| Author | Message | ||
     Disturbed |
Love the mag and on this month's cover is "Ultimate Literbike Comparo" with the usual suspects from "The Big 4" with the addition of the 1098 Duc. I'd love to see an XB9 or XB12 in there. With the testing they did, it would be interesting! Again on the cover of the same mag: "Torque Monsters!" BMW K1200R Sport and the Bandit 1250S. Again, where the $(@*! is the Buell?!?!?! It would fit in here too, no? Haven't finished the mag as I type this but WTF? Cord | ||
| Cycleaddict |
sorry disturbed, but we (Buell) ain't got the motor to compete with any of those bikes . "we" are out motored by at least 50- 60 H.P. ! | ||
| Disturbed |
1> Fun To Ride 2> Quality 3> Instruments and Controls 4> Ergonomics 5> Chassis and Handling 6> Suspension 7> Brakes 8> Transmission 9> Engine Power 10> Engine Power Delivery Scale of 1-10 on each. Best out of 100 wins. We are out based on HP? I think not. And the other comparo about torque on the other two bikes, 78.3 and 77.6 Lb. Ft. We don't belong here either? (Message edited by Disturbed on June 14, 2007) | ||
| Cycleaddict |
ride any one of those other liter + bikes and then you will see what i'm talking about! them liter bikes ARE mind blurring FAST !!!! Our BUELLS are excellent "street" bikes were-as those liter bikes are basically "race " bikes !! | ||
| Dustybueller |
Addicts right. I have that same mag, I picked it up a few days ago and yeah my first thought was wheres the 12r? A little while back I was talkin to a buddy who has a GSX-R1000.... Basically being able to go 120 in second gear... They would eat an XB and crap out a Blast. That and If you noticed they used "Popular" bikes. We arn't called 3%ers for nothin =\ | ||
| Punkid8888 |
The less people know about Buell the better. I love stopping for Gas and having people go up to the bike asking what is it? is it fast? is it new? Then when you fire it up everyone expected it to make some inline 4 bike whine, when in reality it just thumps. I imagine as the years past we will go from the 3% to maybe the 4%s then maybe the 5%s or the 10%s and eventually Buell will be on almost all magazines and we will see comercials on every channels. But until then no need to rush it. | ||
| Patrickmitchell |
I normally stay away from these kind of threads... But I can't resist this one. Addict is correct. On a pure speed basis, we don't belong on the same track. One of the things I love about my Buell is that it has been built for the real world. My City X is so much more fun to ride than these bikes, that I simply won't buy theirs anymore. If one day I have the cash for a garage full of bikes, I'd go buy a 1098 in a heartbeat. Beautiful, sounds good, fast as hell, great on the track... but after 30 minutes of street riding full on sport bikes, my wrists are numb, my back, and a** hurt. I also like Punk's point. There is one other guy in my area with a Buell. On some level it is fun to have the only one in town. For pure grin factor and real world enjoyment, I'd put my Buell up against anyone. | ||
| Jackelfox |
it seems to me that alot of this is purely because the buell XB is almost 5 years old, the mag's did their comparo's back then, not a whole lot of new to say about them anymore. they wouldnt have done a comparo on the bandit a year ago, but its a new bandit this year, time for a test. | ||
| 07xb12scg |
The Buell XBs have never really been changed, correct? The only real change has been the addition of the 12. Sport Rider is comparing new bikes that have changed substantially over the years. Sport Rider is a magazine slanted towards the track and outright performance numbers of motorcycles. In terms of performance on the track, a stock Buell will not touch a stock 1000cc Jap bike if the riders are equal. Would you want them to include a Buell in this comparison just so they can bash it? (Message edited by 07XB12Scg on June 14, 2007) | ||
| Firefightergarcia |
That's a great way of seeing the future Punkid..I hope your'e right. | ||
| Dustybueller |
07xb12scg: To be honest, yes. Yes, I would love to see a 12r (or s for that matter) in a test like that. Or heck do a smaller bike comparo. I would love to see a Buell in there simply for the fact to just see what all those squids think about em. And as it went with this test (as in the way they were testing) 1> Fun To Ride 2> Quality 3> Instruments and Controls 4> Ergonomics 5> Chassis and Handling 6> Suspension 7> Brakes 8> Transmission 9> Engine Power 10> Engine Power Delivery It would be interesting to see how they score a Buell on those 10 things compared to a GSX-R or a CBR or an YZF...you get the point. (p.s. Thanks for the vote whoever it was) | ||
| Blake |
