Author |
Message |
Northernyankee
| Posted on Wednesday, July 16, 2008 - 10:48 pm: |
|
I haven't read it yet but am about to now. Here is the link. http://www.motorcycle.com/shoot-outs/2008-oddball- literbikes-comparison-benelli-tornado-tre-1130-vs- buell-1125r-vs-ducati-1098s-85133.html |
Teddagreek
| Posted on Wednesday, July 16, 2008 - 11:12 pm: |
|
Cool..... Great line in the video, "If I had to spend my own money it would be the Buell" I thought the under seat radiator was pretty neat.. Hmmm where have I seen this before
|
Not_purple_s2
| Posted on Wednesday, July 16, 2008 - 11:23 pm: |
|
Good write up. The only real strike against the Buell was the low rpm fueling issue (again). I like the emphasis they put on power, though the Buell was lowest in peak power it was the most even through-out. The dyno graph was worth a thousand words.
|
Northernyankee
| Posted on Thursday, July 17, 2008 - 09:35 am: |
|
As for the fueling issue, “We’ve heard of some customers having this or a similar problem, but we can’t account for why it happens to some and not others.” So don't you think Buell would make every effort to give reviewers a bike without the issues. I don't think that I have seen a review that does not have a fueling issue. |
Jaimec
| Posted on Thursday, July 17, 2008 - 09:54 am: |
|
I've always LOVED the look of the Tornado Tre. I'm a little disappointed it had so many issues. I guess looks aren't everything! I thought it was a very well-written and balanced review. One of these years Buell will get the fuel injection straightened out. Didn't the first FI tubers also have all kinds of ridability issues? That was actually the reason my first Buell was the carbureted M2 Cyclone. I'm not having any issues with my 06 XB12Ss so I have to believe Buell will soon sort out the 1125r (and all the new 08 XBs) as well. One DOES get tired of reading all about the fueling issues in nearly EVERY road test article... |
Spatten1
| Posted on Thursday, July 17, 2008 - 10:22 am: |
|
+1 for Jaime's comments. |
Doerman
| Posted on Thursday, July 17, 2008 - 12:38 pm: |
|
Months before saddling up to our test unit I met an 1125R owner who said he had no such issues, but had heard of and met other owners who had. Here’s to hoping you don’t draw the short straw if you purchase an 1125R. That was me by the way. I talked at length with Pete. He is an interesting fellow and a nice guy. Softspoken and almost timid by nature. I am tired of the typical comparison style in Bike-mags anyway. It even gets more tiresome when referred to as comparo as if that is supposed to make it more hip. The article did what an article is supposed to do: Report the facts, describe the experience and leave the conclusions up to the reader. Well done! |
Koz5150
| Posted on Thursday, July 17, 2008 - 02:05 pm: |
|
Good Article... Once again, fuel issues. So when does the XR1200 get released in the US. You know, the Harley that was reviewed to have a a flawless FI system on it??? The distance between Milwaukee and East Troy must be getting farther and farther. |
Swordsman
| Posted on Thursday, July 17, 2008 - 02:30 pm: |
|
I don't understand why bike fuel injection has to be such a pain in the ass. Cars have been doing it well for 20 years. Why is it SOOOOO difficult to make it work properly on a motorcycle??? ~SM (Message edited by Swordsman on July 17, 2008) |
Aeholton
| Posted on Thursday, July 17, 2008 - 03:55 pm: |
|
I don't understand why bike fuel injection has to be such a pan in the ass. Cars have been doing it well for 20 years. Why is it SOOOOO difficult to make it work properly on a motorcycle??? Three little letters.... EPA. |
Xb9
| Posted on Thursday, July 17, 2008 - 04:02 pm: |
|
+1 on the last two posts, amen. |
Spatten1
| Posted on Thursday, July 17, 2008 - 04:07 pm: |
|
Plenty of bikes out there meeting EPA requirements and fueling well. I don't think it's the EPA, I think is is stubborn engineers that refuse to outsource it to a specialist, like most of the other manufacturers do. Even high end autos like BMW don't try to do it themselves in-house. Probably the same guys that designed DDFI 1 that sucked, and DDFI 2 that works great if you don't change altitude. How they saw fit to design an FI system without a Baro or MAP sensor is beyond me. There is a disconnect somewhere in that department. |
Spatten1
| Posted on Thursday, July 17, 2008 - 04:09 pm: |
|
Sorry to be so negative in the above post, but my X1 fuel injection was sub-standard, and my XB does do great, but it sucks if you change altitudes without cruising for a while for it to learn. Just irritates me, because I used to work in the carburetion industry. |
