| Author | Message | ||
     Rocketman |
I happen to have a bit of experience with the engineering of commercial products and what many folks like you would perceive as minor variations of them. What you imagine is pure fantasy. I don't for a moment see any variation in the frame design between XB and 1125 as minor. But I see a lot of work done to make the 1125 frame look and work just like an XB frame. How many times? All anyone with pertinent experience need do is objectively compare the two frames, that in lieu of merely observing their superficial external appearance. And immediately it will become obvious that they are essentially the same design and working principle. They're just not identical. Concept: Similar Shape: Different Size/mass: Greater/different Work point geometry: Different Loads/stresses: Greater, different Rear shock attach point/loading: Radically different Structural section properties: Different Attach/integration points: Different Crash scenario: Different Thermal environment: Different Vibration environment: Different Steering head section: Different Fuel Tank section: Different Frame Spar sections: Different Orientation/angle: Different One could change every area of the XB frame by 1mm in size and shape and say the same things, but essentially it would be exactly the same frame, just bigger everywhere by 1mm. Rocket | ||
| Kowpow225 |
Rocket, Not long ago you seemed to be happy to be here and bringing good (and bad) to the table. Here lately it's beem mostly negative regarding Buell. It's okay I'm not mad atcha I'm just looking for more of the old rocket to resurface. BTW I agree the S1 had more of an edge that the XB's just didn't capture. | ||
| Slaughter |
Title to thread: Anyone fancy a good argument debate relating to Buell motorcycles? ...and to put it all in perspective, we find in the OPENING post: Buell to some extent are shitting on you. What exactly is a "good argument?" | ||
| Elvis |
 Not the best image, but you can begin to see that the frames are very different. The major difference is the cross-member that gives the XB its name. From there, the shapes, contours, fuel outlet, nearly every mounting point etc. are more different than they are similar. The exteriors are the most similar parts, and I'd guess that's a conscious styling decision. | ||
| Socoken |
One could change every area of the XB frame by 1mm in size and shape and say the same things, but essentially it would be exactly the same frame, just bigger everywhere by 1mm. But, thats not what happened. It seems to me that they took the frame look and basics from the XB and made it work on the 1125R. The frame is part of Buell's distinctive styling, and it works very very well. Some people even love the way it, and the bike, looks as a result. | ||
| Doerman |
Sean said: but I'm dancing on the same spot because those benefits need dealing with differently simply because the biggest disadvantage the 1125 has right now is appearance. Am I to assume that the technical merits of the bike does not matter to you at all. In your mind it all comes down to your perception of its appearance? This then is an awfully long thread for the sole purpose of shoring up the idea that it is ugly when ugly is in the eye of the beholder. Although the thread topic is about a good scrap regarding Buell motorcycles, while during the 400 or so posts it circles back, or as Greg to amply put it, dances in one spot... the appearance. Seems clear enough then (to me) what the motivation is: Which is to pick apart the design in every detail to make a weak argument regarding appearance sound strong. When the argumentation drifts onto solid ground on engineering principles backed up with facts on those principles you dismiss those arguments as not germane to the discussion and dance back to appearance issue. On the topic of appearance.. It is a different design that will garner fans and enemies of the appearance. That much has been established. What else is it that you wish to establish? Asbjorn | ||
| Slaughter |
I don't like blue. Even though it's a faster color. | ||
| Rocketman |
I must be blind. It looks very much to me like the the XB frame and the 1125 frame are very closely related. If computers, milling machines and robotic assembly tools give birth, those frames are siblings. Hell, they could even be twins. Just not identical. And by Buell keeping to their XB design there are constraints brought about that result in the appearance of a rather controversially styled motorcycle. WHY WOULD BUELL DO SUCH IS THE LONG RUNNING QUESTION. If I were designing a Buell motorcycle, the first principle of design would be IT HAS TO LOOK GOOD. Only then would I accommodate the technical merits, and if I couldn't I'd start again until I could. And if you think that's ridiculous, how many are buying the 1125 because it's an American motorcycle? Looks will sell thousands all over the world. In Buells case, made in America will seldom be a consideration outside of America. Rocket | ||
| Dbird29 |
Maybe it's time for you to get a Coke. | ||
| Old_man |
To those who will buy them, it is beautiful. I didn't buy a Buell because it was made in the U.S.A. - It is my first one. I have owned many bikes made in Japan and Europe. I like the engineering and the style. It was the motorcycle I liked the best, when I was setting out to buy a new motorcycle. I still do. I have an XB9S that I modified slightly to fit me and am very happy with it. The air cooled, hydraulic lifter V2 has all the power I will ever use and a power band that allows it to pull my 235 lbs up hills in high gear from 1700 rpm. I wouldn't change a thing. 60mpg is real nice too. The style of a bike is a personal thing. Some don't like it. That's OK, the world is full of other bikes to buy. But many, like me, wouldn't want to have anything else. | ||
| Rocketman |
