| Author |
Message |
    
Patrickh
| | Posted on Monday, July 25, 2005 - 06:42 pm: | 
|
Budo beat me to it...
what he said |
Jeremyh
| | Posted on Monday, July 25, 2005 - 07:24 pm: |
|
BTW...who posts "Anonymous"ly?
Maybe its Erik himself.........LOL
I was curious about this chicken shikness also. |
Gschuette
| | Posted on Monday, July 25, 2005 - 07:32 pm: |
|
Most bikes that I have owned had more power than I could use including the 3 Buells I've owned. I am not talking about power, just a modern engine, for me 80 HP is enough.
That seems to be a total waste. Unless power is the ultimate goal why would the old engine be discarded. New water cooled DOHC engines are more complex, less asthetically pleasing (an opinion I know but it has to be a majority opinion, why else would the Jap companies put fake air cool fins on their water cooled cruisers), doesn't sound as good, gets worse gas mileage, I am not sure on the weight but I find it hard to believe that water cooled engines weigh less than the Buell engine.
The XB seems to have the perfect engine for everything except extreme power so why switch engine designs if you are not going to get any benefits?} |
Buells Rule!
(Dyna in disguise)
| | Posted on Monday, July 25, 2005 - 07:47 pm: |
|
Yes, you can buy a drag version V-Rod for $30,000 that's almost as fast as a stock Hayabusa in the 1/4 mile. Good enough for cruiser guys, not good for sport guys
Trying to figure out what the heck this has to do with the general direction of this topic....& I have no idea. |
Trac95ker
| | Posted on Monday, July 25, 2005 - 08:00 pm: |
|
How about a pic of your tires. I bet you got chicken strips. Sounds like you need a drag bike instead of one that handles! |
Buells Rule!
(Dyna in disguise)
| | Posted on Monday, July 25, 2005 - 08:04 pm: |
|
How about a pic of your tires. I bet you got chicken strips. Sounds like you need a drag bike instead of one that handles!
And this is aimed at whom? |
Steelshoe
| | Posted on Monday, July 25, 2005 - 08:12 pm: |
|
To the comment about the vrod engine being to heavy, I did say i'd like to see one similar in design.
Does anyone remember the origin of the stupid thing made by Clinton in referance to the Bush 1 economy? My words got more outrage than Clinton and he was deliberatly insulting the Pres of USA. I did mean for it to have some humor to it. guess it just backfired.
When I had my XB I just didn't like it to sound like a harly, which I have owned many, I guess I want Buell to have its own signiture sound etc. I was really reved up to see an inovative engine design to match the XB inovative frame design.
I do wish people would read the whole thread and my additional comments before raging on me to bad, I did not post and run, I'm here to take the punishment! |
Gomo
| | Posted on Monday, July 25, 2005 - 08:25 pm: |
|
The one thing I have never been able to understand is why some folks feel the need to compare Buells to other bikes to the point where they believe the other bike is a better product. Perhaps the better thing for them to do is find a message board of those that feel the same as they do. Granted, comparision is a good thing. It pushes ideas along as far as wanting to produce a better product, but some people have had a tendency to try and drag whichever Buell model they're discussing into the mud.
This only proves one thing - they don't get it. Just as we as riders may have a tough time trying to describe the sensation of riding to a non-rider, it's hard for some to understand that there is more to a bike than spec's. Sure the numbers may help sell to some, but all you really need is to get on a Buell and spend some time on it to understand what many on this board already know.....................I hate to put it this way but; if I have to explain....yada yada yada.
 |
Benm2
| | Posted on Monday, July 25, 2005 - 08:38 pm: |
|
What are we all going to say when Buell DOES give us more power? From the inception of the company, power increases have been fairly steady. Sure, the past few years have been primarily chassis & reliability related, but I'm sure the power will come.
Some time not long ago, on a thread about racing and Buell's non-performance in AMA FX (sorry, but its true), Court said "wait till 2006".
I'm CERTAIN he wasn't referring to the Ulysses chances in FX.