Ikeman
| Posted on Thursday, July 17, 2008 - 04:30 pm: |
|
+1 I have no idea why they don't put mass air flow sensors on these things. |
Spatten1
| Posted on Thursday, July 17, 2008 - 04:44 pm: |
|
On this board the speculation in the past has been that for a mass air flow to work you would need a ton of baffling in the air box due to the intake pulses, which would be impractical. That's why I always state "MAP or baro", in case it's too tough to get a good pressure reading inside the air box. |
Spatten1
| Posted on Thursday, July 17, 2008 - 04:48 pm: |
|
Ikeman: I see you are from PA. I first noticed the DDFI 2 altitude issue when I'd run at Summit Point or Pocano, take the bike home in the truck, then it would barely run when I got home in Philly area. Eventually I got help on Badweb and learned to "teach" the FI to get back on track with some steady cruise. |
Azxb9r
| Posted on Thursday, July 17, 2008 - 05:22 pm: |
|
The DDFI system on the Buell reminds me of the "Digital Fuel Injection" system that Cadillac was using in the early 80s. It is a very primitive system without an accurate means of determining load. The addition of a MAP sensor would help this system quite a bit. Mass Air systems are capable of being more precise in their fuel delivery, but the simplicity of a speed density system would make it more desirable on a motorcycle. Imo, the gap between autos and motorcycles in regards to FI systems is a matter of time and money. Auto manufacturers have been working with FI systems for decades, and they have spent quite a bit of money developing the systems. On the other hand, FI is fairly new to motorcycles. Companies like Honda and Suzuki have the resources of their automotive divisions to draw from, as a result, they have FI systems that work quite well. Buell definitely is an enigma on this though. Harleys FI system seems to work well, but Buell chose not to use it. I have not bothered to look at the system on my wifes Fat Boy, so I don't know what they are using, but that bike will fire up and run smoothly, with no popping and farting or any other issues regardless of the temperature. Throttle response is always smooth and consistent, and it seems to respond to atmospheric/elevation changes quickly. |
Spatten1
| Posted on Thursday, July 17, 2008 - 06:24 pm: |
|
Imo, the gap between autos and motorcycles in regards to FI systems is a matter of time and money. This is a fact. I worked on emissions certification for one of the MC OEMs in the 1990s. Due to relatively low production numbers, the R&D as well as component cost for automotive quality fuel control would impact each machine too much, so CARB and EPA let the MC manufacturers have much more lenient regs. That is why, per mile, a motorcycle puts out so much more pollution than an SUV. Buell will tell you that DDFI 2 has such quick response to the O2 readings and TPS that it does not any other sensors to calculate load. Still doesn't help with baro changes unless you get it into learn mode (which the factory refuses to define to this day) I agree about HD fuel injection, it works great from all accounts I've heard. (Message edited by spatten1 on July 17, 2008) |
Doerman
| Posted on Thursday, July 17, 2008 - 08:56 pm: |
|
Are you guys sure it is all about programming? The article points out, and it can be confirmed by several owners here, that some owners have a flawless FI system (that includes me). Programs are programs.. They either work or don't work. There are other possible culprits: - fuel rails - O2 sensors - ..... Either way, it is strange |
Fresnobuell
| Posted on Thursday, July 17, 2008 - 09:21 pm: |
|
I wonder if the bad FI on the 1125r in the shootout hurt the power numbers....seems really low compared to everything I have seen.. I also question the "stockiness" of the Ducati engine. They just happened to get an 'S' when they wanted a standard 1098...seems fishy to me...what else was upgrades on that test 1098S--ECU? Who would know? That being said, Buell could learn something from Ducati and send its best test units to these press reviews and shootouts.. Geez. Talk about shooting yourself in the foot! |
Spatten1
| Posted on Friday, July 18, 2008 - 09:16 am: |
|
The 1125 I test rode was horrible under 4k. If I were the dealer, I would be concerned about letting people test ride the thing and tell their friends. The salesman didn't seem to even notice that the fueling was bad under 4k. |
Spatten1
| Posted on Friday, July 18, 2008 - 09:17 am: |
|
Either way, I thought the review was good and positive for the bike. |
Azxb9r
