| Author | Message | ||
     Rocket_in_uk |
If their connections are good they will likely know some of the 16 Buell Motorcycle Engineers and Logistics personnel who spent over 2 years in Austria during the development. My 'connection' must be bad then as they never heard of such people residing in Austria for over two years. But they made mention of Buell people coming and going for a couple of years or so. Maybe these are the 16 you refer to. Certainly not full time working at Rotax. A few days here, a week or two there, maybe. Pretty standard procedure for clients across the world to send their own people to liaise on any type of business venture. But certainly not the two year commitment you're making out as if they took up permanent residence there to imply the significance of their input Court. So you tell me. Is my 'connection' bad or you were economical with the facts  Rocket in England | ||
| Hootowl |
"If I took an 1190 engine, for my production motorcycle, and copied the crankcases, changed 140 parts inside it then called it a Rocket engine, would Erik be cool with this?" If you had co-designed it with him, and bought the rights to the engine from him, then yeah. I'm sure he'd be fine with it. You know, for a smart guy, you sure are being obtuse on this subject. | ||
| Rocket_in_uk |
You know, for a smart guy, you sure are being obtuse on this subject. Because I refuse to be lied to or be part of a lie? You only need ask yourself why EBR would want to distance themselves from Rotax and claim the 1190 as an exclusive EBR engine to understand the facts. I think we all know the truth. Just some here don't want to accept the facts as if doing so would diminish the 1190 engine, EBR, and their efforts in racing in some way. Rocket in England | ||
| Hootowl |
So, Erik Buell is a liar. OK. I'm done with this topic. | ||
| Rocket_in_uk |
So, Erik Buell is a liar. OK. I'm done with this topic. He's been rather economical with the truth If it pleases you I called him a liar, then so be it, but it's not quite what I meant about the man in general. But fine. You need an excuse to back down so go ahead and take it. The 1190 is still a Rotax designed Helicon derivative any way you look at it or tell the story. You know that. Others like you who refuse to accept this also do. You're the real liars. The rather nauseating Buell zealots prepared to lie to yourselves at all costs, and for no other reason than to champion a motorcycle company rather like some would a football team. Sorry but it's roots are in Rotax, Austria, and not North America. Get over it! Rocket in England | ||
| Hootowl |
I changed my mind. I'm done with you. It was this kind of shit that got you banned before. | ||
| Rocket_in_uk |
So, Erik Buell is a liar. OK. I'm done with this topic. It's a motorbike Hoot. All be it one which stirs emotion and argument at both ends of the spectrum. It's not a Honda where expectations are much more simplistic for people to handle. Got me banned? What next. Firing squad? You think I'm not entitled to a passionate opinion? Which is not why I was banned before. Thank you for bringing it up  I'm as disappointed as the next when EBR are not succeeding as I expected in racing. It's not enough for me they're just in WSBK racing. You might understand this a great deal more if you were British. We don't take prisoners in motorcycle road racing over here. It's the way it is. If you could grasp this you would understand more where our hard line stance comes from with the sport and those in it. It's also why we don't take or make up excuses. You get found out very quickly over here, and frowned upon soon after. It's a hard sport where a race like the TT is revered the way it is because it's incredibly tough and incredibly dangerous. Those that succeed are heros. Those that don't are respected for having a go. Take a step back from the TT (not talking Irish RR). You'll arrive at our national circuits. Take a look at them. Have a go at them on Xbox or Playstation. You'll quickly grasp several of our tracks are very much like sections of the TT course in miniature. Like narrow country roads - just in a much more controlled racing environment. Tracks like Cadwell are good examples. And whilst Olivers Mount doesn't take in a round of BSB, it does offer two big races each season. The Kock of the North and the Gold Cup. If you ever had the chance to spectate at Oliver's, you'd be shocked. I know of no other track like it anywhere in the world. It makes some parts of the TT look easy. And whilst Oliver's no longer awards championship points, it attracts many of the very top road racers to this day, and has done for sixty odd years. Many of our circuit racers, big names in BSB, WSBK, Moto GP, also won't race here. It's that tough! Sheene wouldn't race the TT after his mate was killed there. But Sheene raced at Oliver's many a season - and held the Gold Cup record number of wins until a couple of decades ago. WSBK racing does not feature any tracks like Cadwell or Olivers. Perhaps Laguna is closest but nothing like. Over here the British revel at the challenges our types of national circuits bring out in our teams and riders. It's also why BSB attracts top riders from many other great racing nations. Thus EBR's seemingly softly softly approach is therefore all the more difficult for us British fans to grasp. I can't think of a