| Author | Message | ||
     Bad_karma |
Curtis I was thinking as in mass centralization beside the engine much like the RC51. When I have laid my tubers down it's been signals, shifter tips and air box covers. Every time I was able to get back on the bikes and ride home, once that was over 300 miles. Not ever thinking of an insurance claim for the value of the damage was so little. Looking a the brackets that hold the radiators, not very robust looking. But I'm assuming that is what the shrouds are mounted to. I will read and watch and reserve my conclusions until tested in the real world. Joe | ||
| Molly_hatchet |
finding a way to exploit the weaknesses of the competition is a smart thing IE the pods acting as crash barriers while most sportbikes have insurance thats in the stratosphere..thats smart..building on rotaxs exp with aprilla..smart...all the other little do dads seem to go with the theme..making a butt ugly bike...not so smart..but hey its always the pretty girls that are biggest problems...ive said it before.. im sure in the right hands the 1125 will be a weapon of destuction...and hopefully soon here we will see some mods..cmon people its been like weeks now how could u restrain urselves from tearing that thing apart and puttin new stuff on it....anybody make a pipe for this thing yet. | ||
| Rocketman |
I had hoped for a technical discussion as well. Instead you keep spinning it back to your opinion of aesthetics. "It's really not my fault it's not that attractive. I was interested to establish why." Rocket | ||
| Rocketman |
Rocket, do you have anything against the XB's or 1125R other than the styling? XB not really. I'd be happy to own one if it came at cheap money. I've said so before. I've even called the Uly ugly many times, but it's not a bad looking bike. I'd own one, but that type of bike is a little more specific in its purpose, so not for me and thus I don't get involved in Uly discussions. The XB design has won acclaim from many for it's handling And the Buell insiders here have referred to this as 'magic' and made statements like "no one else has been able to do it like Buell" or "no one else understands how Buell were able to do it". And on this largest of Buell forums these Buell insiders have never once, despite being asked by not just me, ever backed up these bold claims with anything other than "did you see the Bike article. Best cornering blah blah blah......". No technical knowledge shared. No magic explained. Just the usual f**k off you're a troll for doubting us. The 1125R looks to fix at least one of those problems. Do you have a problem with the design of the 1125R engine? Yes. It looks cheap and flimsy next to a similar design KTM are offering. Other than that , no, except for the bold performance claims we can't wait to see. And again the Buell insiders refuse to give evidence of these restricted HP yet phenomenal top speeds, for example. And once again you're a troll if you ask for them. What would be your recipe for your perfect sportbike? To start with it has to look bloody fantastic to capture the public's imagination. Then I'd make it handle and perform without compromising its appearance. Rocket | ||
| Elvis |
07:05 am 11:03 am 06:00 pm 06:03 pm 07:21 pm 08:42 pm 09:34 pm 10:21 pm 10:40 pm 10:58 pm 11:05 pm 12:04 am 06:36 am 06:59 am What are those times? Those are the times (eastern standard time) that Rocket has posted on this thread over the past 24 hours. Why are you so obsessed with this Rocket? I personally think the Honda Rune is the ugliest production bike ever made, but I haven't wasted one minute of my time posting that opinion on a Honda website. Most of us here like the way the 1125R looks, but most of us here don't spend a lot of time talking about how it looks (unless goaded) good or bad . . . because we're guys. Heterosexual guys typically don't obsess on the looks of anything (you need look no farther than most of our closets to see how true that is). If any of the guys I ride with spent this kind of time talking about the looks of any motorcycle, I think we'd start by ignoring him, if that didn't shut him up, we'd make fun of him, if that didn't shut him up, we'd stop inviting him, and if he showed up anyway, eventually someone would kick his ass. What is missing from your life that you need to devote so much time to discuss something as un-interesting as the looks of a bike you don't like? Seriously. Do you ever worry that there's something missing that leads to this kind of irrational behavior? Does it give you some sort of pleasure? Is it an obsession? Is it like scratching an itch and you just can't stop even when it just leads to more an more discomfort? Do you feel better or worse about yourself once you've posted here? I'm not just trying to be flip. I just can't see how the posts you slap up here could lead to any sort of enrichment of your life, and I wonder if some other activities might not be more rewarding. If it really does give you pleasure, fine. It doesn't affect me one way or the other, but if it doesn't really make your life better, maybe you should consider breaking the pattern of behavior. | ||