| Posted on Friday, July 18, 2008 - 02:14 pm: |
|
Are you guys sure it is all about programming? There is more to it than just programming. It is possible that the system works fine within certain parameters, i.e. elevation and temperature. Take the bike outside of those parameters, and the system is not able to cope with it, due in part to its primitive design. Just speculation on my part. |
Doerman
| Posted on Friday, July 18, 2008 - 05:11 pm: |
|
I understand where you are coming from Mark. But here in Cali I ride at elevations ranging from sea level to 7K feet and temps from 45 (January) to 100F (now). And no problems indeed. On the other hand I spoke to a 1098S owner that has had his bike since March 07 and they have yet to figure out his fueling problems which are stalling at low speed and stumbles under 5K and at 7K. He was coveting my fine running 1125R and thinking about giving up on the 1098S. |
Azxb9r
| Posted on Friday, July 18, 2008 - 08:45 pm: |
|
That is interesting. Every time I go up Mt. Lemon or Kitt Peak I go through this cycle... At the base of the mountain it runs well, as I get up past about 5000 ft. it begins to run poorly, as I continue to the top then start to head down, it has a period where it will run well again. As I continue down , it will start to run poorly again, a couple of miles after I get back down to the flats it will start to run well again. Another issue I have is weather changes. It is monsoon season here right now, which means that the barometer is bouncing all over the place. Every time there is a sudden, drastic change in weather, the bike will run like hell for a while untill it can relearn. What I am getting from this is that the system learns very slowly. When going from 2500 ft to 8000 ft in a short period of time, it just does not seem able to keep up. I believe that the newer system on the 1125 is supposed to be faster, but I don't know enough about it to make an intelligent comment. I love the bike, and have learned to live with its eccentricities... but it would be nice to have a more sophisticated system. Knowing what can be done makes you want it. |
Krassh
| Posted on Friday, July 18, 2008 - 09:11 pm: |
|
Might want to check and see if your Baro Sensor is installed correctly or if it has anything in it. |
Xb9
| Posted on Friday, July 18, 2008 - 09:59 pm: |
|
I think he's talking about his 9? (no baro sensor) |
Fresnobuell
| Posted on Friday, July 18, 2008 - 11:11 pm: |
|
My 25r ran from 250 feet to 7,500 feet in 1 hour today and ran like a champ. There was some loss of power due to the elevation, but the bike ran great even during some sub 3K RPM portions in slow traffic. If the article is right about the hit and miss fueling issues with the 25r (and based on the evidence it does seem hit and miss), then I am blessed. Keep the re-flash away from my bike! PS--My '06 XB9SX does just as good on the same run. Never misses a beat. Never understood the criticism of the DDFI2.... |
Spatten1
| Posted on Friday, July 18, 2008 - 11:37 pm: |
|
AZXB9R: Try to run somewhat steady throttle between 3k and 3.5k for a few mintues during your decent or ascent and see if it helps it adjust. I know when going through twisties and elevation changes that is nearly impossible, but that is how I think the system learns. That is the theory around here anyway. |
Krassh
| Posted on Saturday, July 19, 2008 - 04:09 am: |
|
Aahh should have read his profile, previous posters were complaining about the 1125R so figured wrong. |
M2nc
| Posted on Saturday, July 19, 2008 - 11:58 pm: |
|
Good article! I liked their format, the winner is the bike that suits your wants and needs best! Ducati = Best Weekend Warrior. Benelli = Best Exotic, Looks and Sounds. Buell = Best Daily Rider and Most Fun. I think the test rider got it. Buell's hook is how much fun they are to ride. I am glad to see a review that talked about the fun factor of the Buell. My Uly's fun factor is tops and I am glad to see that there is a reviewer out there that notice that the fastest bike is not necessarily the most fun to ride. This was a good bike in comparison to some of the other test bikes, but I am seeing a consistent complaint about fueling at low revs. I know Buell will get it figured out, but its a big deal. The overall result of the sub-standard fuel mapping is that the entire bike gets a "slightly crude" label. I believe that label would just about disappear if the mapping issue was resolve. Overall though, the best review I have seen on the 1125R to date. If enough readers put the facts laid out by this article, Buell will be very busy building 1125R's. |
|