etc. also means improved performance. You have been reading too many manufacturers publicity brochures and press releases I think. The real reason for putting a shock to one side is that it simply doesn't fit where they wanted it to go in the first place because there is a large lump of metal in the way. Manufacturers won't very often admit having to compromise though, so they come up with all sorts of techno babble to excuse the fact that they have had to compromise design becaue of space/cost/production issues. Having an offset shock does not give 'better geometry' at all, in fact the geometry is exactly the same as if they used the same shock mounted centrally. If anything it would put unequal stresses on the swingarm which needs to be beefed up to cope. It has nothing to do with 'mass centralisation', is no lighter and does not add to performance. Yamaha, Honda and Ducati have had no performance issues with 'conventionally' mounted monoshocks until now. In the case of both the Ducati and 1190 it is simply to fit the rear cylinder and exhaust into the space available, which necessitated shifting the rear shock somewhere else. Moving it to one side is the simplest/cheapest method without totally redesigning the rear end of the bike, and so is a compromise. In the case of bikes such as the Yamaha MT03 and Kawasaki Ninja 650 it is simply a cosmetic design 'tweek' to make the bike look different to the opposition and has nothing to do with performance at all. We could of course make up some theoretical advantages, such as easier access to adjusters or better shock cooling, but these are not the primary reasons for placing the rear shock where it is and would be only incedental benefits if at all. | ||
| Xb9er |
Give it a rest Blake. Yamaha won with it this year in AMA the year before last in WSB. And Ducati has been winning with several more times. because they can afford racers that can ride a buell blast and beat the competition | ||
| Hybridmomentspass |
now youre just being silly, there is NO WAY a great rider could beat the others in the field of an AMA or WSB race on a buell blast. Unless it had a motor swap. Better Brakes. Better suspension. etc etc etc silly XB9er....  | ||
| Mnrider |
I remember when ATK had the shock on one side way back when. Under seat exhaust makes no sense to me. Hey guys remember this is a Buell forum and we're excited about the 1190 and the great press it's getting even if your not. Why so much hating? | ||
| Rpm4x4 |
Why so much hating? It must be the Minnesota nice in us because I was just thinkin the same thing. Can we at least agree the 1190 and 1199 are both amazing bikes? | ||
| Court |
>>>>Can we at least agree the 1190 and 1199 are both amazing bikes? Welcome to my world . . . that's what I've been saying all along. I just grow weary of hearing folks infer that the Buell is _____(fill in the # you're comfy with) as good as a Ducati. Ducati has been in deep shit for a couple years and I'm thrilled to see this bike and the company heading in the direction that seem to be. | ||
| Blake |
Dana, >>> Yamaha won with (under-tail exhaust) this year in AMA, the year before last in WSB. And Ducati has been winning with several more times. Are you contending that the underslung exhaust offers no performance benefit for the new Ducati superbike? If so, then your logic is false. Your premise is apparently that if championships or races are won absent a certain technical innovation, then that certain technical innovation cannot benefit performance. That premise is of course nonsense. Try again. The pertinent question not what has won or not. The pertinent question on is whether or not a more compact, more mass centralized, better weight-balanced motorcycle offers better racing performance than one that is heavier, less optimally weight-balanced, and less mass-centralized. The answer of course is that mass centralization, reduced weight, and more optimum weight balance is beneficial to racing performance. The use of an underslung muffler configuration was key to achieving all that. It reduces weight, centralizes mass, and it moves the weight balance further forward. In Ducati's case, they went to great lengths to achieve performance benefits. They altered the engine orientation in the chassis; to accommodate that they had to relocate the rear shock mounting to the side, then in turn they also moved the muffler under the engine instead of under the tail. They did all that for the sole benefit of performance while sacrificing major style points and a long held design trademark of the Ducati superbikes, their venerable twin under-tail superbike exhaust. Matt, >>> The real reason for putting a shock to one side is that it simply doesn't fit where they wanted it to go in the first place because there is a large lump of metal in