| Author |
Message |
    
M1combat
| | Posted on Monday, October 03, 2005 - 07:32 pm: | 
|
"What is key to the "fuel in frame" patent"
I don't know, but my assumption would be that it's a lot like the ZTL patent. It probably prohibits taking advantage of the Fuel in the Frame like Buell does as opposed to actually having the Fuell in the frame.
The patent on the ZTL doesn't seem to preclude the use of a rotor mounted to the perimeter of the wheel. I think it precludes the best method that Erik could come up with of mounting the rotor, as well as (and I believe this is the significant part) actually taking advantage of the ZTL system by reducing the mass of the wheel. I think the ZTL patent mentions that you can't mount a perimeter rotor to a wheel that can't also deal with braking torque through the spokes. Therefor, you can't actually take advantage of the system even if you do use a perimeter mounted rotor.
I would imagine that you can't use fuel in the frame to centralize mass or to lower the moment of inertia of the fuel. I'm not certain though. |
Jlnance
| | Posted on Monday, October 03, 2005 - 09:45 pm: |
|
Buell did apply for the patent (if memory serves and you can check this out and prove me wrong if need be) about 4 years prior to 1993.
Lets see. That would be 1989, which would mean the patent expires in 2006. How coincidental that it shows up on other manufactures bikes this year.  |
Cruisin
| | Posted on Tuesday, October 04, 2005 - 08:24 am: |
|
Yup, Erik's had that idea for quite some time:
United States Patent 4,951,774
Buell August 28, 1990
Combination motorcycle frame and fuel tank
Abstract
A combined motorcycle frame and fuel tank utilizes a pair of hollow beams to form the main chassis of the motorcycle. The hollow interior of the framework is utilized as a fuel tank for the motorcycle.
Inventors: Buell; Erik (Mukwonago, WI)
Assignee: Buell Motor Company, Inc. (Mukwonago, WI)
Appl. No.: 294282
Filed: January 6, 1989 |
José_quiñones
| | Posted on Tuesday, October 04, 2005 - 09:53 am: |
|
The Buell patent refers to previous us/world patents, including a 1956 French patent.
This is from the US patent referenced from 1966:
 |
Jeremyh
| | Posted on Tuesday, October 04, 2005 - 10:44 am: |
|
its funny, i don't see BUELL doing any crying about what Japanese companies are doing............why the hell should the customers. Who really gives a rats arse and what is anyone going to do about it anyway besides make an observation an cry about it to thousands of others. |
Fdl3
| | Posted on Tuesday, October 04, 2005 - 11:44 am: |
|
I wonder if Suzuki has any plans for changing the exhaust outlet on the 1K model to match that of the 750/600? |
Cruisin
| | Posted on Tuesday, October 04, 2005 - 12:53 pm: |
|
Nobody's crying...we're LAUGHING. Buell was criticized for so long, and now other companies are using ideas that are "radical" that have been on Buells for over a decade.
It's damn funny! |
Mbsween
| | Posted on Tuesday, October 04, 2005 - 04:57 pm: |
|
Wow,
who would've thought such technology was possible in Western NY! Okay so it was almost 100yrs ago.....
Did the Bills have a winning record back then? |
Court
| | Posted on Tuesday, October 04, 2005 - 04:57 pm: |
|
>>>>its funny, i don't see BUELL doing any crying about what Japanese companies are doing............
And you won't. Remember the scene where the guy was picking the lock and the Rottweilers were charging across the lawn.
He summed it up with the mantra he kept chanting to himself. . .
quote:Don't watch the dogs
|
Bigblock
| | Posted on Tuesday, October 04, 2005 - 05:16 pm: |
|
HAhahahhahahahahahahhaah! |
Blake
| | Posted on Saturday, October 08, 2005 - 01:24 am: |
|
Oldog,
Yes it does have similar lines to the 2003-2005 XB swingarms. Lots of variations on the swingarm theme though.
I'm still tickled about the amazingly arrogant characterization by CW's Matthew Miles of the underslung exhaust...
quote:
"Whereas other manufacturers have positioned the muffler up high under the seat, Suzuki (along with Yamaha on the new YZF-R6) has opted for a radical, mostly under-engine design..."
Interesting that though Buell has offered that same exact technology in mass produced sport bikes for years, now that it shows up on a Japan Inc sportbike, it is suddenly "radical."
In ten more years is there any doubt that they'll be making similar comments about a ZTL perimeter brake/wheel as it debuts on a Japan Inc motorcycle? LOL! |
Rocketman
| | Posted on Saturday, October 08, 2005 - 06:30 pm: |
|
Kevin Ash writes in this weeks MCN explaining the reasoning behind the Japanese manufacturers using under slung exhausts.
The Euro 3 emission laws due in January 07 mean bikes have to pass a cold as well as fully warmed up engine noise and pollutant test.
Liquid cooled engines need time to warm up the coolant to normal temp as well as the engine before they run at their most efficient. Placing the cat as close as possible to the exhaust valve allows for the fastest warm up possible.
Though Ash doesn't say so he does imply that Euro 3 regulation has a time scale factor built into the test between cold and fully warm. I take this to mean that the sooner a liquid cooled motor warms the more able of passing Euro 3 regulation.
Rocket |
Oldog
| | Posted on Saturday, October 08, 2005 - 09:18 pm: |
|
Blake:
I guess that Buell isn't a manufacturer? 
I quit reading the rags years ago shortly after I purchased my first IL4 that was supposed to have great handling, and while better than some of the other IL4s of its time. My sled did not turn rings around the other scoots as touted.
As I kept reading them testing got really vaugue and so-so. Or take apart pix and pages of rambling about this or that test. They seem to be more about impressing each other than what it was like to ride the bikes in the real world.
It will be interesting to see what the Japanese do in the future. They are good at taking an idea and improving on it.
For now Kudos to the Erik and the Elves, We both know what they knew - who gives a rats posterior about what the popular press thinks, Build the best AMERICAN bike that we can, they did it the copied exhaust, Is proof that the concept is both simple and sound,
I wonder what the elves have coming up next! well theres '07 |
Blake
| | Posted on Sunday, October 09, 2005 - 02:20 am: |
|
Sean,
Pretty sure they could have stuck the cat(s) up closer to the heads without putting the muffler underneath the engine. Next thing you know they'll be heating the cat(s) electrically in order to get them working sooner. That will probably be touted as some kind of amazing high-tech innovation too. LOL!
Call me silly, but why don't they just use a higher-tech higher-efficiency engine that doesn't need a cat to meet the more stringent emissions specs? D'OH!  |
Rocketman
| | Posted on Sunday, October 09, 2005 - 09:26 am: |
|
Call me silly, but why don't they just use a higher-tech higher-efficiency engine that doesn't need a cat to meet the more stringent emissions specs? D'OH!
Well that was Ash's real point and the reason for the article. To quote Ash, "Air-cooled engines are proving easier to pass the latest emissions regulations" and the articles title? AIR-COOLED MOTORS ARE HERE TO STAY though Erik's name wasn't mentioned for holding up the air cooled motors end. Nothing strange about that then but who knows what they'll tout in the future when air cooled Buells rule the roads.................yikes 
Rocket |
|
