| Author | Message | ||
     Mr_grumpy |
Coolice, It'll even keep your arse warm in winter.  (Message edited by Mr_Grumpy on March 01, 2005) | ||
| Brucelee |
I am with Keith. Just smooth out the current mill and give it a little more rev range and smoother shifting. I"'d own one." There you go! I for one would like a hydraulic clutch and 6 speed trans next XB revision. That would be nice and does not seem like too much to ask! Secondly, how about some of those race goodies we read about for the next XB. Twin intakes, more CCs would be nice. I would buy a 115 HP XB with a 6 speed in a heartbeat! | ||
| X1tx |
Like Ducati did with the Monster (their bike comparable to the Lightning) I wish they'd go with the same dual prong approach. Still continue to develop and refine the current XB mill. There's still more to be had out of that. But for those wanting "More more more" also get a water cooled bike to market. With the Monster, the jump from the old 900 air cooled mill up to the 916 based engine was ~20 - 30 HP with the same relative state of tune (though the 916 based bike revved higher). Let the buyer decide. Would I want a Revo? Depends on how it was done. If it comes out (like the VRSCR) making only 102 HP and getting 30 mpg, no thank you. I could do better with my X1. I just don't know if the Revo can deliver the fuel efficiency the air cooled engines do now. If the water cooling ends up doing nothing other than adding a radiator it will sit on a sales floor gathering dust. But if it buys a significant power increase and comparable fuel efficiency, it would work. Perhaps the VRSCR gets such shoddy fuel economy due to being strapped with an extra 150 - 200 pounds? It is a fairly heavy bike. | ||
| X1tx |
I would buy a 115 HP XB with a 6 speed in a heartbeat! Ditto Bruce........  | ||
| Bigeasy |
I like the current motor in my xb12s alot. But I have to agree with you guys on the 6th gear. I mean look at the rest of the bike. With what the guys and gals at Buell have done already I don't think they would have any problem adding another gear! A little more power would be nice but with the short wheel base I dont know that I would want something with 145 hp, 115 yes that would be perfect for me anyway. Dont want to be riding around on a unicycle all the time! art | ||
| Midknyte |
I guess everyone should get rid of their cars and go buy old VW Beetles,these new fangled cars are so complicated with their water cooling and all... hehe, funny you should say that. I'll admit one of my favorite cars was a Geo Metro. Carb'ed 3 cylinder. Simple. It was our back-up car! When everything else broke, all I had to do was charge the battery and it was out the door no longer how long it had been sitting. | ||
| Dago |
I recall him talking about that very same thing when he was here in Dallas. Evidently, those reports would certainly shut everyone up about Buell's "lack" of quality and reliability. (Message edited by dago on March 01, 2005) | ||
| M1combat |
""Sure, with a water pump to fail, radiator to knock holes in, hoses to leak, not to mention needing to add weight (other than the water, radiator and water jacket) for the catalytic converter and AIR pump the water-cooled bikes need." Is your current car watercooled,do you worry about these issues with it." Yes, both current cars are water cooled... The one that I give a rip about performance in... I replaced the radiator with a large aluminum radiator to save weight and improve cooling. I replaced it because it got a hole in it from a piece of metal that THANK GOD missed the paint and the grill... I have NO idea how it made it to the radiator w/o hitting either of the other two, but it did. Also, before I swapped the radiator the car over-heated once and blew a hose... I'll keep my air cooled bike... It's PLENTY powerful enough as it is. Sure, I could wish for more power, but through my favorite section of road I'll bet I wouldn't gain hardly anything at all with another 20 HP. It just means I would have to get on the brakes earlier and I try to use the brakes as little as possible... BTW... Can anyone explain to me exactly how water cooling is better than air? Have you ever actually watched an air cooled bike overheat and be forced to pull off the road because of it? I'm sure it's happened, but I've watched more water cooled bikes overheat than air cooled, and I've grown up around air cooled bikes... Please enlighten me  . Oh, and BTW... From what I've heard JD Power & Assoc. rated the Buell XB platform the most reliable and trouble free motorcycle you can buy. I've personally had my bike in stop/go traffic at over 100F and the only side effect was a little bit of pinging when I would get on it, but only until I had ridden about 1/2 of a mile after I got out of the traffic and it cooled down a little. | ||