Well, Court, care to retract? Or, is there "more to come"? WE'VE ALL SEEN THE PARTS. They've been plastered in Cycle (?) and Roadracing World. Pictures of the dual downdraft heads have been posted on this very board... When do they hit the showroom? Are they some of the "cool new parts" to arrive in the accessory catalog, similar to the exhaust mentioned by Anony not so long ago?
Once again, though, we are yelling at those who ask for more power, directly or indirectly "questioning their manhood" (sorry Charolette or anyone else. Metaphorical). Some people may just want more power, FROM the factory. Not from Pammy, Wes, Aaron or anyone else, but from Erik, with a warranty. Some of us relish breaking the seals on an engine, some don't. Wanting more power is not bad, and those who ask for more from a Buell are not bad. They are either current or potential new Buell owners. They like almost everthing else, but have one small request. Is that so bad? |
Crashm1
| | Posted on Monday, July 25, 2005 - 09:36 pm: |
|
Court,
Your comment about trading in the Soft tail for a Buell hit home with me. I took a 13 year break from motorcycles and when I started thinking about another I decided on a 90 Softtail. I was bored out of my mind. After two years of trying to personalize it so I might actually really enjoy riding it I test drove a XB and the Softtail got traded in for a X1 a week later. In retrospect I think lost money on the deal but I got a motorcycle that makes me grin from ear to ear everyday. I've used up two rear tires and one front riding the X1 every chance I get. I'm hooked. If there's a Buells Anonymous I don't want to know about it, I like this addiction. |
Reepicheep
| | Posted on Monday, July 25, 2005 - 09:37 pm: |
|
I've got the chance to put some seat time on a V-Strom... and while I have not ridden the Ulysses, I have had plenty of times on M2's and XB's.
Based on Ferris's posts, and Cycle world reviews, and various postings on various internet groups, I expected the Strom to be an outstanding motorcyle.
It was fine, but the things that kept coming to my mind were things like "all the worst bits of an SV-650 with none of it's strengths" and "top heavy" and "awful vibration in the bars" and "can't these Japanese engineers find SOMEBODY taller then 5 foot nuthin to test ride one of these things before they ship?" and "my Buell makes scary noises, but none that sound like a bad crank bearing like this thing does". The suspension was sloppy and ambigous, the handling was all over the map based on what state of compression the suspension was in at the moment, the brakes were fine except for what they made the suspension do. Between the throttle slop and the chain slop, the thing was always flopping forward or backwards. Oh, and I thought "the motor has nice power", and "it sure does shift nice".
All in all, my XB9SX *never* felt like as good a motorcycle as it did after riding a VStrom. "feels like it was carved from a solid chunk billet" and "smooth and willing" and "does exactly what I want exactly how I want exactly when I want" was what i was thinking.
Do I want a more powerful motor in a Buell? *shrug*, I don't care, just don't put it in my model, I don't want my insurance rates to reflect it.
Would I have traded the XB9S for a more powerful motor? Hell no. Would I have traded the XB9SX for a more powerful motor? Hell No. Would I have traded the Ulysses for a more powerful motor? Hell No. There are SOOOO many bikes that are "motors with wheels" already, I am much happier Buell keeps doing things that have not been done yet, so long as they are things that work. |
Jon
| | Posted on Monday, July 25, 2005 - 10:22 pm: |
|
Do you think the fact that the V-strom weighs 100lbs more might take away from it's ability to use the power you cite? Just wondering. |
Swampy
| | Posted on Monday, July 25, 2005 - 10:53 pm: |
|
I like the term "American Muscle Bike"
@2005rl |
Budo
| | Posted on Monday, July 25, 2005 - 10:54 pm: |
|
See specs above,
V-strom
Dry Weight: 208kg (458 lbs.); 210 kg (462 lbs.) CA. model
XB12X
Weight
Dry Weight 425 lbs |
Budo
| | Posted on Monday, July 25, 2005 - 11:01 pm: |
|
I have ridden both XB9 and the XB12 and the Suzuki SV1000 (v-twin). The Suzuki is a way more fun motor, it pulls hard all the way to the redline of, I think 11,500. Seemed to me the XB ran outta steam just when it got going good.
