| Author | Message | ||
     Raymaines |
MCN did a little tech review of the FireBolt this morning, check it out. FrieBolt Review | ||
| Blake |
Ray: Everybody is a friggin' expert it seems. MCN's comments like their title "Buell’s Firebolt radical? We’ve seen it all before" are very indicative of some level of subjective personal agenda on the part of the author. Sure, we have seen fuel in the frame and perimeter brakes, but NEVER on a production motorcycle, let alone one with a 1200 cc engine, a dry weight of 385 LBs, a 52" wheelbase, and a 21 deg rake! MCN then quotes a Steve Harris as saying "May" be okay? The oil in the swingarm is totally negligible in it's effects on rear suspension performance! Then after criticizing a totally insignificant addition to the unsprung weight (Harris should have said "inertia") of the rear suspension, MCN then in reference to the significantly reduced unsprung weight of the front wheel says: So which is it? On one hand the negligible effect of the oil on the rear suspension is questioned then the significantly reduced weight of the front wheel is labeled as a "marginal" benefit!!?? MCN's Jon Urry apparently feels that some bozo's quote is news worthy and as long as it supports his personal agenda. Such quotes are a dime a dozen; anyone can dig up seemingly reputable individuals who are willing to support whatever the author's personal agenda might be. I consider it irresponsible reporting and a disservice to their readers. It will be interesting to see the reports from knowledgeable road racing types. What that article failed to say was that Buell was the first to offer the "already seen" innovations in a production motorcycle. I lost a lot of respect for MCN after reading that article. | ||
| Aaron |
I agree. What a stoopid article. I got the impression that someone feels threatened, and felt compelled to poo-poo it to protect his feelings. No substance to the article at all. | ||
| Rocketman |
Blake San : re MCN on Firebolt...... maybe you took it wrong. I think the fact that the Firebolt is so radical in certain areas is why MCN have published such a feature. If anything, the fact that the author consulted Steve Harris and Bob Stevenson shows how serious he considered Buell's creation. Let's not forget Bob Stevenson is in some ways responsible for the design of our tubed Buell frames as it was he who built the first Barton frame.  As for Harris, they've built many a GP chassis, never mind the road bike stuff, and are surely to be regarded as world leaders in chassis design. Chill out dude, I'm impressed they even considered EB's Firebolt for such constructive criticism ! Rocket in England | ||
| Davegess |
Rocket, you may be correct, just the fact that they went to Haris to get an opinion show just how seriouos this bike is. i think there is a bit of "not invented here" to it also in the been done before comments. Yeah it has been done before but not for production use and not in a total package. I do detect a bit of jealousy here, Harris is one of the world's top chassis guys but so is Erik and he probably doesn't like erik getting kudos for stuff. Dave | ||
| Rocketman |
I read it different. I thought the comments about "done before" were just a way of expressing to readers that they should understand the history behind such ideas. Anyways, let's not dispute it as such as it must all be publicity, one way or the other. I'll look forward to reading the full article next week and I'll update you all if there's more. Father Gess at Bonneville ? Rocket in England | ||
| Blake |
Harris totally missed the fact that the oil in the swingarm allows the 52" wheelbase. Or at least MCN didn't see fit to quote him if he did. I don't have a real problem with what Harris said; My complaint is with MCN publishing statements like "Buell’s Firebolt radical? We’ve seen it all before" and "Revolutionary or gimmick-laden? The Buell Firebolt.". Rather than headline and title the article so negatively, MCN could have just as easily slanted it positively or neutrally and exposed the pertinent details within the article itself. Instead they start out by insinuating that the innovations are simply nothing new and are gimmicks to lure an unsuspecting buyer. Unfortunately the article spouts opinions and generalities, with absolutely no real analysis or technical details; that is irresponsible journalism. It came across to me as a real slam at Buell by someone who is trying to support his own personal agenda. It's crap. | ||
| Blake |
Rocket: The only thing I see in common between that Barton frame and a Buell frame is that both are tubular steel. Surely you can see that the Barton's relatively flimsy cradle type frame is no where near the same beast as the Buell truss frame. I'd give Duc more credit for inspiring the Buell frame. I'd give Erik the final credit with the RR1000. | ||