| Thepup |
I watched a show on Discovery Channel about the V-ROD,they took a V-Rod left it running in a walled off area,in the desert to see if it would overheat,do you think an XB would be safe to do this with?If a waterpump,a few hoses,and a radiator seem complicated to you,well let's just leave it at that. | ||
| Benm2 |
Well, one advantage of water cooling is the limiting affect of overheating. The coolant needs to boil in a water cooled engine during overheating, keeping the temperature around the boiling point during those excursions. On an air cooled bike, it just gets hotter. 'Course, once the coolant's gone, all bets are off. My M2 regularly overheated in heavy commuting traffic, with lots of pinging & grumbling, odd backfiring & such. Yes, a little motion went a long way. And, adding a fan to blow between the cylinders (S3 style) would have been an immense help. Since the XB's are fanned, it should be fine. Maybe another advantage is noise. The fins ring, water jackets absorb noise, right? Interesting to look at testing / qualifying times at Qatar. The current MotoGP bikes are ranging from 1:58's to 2:00's, the WSB bikes qualified on pole at 2:01 or so. Considering the differences in weight & power, that's doesn't seem to be much of a range. So it gives credence to the belief that more power doesn't give you much benefit in the twisties. IMHO. Ben | ||
| M1combat |
"I watched a show on Discovery Channel about the V-ROD,they took a V-Rod left it running in a walled off area,in the desert to see if it would overheat,do you think an XB would be safe to do this with?If a waterpump,a few hoses,and a radiator seem complicated to you,well let's just leave it at that." They do that to all bikes, yes, even the XB. Who said that it's too complicated? It isn't. It's just not necessary is all. Oh, and the water pump went out once on that car I mentioned earlier... The fact that more power doesn't do much in the twisties doesn't need any more credence... It's fact. Better tires and suspension geometry are always good though. We have geometry that's pretty much perfect as far as I can tell. The tires are pretty much THE equalizing factor in a turn once the mass is equalized. Just for the record, adding mass is the WRONG direction... Don't get me wrong... More power is useful, it's just that getting there while also adding weight is pointless. You will slow down in the turns, then need to not only go faster out of the turn, but you will also have to gain what you lost. THEN... you have to make a pass. Extra weight is downright WRONG when you are trying to stop. Maybe a heavier engine will allow more power to come out of a turn, but you will take longer getting INTO a turn... Not a good idea. Going into a turn is a favored place to make a pass. You can't sacrifice turn entry speed for turn exit speed. Exit speed has it's place as well, it's used ALL THE WAY down the next straight. What about Le-Mans though? You go through the Ford Curves and then immediately hit the finish line. Pretty much the same thing at Silverstone. You need corner entry speed there. Sears point? You need exit speed. Laguna? Exit speed. Daytona? Mid-Corner speed... What do you LOSE with a V-rod mill at Daytona? You lose exactly what you need. The XB engine is good for another 25 reliable HP if you ask me. I think we'll see it once Buell finds it and makes sure that it's actually reliable, and I'm pretty certain it will be air cooled. Why add 25HP along with weight when you can most likely do it w/o adding the weight? Oh yeah, because water cooling is easier... No thanks. Lighter is better than more power. | ||
| M1combat |
Oh, and... "On an air cooled bike, it just gets hotter. " That's not true. Once the Delta T gets to a certain point, an air cooled engine stays at the same temp. Yes, the engine does radiate more heat than a water cooled, but they work the same way. It's more about cooling efficiency than method... Packaging defines what method you use. If you can package an air cooled engine in such a way that the cooling is sufficient, then water is not needed. It's more of a crutch (or maybe a tool that CAN be used when needed). Do I think we'll see a 180HP air cooled twin? Not likely, but you don't see any other 180HP twins anyway do you? | ||
| Midknyte |
...Do I think we'll see a 180HP air cooled twin?... 50 years ago you could have pose this question as do we think we'll see a 100HP air cooled twin? | ||
| Court |