On another note, I spent some time with the v-strom club. A couple of those guys had ridden their V-stroms from N. Carolina to Prudoe Bay Alaska. Alot of that on gravel roads, the haul road and the Al-Can highway. Another group had ridden their bikes 3000miles North to South on the Continental divide all off road, fire roads and trails. None of these guys had any problems. So, get back to me when the XB12X has a track record.
On another note, the V-strom is readily fitted with a skid plate and crash bars, the skid plate on the XB12X appears to be standard equip, that is the muffler is going to double as a skid plate. |
Blake
| | Posted on Monday, July 25, 2005 - 11:38 pm: |
|
Let's see...
From December 2003 MCN: Suzi DL1000 Summary Table (measured values)| Rear-Wheel HP | 89.2 HP | | Rear-Wheel Torque | 65.6 lb.ft. | | Wet Weight | 523 lbs. | | Avg Fuel Mileage | 43.7 | | Top Speed | 124 mph |
Now to simply compare... 
Performance Comparo: Buell XB12X vs. Suzi DL1000
| Parameter | Suzi DL1000 V-Strom | Buell XB12X Ulysses | Advantage | | Wet Weight | 523 LBs | 498 LBs | Buell | | RWHP | 89 | 92 | Buell | | Top Speed | 125mph | 133mph | Buell | | Fuel Efficiency | | | Buell | | Load Capacity | 442 LBs | 452 LB | Buell | | Suspension travel (F/R) | 6.3"/5.9" | 6.5"/6.4" | Buell | | Wheelbase | 60.4" | 54.1" | Buell | | Ground clearance | 6.5 | 6.75 | Buell | | Front forks | conventional | inverted | Buell | | Front forks | preload only | fully adjustable | Buell | | Rear shock | preload & rebound | fully adjustable | Buell | | Conclusion | crushee | crusher | Buell  |
|
Jerry_haughton
| | Posted on Monday, July 25, 2005 - 11:44 pm: |
|
the skid plate on a V-Strom is NOT a skid plate, it's a piece of thin plastic.
decent bike, the V-Strom, but after putting 8000 miles on one last September I couldn't help thinking it was built to a low price point, and offed it for my FJR.
LOVED the ergos on it, best of any street bike i've ever owned. part of the ergo charm came because it sat so high, which made riding in mud or loose gravel REALLY a chore ( i'm 5' 8" ).
the suspension is only fair. works ok, but if you ride one on the Dragon (i have), you have to wait for the suspension to catch up before you slam the bike into the next corner. that said, my V-Strom DID impress me at Deals Gap, but you have to be good enough to stay ahead of the suspension.
LOVED the engine, especially after a set of cans and a Power Commander (very lean without it). but, like Reep mentioned above, mine started making death rattles from what i thought was the lower end, which, apparently, was a bad clutch basket in the 2003 run (mine was a brand-new '03).
LOTS of driveline lash, as Reep mentioned, which made gnarly off-road stuff not very much fun at all. miserable, actually.
decent fuel mileage if you weren't spanking it too hard (mid-40's), and LOTS more fuel load than the Ulysses, a BIG plus in my mind.
VERY comfortable seat, again the best of any street bike i've owned.
TERRIBLE wind protection. the shield was decent, the fairing not. what a bulbous waste of potential. and the tank, while metal, is partially "shrouded" by the plastic fairing, making using a magnetic tank bag problematic. still, easier than on the Uly, i bet.
had RKA soft luggage on mine, so can't compare to the Uly.
the Suzuki 1000 v-twin motor is a nice piece, pleasant, pleasing power, lots of hp, lots of torque, and mine was smooth.
but in the end, there were too many factors on my V-Strom that were designed, engineered, and built to a cheap price point to hang onto it. i WANTED to love it, but i couldn't.
will be interesting to see how the Uly does in the real world. if i know Erik, i think it's "track record" will be just fine.