| Hans |
Blake, you couldn`t have said it better. Rim brake Belt drive without need to adjust Air cooled V twin Oil in swingarm Gas in frame Very brutal steering geometry Twin headlamp It is not loaded with just goodies: It are all specialized contributions fitting in the overall concept of centralizing mass and light as possible. Ha, why do people look at the most beautiful woman even if they have "seen it all before" And what about saying towards a modern music componist: Nothing special, I did hear all those tones already long beforebefore. The article in MCN is absolutely nuts. | ||
| Buelliedan |
Blake, How do I get me one of those 1200cc Firebolts? | ||
| Court |
Done before?...perhaps...but bringing the individual benefits of all the Firebolt's inoovative features together into a commericially viable package is an accomplishment and Erik Buell deserves due credit. In the words of Steve Jobs...(when many folks had bits and pieces of what would become the PC) "Real geniuses ship". Court | ||
| Tripper |
I gotta say that I've been carrying around a real hate for "The Motor Co.", enough so that I used to sound like that ridiculous essay that was posted here recently. But anyone who is watching has to hand it to HD for letting EB go friggin nutzo with the Firebolt, and having the balls to release it. And that VRod is probably a bigger risk to their core business. These are exciting times, I just hope the magazine test bikes hold up. | ||
| Rocketman |
Shucks Blake, you thought it was that bad ? Best I can say is, I read MCN every week so I might have a different take on the feature in question. I also think that MCN have been really good to Buell. See for yourself by searching their website for Buell stuff. There's a stack of it. I like even more the fact that they didn't just write about stock Buell's, they went as far as to give Just Harleys stroked monster S1, now owned and ridden by Sandy Griffiths in Wales, a full two page write up and road test, way back in 1998. It's the fact that they have written great things about Buell that I don't see that article as a slam at all. Constructive criticism perhaps, but hell, they are asking the top boys and not just some "back street tube bender", if you'll pardon the expression  As for the frame not looking anything like a Buell frame, that's why I posted a pic of the headstock area only, because that part still does. For sure, lots of the frame is nothing like the Buell, but that doesn't take away the fact that Spondon Engineering are a world renowned frame manufacturer with a fabulous reputation, especially in the Streetfighter world ! Anyway's, MCN have been good to Buell over the years and I think that is a real plus point for Buell sales in the UK because MCN (large classified supplement every week) is possibly the first and only place many prospective purchasers will look when they're in the market for a Buell. In any case, all the worlds manufacturers are probabaly holding their breaths in awe of EB's latest frame geometry, hoping it doesn't work, which is maybe another reason MCN asked Spondon and Harris the question. Hell, if this Firebolt put down its power more consitantly on all of the road\track, it won't take as much HP as the Japanese or Italians use\need to build a world beater. Just imagine what the thing might be capable of with a paltry 110 HP, which is why I think it should been made capable of achieving at least 150 mph too. After all, beating anything on a flowing cross country road, or a twisty race track is all well and good, but it would be even better if the thing was uncatchable on the straights , otherwise all that hard earned pace in the twisties becomes for nothing when the opposition pull it back again on the fast bits. Rocket in England | ||
| Davegess |
Erik always tries to build bikes that he likes. I have not talked to him but have traded some emails and talked to others and he seems more excitied about this bike than any previous Buell. I can't wait to ride one as this this is gonna be very much fun. Unfortunatly for all you large and extra large folks Erik is only 5'10" and very fit so this bike will be a tight squeese for you. Dave | ||
| Eeeeek |
Dave: Wehn I last talked to Erik, he told me about his 150 hp turbo X1 and he semed to like that. When watching the dealer tape about the Fireblot, it specifically say's that it is not a straight line bike. Now, I know Erik likes high hp bikes, so it makes sence that a high hp Buell is on the horizon. Regardless, the Firebolt is not the bike for me. Maybe if I could swing a multi bike stable. Vik P.S. Chop pointed out Erik was wearing an "Offspring" shirt |
