| Author |
Message |
    
Froggy
| | Posted on Tuesday, October 07, 2008 - 03:35 pm: | 
|
Glad its gone, once the 9SX is gone we get an 1125XT!  |
Jonnyrotton
| | Posted on Tuesday, October 07, 2008 - 05:52 pm: |
|
It doesn't sound like anyone has any real insight to the question. |
Cycleaddict
| | Posted on Tuesday, October 07, 2008 - 10:57 pm: |
|
the shorter stroke of the 9 motor results in a more "modern" oversquare bore /stroke ratio. the long stroke 12 motor's bore/stroke ratio is like an old tractor motor . so maybe the 9 motor was chosen for it's more racy power characteristics ? |
Andymnelson
| | Posted on Tuesday, October 07, 2008 - 11:53 pm: |
|
"It doesn't sound like anyone has any real insight to the question."
LOL...my thoughts exactly. :-p I keep checking back on this post hoping to find someone with the inside scoop, and keep reading a lot of "I think"s and "probably"s...
Very interesting to read peoples perceptions of Buell however. |
Jonnyrotton
| | Posted on Wednesday, October 08, 2008 - 12:06 am: |
|
I was hoping "anonymous" might have been someone who either worked for Buell or is working for Buell, and could shed some light on this matter. |
Sweatmark
| | Posted on Wednesday, October 08, 2008 - 12:21 am: |
|
"It doesn't sound like anyone has any real insight to the question."
Yeah, Jonny, I too was hoping we might get one of those informative Anonymous insights here.
Considered this again today. Just a guess, but if the Blast's <500cc displacement was selected as a balance of power and insurance costs, then the XB9's use of the Blast's piston/head/cylinder would have provided good v-twin performance via already proven components, with minimal engine development costs for the XB project.
More conjecture, but makes sense to me. |
Jaimec
| | Posted on Wednesday, October 08, 2008 - 08:50 am: |
|
Just a note: Did anyone notice that Ducati introduced the Monster 620 BEFORE the new Monster 1100? Wonder what they were thinking... |
Hammeroid
| | Posted on Wednesday, October 08, 2008 - 09:20 am: |
|
Jaimec, I just pm'd you.
Sean |
Cityxslicker
| | Posted on Wednesday, October 08, 2008 - 01:31 pm: |
|
The XB9SX is our most popular bike, we sell more of that unit than anything else in the line up. The blast is second, the Uly is third.
And if you have any questions about what a CityX can and cant do, come out to my neck of the woods and I will school you on how well that bike handles anything you throw at it.
|
Froggy
| | Posted on Wednesday, October 08, 2008 - 02:05 pm: |
|
Well your sales are biased. People come in looking for a geezer glide, then you do a bait and switch with the 9sx |
Jonnyrotton
| | Posted on Wednesday, October 08, 2008 - 03:35 pm: |
|
My current bike is a Cityx and my second Buell (first was a m2 cyclone)a Firebolt xb12r. After getting the cityx with what I feel is an underpowered engine. It got me to wondering my above question. 45 post later we still don't know. |
U4euh
| | Posted on Wednesday, October 08, 2008 - 03:38 pm: |
|
I am sure it helps having a bike sitting out front that actually gets "ridden" in the real world!
I've got my opinions on the 9 vs 12. I think back to the GM 'X' body's. The x stood for eXperimental. Once that was a proven technology they ran with it.
XB-eXperimental Bike-hmmm again just my opinion
|