Ferris |
Jerry_haughton
| | Posted on Monday, July 25, 2005 - 11:48 pm: |
|
ps: the V-Strom is NOT fitted with crash bars. they're optional.
as is a centerstand. nice touch.
the rear shock preload is adjustable with an easy-to-reach wheel adjuster (even while riding), another nice touch. |
Jerry_haughton
| | Posted on Monday, July 25, 2005 - 11:53 pm: |
|
ps: the luggage rack on a V-Strom is SUPERB, large, flat, with a rubber non-slip pad and bungee cord "hooks," and mounts flush with the seat so that large luggage items (or new shop tools in big boxes) can be lashed to the backseat AND the rack without any special gymnastics. |
Jerry_haughton
| | Posted on Monday, July 25, 2005 - 11:56 pm: |
|
Based on Ferris's posts, and Cycle world reviews, and various postings on various internet groups, I expected the Strom to be an outstanding motorcyle.
it's worth repeating, i think, that i owned mine for a total of five months.
decent bike, enjoyed riding it back and forth across the country, just couldn't fall in love with it enough to keep it. |
Patrickh
| | Posted on Tuesday, July 26, 2005 - 09:09 am: |
|
Don't get me wrong, I have bought and sold a TL1000 and a SV1000 since buying my M2...and the M2 is still in the garage. However the only place I can see where Buell crushes Suzuki is in the suspension (ergo handling) category.
Would I buy a V-Strom, no way.
If you are a power guy a 90 degree Suzuki motor can be easily fettled to make BIG power without sacrificing reliability in any way.
When Cycle World does a comparo, both bikes will have similar ratings until the "street" section, where the nimble XB chasis and suspension will shine. |
Patrickh
| | Posted on Tuesday, July 26, 2005 - 09:15 am: |
|
Some snippets and factoids from the September CW article...
List price = $11,495
Fuel capacity = 4.4 gallons
Seat height = 35"
Ground clearance = 7.0 "
Wet weight = 496lb
Wheelbase = 54.3"
Rake/Trail = 22.0o/4.8"
SAE RWHP = 83.70 @ 6800 rpm (looks like less power up high than XB12R/S models)
Torque = 68.90 ft/lbs @ 5k (with more power/torque down low)
1/4 mile = 12.18 (110.24 mph)
Measured top speed = 131 mph
Please see Steve_A's explanation concerning the less than expected peak HP. That might have affected top speed too.
(Message edited by blake on July 26, 2005) |
Budo
| | Posted on Tuesday, July 26, 2005 - 10:06 am: |
|
Nice chart Blake, so Blake how did you get 93 hp and Patrickh got SAE RWHP = 83.70 @ 6800 rpm (looks like less power up high than XB12R/S models)? |
Tramp
| | Posted on Tuesday, July 26, 2005 - 10:41 am: |
|
steelshoe- no matter what your intention was with your thread, you directed it at an individual and called him stupid.
outside the 'virtual' world that
warrants an apology on your part.
I have said far worse and far more insulting things to individuals on the 'net, and later i
realized that i likely would not have said them in person. not because of any sort of fear of
a well-deserved (& likely sorely needed)crack in the mou th, but because
in person we usually find way more positive attributes and respond to them more positively.
how about an apology for this "Mr. Buell" character? |
Danny
| | Posted on Tuesday, July 26, 2005 - 11:41 am: |
|
Budo, a Ulysses crushes the V-Strom in every performace aspect. So the only reason to pick it would be to go backwards.
I'll be the judge of that. I still have 9 months of 75-mile daily commutes. The last two years I've used my V-Strom so I have a frame of reference. I even have a 175-mile loop up in the foothills that I can use for comparison between the two.
I think Ferris and I should each get one long-term so that we can objectively evaluate and report back here.
C'mon!! Gimme!! (Give us)
Danny
95 S2
02 V-Strom
What's next? |
Jerry_haughton
| | Posted on Tuesday, July 26, 2005 - 11:48 am: |
|
what Danny said.