better way or a more in depth way to put across how I see this. After 15 years of high expectation from Buell, I've little patience for this tippy toe approach to the highest form of proddy racing in the world. More so when Buell champions his efforts by stating one of the worlds wealthiest men shares his passion in a like minded way, then has his largest two wheeled production company in the world sponsor Buell's efforts. This when Norton are entering the TT to win it with what could be described as a similar bike in the way it has evolved, yet they're doing it with their own money and pretty much making all of the bike in a small purpose built unit in Derbyshire. Non of the above should we be falling out over though. We have differences of opinion is all. Our expectations too. But falling out? Not why I'm here dude. Rocket in England | ||
| Rcf2 |
http://www.crash.net/wsbk/interview/204134/1/geoff -may-erik-buell-racing-qa.html | ||
| Rocket_in_uk |
Erik Buell, founder and Chief Technical Officer of the motorcycle company that bears his name, has never been one to stand still. His diligent team of engineers and designers have garnered hundreds of patents for the development of their air-cooled race bikes. While that might be enough to please just about anyone, Buell knew that his company—which is owned by Harley-Davidson—had to make a significant change if it wanted to gain mass appeal in the sports bike market. Harley has been providing Buell with custom designed versions of its air-cooled V-twin engines since its inception in 1993 and that has posed a problem for the sports bike manufacturer—not that it was sourcing from Harley, but what it was getting. Sports bike aficionados eschew air-cooled engines because they lack power and reliability due to the need of a constant flow of air to manage heat dissipation. Liquid-cooled motors can operate at top performance regardless of riding conditions. Buell didn’t want to just develop a liquid-cooled engine to satisfy his company’s customers, but he wanted to set new benchmarks in performance and innova-tion. Harley already had its liquid-cooled Revolution engine, developed with Porsche Engineering for the 2002 V-Rod, but Buell wanted something more compact. Knowing that his relatively small team would be unable to design, engineer and manu-facture the engine itself—not to mention the fact that Harley was busy developing its next-generation engines and products—Buell turned to Porsche Engineering and BRP-Rotax (who supplies motorcycle engines to Aprilia and BMW) to submit proposals on what they could bring to the table in terms of development resources. “We talked to a number of people about the project. Porsche was a possibility, but we were all impressed with the Rotax team’s style. Their way of thinking was a significantly better fit than Porsche’s was,” says Buell, who dedicated five of his design engineers to the 3.5 year project that eventually resulted in the Helicon engine: A compact 72° 1,125-cc V-Twin producing 146 hp at the crankshaft. “The 72° angle turned out to be the best compromise for packaging. We considered a 90° but that packaging was too difficult to work within our chassis design,” Buell adds. The Buell engineering team laid out specific requirements for the overall weight and power band, as well as the design of the crankcase, clutch and shift mechanism. Each is closely related to the chassis design. Rotax, meanwhile, worked on engineering the engine’s internal components and transmission configuration. Among the key attributes of the Helicon: The 72° angle allows the engine to be located far forward in the chassis, helping to limit weight distribution to 54% on the front tire, while reducing vibration. Three balance shafts: Two designed to cancel primary rotating imbalance and a third to cancel the rocking couple. Displacement: 1125 cc chosen for optimal 103-mm bore and 67.5-mm stroke for better breathing and reduced friction, resulting in increased rpm (redline: 10,500 rpm). Dual overhead cam design features a self-adjusting chain drive on each cylinder to the intake cam, and gear drive from the intake to the exhaust cam. Less space is needed over the cylinder head when compared to a two-sprocket design, and overall weight is reduced. Valves actuated with finger followers adjusted with shims, a design commonly found in Formula 1 engines and used in various diesel engine applications. This results in lower friction and quicker valve opening, while eliminating valve float and providing for a steep valve angle of 18°. Magnesium valve covers reduce weight. Integrated dry sump oiling reduces internal windage losses, and an integrated oil reservoir on the lower left side of the crankcase helps to keep the engine compact. Development of the Helicon’s piston and ring pack was particularly tricky, Buell says, because of the high durability targets established by the team: “We did a ton of FEA [finite element analysis] work on those pieces to meet the targets.” The Helicon team made “significant breakthroughs” and have filed patents for the development of the break-away engine mounts on the frame and fuel tank that result in improved crash performance, along with the ECU-controlled fuel pump that modulates fuel delivery based on specific commands from the ECU. The rotatable mounting of the engine itself helps to improve the ease of serviceability of valves, and is awaiting patent approval. “The engineering team should be happy with what we have accomplished because none of these innovations are insignificant,” Buell says. “What’s most amazing is that we self-funded this engine without Harley’s help.” Rotax has worked with Harley-Davidson in the past, providing engines for its military motorcycles, including the MT350E used by British and Canadian forces. Rotax also provides engines for watercraft, ATVs and snowmobiles made by its parent company, Bombardier Recreational Products. Rocket in England | ||
