| Author | Message | ||
     Glitch |
Confederate likes Erik's exhaust idea as well.  | ||
| Sifo |
If it is indeed something that would wear out and fail, it would have a service interval similar to filters and fluids. And the lifetime drive belt. | ||
| Stirz007 |
"The Buell patent was for the break-away steering head to protect the integrity of the tank, not making the frame a gas tank." Check it out: Patent 6484837 _ Motorcycle frame having integral fuel storage unit and break-away steering head. (2002) http://www.wikipatents.com/US-Patent-6484837/motor cycle-frame-having-integral-fuel-storage-unit-and- break-away/Page-1 Then there's this one (1990) http://www.freepatentsonline.com/4951774.pdf The latest I've seen is: http://www.freepatentsonline.com/7690467.pdf(April 2010) So I think it's fair to say that the fuel in frame patents are one of Eric's 'things' JR Bourget has the patents on the 'oil in frame', but not until 1999. I know for a fact that JR wasn't the first to think of it, just the first to patent it. JM | ||
| Reepicheep |
Yup. Honda XR650s had oil in the frame for quite a while before that. | ||
| Azxb9r |
I have to replace the flex couplers on cars on a pretty regular basis, and they dont move nearly as much as a coupler connected to a swing arm would have to move. They can also be disturbingly expensive. A flexible piece of tubing for a fluid is much different than an exhaust flex coupler. | ||
| Buellbozo |
Hell, the Triumphs that killed Triumph (71 and later) had oil in the frame. And so did SR500s. | ||
| Avc8130 |
As an aside I do not believe it matters who patents the idea first, I believe it matters who has documentation to create the idea first. If Erik was awarded this patent in 2009 based on drawings and documentation from 2007 (assuming), but Confederate had this design/concept in 2006 Confederate could contest the patent. Realize when I say this they may not actually win anything or prove anything, but they could be successful in costing Erik quite the sum of money as the onus is on the defendant (or enough of it is) and lawyers cost $500/hour. ac | ||
| Ensigncrusher |
The patent was applied for in 2009, underwent a significant back and forth, notice of rejection, etc etc etc and the application was first published by the USPTO last month. I don't believe it's actually been granted yet. | ||
| Court |
Patent PENDING offers full protection. | ||
| Avc8130 |
Patent pending offers full protection, and the opportunity for anyone working on similar technology to contest that they have been doing it longer... | ||
| Court |
>>>>and the opportunity for anyone working on similar technology to contest that they have been doing it longer... Precisely the reason that whenever I have an idea for anything that may go commercial I jot it down, seal it in an envelope and mail it to myself. Be mindful that Mr. Buell, currently holding a couple hundred patents, was raised by a Intellectual Property Attorney. . . this ain't his first rodeo. | ||
| Court |
That is inaccurate. | ||
| U4euh |
As stated before, what will this do to the bearing failure issue? Overheating bearings due to a HOT swingarm seems likely. | ||
| Pushrodpete |
Erik is 60-ish right? Then he must have had a hand in the development of the swingarm/exhaust combo on the late-1940s Imme R100, too! THAT explains it!  (and this one's even single-sided, to go with the single-sided fork!) Right? No one else but Erik could have thought of something like this....right? All outside-the-box motorcycle design has taken place only in the last 25 years, right? And again, only by Erik, right? Dammit... out of kool-aid again......... | ||
| Mr_grumpy |
Court, you're not being very helpful. If it's inaccurate, why? If you know better, spit it out. Pete, I get where you're coming from. My 1960s Mobylette moped, that I had when I was 16, had fuel in the frame & an underslung exhaust. I'm out of kool-aid too, More coffee instead.  | ||
| Hughlysses |
Innes- here's the frame patent: http://patft.uspto.gov/netacgi/nph-Parser?Sect1=PT O2&Sect2=HITOFF&p=1&u=%2Fnetahtml%2FPTO%2Fsearch-b ool.html&r=13&f=G&l=50&co1=AND&d=PTXT&s1=%22buell, +erik%22&OS="buell,+erik"&RS="buell,+erik" It references both the break-away steering head and the "fuel in frame" concept. | ||
| Hughlysses |
Here's an interesting pic from the patent that started the thread:  The bike looks like a standard 1125R. Note that it appears to still have a partial muffler below the front of the engine. As Ft_bstrd suggested, it does look like this would be a really cool way to re-configure the exhaust on the 1190RS. The unanswered question remains will this patent when issued belong to the now defunct Buell Motorcycle Company, or does it become Erik's or Erik Buell Racing's? | ||
| Avc8130 |
I figure the biggest advanatage to the swingarm exhaust is the ability to use longer headers and still maintain a streamlined design. Clearly the connection between the headers and swingarm is the largest hurdle. In all reality a piece of flex pipe would probably be more reliable in the long run than an 09 1125 stator. Oh no he didn't! LOL ac | ||
| Blake |