Ferris |
Whodom
| | Posted on Tuesday, July 26, 2005 - 11:53 am: |
|
Interesting to hear from a V-strom rider. They're pretty cool bikes, and I followed them closely for a while. There's a good V-strom group at Yahoo. Interestingly, someone markets a belt drive conversion for the Strom, and several people on the Yahoo group were working on 17" front wheel conversions for their Stroms mainly due to lack of availability of good street tires in 19" size.
Seems like the Buell is just what some Strom riders were looking for all along. |
Nedwreck
| | Posted on Tuesday, July 26, 2005 - 01:31 pm: |
|
I like the V Strom, I don't think it's ugly. The only reason I wouldn't buy one is coz it's, like the X, too bastard tall.
Bob |
Blake
| | Posted on Tuesday, July 26, 2005 - 01:37 pm: |
|
Budo,
My bad, should have been 92RWHP.
See...
http://www.badweatherbikers.com/cgibin/discus/show.cgi?tpc=32777&post=482367#POS T482367
I cannot believe Buell sent CW a bike without first running it on the dyno to ensure it was running properly! <sigh> |
Blake
| | Posted on Tuesday, July 26, 2005 - 01:39 pm: |
|
Or if they did, then I cannot believe that the person testing it and reviewing the test data didn't catch the problem.
Actually "cannot believe" is not the right phrase, more correct would be "am very disappointed." |
Court
| | Posted on Tuesday, July 26, 2005 - 05:44 pm: |
|
>>>>Budo, a Ulysses crushes the V-Strom in every performace aspect. So the only reason to pick it would be to go backwards.
I suspect that an upcoming test, by a SPORTBIKE magazine no less, will satisfactorily address this issue.
Court |
Budo
| | Posted on Tuesday, July 26, 2005 - 05:55 pm: |
|
Sportbike? I will look forward to reading that one. |
Newfie_buell
| | Posted on Tuesday, July 26, 2005 - 09:43 pm: |
|
This one is for Tramp and Josh!!!
"I wonder if they are using the same ENGINES we are using"
Bwhahahahahahahaha
All I can say if you like the whine of the inline four (nag, nag, nag) then just go buy one and enjoy, if you like the roar, rumble and grumble of the 45 degree V-Twin then take the Buell.
To each their own and in my opinion the Buell make enough of the right power in the correct range for back roads blasting AND NOW for OFF ROAD back roads blasting.
The rest of the world can peeee off and leave us V-Twinners Alone. |
Tramp
| | Posted on Tuesday, July 26, 2005 - 09:54 pm: |
|
Thanks, Newf
It all comes down to personal preference.
Most Buellers I know have owned inline 4s in the past (I LOVED the '86 Z900 Ninja and '81 Katana I had in the late 90s in California)....we have often owned Harleys (I sure's he*l have) and some other stuff.
we/I prefer the overall useable torque & blap of the Buell.
Sort of a yank vincent for us fellers... |
M2nc
| | Posted on Tuesday, July 26, 2005 - 10:31 pm: |
|
Tramp, Ditto.
I have an I-4 and V-2 . The I-4 is all machine, the Buell is all soul.
Right motor, especially for the Ulysses, great match for Buell.
my two cents. |
Blake
| | Posted on Tuesday, July 26, 2005 - 11:39 pm: |
|
Phffbt. What do you know. Koolaid drinkin' Buell fool.  |
Aesquire
| | Posted on Wednesday, July 27, 2005 - 12:16 am: |
|
I am actually kinda thrilled that Buell came out with, not, just the sport touring bike lots of you asked for, but also a Baja Buell at the same time! The use of the longer swing arm on the new Lightning model is just icing on the cake.
I & my "old 2001" model would be overjoyed to have such an modular feast at hand. I run a M2L with S3T bar & fairing. Mix & match from a palette of all Buell parts has been fun to watch others do, & it's just a matter of time before those hard bags end up on a Firebolt. etc. etc. |
Tramp
| | Posted on Wednesday, July 27, 2005 - 12:26 am: |
|
waiddaminnit with the 'ditto' there M2...I said I PREFER the buell.
maybe I should have added: "BY FAR" |
|