They'd score it poorly on account of they are unwilling to consider "different" as anything but bad. Buells are very different from conventional sportbikes and those folks at Sportrider and Motorcyclist don't have the patience to learn how to ride differently in order to suit the XBikes and their strengths. They are also fairly rigid in their gage for comparing performance; they use only engine displacement, nothing more. That's how I remember their reviews. Pretty pathetic. I recall where they lauded the power of the SV650 at 67 RWHP, but derided the 75RWHP XB9R. It was such blatant bias that I sent an email questioning them on the issue. Got the excuse back that they rate engine performance based on displacement only. Ignorant idiots. | ||
| 12r |
The latest issue of Superbike magazine has a mini-test of the TT. Far from ripping into it, the test is a fairly well-balanced evaluation of the TT for what it is. Buells have drifted so far out of the mainstream here in the UK that they are rarely compared to anything else. A recent 'cooking' V-twin test featured a VTR1000 Firestorm, an SV1000 and a Ducati, but disappointingly no Buell. | ||
| Sloppy |
You have to remember that the long stroke v-twin has the same lungs (air capacity) as a 4 cylinder 600cc. So the only time you can draw comparisons are when you compare against 600's. Comparing power between a long stroke twin against a 1000 cc 4 cylinder is pointless. | ||
| 07xb12scg |
They are also fairly rigid in their gage for comparing performance; they use only engine displacement, nothing more. That's how I remember their reviews. Pretty pathetic. I recall where they lauded the power of the SV650 at 67 RWHP, but derided the 75RWHP XB9R. It was such blatant bias that I sent an email questioning them on the issue. Got the excuse back that they rate engine performance based on displacement only. Ignorant idiots. A bike with 300ccs or so more displacment should make more power. And it should probably make more than 8 more horsepower with such a displacement advantage. | ||
| Dustybueller |
Maybe they are just afraid that if they get on a Buell they'll love it more then thier precious gixxer  | ||
| Spike |
All else being equal an engine with ~300cc advantage should have more than 8hp advantage. However, they aren't, so it doesn't. We've beaten that to death here. I think Blake's point was that when the magazine tester twists the throttle he doesn't/shouldn't start doing calculations based on the displacement of the bike, he should only be thinking about the power that is reaching the rear wheel. If the SV is praised for having 67 horsepower and the XB is bashed for making 75 horsepower, that's bias. Specific output is great on a spec sheet or if you're an engineer, but means nothing when it comes to riding the motorcycle. Here's a fun hypothetical: Company XYZ has developed an engine producing a whopping 300hp per liter. The engine displaces 250cc and produces 75hp at 20,000rpm. Company ZYX has developed an engine producing a timid 100hp per liter. The engine displaces 1500cc and produces 150hp at 8,000rpm. Both engines have similar size, weight, and fuel consumption. Which would you rather have? | ||
| Thepup |
"I think Blake's point was that when the magazine tester twists the throttle he doesn't/shouldn't start doing calculations based on the displacement of the bike, he should only be thinking about the power that is reaching the rear wheel. If the SV is praised for having 67 horsepower and the XB is bashed for making 75 horsepower, that's bias." Spike that would be true except that the SV650 weighs less than the XB so when he twists the throttle,he may not feel that extra 8hp.Not so biased now is it. | ||
| Spike |
Even with the weight advantage the SV650 still boasts a slower 1/4 mile time than an XB9. RPM for RPM, the XB9 outpowers the SV650 by a fair margin. If the tester can't feel the difference between the two, the tester is broken. | ||
| Blake |
The point is that when I questioned Motorcyclist on their bias, their answer was that they compared the XB9 to other literbikes like the GSXR1000 and so it's power was relatively poor in comparison. They are idiots. | ||
| Blake |
To clarify, the article in question was not a comparo. The SV report was in an entirely different issue than the XB9R and they were not compared to one another, just evaluated on their own. | ||
| Kowpow225 |
Sportrider did a comparo a while back putting an XB9R, F4i, R6S, and a couple of other 'real world' 600 inline fours up against each other. Their score card at the end to a large extent contradicted the article. I think they fool around with the final tally to suit their tastes. | ||
| 07xb12scg |
