| Author | Message | ||
     Slaughter |
Tubers  | ||
| Ridrx |
 | ||
| M1combat |
Sorry Rocket... Just meant that as a simple question  . I should have clarified but I was a bit short on time. I guess I was asking if you thought they should progress beyond the tech that makes the XB the XB (aside from the engine) if they put a "modern" high powered engine in it. By that I mean... Should they take the fuel outta the frame and the oil outta the swingarm? Should they put the exhaust beside the swingarm (ala GSXR)? Should they lengthen it? Should they rake it out? Should they put a full fairing on it? etc, etc... Should they make a bike just like a Ducati? Or... Should they take the proven (I know... some people would debate that) XB design and modify it (or clean sheet it, but keep the good ideas, which IMO are most of them if not all of them) and make it better and right for a high powered and light weight engine? Keep in mind that 140HP XB engines seem to work just fine in an XB race bike... I guess I'm just asking what you would change? I'm not so sure that the XB chassis is the "final" word in "STREET" motorcycle chassis design... but I believe I'm reasonably safe saying that it's the current word. What would you do that's new? If you're not sure... What do you believe needs to be changed to make the current XB chassis (The Firebolt specifically) more suitable to a high powered light weight possibly water cooled engine? After those changes... Do you think it would still be fair to call it an XB chassis? Imonabuss... Thank you for acknowledging the swingarm angle of the tube frames BTW . I've been mentioning that in reference to pretty much EVERY other sport bike made today aside from the XB. Wheelbase changes = BAD. | ||
| Naustin |
The tube frame bikes are all gawky and awkward with the fuel tank perched way up over the engine, and the air box sticking out the sides. The swingarm has a bad angle for handling, the shock absorber looks dumb underneath, yada, yad, yada. They look very garage made. Yeah, those tubers are just crap. I can't believe they even made them they're such garbage.   Tuber owners must just be suckers for owning them, huh? (Message edited by naustin on February 27, 2007) | ||
| Ft_bstrd |
Yeah, those tubers are just crap. I can't believe they even made them they're such garbage. Tuber owners must just be suckers for owning them, huh? Especially the blue ones! They suck most! | ||
| Xl1200r |
I can't see how anyone can actually say an XB is selling out and keep a straight face. Do we need a history lesson? If the XB is a sellout next to the Tubers, then... The typical Tuber (X1, S1, S2, S3, M2) are sellouts to the RS and RSS1200 for losing so much fairing and way-cool folding passanger seat on the 2-up models. Later RS models are sellouts to early RS models because they got a 5-speed tranny. The RS1200 is a sellout to the RR1200 for being a much more streetable machine. The RR1200 is a sellout to the RR1000 for using nothing more than a typical Sportster engine. The RR1000 is a sellout to the RW750 for not being a race-only machine. The RW750 is a sellout because it was not a product of Erik's first business, 'Pittsburgh Performance Parts'. 'Piitsburgh Performance Parts' was a sellout business because he opened it while living in Wisconsin. Harley-Davidson sold Erik out by hiring him outside of his home state. Pennsylvania is a sellout because it allowed Erik to learn how to race, repair and engineer motorcycles instead of teaching him how to bake bread a build a barn in a single day with all of his friends. This thread fast became a total joke. Everyone knows the next Buell HAS to be a sellout to the XB since that's just history of Buell. Erik got the patent for the fuel-in-frame design in 1988. Does that make every RR1200, RS1200, RSS1200, S1, S2, S3, M2 and X1 bike is just an "excuse"??? Buells basic drive has been building streetable sport bikes - sacraficing nothing for handling. If the XB handles better than a tuber, then it's fulfilling this drive. Erik's vision was not to build tube-frames his whole life, and nobody forced him into building the XB. Anyone who believes so is a misguided fanatic. And the Corvette came out in 1953 (not sure if you were implying 1957 was the first year). I wonder how many thought the Corvette was a sellout when they started using a V8 engine instead of an inline 6 2 years later. | ||
| Molly_hatchet |
no i just couldnt remember exactly what year the vette came out so i used a little kentucky windage on that one to make my point . | ||
| Court |
Ohhhhhhhhhhhhhhhh lordy . . . ya shoulda heard the ruckus when the very aero looking RR1200 yielded to the "flip up seat" RS-1200/4 Westwind. Buell was doomed. . . . doomed I tell you! | ||
| Ridrx |
IF BMC continues to deliver the GRIN factor we all love so much then it won't really matter HOW they do it. I don't believe Erik has strayed from the path of delivering ridiculously FUN bikes, so I wait patiently for the new addition with no expectations. Did any of you see the XBR coming? I have no doubt that whatever he does it will be BIG FUN. | ||
| Firemanjim |
Yeah them damn tube frame tinkertoy bikes--who would ever ride one of them---and want to do so at over 200??? I think I'll stick with my poor old "garage built" bikes for now---besides the 300 HP beast I am building for Bonneville is being built in my garage!!!! Not to say I won't be there drooling over the new 750/1000 v-twins--heck I was the first non-industry guy to test ride an XB. | ||