>>>do you think an XB would be safe to do this with? Yes. Your Buell XB is likely one of the best engineered items you own. New means of methods of testing durability and reliablity ensure your money was well spent. Thanks for pointing this out. Court | ||
| Thepup |
From what I have read the Revo engine is not much heavier nor bigger than the current XB engine.I would say Buell can bring that weight down even further.Hoses,radiator and coolant probably would only weigh around 20#,easy to make up for.lighter swingarm,no need for an oil tank built in,no oil lines.I think that would make up for the radiator and hoses.I know that ppl will make excuses why not to go with liquid cooling,but you should atleast open your mind to it. | ||
| Court |
>>>Court, please re read my post,I said nothing about the lack of reliability of the XB Smart move Pupster. The measure I'd choose would likely bne something like warranty $$ per unit. Not sure where you'd find that, but I'm sure manufacturers have it. Court | ||
| Thepup |
M1,you do realize that all Japanese litre bikes are liquid cooled and weigh less than a XB. | ||
| Josh_ |
>M1,you do realize that all Japanese litre bikes are liquid cooled and weigh less than a XB. You want to take any bets on that? | ||
| Thepup |
ok all but the Honda ,and it weighs 5# more. | ||
| Midknyte |
 I just wanna ride!  | ||
| Thepup |
I know I shouldn't say this ,but it's supposed to get chilly tonight in Fl.,43. | ||
| M1combat |
LOL . It's just 5#... That's so insignificant it could theoretically be thought of as less weight... In theory... Anyway... "lighter swingarm,no need for an oil tank built in,no oil lines.I think that would make up for the radiator and hoses.I know that ppl will make excuses why not to go with liquid cooling,but you should atleast open your mind to it." Open my mind to it? How about I just keep sitting where I'm at (which is outside the box) and I'll continue on my merry way thinking "Buell will probably use water cooling when the CTO thinks it's prudent". I agree with him. It's not necessary right now. Buell isn't building a race replica bike. If they do... guess what... It'll be air cooled . The FX bikes are air cooled. Oh, and I feel it's a good time to mention that they do QUITE well considering last year was their first, they don't have "factory support" to the tune that their consistently faster competitors do (and there aren't many who were consistently faster, full factory support or not), and they weren't qualifying on qualifying tires... "M1,you do realize that all Japanese litre bikes are liquid cooled and weigh less than a XB." I certainly do with the exception that Josh pointed out. They are also 3-5" longer, have more rake, are less stable over mid-corner bumps, aren't NEARLY as comfortable, don't pass emissions w/o a cat (let alone FUTURE emissions standards), are slower through turns and feel "lethargic" compared to an XBXR, and for the most part, they haven't garnered the following of intelligent, proper and just plain "informed" connoisseurs that Buell has. Oh yeah... How much DOES the swingarm on a current litre bike weigh anyway? One more thing... Are they as stiff as the current XB swingarm? Please bring some FEA to the plate if you've got it... Don't get me wrong... I like Japanese bikes, I like Italian bikes, I like German bikes... I like motorcycles in general. I just think that for what Buell was going for with the XB platform, water cooling is mostly useless. In my above statement about the lack of 180HP twins I wasn't exactly looking that far into the future. I was thinking more along the lines of 3-5 years... Now that I think about it though... Maybe you ought to take a look at the Dyno sheets of Aaron's LSR bike... It's air cooled BTW . Anyway, I don't mean to jump all over anyone here at all... I just think that Erik has a bit of a different vision for Buell than a lot of people figure, and it does torque my chain (or belt anyway ) a little to hear people saying that Buell took a wrong turn when they went with air cooling... They didn't take a wrong turn, they took "A" turn that lead them in the direction that seemed correct when they made the decision. To qualify that, I think they made the right one. | ||
| Josh_ |
What are you comparing? Manufacturer dry weights? No battery, oil, gas, water and who knows what other fantasy figures? Anyone got an MCNews handy with the comparison page? Let me know their tested weights for some of the liter bikes like the SV1000S (412lb claimed dry vs Buell's 395 claimed dry) and the ZX-9 (which was 470lbs wet in 2002) | ||
| X1tx |
