| Author | Message | ||
     Coxster |
A recent issue of Motorcyclist mag referred to a 1992 introduction of mass centralization etc  I hope I set them straight  Just gotta give credit where it's due! | ||
| Bigblockbruce |
Nice one, Jim.  | ||
| S1owner |
Awesome I just red that yesterday! | ||
| Kilroy |
nice- | ||
| Buellish |
I read that and wondered if it was a Badwebber. I guess they don't pay the editors enough to check facts. Somebody's got to keep them straight! | ||
| Mcelhaney14 |
Good job Jim! | ||
| Jayvee |
Is Mass Centralization even a "technology" or more nebulous like a design goal expected to improve performance? Mass centralization pretty much started when the first makers around 1901 were settling on the best place to put the engine on the bicycle. It was tried on the front fork, under the seat, over the rear wheel, even inside the front wheel. Within a decade most all were putting the engine in the mass centralized position we still see today. Racers too, tried gas tank under the engine, for example. Buell was very likely the first to advertise it as such. I can't even remember that the other two parts are in the Trilogy of Tech. Getting old...! | ||
| Ratbuell |
Chassis rigidity. Low unsprung weight. | ||
| Kilroy |
I thought "low center of gravity" was one?? | ||
| Kilroy |
I stand corrected by myself | ||
| Foximus |
I'm not going to read through all of this. But there is a massive difference. Honda did in fact start the "low center" of gravity trend. They did it in 1989 in the gp500 bikes. Honda had brought in a team of their automotive engineers after massive F1 wins, and this is what they brought to the table. However Low center of gravity doesnt work for bikes. And honda had a horribly dangerous chasis that year. Buell however did Mass Centralization. its not low. Its in the center. And you can take that to the bank. |