| Jackbequick |
"..To start with it has to look bloody fantastic to capture the public's imagination. Then I'd make it handle and perform without compromising its appearance..." So let's see if I understand your proposed design and development process. First you would draw up a design for a good looking bike, ensuring it appeals to the public. And, since you seem to consider it unfair to draw on any previous designs (even if they worked very well), the design would have little or nothing in common with previous designs. Then I assume you would build a prototype and work out the details to make it handle well, while, at the same time, ensuring that it meets all of your and the general public's performance expectations. And you would accomplish the final stages without sacrificing any of the esthetics of your original design. And you'd accomplish all that, meeting all mandatory specifications and certifications for a street legal production motorcycle, by the summer of 2009? Is that the plan? And are you taking any bets? :>) Jack (Message edited by jackbequick on January 11, 2008) | ||
| Dbird29 |
"Pandering is not a factor. Look to thyne own self. Please stop polluting BadWeB with your petty indignation and arrogant confrontation. That is not a request. The rest of us must cease immediately responding to the trolling. Without an audience response, a troll will soon wither and disappear." Blake (about a few hundred posts ago) | ||
| Rocketman |
Anyone fancy a good argument debate relating to Buell motorcycles? Rocket: TITLE OF THREAD If you don't like a slap in the chops, why do you insist on coming back? Haven't I slapped you enough? I dunno. Maybe you're kinky or summat? Rocket | ||
| Rocketman |
Elvis, I lead a very sheltered life. Most of it spent masturbating over Honda Runes actually. Rocket | ||
| Rocketman |
No Jack, not a plan. But then I don't have a motorcycle factory at my disposal. Ducati do, and they managed to build a street version of a Moto GP bike within 2 years. They managed to do so whilst they were redesigning their Monster range. Introducing a brand new range consisting of three different 'Classic' models. Designing two different capacity sportsbikes, the 1098 to include homologated versions to race in national Super Bike series around the world and WSB itself of course. Introduce a new model, the Hypermoto, based on the Multistrada, which they also revamped. Did I mention Ducati won the Moto GP title last year. And that was on an entirely new bike too. And to think the poor buggers at Ducati are penniless apparently. Sorry Jack. What was your point? Rocket | ||
| Mainstreamer |
Jeeezz Elvis, what are you trying to say?? The sexuality of frequent posters is in question? Hope not! Or if you don't like the looks of the 1125r your sexuality is in question. Hope not! Some might feel that those who actually like the looks may need glasses, perhaps the result of excessive..... well you know what I mean. If people want to participate here that's a choice they make. Why do some feel they have to make personal attacks on Sean. Suggest they avoid this thread rather then resort to attacks on others. Thanks you. | ||
| Ducxl |
Ducati do, and they managed to build a street version of a Moto GP bike within 2 years. They managed to do so whilst they were redesigning their Monster range. Introducing a brand new range consisting of three different 'Classic' models. Designing two different capacity sportsbikes, the 1098 to include homologated versions to race in national Super Bike series around the world and WSB itself of course. Introduce a new model, the Hypermoto, based on the Multistrada, which they also revamped. Did I mention Ducati won the Moto GP title last year. And that was on an entirely new bike too. And to think the poor buggers at Ducati are penniless apparently. Outstanding,excellent post | ||
| Blake |