| Rocket_in_uk |
Gunskirchen, Austria, July 9, 2007 – BRP-Rotax, the Austrian affiliate of BRP, is pleased to announce the production start of a new 1125cc motorcycle engine. The new engine, exclusively developed for Buell, will be produced by BRP-Rotax in Gunskirchen, Austria. "BRP-Rotax is leading in developing and producing high performance engines destined to a wide range of recreational markets," said Gerd Ohrnberger, vice-president and general manager, BRP-Rotax. "We welcome the opportunity to team up with Buell on this market-leading motorcycle" he concluded. Rocket in England | ||
| Hughlysses |
Rocket, all that seems to confirm that Buell was heavily involved in the design of the 1125 Helicon engine. My take is that Buell specified the major parameters like weight, horsepower/torque/RPM targets, overall dimensions/configuration, and displacement. Rotax did the detailed design of the elements that actually comprise the engine. I'm sure there was a lot of give and take between Buell's engineers and Rotax's in figuring this thing out. Who designed the 1125 engine? Based on what you posted above, I'd say Rotax and Buell. Now the 1190 is a generation away from the 1125. We know it has a lot of new major components including cylinder heads, crankshaft, rods, pistons, and cams compared to the original engine, all of which have apparently been designed in-house by EBR. It doesn't seem like a stretch to say that the 1190 is an EBR-designed engine. | ||
| Rocket_in_uk |
Rocket, all that seems to confirm that Buell was heavily involved in the design of the 1125 Helicon engine. Not how I read it Hugh. Rotax, meanwhile, worked on engineering the engine’s internal components and transmission configuration. Among the key attributes of the Helicon: My take is that Buell specified the major parameters like weight, horsepower/torque/RPM targets, overall dimensions/configuration, and displacement. Which is what I suggested a few days ago, seeing as it's common practice. Rotax did the detailed design of the elements that actually comprise the engine. Which makes it a Rotax designed engine. I'm sure there was a lot of give and take between Buell's engineers and Rotax's in figuring this thing out. Doubt it very much. Rotax designers would have done all the donkey work to the specific requirements asked of by Buell. Why would Rotax need Buell engineers interfering. You don't hire a leading engine design and manufacturing company and have outsiders help you. What could Buell people bring to the engines design which Rotax would need? Who designed the 1125 engine? Based on what you posted above, I'd say Rotax and Buell. You're right. Rotax designed the engine essentially, making it a Rotax engine. Buell did the design of the crankcase, clutch and shift mechanism. Each Now the 1190 is a generation away from the 1125. We know it has a lot of new major components including cylinder heads, crankshaft, rods, pistons, and cams compared to the original engine, all of which have apparently been designed in-house by EBR. It doesn't seem like a stretch to say that the 1190 is an EBR-designed engine. I'm afraid it does for me, just as if stripping any Japanese (choose any manufacturer) four cylinder engine, like say one used in a drag bike, replacing the cylinder head, cylinders, pistons, crank and rods, does not make such an engine anything but a modified Japanese designed engine. It's the way it's been and always will be. Call it an engines DNA. Rocket in England | ||
| Gregtonn |
Sophistry, specious logic and fallacious argument. As is usual in Rocket's posts and sadly in many of Trojan's. G | ||
| Wymaen |
Gregtonn, I think you're repeatedly repeating repeated repetitious redundancies. Repeatedly. Reportedly. | ||
| Hughlysses |
OK, now that we've settled that, good to see that they're on the island and almost ready for practice!  | ||
| Rocket_in_uk |
Sophistry, specious logic and fallacious argument. As is usual in Rocket's posts and sadly in many of Trojan's. When someone engages in a conversation, and is shouted down for supposedly being wrong or of fallacious argument, as you put it Greg, then all the more reason to post facts and show exactly who knows what they are talking about. Rocket in England | ||
| Rocket_in_uk |
Plater at Cadwell SG2  Cameron Donald get's first test under his belt on the all new SG3. We had a great start to testing with Cam at Cadwell and already making strong progress in aligning the bike to Cam's riding style and TT requirements. Very busy times at Norton as we are continually pushing our Commando 961 road bike volumes in the factory, never forgetting our core business. TT prep continues with the all new SG3 turning into a really strong package and getting great media coverage as you can see!  See the difference EBR? Rocket in England | ||