No one is disputing any of what you say. The bigger picture is, you and many like you don't represent the demographic Buell are telling us this bike was aimed at. That it does suit you and many like you is what Buell are banking on. Someone has to buy it, otherwise it will be a total flop. I doubt the 1125 will be a big hit in Europe. Buell will likely claim it met or even exceeded their targets. But then they won't be as high as I think we are being led to believe by some. But hey, no one on the inside is telling us anything, except how great this bike is going to be, and how well it's going to sell. So without knowing what Buells first year Euro sales target is.............  Rocket | ||
| Molly_hatchet |
for me one of the biggest problems was, at first glance that day it the pics were released i was giddy...then after closer examination..i wasnt all that giddy anymore...others felt the same..things were posted..things got a little heated...then some anonymi threw the gauntlet down calling the RC8 an origami bike and stating the 1125 will whomp the 1098 and that both the competitors were ugly and should pack things up and go home now that the 1125 had arrived...well some of us that still reside in the real world thought ooh hell no..maybe its got some horsepower but im sorry that dosent make it a world class superbike im still dumbfounded as to why the 1125 is even being classed with the other superbikes...it seems a lot more at home with the likes of the FZ or monsters and other naked bikes...its been said by annymi and others that the powerband is smooth even friendly the ride height is for comfort...wow i just dont get the whole its a superbike thing...if ya dont wanna lay down on ur bike and go 200 thats fine just get the hell outta my way...anywhoo the gloves were off long ago so quit ur bitchin and join the fray or beat it...the 1125 is not a super bike ...and its wierd lookin.. i like most riders in the world could give a f@&c less what the small engineering details are and how many patents the bike has...its a bike if i dont like the way it looks i wont ride it ....there are plenty of fish in that big sea so if ur gonna throw down the gloves u should ready for a beatin or to give one... | ||
| Aesquire |
To my eye, the frame is fine. The blue color serves to point it out, and that's been a Buell tradition. Nuke blue/molten orange tube frames strike a note? ( how much to nickel plate my M2's frame I wonder? ) But the frame shapes are ok to me. It's obvious the exterior lines are meant to be a "refinement" of the Xb's. The fairing shapes are pleasing to the aero trained eye, though from the front it somehow reminds me of a yamaha? & I'll put up with a little weird in a headlight if it WORKS. Tail section? ( superficially ) Pure Firebolt. ( and I still think license plate/tail light re-locators are going to be a big seller on 1125R's ) I don't know if that's the style point I would have emphasized, but if it's to be defined with the Firebolt as "sportbike", I guess the "family look" makes sense. Can't wait for the "lightning family" version. In fact, I'm probably waiting for the S3 or M2 like machine. Pods, pods pods. They put them where they are to achieve a # of goals. They don't look any worse than many plastic bits hung on tanks to hide radiators. Better than most. Super Dukes & Motocrossers? Not the beauty I grew up with. You want the radiator under the seat like a Harley Nova? Fine, If my butt don't burn. Great! if you can get Meredith effect thrust from the expanding heated air to add to my speed, like a P-51 Mustang, even better! ( 200 hp recovered from a 1200 hp Rolls Royce designed engine. ( made in the U.S. by Packard )) | ||
| Old_man |
Rocket, I understand your point. We will have to wait to see what the world thinks of the new bike after it is ridden. I hope you get an opportunity to give one a test ride. I am happy with a bike that I can enjoy on the road. I do not race and ultra-horsepower bikes are of no use to me. I do admire great handling and braking in a motorcycle, something very useful to every rider. | ||
| Blake |
"One could change every area of the XB frame by 1mm in size and shape and say the same things, but essentially it would be exactly the same frame, just bigger everywhere by 1mm. " Wrong. That would just be scale. The following are much different:
Not just scale, but totally different. | ||
| Blake |
"I must be blind." Funny you say that, cause from my view, you certainly are, more from a lack of understanding of what it takes to engineer, tool and build the Buell frame than anything. It's mostly casting. | ||
| Rocketman |
Let me understand this then. Making an XB frame 1mm larger than an existing one is somewhat less a task than making a frame for an 1125 which only seems to mimic the appearance of an XB frame? As an engineer perhaps you'd like to tell me which parts we can skip through to simplify the process in making the 1mm larger XB frame? Funny you say that, cause from my view, you certainly are, more from a lack of understanding of what it takes to engineer, tool and build the Buell frame than anything. It's mostly casting. So there's no computer aided design? No stress analysis? No milling? No drilling? No welding? No grinding? Jeez, on the one hand it's a freaking task and a half for Buell to build an entirely new frame for the 1125 according to you. Yet on the other hand it's mainly a process of casting when it comes to questioning my engineering knowledge? Yeah I see now. I was blind all along. Is that an oxymoron? Rocket | ||
| Slaughter |
- thanks to Monty Python: The Life of Brian | ||
| Dbird29 |
Isn't that the movie with the song "Every Sperm is Sacred"? | ||
| Not_purple_s2 |
That was song was from Monty Python & The Meaning of Life. I believe it was their way of thumbing their noses at the Catholic Church for "banning" The Life of Brian | ||
| Blake |
