| Author | Message | ||
     Rick_A |
I have to agree with that...though, IMO it's likely the finest aircooled pushrod engine period. As far as power...in my personal situation I'd just like to see that torque curve that flattens then drops after 6200RPM on my S1 to go to redline. I'd be absolutely happy then. The XB's don't have that problem stock...and with blueprinted engines, proper tuning and mild porting I've seen people get numbers hovering around 110HP with 80ft-lbs of torque. Seems great to me! | ||
| Ray_Maines |
I've been there, I've done that and have the T-shirts to prove it. By the time my last wish comes true I've dreamed up three new wishes and I'll bet you’d figure out something else to wish for too. I got my 100 rwhp, now I’m wishing for a big fat, flat torque curve. When I get that I’ll start wishing for a sub 400 lb. bike with carbon fiber wheels. Then it’s Olin suspension, then....... | ||
| Court |
Is it just me or has anyone else noticed that there are like no complaints from OWNERS about the power of the XB. I've seen some more "sure, more is always better" but they are always followed with some glowing compliment about the bike in it's "as delivered" state. I've a prescription for the detractors...get to your local newsstand and get involved in following the ongoing long-term test of the Buell XB9R in Superbike magazine. From the outset, by their own admission, they've looked for a reason to say "see, we told ya so" and for the Buell to be outclassed by the other machines in the test fleet. To date, the Buell does nothing but continue to put out, perform and swallow up UJM's on the race course and street. Cut and paste is proving "bad science" so, I'll try to photograph a couple of the pages and reproduce here. Number me among those who is damn glad Buell waited until the bike was sorted out for the release...it is, loosely quoting Erik in Cycle World "everything promised and more". Court (P.S. - I offered up a "ok, then prove it by putting a Sportster motor in a Buell challenge in 1996. One guy got to make a fool of himself. It may be time to resurrect the challenge by offering someone a lucrative award for building a Sportster motor...armed with ONLY a Buell parts catalog. Which,if.....IF...Jose' is right, is not only possible, but easy) | ||
| José_Quiñones |
What? I think you have that backwards from what you meant to say. try to build a Buell engine WITHOUT a Sportster parts catalog You can call the XB engine "new", but it's like my granpa's old ax: it's on the second handle and fourth head, but it's still my granpa's old axe. My point all along is that the magazines, which have much greater circulation what what any one of us here write, mention and complain about the FACT of the motor's lineage in it's reviews and that stops a lot of people from even considering the bike. Especially if it's not shifting right. Until the engine changes COMPLETELY this situation will not change. | ||
| Court |
>>>Try to build a Buell engine WITHOUT a Sportster parts catalog So. . . you are saying that, with nothing more than this Buell parts catalog (P/N 99574-03Y) lying on my desk (for the record, I do not own a Sportster parts catalog) that I can not build an XB motor? | ||
| Bykergeek |
No complaints as a Fbolt owner but I do have a Buell'a Claus wish list..  | ||
| Captainplanet |
My Buell Firebolt 6 month report. Satisfaction with bike - 100% Satisfaction with dealer service - was 100% until I tried to get a seemingly simple sidestand replacement. The bike is great. It has plenty of power for riding within the legal limits and plenty more for riding outside of the legal limits but within my sensible limits on the street. I love the motor. Coming off of a Jap bike (Kawa Ninja), the motor is sweet for the type of riding I do, which includes commuting to work daily and riding in the Austin hill country on the weekends. You don't have to rev the piss out of this motor to go. I think the bike is deceptively fast. Handling is great. Yes it feels a bit different from you average sport bike. I love it. It goes exactly were I want it to go when I want it too. Brakes are very strong. It will stop quickly, enough said. Sure I want more power. Doesn't everyone. I want more power in my car, computer, and bank account as well. So be it. Bike has been perfectly reliable in all weather. This bike runs the same in pouring down rain as it does in 110 degree heat. I couldn't say that about a lot of other bikes I've own. In summary, the only negative thing has been trying to get the replacement sidestand. I hope that isn't an example of how the dealer trys to treat me on warrenty work in the future. I have to say that Buell Customer Service quickly took care of the sidestand issue with my dealer. It's 65 degree and sunny here so I am going out for a ride. Jeff | ||