Agree you can get all the power you can useon the street with air cooling. I'm sure Buell and H-D will continue to develop liquid cooling in preparation for the day that the air cooled mill can no longer make the EPA happy. But for now, the progress they've been able to make with what is essentially a very old design is impressive. It's not technologically advanced, just well developed and defined. But if you want a 'race bike' you may want more ponies. I like the X1 because it puts a grin on my face when I ride it. Could care less about what the dyno sheet looks like. If I was desperate for more HP, NOS is fairly cheap.................. | ||
| Thepup |
What are you comparing? Manufacturer dry weights? No battery, oil, gas, water and who knows what other fantasy figures? Anyone got an MCNews handy with the comparison page? Let me know their tested weights for some of the liter bikes like the SV1000S (412lb claimed dry vs Buell's 395 claimed dry) and the ZX-9 (which was 470lbs wet in 2002) Comparing wet weights on SportRider.com,so go check it out. | ||
| Thepup |
M1,most ppl who ride are not going to notice 3-5 inches.Buell does not compete in SB,I wonder why?What was their top finish in FX?Seems those long unstable Japanese bikes sure have problems with Buells. | ||
| M1combat |
"most ppl who ride are not going to notice 3-5 inches" Yes they will... Besides, we weren't talking about the people, we were talking about the bike and what is/isn't more or less capable. Keep in mind that 5" is just about 10%... The real story is the rake though. More rake = slower turn in given the same effort at the bars. So does centrifugal force (which the Buell has plenty of) but it's offset by the rake. I won't even mention un-sprung weight (oops). Well since I did... My copy of RRW states that one of the big four 600's got something like 300 grams of unsprung weight removed from the front end... The Buell is POUNDS lighter... "Buell does not compete in SB,I wonder why?" The rules won't allow it for one, and two, they're not as far off as you think with regard to lap times. As I recall, they would qualify about mid-pack in the superbike class. Their top finish in FX... Was it sixth or fourth? I can't remember. The more interesting fact is that there were about the same number of fully factory backed riders/bikes BEHIND THEM than there were IN FRONT of them . Japanese bikes DO have problems with Buells... Let me clarify... The Buells have slightly higher mid-corner speeds, the IL4's have slightly higher straight-line speeds. What does that tell you? It tells me that when the Buells get a little (and I mean a little) closer in a straight line, the IL4's will need to worry (and I assure you, they already are). They'll be losing podiums and wins. Mark my words. The Buells are even a little overweight compared to the IL4 as I recall... Go look up lap times for super bikes and FX bikes. There's not much difference at most of the tracks. Anyway, to get back to the point, If the FX bikes were running a V-Rod engine, they would be constrained to what... 750cc? They would still have the extra weight, but less torque. They would lose their advantage in the corner, and probably not gain anything in the straights. I really think you ought to get your facts straight before you argue against Buell wrt racing. The Buell uses a lump of breathed on 1957 technology to compete against THE BEST that Japan has been able to make in a 600cc IL4 configuration. This must say something about the chassis... Yeah, I know, now you feel like you have to mention that we use about 2X the displacement... How simple minded is that? You tell me, then I'll tell you . Put that in your pipe and smoke it. OH YEAH... And the Buells are ORDERS OF MAGNITUDE CLOSER TO STOCK! Look at the cost difference to build a competitive IL4 vs. a competitive Buell... Thank you, Drive through... | ||
| M1combat |
Oh, did you check out the Dyno chart of Aaron's LSR bike yet? | ||
| Ray_maines |
The Pup sez: "M1,you do realize that all Japanese litre bikes are liquid cooled and weigh less than a XB." [?] and he takes a bit of abuse for bashing the XB Here's what the January issue of Motorcyclist has to say, page 106 "HARD NUMBERS:" Buell XB 9 R Firebolt ('02) wet weight = 455 lbs Buell XB 12 S Lightning ('03) wet weight = 462 Honda CBR 1000 RR ('04) = 466 lbs. Kawasaki ZX - 10R Ninja ('04) = 433 Suzuki GSX-R 1000 ('04) = 444 Yamaha YZF-R1 ('04) = 449 | ||
| Reepicheep |
Remember what E. Buell said in an article way back, during WWII, when the German water cooled tank engines were badly overheating in the Africa desert, the solution was to go back to air cooling. An aircooled engine always runs hotter. That means tolerances can't be as tight. But in order for heat to flow (like electicity), there has to be a temperature differential. The bigger the temperature differential, the faster the flow. |