Sportrider did a comparo a while back putting an XB9R, F4i, R6S, and a couple of other 'real world' 600 inline fours up against each other. Their score card at the end to a large extent contradicted the article. I think they fool around with the final tally to suit their tastes. I'm not so sure. Maybe to a certain extent, but their big knock on the Buell was its price and its engine and they stuck with that throughout the article if I remember correctly. I'll have to reread that article. (Message edited by 07XB12Scg on June 16, 2007) | ||
| Jiffy |
I have seen many positive reviews of the XB series. It is 5 years old. Buell please give us something new to brag about in July. I would love to see some test ride reports in the Mags praising the Buell for it's new and innovative street bike. | ||
| Stang37 |
There was a mag (don't remember which, but one of the majors) pumping up the Wakan brand in a short story. Good looking bike, but they almost take the tone that the Buell isn't a real bike. The specific comment is that Wakan is better because it visually celebrates the V-twin while Buell hides it. Like I said, the Wakan was cool, but I was disappointed to see them clearly embrace a nobody over a 'not quite nobody' bike so readily. No respect. BTW, I figured out one of the reasons I could never put my finger on for buying my 9sx...it looks like a modern street tracker...I always dug those, but they are hard to find without building one yourself. | ||
| 07xb12scg |
There was a mag (don't remember which, but one of the majors) pumping up the Wakan brand in a short story. Good looking bike, but they almost take the tone that the Buell isn't a real bike. The specific comment is that Wakan is better because it visually celebrates the V-twin while Buell hides it. Like I said, the Wakan was cool, but I was disappointed to see them clearly embrace a nobody over a 'not quite nobody' bike so readily. No respect. BTW, I figured out one of the reasons I could never put my finger on for buying my 9sx...it looks like a modern street tracker...I always dug those, but they are hard to find without building one yourself. That was also Motorcyclist or Cycle World. Wakan is the one who said that Buell tries to hide the HD engine instead of celebrate it. I sort of agree. If Erik Buell had another option, he wouldn't have chosen the Sporster engine IMO. The Wakan isn't a real bike. It will be a very limited production bike at a ridiculous price. This is if it even makes it to production. And you think the CityX looks like a street tracker? That's one impression I've never gotten. | ||
| 2kx1 |
Cycle World had that wakan thing. On another note Motorcyclist now has a Uly for a long term test bike,and it to be starting off rather well. | ||
| Bombardier |
Who gives a good rats arse what anybody else thinks about a Buell?!? YOU LIKE IT. YOU RIDE IT. If you spend the rest of your life trying to keep up with the joneses you will die trying. Just enjoy this magic bike for what it is. Not what someone coulda,shoulda woulda done to it. | ||
| Kowpow225 |
Sportrider did a comparo a while back putting an XB9R, F4i, R6S, and a couple of other 'real world' 600 inline fours up against each other. Their score card at the end to a large extent contradicted the article. I think they fool around with the final tally to suit their tastes. I'll stick by my initial statement. Now that I'm looking at the article there's a few things I'd like to point out about the Buell. 1. They list as a positive that the 'price is now in line with performance.' 2. They list as a negative that it 'still needs more power'. They also state that in spite of having the most torque of any bike in the test, it feels like it has the narrowest powerband. I wonder if they ever rode the thing? In the final tally area they rate the ss800 ducati's brakes a 7.9 as well as the Buell at 7.9. So they have the same brakes huh? Not even close. Earlier in the article the Buell is praised for its brakes saying 'theres no denying its outright stopping power'. And listed as a negative for the Duc is its 'wooden brakes' yet they receive the same score.(?) In engine power, Duc gets an 8.1, Buell gets a 7.5 yet outguns the Duc by roughly 3 ponies. Not to mention the enormous torque advantage of the Buell. How does that warrant a lower score? I think we have a broken tester. Thanks spike.  LOL | ||
| Sloppy |
Minor correction on the displacement thing -- more displacement does not equate to more horsepower, but instead, greater torque. Horsepower is a function of displacement AND stroke. All being equal, shorter the stroke, the more the horsepower. In other words, in a "typical application", a 600cc twin will make less power than a 600cc 4cyl which will make less power than a 600cc 6 cyl. |