| S320002 |
"Until the engine changes COMPLETELY this situation will not change." Obviously, as with many people, the problem is not the performance but the technology used to achieve that performance. I find it amusing that the XB engine is derided for its "1950s technology" yet in the next breath they want to compare it to "modern" liter bikes, just because of its displacement. Up until this year these same "experts" were content to let DOHC twins have a one third advantage in displacement over DOHC fours in both AMA and WSB. Where did that logic come from? (Rhetorical question of course.) Some just don't seem to be smart enough to see past their technology blindness. Making old technology work better can be every bit as effective as using or creating newer and more complex technology. I know these ideas will be too deep for some people but I had to try. Greg | ||
| Imonabuss |
But it's like Grandpa's old axe with a carbon-fiber handle and a titanium head...so it's a pretty cool axe. | ||
| Budo |
Quote: It is simply the finest air-cooled 1000cc pushrod engine ever made. -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Which made me wonder. How many air cooled push rod motors are there. HD/Buell, Yamaha VStar?, MotoGuzzi. What else? | ||
| Rick_A |
Ray...thinking on it you're probably right. A square bore and stroke would probably do me for good...but for now I've gotta make do  BTW...what happened to your M2's? Fixed?Sold?Scrapped? Just curious. | ||
| José_Quiñones |
Take the sportster part numbers out of the Buell catalog, then try it..... you know, the starter, the gearbox and related items, the clutch, the primary chain, the oil pump, etc.... | ||
| S320002 |
"try to build a Buell engine WITHOUT a Sportster parts catalog" Note the word engine in this line. "Take the sportster part numbers out of the Buell catalog, then try it..... you know, the starter, the gearbox and related items, the clutch, the primary chain, the oil pump, etc...." 1. Starter. Q: Who in their right mind would buy a bike without an ultratech starter? A: Just about everybody, but then its not really part of the engine either. 2. Gearbox. Gear ratios modified at the request of Erik Buell for the 2000 model year. Shift mechanism modified by Buell for 2002. But then the gearbox is not really part of the engine either. 3. Clutch. See item #1. 4. Primary chain. XB chain tensionor is a Buell specific part #. See item #1. 5. Oil pump. Modified by Buell three times since 1997. This really is an engine part! Etc... maybe this means the nuts, bolts and screws. Heads? Buell. Pistons? Buell. Crank assembly? Buell. Cylinders? Buell. Cases? Buell. JQ, you should be able to see a pattern here. No? Greg | ||
| Crusty |
I lurk on this board a bit, and I occasionally post something, but I'm not totally familiar with everybody and their histories. Please forgive me if I'm mistaken in my assessments. With that caveat, what I'd like to know is: Jose, did you get a lemon or something? It seems that I've never seen a positive word about Buells in any of your posts. If the bikes suck as bad as you make out, why don't you go buy something really advanced; I suggest a Kawasaki Mach 3. You know, the bike that made all Harleys obsolete. It embodied all the latest technology-flexible frames, drum brakes and suspension that kept the tires from rubbing the undersides of the fenders. It also had a different ignition system each year it was produced. I like pushrod engines. They have a lower center of gravity than OHC engines. I also like hydraulic lifters. I don't have to adjust them on a regular basis. I also think that the Sportster engine in its Evo configuration is one of the most durable and maintenance free (as well as underrated) engines in motorcycle history. You seem to feel that a racebike is the ultimate street machine. If Troy Corser rides one on a track and wins with it, then it's got to be better, right? I don't like Ducatis. They require too much maintenance for me. Last time I looked at an Aprilia, I couldn't even see one of the spark plugs, let alone get in there to try to change one. I dislike unnecessary complexity. My wife had a Blast. The only problem she had in 10,000 miles was that the rear tires wore out so quick. Nothing broke or fell off. That's the same technology that's used in the XB's. I like what I've seen so far, the Firebolt and the new Lightning, and I'm eagerly awaiting the successor to the Thunderbolt. I think it'll be a real joy. Wake up and smell the coffee! NO other bike feels as good to ride as a Buell. If I found a bike that felt better, I'd sell the Buell and buy it. | ||