"As an engineer perhaps you'd like to tell me which parts we can skip through to simplify the process in making the 1mm larger XB frame? " Darn near all of them. For instance, why would you need to move the shock off centerline and put the mount in a completely different place? Answer: You wouldn't Why would the loads and stresses change other than negligibly? Answer: They wouldn't. Why would the fuel capacity change from 4 to 5.6 gallons? Answer: It wouldn't. Why would the vibration environment change? Answer: It wouldn't. Why would the locations of engine support points and swingarm connection points change drastically? Answer: They wouldn't. Ditto for the entire list. You seem to be arguing semantics. I'm trying to discus engineering. The difference in your 1mm scenario versus the actual differences in the two frames is one of negligible versus drastic. Anyone with vision should be able to see that. I used to have customers with the same problem as you. They couldn't understand why we needed an extra $200,000 just to accommodate what in their mind was a very simple and easy modification to one of our standard products. They'd say "we just need an extra ±5o of azimuth travel, how can that cost so much?" The added cost sure as heck wasn't due to material or tooling. It was all engineering. | ||
| Blake |
Funny stuff Steve.  | ||
| Captpete |
I like the looks of those big air scoop/sliders. And I like the notion of a quiet zone. You got a few spare moments you could put toward photoshopping those onto an S1W for me, Rocket? Capt Pete | ||
| Captpete |
PS - skip the engineering part. Just stick 'em on there. The concept stage, if you will. | ||
| Captpete |
PPS - You don't have to desecrate yours. Pull the image off my profile. | ||
| Rocketman |
Sorry Blake, but moving a shock location or an engine mount or increasing fuel capacity might require more 'work', but I'd be more than happy to argue that making everything 1mm larger requires ALL parameters of design to be looked into, calculated, reappraised, analysed, tested etc etc etc, thus still be a great deal of 'work'. We could argue that changing the rake of an existing XB model, and putting in a different engine requiring new mounting locations and an increased fuel capacity is more work, or less work? Whatever the final outcome of change, modification, redesign, which is really anymore or any less work? Does it really matter? The end result is what counts, as does the appearance when something such as a motorcycle finally ends up within sight of a potential customer. The point is simply this. The 1125 frame is an XB frame. Just a different version of it. As such, it offers some great Buell designed advantages to the motorcycle that is built around it. But in the 1125's case it has brought about a rather unconventional design that doesn't sit well with everyone. So why, if it takes so much effort to rehash the XB frame design, look, appearance, whatever you want to call it, didn't the 1125 turn out less controversially styled and rather more recognisably attractive as a motorcycle? More so if as you say it's a clean sheet design? Answer, because Buell wanted to stay with the XB type design for a number of reasons sacred to Buell. Not least of all, somewhere in the rehash is a relationship that draws physically, scientifically and aesthetically from the design of the XB chassis. Rocket | ||
| Rocketman |
Captain, I could not do that to any S1. Such would be Buell blasphemy. That is why my own heavily modified S1W still stays true and accurate to the original design. I simply added better quality components. Made more power. Shaved off some weight. Improved the handling and stopping. Redecorated.  Rocket | ||
| Blake |
"I'd be more than happy to argue..." D'UH! | ||
| Elvis |
I must be blind. It looks very much to me like the the XB frame and the 1125 frame are very closely related. If computers, milling machines and robotic assembly tools give birth, those frames are siblings. Hell, they could even be twins. Just not identical. If you honestly want to begin to understand the differences between the frames . . . . . . rather than just argue . . . . . . which I guess is the intention of this thread, so maybe I should just stay out of it . . . . . . begin by looking at the mounting points for the subframe. See how mounting points for the subframe, engine and suspension are located on very different locations for the two frames? That will dramatically change the way forces are transferred through the frame. Since a frame's entire reason for being is to transfer forces, transferring forces via different routes will dramatically change the function of the frame. Now go a little farther and look at the cross-beam. Won't that difference again dramatically change the way the two frames transfer forces? Now consider the differences in shape and size of the internal beams. See how they have dramatically different ridges and curves? Consider corrogated vs. non-corrogated card-board to begin to understand how those kind of changes can change the characteristics of a frame. Now look at the location of the welds and how they show that the actual welded components are very different. Again, that will dramatically change how the forces are transferred. One thing we don't even know is how the wall thickness' of the frame components differ, but I expect they are very different. Again, the transfer of forces through different thickness' of metal that are joined differently and curved differently will be very different. If I remember the original press material, this frame, while have a much larger capacity is lighter and more rigid than the original, so that gives us a macroscopic idea of how all of those changes work together. Overall, I'd say the 1125R frame is more dramaticaly different than the XB than the 1125R engine is from the XB engine. . . . but they do look similar don't they? And I guess if we want to keep open ended arguments going we should focus on looks rather than the things that really matter.  (Message edited by elvis on January 09, 2008) | ||
| Gregtonn |
 The 1125 frame is an XB frame.     By that logic a Ducati 1098 frame is a HD Sportster frame. Just a mess of steel tubing and plates welded together to accommodate a V twin engine. One water cooled one air cooled. Do they teach classes for that kind of crap or are you self taught? Dang that was funny!! |