the way. Exactly. The same reason Buell did as well. You've only restated my point. Ducati wanted improved weight balance and mass centralization. The offset shock allowed that. But it had never been done before on a superbike. There are serious issues and challenges in implementing an offset rear shock. Buell proved it could be done and still achieve first rate chassis performance. They were the fist to do so in the class. If Ducati failed to notice that, I'd be very surprised. Ducati's choice was to either lengthen the wheelbase, and/or use less than optimum engine orientation (less than optimum weight balance) or offset mount the rear shock to the side. You've said the same exact thing using different words is all. You just don't care to credit the folks at Buell with implementing that innovative solution before Ducati. I don't get it. | ||
| Bads1 |
Are you contending that the underslung exhaust offers no performance benefit for the new Ducati superbike? No not at all Blake. They won with it. Plain and simple as Honda did as Yamaha. My point is you were surprised.... then you turn around and say it was a smart move.lol You act like these companies have not looked at the underslung exhaust many years ago to see its benefit. Sorry to say but I'm willing bet they have and decided at that point and time it wasn't worth them doing so at the time. Buell first with a inverted fork??? You sure about that ??? | ||
| 2kx1 |
While I don't think that Ducati has copied anything from Buell, I am sure that they and other manufacturers have checked to see why,or reverse engineered alot of what has been done by Buell. Besides all that does anyone know what is coming in the next few months? | ||
| Fast1075 |
What is coming in the near future is "BOLD NEW SPECULATION"  | ||
| Blake |
Dana, >>> No not at all Blake. Good. Then we agree. The underslung muffler offers performance benefits. >>> They won with it. I'm again lost as to the point. Not sure who "they" are in this one either. Buell? >>> My point is you were surprised.... then you turn around and say it was a smart move.lol You act like these companies have not looked at the underslung exhaust many years ago to see its benefit. The discussion ought not to be about me. Start another thread for that if you like. Please. Improving the performance even at the cost of style is a smart move for a racing machine. In terms of racing, how could it not be? I was surprised because Ducati had stuck with the undertail style for so long, and it had become a very distinct and recognizable signature of Ducati's superbike. They had seemed stubornly married to the style feature, so yes, I was surprised to see them abandon it, even for the benefits of an under-slung muffler. Smart folks at Ducati finally over-ruled their style mavens. It was a smart move from the perspective of performance. It's unclear if any serious sport bike manufacturer ever considered using an under-slung muffler before Buell. Doing and achieving is what is knowable and measurable. Buell did it, proved its significant benefits, won races and championships, others noticed. Virtually the entire industry has followed suit at some level. Pretty cool to see some aspects of development in motorcycle racing being led by American engineering and innovation. Don't you think? I guess I don't understand the opposition to that sentiment. | ||
| Buellkowski |
I am sure that they and other manufacturers have checked to see why, or reverse engineered a lot of what has been done by Buell. It has been commented previously on this board that H-D is not currently expending resources to protect Buell technology patents. If that's the case, does that imply that the doors to Buell-like tech are wide open to other manufacturers? | ||
| Bads1 |
Blake, Sorry man I just don't agree with ya will leave it at that. LOL I know I know Buell did it all.lol Give me a frigg'n break. I love what they have done but wow.... do you eat the peanuts out of Buell's $HIT.I'm a fan but I'm a fan of lots of different bikes. | ||
| Ferris_von_bueller |
I would have to add that Buell winning the AMA Daytona Sportbike Championship had a lot to do with Danny Eslick as proved by his back to back championships. The 1125 was certainly up to the task but I doubt a lesser rider would have had the same success. Is it a competitive bike? certainly. Is it a dominating game changing bike? no | ||
| Ducxl |
The 1125 ran in a 600 class and won.the Ducati 1098 wasn't allowed but the 848 was.same as the XBRR 1300 racing against 600s.if it smells like sh... ..nevermind. Buell was an inovator with their exhaust solution. As an owner of both a pair of Buells' and Ducatis' I can state they're both outstanding machines. | ||
| Court |