| Shazam |
Look, these bikes have been in the hands of the public since April....where are the people that are having problems? They usually squeal the loudest, right Jose' It is a testament, that no peeps have emerged here on the issue of reliability with the new engine design. I will put it here for you in black and brown....I can't break mine....and no one is trying harder! it was 27 degrees when I left my house this morning at 7 a.m. It was 8 hours and three hundred miles later when I pulled back in after two fantastic meals and a whole days worth of comraderie with my fellow buellers.....priceless. | ||
| Davegess |
Let's see the XB is using 1950's technology so it is bad right? So I fllip open my Pomeroy and look at maybe 1913 and what do I see? 4 cylinder, water cooled overhead camshaft 4 vlave motors! Why the new GSXR is using 1913 technolgy! It must be more bad (whoa call the grammer police) than than the XB 'cause the XB is alredy up to the 50's. Pushrods are not a whole lot older engine tech than overhead cams. Both got invented and developed from the very early days of internal combustion engines. It is not the broad configuration that you choose but how well you carry it out. I can site numerous instance when the latest greatest engine proved inferior for the task at hand to a seemingly lower spec "old" technolgy engine. The small block "thinwall" Chevy comes to mind. US and European road racing in the early fifties was dominated by the exotic 12 cylinder overhead cam engines form Europe. When the new chevy came out a lot of hot rodders built sports car to race in SCCA and Cal club races. Now this engine feature a single camshaft down in the block and the Europeans pretty much dismised it as "old fashioned". And it was if all you looked at was the valve arangement. BUT it was designed to be a very good revver for a pushrod motor and as a result made some pretty decent power. Not as much per CI as a Ferrari but A class racing in the US didn't have an upper displacemtn limit. Now prior to the Chevy many had stuff BIG american engines into sports chassis and had some success but the things always weighed too much for the power they made. The Chevy was different. It featured significant advances in casting technology so was actually quite light for it's power output. A pushrod 300 CI Chevy might not make much more power than the 180CI Ferrari but it also but it also didn't weigh anymore, may have weighed less. American motors stated winning many many races with "old technolgy". How does this apply to the XB? Well the motor in th XB suits it. It is a pretty good motor for the job it does. It allows Buell to built and sell XB's in the small quantities they are prepared to sell them in for $10000. Now Buell perhaps could have invested as much in the engine as they did in the cycle parts and we woul dhave had a very cool bike but how much ould it have cost? $12000, $13000? I' take it the way it is, it fits my pockekbook. Would I like to see a new engine? I would love to see what Erik would do with the budget to start with new tooling and a new assembly line. I bet we would get something none of us have even thought of. Perhaps the next generation, the 2008 bike. Me I plan to ride the wheels off mine. It should be ready for replacement in 2008. Dave | ||
| Jscott |
Dave, "I bet we would get something none of us have even thought of." How about a four stroke version of his original Barton square four? | ||
| Davegess |
J, too big too complicated. It only works as a two stroke 'cause you don't have valves and camshafts to deal with. It isn't even all that good of a two stroke, the arrangment involves counter rotaiting crankshafts and is large and more complicated than a V or inline arrangement. It presents lots of problems for coolng exhaust valves also. (A problem the old Ariel square four had in spades) Dave | ||
| S320002 |
Dave, I was waiting for someone to bite on that '50s thing. I had a similar analogy in mind. What was it that guys said... something about great minds? Obviously that would leave me out. But Zorus Arkus Duntov (sp?), father of the small-block Chevy, and Erik Buell would have likely agreed on a lot of things. I also would like to have seen Erik Buell and John Britten in a brainstorming session. Ah well...what is yet to come may be better than what could have been. Greg | ||
