| Author | Message | ||
     Redbuelljunkie |
For some reason this seems familiar to me...   And I must say, it sure is a good-looking bike...   Imitation is indeed the sincerest form of flattery. | ||
| Sparky |
Boy, I hope they're paying royalties to Mr. Buell for copying those ideas.  Kind of reminds me of when the dune buggy mfgrs. flooded the market copying Bruce Meyers' pioneering fiberglass dune buggy back in the sixties and forced him out of business. Granted it's not the same situation but you can see where I'm coming from. Cool bike BTW. | ||
| Buelliedan |
Mr Buell did not invent perimeter braking. Buell was just one of the first to put it on a production bike. | ||
| 86129squids |
Funny how they had to do the casting at that weird angle- looks a little more exposed to damage that way, but OTOH, maybe the caliper/pads hanging down in the breeze might help cooling... I've always LOVED Bimotas- wish they could've made that direct injection 2smoker work...  | ||
| Strokizator |
Check out this front brake. I like the way it attaches to the rim. Twin discs seems overkill. http://tinyurl.com/783gw8m | ||
| Court |
Twin discs serve the same purpose as sequins on a bikini. Looks. | ||
| Blake |
Buell was the first to put full floating perimeter braking on a production bike and lighten the front wheel accordingly. It's in the Buell patent.  EBR took it even further. It's really cool to see an exotic high-end sport bike manufacturer like Bimota following Buell's lead. Look out! Here come the naysayers! | ||
| Buelliedan |
Nope no argument from me. I thought it was what I said? | ||
| Guell |
full floating perimeter braking I believe that was the biggest thing about the buell system | ||
| Court |
One way, to help summarize . . . would be to say that all the attempts to utilize perimeter braking, prior to Buell, resulted in diminished braking. Buell was the first to employ a system of perimeter braking that IMPROVED the braking AND handling characteristics of the bike. Buells innovation was substantial enough to relegate Honda's NAS to "concept only" (i.e. they couldn't produce for sale) status. Ditto the exhaust placement. | ||
| Jaimec |
Bimota took Erik's idea one step farther. No one else noticed that was a RADIAL CALIPER on that perimeter brake?? | ||
| Svh |
I did! Can't tell in the pictures but if it was a monoblock style that would be even better! I like it. Bimota makes some very cool boutique bikes. | ||
| Mr_grumpy |
True what Court said about twin discs. I saw an XB race bike with a twin setup about 5 years ago somebody cut in front of the rider on the track & he grabbed a big handful. Spat him over the bars & cartwheeled the bike. | ||
| Hootowl |
EBR says in a perimeter brake there's no advantage to using a radial caliper. | ||
| Jaimec |
I imagine a twin-perimeter brake setup would add considerable gyroscopic precession to the front wheel, too... it would fight you trying to turn the bars. | ||
| Jaimec |
Hootowl: Actually, I've never understood how a radially-mounted caliper was supposed to be any better than one traditionally mounted. But, they're standard equipment now on ALL high-end sportbikes, so there must be some reason for it. | ||
| Svh |
Jaime- Here is some info from the brake bible online: Radial calipers / radial brakes. Around the year 2003, motorbikes started to hit the showrooms with a new feature - radial brakes. The magazines and testers will all tell you that radial brakes make the bike stop quicker. Not true - they have nothing to do with stopping power and everything to do with the design of the front forks of the bike. More and more bikes are coming out with upside-down forks. ie. instead of the fat canister part of the fork being at the bottom of the assembly, it's at the top. This means that the fork pistons are now the part of the suspension with the wheel attached to them. It also means that it's impossible to put a stiffening fork brace down there now because the brace would need to move with the wheel, and the length of the fork pistons precludes that. The stiffness of the front end is now entirely dependent on the size of the front axle. Bigger axle = stiffer front end. A side-effect of this design was that traditionally-mounted brake calipers could cause a lot of vibration in the steering because of flex between the wheel (with the brake disc bolted to it), and the fork leg (with the caliper). The slight tolerance allowed by floating brake rotors couldn't compensate for the amount of flexing in the forks. To reduce the brake-induced fork vibration, the brake calipers were moved around the rotors slightly so that they fell into the front-rear alignment of the wheel axle. This is because there is less lateral flex at that point, which means less or no vibration. The caliper mounts were changed too. Traditional calipers bolt on to the forks with bolts going through them at 90 degrees to the face of the brake rotor. With radial calipers, the bolts are aligned parallel to the brake rotor - effectively also in the front-rear alignment of the wheel. This design is a trickle-down technology from superbike racing where a radial caliper mount allows the racing teams to use different diameters of brake rotor by simply adding spacers to the caliper mounts. http://www.carbibles.com/brake_bible.html | ||
| Jaimec |
Gotcha. That makes sense. I had a feeling it had something to do with the advent of "upside-down forks." Doesn't make any sense at all with traditional forks, or the BMW-style duolever and/or telelever front ends. Thanks. |