"To me the oil in the swing arm is putting weight in an unsprung area, no matter how small, it still is weight unsprung." Let's look at the big picture. The performance benefits yielded by the Buell XB oil tank scheme are three fold: Mass centralization (improves handling), overall compactness of integration into the motorcycle (allows shorter wheelbase which improves handling), and the efficiency (reduced mass improves handling and acceleration) of the dual use scheme (swingarm + oil tank in one). Even narrowing our focus to just unsprung mass of the rear suspension, we actually find that the effect of the Buell XB motorcycles' integral swingarm oil tank really is negligible, not a factor. I'll try to explain why.  The Buell XB oil tank is located far forward at/near the swingarm pivot, which rotates (angular displacement) much more than translates (linear displacement) vertically. What little actual translation the oil/tank sees is very much less and occurs very much less rapidly than at the rear axle, thus having a much diminished effect upon rear suspension performance, so even in translation, the effect is negligible. Interestingly, if at any instant the return stroke (shock extending) exceeds 1.0 g at the oil tank, then the mass of the oil would be effectively removed from the suspension system. The applicable governing equation is the simple f=ma; the oil's unsprung effect being the force "f" generated by the mass of oil/tank (m) due to its acceleration (a). If the mass of oil/tank is only translating 1/10 of the distance and at 1/10 the velocity compared to the rear axle, then it will experience 1/10 of the acceleration and thus its effective mass at the rear axle is only 1/10 of its actual mass back near the swingarm pivot point. The oil being a liquid, it is not inclined to rotate with the swingarm and so presents negligible effect in the way of unsprung inertia (rational/angular equivalent to translational/linear concept of unsprung mass). Two quarts of oil weigh about 3 LBs? One tenth of that amounts to 4.8 ounces. The total unsprung weight just of the rear wheel/axle/brake/sprocket/tire assembly is probably somewhere upwards of 30 LBs, so the effect of 0.3 LBs would be 1/100 of that, in the noise, entirely negligible. Let's look at the big picture. The performance benefits yielded by the Buell XB oil tank scheme are three fold: Mass centralization, overall compactness of integration into the motorcycle, and the efficiency (reduced mass) of the dual use scheme (swingarm + oil tank in one). The mass centralization directly benefits handling; it is simple physics; the Buell tube frame motorcycles' oil tanks were mounted higher and not nearly as mass centralized. The compactness of integration of the Buell XB's swingarm oil tank indirectly benefits handling; it allows a significantly shorter wheelbase where the separate/independent oil tank placement would not. The dual use scheme of the Buell XB's integral swingarm oil tank directly benefits handling and acceleration performance both since it reduces overall mass of the motorcycle. A separate oil tank with mounting bracketry and hardware would lead to significantly more mass. More mass hurts handling and acceleration performance both. Fun stuff. The integral to engine dry sump oil tank of the Buell 1125R improves even more upon the Buell XBike's swingarm-integrated oil tank in that it is even more mass-centralized and also eliminates a significant amount of external plumbing (added parts/complexity). | ||
| Wolfridgerider |
When the motor is running, how much oil is left in the swingarm? | ||
| Rocketman |
All very well, but can you explain the design constraints that forced Buell to place the heat exchangers (as you like to call them) onto the side of the 1125, thus forcing a controversially styled motorcycle? Rocket | ||
| Wolfridgerider |
but can you explain the design constraints that forced Buell to place the heat exchangers (as you like to call them) onto the side of the 1125 a lot shorter wheel base | ||
| Rocketman |
But they extended the 1125 wheelbase over the XB length. Why not extend it a little more to get the radiator more conventionally placed? Rocket | ||
| Wolfridgerider |
What do I type like?? A Buell engineer?? HELL IF I KNOW??!! A full farring should fix those  eye sores right up. | ||
| Ducxl |
OH MAAAAANN! WTF! More of the same !! Rocket,do what i did,stop whining.When the first XB came out i quickly voted with my wallet and bought the 996.That i now own an XB says the style can grow on you. IT DID for me,hence my XB12r. Quit it already | ||
| Ceejay |
That's what I'd like to know, but not for the reason Rocket has, for which I still can't figure out why a conventional placement is better-save for in Rocket's case(and many others) looks. I'd like to know if BMC came to the conclusion that 52 was just too short because it created weight distribution problems, power transfer problems, rideability, etc. To me it seems odd that a bike would attain best handling bike status and then the company that made said bike would change the geometry that got them there in favor of a more conventional chassis layout. | ||
| Davegess |
For the 30th time, shorter wheelbase is better; side pods work better for airflow. No design constraint at all. Package looks good to me, too bad it looks bad to you. | ||