>>> No one else but Erik could have thought of something like this....right? Wrong. Not sure who you are arguing against as no one here is asserting anything of the kind. I guess it's nice to win an argument with whatever straw man you are able to contrive. It makes for poor discussion though, and reveals deep intellectual dishonesty. You can do better; even if as it appears your intent here is to belittle and attack Erik Buell, you can still do better with honest information. >>> All outside-the-box motorcycle design has taken place only in the last 25 years, right? And again, only by Erik, right? Again, wrong. You've upped the nonsense by expanding your straw man to almost infinite idiocy. The intellectual dishonesty in your assertion is comical if not so ludicrous. >>> Dammit... out of kool-aid again......... You apparently have your own very bitter supply and are snorting it directly in powder form. | ||
| Swordsman |
While they are not the same design, I think claiming NO resemblance is silly. I say that because the Confederate uses the actual exhaust pipe as the swingarm. The Buell design (from what I can tell of the diagram) has a hollowed out aluminum swingarm with a pipe passing through it. To me, that's a big difference. But maybe I'm looking at the pic wrong. (The there's that whole deal about the exit port situated in a way that fills in the vacuum, which is way different than what the Hellcat is doing....) ~SM | ||
| Trojan |
I don't think this will make production unless someone can make that huge swingarm/exhaust a lot lighter than it appears in the drawings! Surely it isn't a great idea to move weight from the chassis to the rear wheel and increase unsprung weight just so you can incorporate the exhaust system into the swingarm/hugger assembly. Seems to be an answer to a problem that doesn't exist yet? Just coz it is patented doesn't mean it is practical or even sensible  | ||
| Hughlysses |
By spreading out the material used to form the swingarm into a larger shape, you may be able to make a stiffer part with no increase in weight (or an equally stiff part of lighter weight) while also incorporating the muffler. | ||
| Hootowl |
Fuel in the frame had been done before. I suspect that if it hadn't been coupled with the break-away steering head, the patent would not have been awarded. 'Course, I've been "inaccurate" before. | ||
| Blake |
Rex, >>> Some exhausts get moisture and rust out, even the Buell mufflers. Wonder what this would do to the swing arm? Corrosion resistant aluminum or stainless steel alloy = no problem? The flex joint would be fine. The range of motion is tiny. The flex joint can be designed to withstand both the temperature environment as well as the deformation. Difference between the confederate and Buell configuration is that the Buell version includes an actual muffler utilizing acoustic wave canceling (tuned resonance chambers), and it utilizes the torque box of the swingarm, not just one of the arms in the form of a simple bent pipe. | ||
| Mikef5000 |
I find the flexjoint in a car exhaust is often the failing point, and they have a tiny range of motion! All they account for is motor mount movements and exhaust bouncing. This would have to have a significant range of motion. Car flex joints are also ridiculously expensive. I only see this 'working' under one of two conditions, they use something other than a standard automotive style flex joint, or they somehow make them quite inexpensive and simple to replace. | ||
| Rex |
Fun to consider. Fun to look at ideas people have to utilize current parts for multi purposes. When you see a Buell frame hanging around for the production line, you realize how small it actually is and how you can use a frame and a tank as one small unit. It looks very impressive. Neat idea. I always thought that the oil in the swing arm made sense. My only worry was the line running from it to the motor. Apparently there were no problems at all with this design and the flexible hose. I have not heard one problem from that one The Belt pulley unit. I have not heard of one of those wearing out? anyone else? I like the Britten idea of funneling the air thru the body work and out the back thru the radiator. I also like the fact that Britten took the motor, then attached the forks, the swing arm to the it, without really having a frame. | ||
| Boltrider |
So the question is where's the other patents? I was expecting a whole slew of them with 2011 on the horizon. | ||
| Ferris_von_bueller |
Interesting a fellow Badwebber told me about this back when the dirt bike project was underway. I just assumed he was talking about the dirt bike. I guess they carried the idea over to the 1190. | ||
| Reepicheep |
Cityslicker wore out a tensioner, but he doesn't count, he's special. | ||
| Hughlysses |
So the question is where's the other patents? I was expecting a whole slew of them with 2011 on the horizon. This will give you a list of all the pending patents listing "Buell, Erik" as the inventor: http://appft1.uspto.gov/netacgi/nph-Parser?Sect1=P TO2&Sect2=HITOFF&p=1&u=%2Fnetahtml%2FPTO%2Fsearch- bool.html&r=0&f=S&l=50&TERM1=buell%2C+erik&FIELD1= &co1=AND&TERM2=&FIELD2=&d=PG01 Note that every one I've looked at still lists the assignee as "Buell Motorcycle Company". Hopefully part of the deal with Erik leaving HD is Erik getting the rights to all the patents that were pending. There could well be other patent applications related to Erik Buell Racing that don't list Erik as the inventor. (Message edited by Hughlysses on November 23, 2010) |
