| Author |
Message |
    
Clarkjw
| | Posted on Thursday, June 11, 2009 - 01:07 pm: | 
|
Hey,
There are some more detailed pictures of the pace bike here
http://www.ultimatemotorcycling.com/2009_Buell_Off icial_Pace_Safety_Bikes_AMA_Pro_Road_Racing
Also, I imagine Buell will relocate the fans and airscoops like Eslick has done. Probably putting some 'airbox' mesh where he's left a gaping hole |
P_squared
| | Posted on Thursday, June 11, 2009 - 01:24 pm: |
|
Eslick's relocation is due to the difference of the products. I believe RMR is using FlexiGlas on their bikes which allow the option of removing the fans behind the rads. Here’s the pic of the ’08 MotoST bike which shows the difference of the pods:
The Buell Racing body is a different design, which actually covers the pods. |
Gregtonn
| | Posted on Thursday, June 11, 2009 - 01:27 pm: |
|
"Also, I imagine Buell will relocate the fans and airscoops like Eslick has done."
Why would you imagine that?
It will not happen on the pace bikes.
G |
Clarkjw
| | Posted on Thursday, June 11, 2009 - 01:32 pm: |
|
Did I say it would happen on the pace bike, which are already built and released?
Note the thread title: 2010!
This is my speculation for 2010. Yes, flexiglass allows for the removal of the fans in their "rad ram air" configuration. I think Buell should direct the flow from innner scoop to outter scoop for 2010. The pace bikes were just thrown together using Higbee's faring.
Since we are speculating, I think Buell will scrap the second failed attempt a pressurize airbox and revert to the open airbox with vented tank. THE BIKE IS NIGHT AND DAY WITH THE INNER AIRBOX REMOVED.
(Message edited by clarkjw on June 11, 2009) |
P_squared
| | Posted on Thursday, June 11, 2009 - 01:45 pm: |
|
I hear what you're saying, but I don't think they will take the FlexiGlas approach. More likely to just put their existing race fairing on it & cover the pods.
Also don't think they'll vent the airbox, mostly because of noise. The bike is already on the borderline of EPA requirements as evidenced by the noid being there to reduce noise to get it past the test. Adding more noise to the equation doesn't make sense in that context.
I do like your ideas though. |
Court
| | Posted on Thursday, June 11, 2009 - 01:52 pm: |
|
>>>THE BIKE IS NIGHT AND DAY WITH THE INNER AIRBOX REMOVED.
That is an accurate statement.
However there are some impediments to doing that to a production bike. |
Hootowl
| | Posted on Thursday, June 11, 2009 - 02:01 pm: |
|
"However there are some impediments to doing that to a production bike."
The noise police strike again. |
Clarkjw
| | Posted on Thursday, June 11, 2009 - 02:16 pm: |
|
The XB12R has a vented airbox, I'm not sure why they couldn't do the same thing. The early prototypes even had vents by the gas can. |
Gregtonn
| | Posted on Thursday, June 11, 2009 - 02:17 pm: |
|
"Did I say it would happen on the pace bike, which are already built and released?
Note the thread title: 2010!"
You posted: "There are some more detailed pictures of the pace bike here"
Gosh. Wonder why someone would think you were talking about the pace bikes.
"I think Buell will scrap the second failed attempt a pressurize airbox and revert to the open airbox with vented tank."
Once again to be specific and for the record; It ain't gonna happen on the street bikes.
Also just because I'm curious; What did you mean by "...second failed attempt a pressurize airbox..."?
G |
Clarkjw
| | Posted on Thursday, June 11, 2009 - 02:25 pm: |
|
The old XB's 2005 and earlier had closed airboxes. 2007 have vented ones. |
Gregtonn
| | Posted on Thursday, June 11, 2009 - 05:17 pm: |
|
Jason
I'm more curious about why you say it was a "failed attempt".
G |
Unibear12r
| | Posted on Thursday, June 11, 2009 - 06:02 pm: |
|
The "old" XB had a "vent" to the left scoop but came in at 90 degrees to the air stream through the scoop, the rear cylinder and out the fan in back. You are not going to create pressure with that set up nor was it intended to. It was done to reduce noise. |