| Rocketman |
My point is much simpler than what I would change if it were up to me. Buell needs a new bike. I don't care if it has a tube frame or an alloy beam frame or something else. Just not another XB frame. The XB frame has one inherent design problem. It takes up too much of the motorcycle from an aesthetic point of view, which pretty much determines the amount of options left when designing a naked motorcycle. Non are so radical any longer in their different designs as all variants have become too samey. New engine, new bike, new performance. That's what I'd do. And just for the Buell rose tinted goggle brigade. I never said the XB's as a motorcycle was Buell selling out. Just the way they have been over produced and sold is the problem I have with them. Mainstream average Joe doesn't interest me. That's why the Japanese big four can never sell themselves out. They make all kinds of motorcycles. Buell shouldn't. Rocket | ||
| Bigblock |
So, the King has no clothes? | ||
| Midknyte |
The XB frame has one inherent design problem ok, I'll dissagree with that. I think it's a thing of beauty. | ||
| Ft_bstrd |
I think I understand Rocket. He sounds like the kind of guy that likes Punk until it becomes mainstream. He liked REM until you could hear them on the "pop" stations. He likes a restaurant until more than 20 people know it's there. The XBs are so numerous because they have become popular. They are popular because they are good. By virtue of the technological and design features, the tubers are NOT as good as the XBs, but they are less numerous. By being less numerous they are therefore "better". If you don't like the XB frame because of the aesthetics, that is fine. I'm sure that others share your opinion. To claim that the "new" frame Buell should build is a tuber is silly. | ||
| Xl1200r |
I too have to agree that XB frame is nice piece to look at. I like naked bikes, and I also like full-fairing bikes, and I think the XB does a good job of finding a happy medium (on the Firebolt), and still very much a naked bike for the Lightnings. I can tend to see where Rocket is coming from as far "ooverproducing". I, for one, hardly ever see another Buell anywhere aside from the guy's that I ride with all the time. At least where I am, they still tend to be an elusive species. However, When I was a teenager, I used to LOVE old cars (I still do), and I remember going to car shows all the time in the summer, and always dreamed of owning a Camaro or a Chevelle. But after a couple years, I just got sick of going to car shows and seeing the same cars over and over. How many Chevelles can you look at? I think it's different when it's your own, but I do see where Rocket is coming from, though I disagree (at least where I am) that a Buell can be considered anything close to being a popular bike. There are 2 dealers in my area (you have to drive 100 miles to find the next closest one) and I don't think those 2 dealers sell more than 20 bikes per year between them. | ||
| Rocketman |
Ft, you nailed it down tight, except for your last comment. I'm not saying Buell for me have to and should build a tube frame. I'm saying build something that gets away from the XB chassis. Not take the XB out of production. Just offer another choice, and if Buell can do great things to any motorcycles design, geometry, handling and cornering ability, then let's see him do it again with something new and once again radical, but not with the dumb fuel in the frame idea. I don't care how well it works, the biggest problem I have when looking at an XB12S, which is a very nice cool looking bike, is the air box cover dummy tank effort looks like a peanut on a dinner plate, or worse, Mike Tyson wearing a bra. The geeky frame limits where one can take the looks of the XB when considering a naked design. Rocket | ||
| Sparky |
Speaking of the tubers looking "very garage made", one of the guys at the last checkpoint on the '97 Pasadena MC Club Greenhorn Run asked, upon seeing my '96 Lightning, stock fenders and all, "What is that Buwell, . . . a kit bike?" I had to laugh at his mispronunciation, but I could see his point. | ||
| Naustin |
I used to think that being hand built was something to be proud of, but now that I know my tuber is Gawky and Awkward, My stomach turns whenever I look at it.  | ||
| Spike |
You guys are so weird. "How dare someone state that they like their bike better than mine!?! Now I have to go whine about it on badweb!" Seriously. Get out and ride more. If you like your tuber, go ride your tuber. If you like your XB, go out and ride your XB. Why moan about it someone else doesn't like your bike? | ||
| Naustin |
 (Message edited by naustin on February 28, 2007) | ||
| Snakedriver |
I bought my XB because Erik is a geek. He seems to get truly excited in those videos on buell.com. I cant afford a Ferrari, Shelby, or Morgan. But I can afford a Buell. The Buell next to my TR-4 looks great. Give me the Fuel in frame and my hand crank (yes even in '65 the TRs came with a crank) and Im happy. The next anything should never be a step backward. What ever that is. Maybe a translucent frame so you can see the fuel and the engine! Hell that could even lighten up the bike by a few ounces since it wouldnt need a fuel low light! | ||
| Buellistic |