| Wolfridgerider |
Ceejay, you're going to make me get the 1125R training book out when I get home. The wheel base was discussed but I can't remember what was said. | ||
| Court |
Ducati do, and they managed to build a street version of a Moto GP bike within 2 years. They managed to do so whilst they were redesigning their Monster range. Introducing a brand new range consisting of three different 'Classic' models. Designing two different capacity sportsbikes, the 1098 to include homologated versions to race in national Super Bike series around the world and WSB itself of course. Introduce a new model, the Hypermoto, based on the Multistrada, which they also revamped. Did I mention Ducati won the Moto GP title last year. And that was on an entirely new bike too. And to think the poor buggers at Ducati are penniless apparently. Outstanding,excellent post I could not agree more. What Ducati has done is amazing. | ||
| Wolfridgerider |
For the 30th time, shorter wheelbase is better I think what Ceejay is saying is why did they go with a LONGER wheel base on the 1125R and not stick with the same wheel base as the XB12R or XB9R | ||
| Freezerburn |
I think there would be a real problem keeping that front wheel on the ground with the shorter wheel base. | ||
| Ceejay |
exactly, especially given the fact that the XB series(with the 52" wheelbase) was considered the best handling bike of all time, along with the fact that the 1125r has spent so much time in the design/testing phase. I'm not sure if Dave was referring to me or not though. | ||
| Ceejay |
Fburn-a 12r with a 52" wheelbase has the same tq as an 1125r with a 54" wheelbase and starts down lower in rev range...if your pulling wheelies high in the revs(where Hp takes over) chances are you would know how to handle it regardless of wheelbase length... | ||
| Blake |
Sean, I challenge you to an objectivity check. In stark objective terms, devoid of personal commentary/opinion, what has Buell Motorcycle Company accomplished in the past three years? I say three years on account of some of the achievements that you listed for Ducati happened a lot more than two years ago; the classic models for instance were unveiled back in 2003 over four years ago. Let's turn from negative to positive, shall we? We are in total agreement that if Buell were to produce a thoroughly modernized Old School themed version of the S1, they would be blown away by the response/success. There is absolutely ZERO doubt of that in my mind! That is however, not a trivial task to accomplish on a commercial scale, and includes at least the following:
The above motorcycle would be gold and would likely sell well at $12,500 or more. Ad a prettied-up, refined, streetable version of the XBRR powerplant that makes upwards of 120 RWHP, and we are talking a bike that would sell like hotcakes even if priced upwards of $15K. Are you with me? | ||
| Court |
>>>the classic models for instance were unveiled back in 2003 over four years ago. That's an accurate statement and if you check the archives you'll find the photo of GUESS WHO . . . standing on the stage as the (SEE WHO ELSE REMEMBERS THE COLOR OF THE DRAPES THAT WERE PLACED OVER THE BIKES) were unveiled. It's puzzled me to this day why Fredrico invited me and not the British expert . . . . Hmmmmmmmmmmmm | ||
| Davegess |
CJ I was not responding to you but to he who must be ignored. I think the 1125 WB is what it because it works. the XB was not the sweet handling bike it is just because of wheelbase. The watercooled engine is likely a little longer than the lovely lump -just a guess- plus all that extra HP might require a little more length in the swingarm for hard acceraltion. You have to remember that this bike was built from first principles, it is not a modified XB. It does share some styling with the XB and i think that was on purpose to keep brand continuity. In some ways it is like looking at an RR1000 tube frame and than the S1 tube frame. Or for that matter a Ducati from 1995 and a 1098. If you are not an expert and look at one today and the other one next week they seem to be almost the same frame. When you put them side by side and look closely to see that they are very different. Different to the point where almost nothing would interchange between the two. Despite what some are saying this is very much a no compromise design. It looks the way it looks because the aerodynamics work. (Not that Buell has ever had any interest in aerodynamics;) The radiators work better on the sides and Buell has extensive testing to back this up. I have not seen the testing and this sort of info will certainly NOT be posted on the internet but I have no doubt they have it. |