| Elvis |
"It is a testament, that no peeps have emerged here on the issue of reliability with the new engine design. I will put it here for you in black and brown....I can't break mine....and no one is trying harder!" I'm thinking this is the biggest reason they stuck with the tested engine design. They had several goals with this new bike, and a huge one had to be imroved perception of quality. It was probably very wise for Buell to trade some extra power for reliability at this stage in the game. Given the negative press surrounding the current engine, I think it's inevitable we'll see a new engine sometime over the next few years, and I'm betting they're working on it now. My best guess/hope would be: 2003-Sport Tourer XB9 and reworked (redesigned?)Blast. . . 2004-New engine in the Firebolt with possibly some re-worked body work. | ||
| Reepicheep |
How hard would it be for the FACTORY to stroke the XB9 engine? I know it would be a bear for the aftermarket, but what about the factory? You loose a little peak HP but gain low end torque. Stroke it, bore it, get back to 1200 cc's, and throw it in the sport tourer (and in the new Harley Sportster). Throw it in the Cyclone replacement also, though right now I don't know if we will ever see one of those (as the new Lightning looks to be an awfully nice Cyclone). Bill | ||
| Elvis |
I seem to remember there were noise and emission issues with simple displacement boosts. From things I've heard from Harley and Buell, noise and emission regulations (maybe more so than power issues) will probably lead away from push-rods and air-cooling in the future. | ||
| Kerryx1 |
Let's see, air, fuel and a source of ignition. Contain it all and put it together at the proper time, harness the result and "Viola!" Technology that's been around longer than all of us. Take a serious look at how many "50's" technology V-Twins are still on the street in all sorts of chassis. They are rebuildable, parts available and above all American. Search your database of quotes and find ANY other bike manufacturer that will stand that test. I can walk into a dealer and obtain OEM parts for a 1936 engine. Bet you can't get a set of rings for your 1996 square piston techno-jap throw away junk. I know my Buell will still be running, rebuilt countless times when I finally throw in the helmet. With all the knowledge and bad mouthing going on, why don't you build your own perfect bike and market it. Believe me, I'll be the first kid on the block to superbike race on the street with my super-techno-steed "JQ" Twin. It'll be cheaper too. With all that tech, I'll never need a warranty. It'll never wear out. By the way, when it hits the streets, I won't even need gas for it's V-Twin ultra smooth nuclear reactor. Get real! There's nothing else on the street that gives you the same adrenaline rush as a Buell. In your own way you have to admit that to yourself. All others come and go like flies at a picnic. 'Ole Baldie  | ||
| Jrh |
post scrapped by me | ||
| Rick_A |
Was the Barton a rotary valve? That's the only reason I'd see a need to make it a square 4. Stroking a motor increases piston speed at a given rpm. Shorter stroke is good. Big bore is also good  . Buell wanted a motor that is both more durable, sportier, and revier. I'd like to keep the big low end torque and have more horsepower. With the increasing EPA strangleholds that's probably not gonna happen. It'll be interesting to see what technology, if any, may emerge to keep our beloved air lungers alive. | ||
| Davegess |
The Barton was a rotary valve. Dave | ||
| Ray_Maines |
Rick: The M2 was crashed and then totaled. The insurance company was generous. Buell quit building tubers and didn't have the XB9R out. Triumphs were being blown out at end of year prices and the model I wanted (Sprint RS) is a slow seller so the price was WAY down. The RS is nice but not perfect. I changed the handlebars and put a TBR slip-on muffler on it and, all things considered, I'm happy.  | ||
| Kerryx1 |
Hey Ray! You're happy and I'm happy you're all in one piece! Happy Holidays! 'Ole Baldie | ||
| Rick_A |
Awww, that's a shame. Good you're alright and everything is in order, though. Is there another Buell in your future? | ||
| Retiredmxer |
Does anyone have any experience with Wileyco exhaust for the Firebolt? |