As an owner of both a pair of Buells' and Ducatis' I can state they're both outstanding machines. Ditto . . . and, at the time . . I had the 2 Buells and the Ducati I had 9 other bikes as well and can definitively state the that the other 9 seldom (except for long journeys on the the FLHTC when Willie G, Rich Teerlink and I did the San Fran to Milwaukee 85th ride) got ridden. | ||
| Ducxl |
This is a Buell site....we' re ALLOWED to cheer on the EBR.Mr. Bad-S-NONE you should recognise that. | ||
| Blake |
Dana, I have a great deal of trouble following what you are saying. Are you disagreeing that an underslung muffler benefits performance? If you agree that it does, then what are you talking about? I have no clue. When I see idiotic insulting commentary like
I gotta rethink the whole mutual respect deal. Maybe you can clarify. 1. Explain to us how pointing out a few technical innovations successfully implemented and demonstrated by Buell means that "Buell did it all." 2. Explain to us how recognizing those technical innovations by one manufacturer precludes appreciating the products or achievements of others. Except for Harley and Honda I can find a bike to put on my wish list from virtually every manufacturer. The Ducati Hypermotard ranks towards the top of the list. I sure don't appreciate the foul language and personal insults Dana. You can do better. | ||
| Ratbuell |
Welcome to my world . . . that's what I've been saying all along. Yes, but...aren't you just an •••••••, Court? That's what I read on the internet, anyway...  | ||
| Court |
That's an accurate statement I worked my way from apprentice ••••••• up to total tool ...... Pretty cool really. Next I'm gonna toss down a couple cool ones and babel and blather about things I'm I'll informed about .... Ideally about a bike I don't own. | ||
| Blake |
Record it and put it in the book. Would make for a neat chapter. | ||
| Trojan |
Ducati wanted improved weight balance and mass centralization. The offset shock allowed that. But it had never been done before on a superbike. There are serious issues and challenges in implementing an offset rear shock. Buell proved it could be done and still achieve first rate chassis performance. They were the fist to do so in the class. That is just plain wrong on so many levels. Offset shocks have been used for years by various manufacturers (although I feel I am repeating myself somehow....). Just because the bikes fitted with them didn't race in the same AMA class as the 1125/1190 does not make them irrelevant or invisible. The physics involved are exactly the same whatever class bike you have. Ducati themselves used an offset shock on the Sport Classic and MHR models just a few years ago. Ducati put their shock where they did on the Panigale because of compromise, not better weight distribution or weight balance. Once they decided where it had to go they went a step further and invented the linkage that allows the shock rate to be altered, which is certainly a first as far as I know. They could have 'copied' Honda and mounted a shock under the swingarm, or maybe 'copied' Britten' or even Buell with an under engine shock, but they didn't. There is very very little in motorcycle design that hasn't been done or thought about before, so the whole argument about copying is pretty lame to be honest. Everybody has copied the first guy who put an engine in a pedal cycle back in 18..whenever it was. Since then we have pretty much only just tweeked the design in small increments. | ||
| Hybridmomentspass |
awesome thread | ||
| Hootowl |
"The 1125 ran in a 600 class and won" Which 600 class did the 1125 run in? | ||
| Jumbo_petite |
The 1125 ran in a 600 class and won.the Ducati 1098 wasn't allowed but the 848 was.same as the XBRR 1300 racing against 600s.if it smells like sh... "The 1125 ran in a 600 class and won" the class was Daytona Sportbike bikes for that class were: the big 4(Honda, Yamaha, Suzuki and Kawasaki) 600s Triumph 675 Daytona Ducati 848 Aprillia RSV1000 Buell 1225R All bikes were weight handicapped to equalize the field and riding on 600 bike tire sizes. If you followed the series. The defining event in the Championship was the hand injury to Martin Cardenas on saturday at VIR during practice. He was barely leading the points with Danny hot on his heels but with Martin out Danny had an easier route to his championship. the next year with Martin and Danny both on 600s Martin won buy like 6 points or so. This year with Martin in AMA superbike Danny reclaimed his DSB championship. If the Buell was such an advantage the podium would have been nothing but Buells. That was not the case and Danny seemed to be the only one to tame the beast and ride it to the front consistently. I want to see Danny race for EBR next year in Supebikes. Danny is a great personality and one hell of a rider. (Message edited by jumbo petite on November 17, 2011) |
