| Author | Message | ||
     Vanvideo |
So I'm now riding on a Nightster, nice bike and all but could use some more oomph. So, if the XB12 motor is derived from the Sportster engine, couldn't Harley manage to fit one into a Sportster frame? Imagine a Nightster with all that power on tap. Harley would rule the power cruiser market! Is it because of the Sportster frame? Can't handle the juice? Has anyone done an engine swap? Just a thought.. | ||
| Glitch |
The "new" Sportster uses Buell derived heads as well as other pieces. Ironic huh. You'd still need to loose a lot of weight to keep up with a Buell, even if you had a Buell engine. | ||
| Jramsey |
Ditto what Glich said. Local guy has a '02 Sporty with T-Storm top end and S/E cams, runs strong but not nearly as quick as my tubers. To much weight,poor handling,Fred Flintstone brakes. | ||
| Spatten1 |
Even with the Buell Spec heads, I think they are down 10 or 15 horsepower. Maybe the chassis is too flimsy for HD to put a 100 HP engine in it, while retaining a margin of integrity. | ||
| S1wmike |
Correct me if I am wrong , but when the XB platform came out they made enough changes to the engine including mounting points that it became a Buell preproirtory engine. Now the good news is that any Buell engine from a tuber will fit in a Sportster. | ||
| 86129squids |
Chasing a dream, youn's- I always wanted to see a CVO Sportster with a light frame and Buell performance parts all over it- Flick and Willie G won't allow any "cross-branding" however, which is foolish IMHO. For a while my former workplace had both a '99 X1 Lightning and a new '09 XR1200 side-by-side. I got to thinking about how in so many ways the 10 year old, 2-3 generation back Buell was the better bike of the two. Buell is a VASTLY underutilized resource as far as "branding" goes, could quite easily be pitched as the High Output/Performance/Competition side of HD. (Message edited by 86129squids on April 07, 2009) | ||
| Jaimec |
The Sportster will NEVER put out as much power as a Buell with the same engine. Not without completely changing the look of the bike, anyway. The Sportster is all about LOOKS, not performance. If you want more performance you'd need a MUCH bigger airbox, and those tiny staggered dual-shorties would have to be replaced with something with a LOT more volume as well. You thought the early tube-frame Buells looked awkward with that giant breadbox hanging off the right-side? Try to imagine a Sportster with something like that... | ||
| Njxb12s |
I might have missed something in this thread reading so fast but that new XR1200 sportster sounds just like a Buell...go check it out!!! That bike is awsome...FYI, I don't sell Harley's/Buells anymore, just a opinion ;o) | ||
| Jaimec |
Off the showroom floor (for an apples-to-apples comparison) the XR1200 is down 13bhp from an equivalent XB12Ss model and quite a bit heavier too. | ||
| Not_purple_s2 |
Do the Sportsters still use heavier flywheels? That could have a lot to do with it. The airbox on the XR1200 is much more restricted than an XB, they had to cram it all underneath the gas tank. | ||
| Gregtonn |
"Maybe the chassis is too flimsy for HD to put a 100 HP engine in it, while retaining a margin of integrity." When it was updated it a few years back HD added about fifty pounds to the Sportster frame. I think they did that with the extra power in mind. Its hard to retain "The Look" and still get Buell like performance. G | ||
| Jaimec |
And there you have the difference in company philosophy. Harley is the text book definition of form over function. Buell is the exact opposite: Function over form. | ||
| Natexlh1000 |
Has anyone ever put a Blast engine in an older sportster frame? thumpthumpthump...... | ||
| Vanvideo |
I'm not talking about Buell-like sportbike performance; there's no way any Sportster's chassis can match that. I'm talking about straight-line, quick-passing power. A true power cruiser. It would have "the look" but with very good acceleration to back it up. Basically a smaller, air-cooled version of the VRod. Now, that would be cool. | ||
| Ferris_von_bueller |
Harley is the text book definition of form over function. Buell is the exact opposite: Function over form. Yea, but why must those philosophies be mutually exclusive? Other manufacturers have no problem putting the two together. | ||
| Mortarmanmike120 |
Phaedrus would describe that as the classic vs romantic view. Of course he also went insane. (Zen and the Art of Motorcycle Maintenance) | ||
| Cityxslicker |
I took a serious long look at what it would take to get my XL883 to preform to the stats in my head... it came out to 4900 in parts and another 1300 in labor... I spent the money on the Buell instead. Absolutely no regrets. its the difference between a sledgehammer and a ball peen; I will let y'all decide which is which. | ||
| Jstfrfun |
Van, it's valves and cams and flywheels, pull your heads put some money in them get the Andrews cams, get the exhaust and feel the butt dyno. The chassis will handle the power, it's not that much. | ||
| Glitch |
Yea, but why must those philosophies be mutually exclusive? I think the Buells are brilliant looking bikes. | ||
| Teeps |
Vanvideo Posted on Tuesday, April 07, 2009 Why no Buell-powered Sportsters? Because they'd be Buells. Or, maybe "Buell-sters" | ||
| Glitch |
Sportuells? | ||
| Oddball |
Spuells |