| Trojan |
Sophistry, specious logic and fallacious argument. As is usual in Rocket's posts and sadly in many of Trojan's. I'd love you to prove me wrong, but sadly I don't think you will or have done yet. Everything that I have posted about the EBR race effort has been based on facts that are easily found. However if you show me where we have been wrong I'll certainly apologise  This weekend at Doninigton we have the sight of an EBR last on the grid again and the other one failing to qualify at all, so please tell me how things are progressing or improving on gthe EBr race front? Sadly the I think the nly headlines that the Splitlath EBR TT team will attract are the ones saying they will enter. With no testing, build up or practice before hand and a very late entry I can't help but think the team (Splitlath) have done this just to stay on the radar, but with no hope of being even mildly competitive in the races they have entered. I think they will be glad just to finish at all. | ||
| Hughlysses |
Practice rained out yesterday, but great conditions today. Cretu was 57th of 70 in superbike and 48th of 61 in superstock. No times listed for Miller in either class; no info on what happened to him. Complete results here: http://www.iomtt.com/TT-Info/Qualifying-Times.aspx | ||
| Rocket_in_uk |
Cam Don Norton 38th is a promising first showing. Rocket in England | ||
| Bigblock |
Go to splitlath redmond facebook page you'll get the latest update by Mark Miller, I don't want to copy and paste it without permission. He said the handling was more stable than expected and the top speed was better than the macau bikes, but a rock cut two wires killing the bike on mile 29 and he didn't have the tools to get to them on the side of the road. Poor paraphrasing, look it up. | ||
| Rocket_in_uk |
Thanks BB - following Rocket in England | ||
| Hughlysses |
Well, FB is apparently selective in what it shows. No update from Mark when I look at that page, but thanks for posting the info. Sounds like they're off to a reasonably good start. | ||
| Rocket_in_uk |
I've found FB updates not simultaneous between PC and iPhone, which makes me miss posts sometimes. Rocket in England | ||
| Hughlysses |
Update on their FB now says a stone flew up and cut a wire by the left footpeg on Miller's bike. Cretu was able to run all 3 pratice laps and provide good feedback. Photo shows Cretu's bike on the course. Interesting that he is running the stock EBR "hubless" rear wheel unlike the AMA and WSBK bikes. | ||
| Trojan |
The TT is a lot more relaxed on equipment that can used than WSBK/AMA/BSB etc as they are not restricted by FIM rules. I think (I haven't read the rules for a couple of weeks so could be wrong!) that WSB specifies that you have to run aluminium wheels rather than magnesium or carbon, hence in WSB they run 'conventional wheels'. Bikes running in the TT senior race are pretty much unlimited and you could attempt to run a MotoGp bike if you really wanted to! I think someone ran a Moto2 bike on a few demo laps a coupleof years ago. Good to see at least one of the EBr bikes put a time in in first practice, although they have a (bray) hill to climb to get into the top 30. | ||
| Hootowl |
WSB teams could run the stock aluminum RX wheel. They don't, I believe, because they've had issues with the wheel spinning in the tire. The wheels they race with have a bead that helps to prevent that. | ||
| 4cammer |
"See the difference EBR? " Maybe next year EBR should field a one-off, purpose built race bike that has 0% relation to anything that is available on the sales floor? | ||
| Trojan |
Maybe next year EBR should field a one-off, purpose built race bike that has 0% relation to anything that is available on the sales floor? I think you have missed the point. Norton have specifically built their bike to race at the TT. They make no pretence that it is in any way related to a road bike in their range and to be honest it doesn't have to to race in the TT. What it does do is give them massive publicity and a chance of doing well in the race. It also shows off their engineering pedigree as they build the frames etc at the Norton factory at Donington Park. This isn't WSb so they can build what they want within the TT rules and will probably benfit from building a bike specifically suited for the rigours of the TT | ||
| Rocket_in_uk |
Maybe next year EBR should field a one-off, purpose built race bike that has 0% relation to anything that is available on the sales floor? Telling how you missed the point yet Matt didn't? More telling considering my first comment in this topic asked why EBR were not doing what you sarcastically suggested. The difference being, my comment was intended as serious. EBR could profit in many ways. Especially in Europe and the Antipodes, from a great showing at the TT. As I said. Norton will do themselves no harm if they DNF. EBR could put themselves in similar position if they were seen to be boldly going to the TT as opposed to being a laughing stock in WSBK. Rocket said "Great to see some EBR's entering the TT. Why aren't EBR / Hero behind this directly? A good showing at the TT would be more publicity than EBR / Hero could dream of in WSBK. It's all a bit arse about face if you ask me. EBR should be entering a factory backed assault on the TT with a top rider. Norton are with Cameron Donald. Rocket in England |