Imonabuss, AKA Harvey, AKA Steve: ie: your post Saturday Feb. 24, 2007 "i" bought a BLAST to ride because "i" look just as big on a XB, but the BLAST is more fun to ride !!! In BLASTing LaFayette | ||
| Ridrx |
Tranlucid Valencia Orange for me please...hell I don't NEED the speedo either(wonder if they'll have an Odometer only option,hour meter?) Anybody know when the next shipment of KICK ASHE wheels is coming in.  | ||
| Ft_bstrd |
Ft, you nailed it down tight, except for your last comment. I'm not saying Buell for me have to and should build a tube frame. I'm saying build something that gets away from the XB chassis. Not take the XB out of production. Just offer another choice, and if Buell can do great things to any motorcycles design, geometry, handling and cornering ability, then let's see him do it again with something new and once again radical, but not with the dumb fuel in the frame idea. I don't care how well it works, the biggest problem I have when looking at an XB12S, which is a very nice cool looking bike, is the air box cover dummy tank effort looks like a peanut on a dinner plate, or worse, Mike Tyson wearing a bra. The geeky frame limits where one can take the looks of the XB when considering a naked design. Rocket The power plant will dictate the frame. If Buell continues to use the HD power plant, I believe that they have moved to the Nth degree of development. I'm sure that there can be additional "refinements", but I do not believe that another evolutionary leap is possible using that power plant. The engine can't be any lower. The CG can't be taken any lower. The handling can be refined but I seriously doubt that a radical improvement can be squeezed out of the XB platform. That is why I believe a new power plant MUST be in the works. With a new power plant comes a blank page from a design standpoint. If the CG could be lowered to the point that the in frame fuel structure was not as necessary, I could see a more conventional tank design being incorporated. I could see a more conventional tube frame design utilized. Until a new power plant is utilized, I fear your dream of a new tube frame Buell is dead. I don't think Erik is remotely out of new ideas. I CAN'T WAIT TO SEE WHAT IS ON THE NEXT HORIZON!!!!! Assuming a tube frame Buell is on the drawing board, what I don't want to see happen is for Buell to create a Ducati Monster with a Buell symbol. I don't want to see a SV650 with a Buell symbol. Although cool, I don't even want to see a Super Duke with a Buell symbol. I want a Buell to be a Buell. I bought a Buell for nearly all of the same reasons Rocket did. I really like to get excited when I see another Buell, when it rarely happens. The alternative is to be in the "me too" club. Then Buell will be nothing more than spec sheet fodder. Who the hell wants another:  On any third Tuesday I can crap on two Gixxers and wipe my butt with a third. I like my bikes a little more rare!  | ||
| Molly_hatchet |
funny thing is that most of the big 4 have adopted the buell design in one way or another....the new kawi's -most of the airbox is fake....the suzuki's- look at the exhaust....yamaha- same thing....i betcha one of em figures out how to put oil and gas somewhere special in the next year or two.....buell is already ahead of the curve on most fronts....if we dont see a streetable version of the XBRR il wear my sunday underware on my helmet for a nice long ride and take pictures....they aint gonna dump the harley powerplant no way...cripes harley owns buell....not gonna happen....new frame...doubtfull but possible...better motor im bettin yaaaaa!!!!.....seems to me like over the last few years all the impovements have been mostly what u guys were already doing to ur bikes...sooo lets think long and hard....steering stabilizer- mmm not really needed....tires already taken care of....well im at a loss....we got rid of the white wheels...how bout a true black frame...better headlights...one more gear and more horsepower baby....thats what we'll see....bet me...watercooled...i dont think so but would be nice...different kind of header maybe...gorrila transmision ? ... XBRR wit lights thats what i want without the 30,000 $ price tag..why else wold they race the thing for a year and retire..THEY WERE TESTING THE NEW BUELL ! . | ||
| Ft_bstrd |
THEY WERE TESTING THE NEW BUELL ! Or they were pushing the envelope to demonstrate the limitations of the HD power plant. I LOVE the XB engine for street, but I think it's days are numbered for Buells. The mechanical margin of error for the hopped up XBRR engine is outside what would be suitable for a production bike. There would be too many failures of too many components for a bike that we would ride hard every day. As has been mentioned here before, a 450cc single would be a great test bed to later graft on a second cylinder for a 900-1000. You have to ask yourself, "why would Buell dump as much as it did into the Buell Racing program only to quit in one year?" I think they learned all that they needed to know, that the HD power plant was not going to be suitable for what they want. If it was to test a new Buell, racing would provide continued data for refinements and improvements to both Buell in general and the XBRR specifically. | ||
| Molly_hatchet |
i cant wait for next summer...thats all i gotta say...not many things stir up this much rumor a year prior to release...cept maybe a new harry potter movie...hey maybe were gettin a firebolt broom and erik will have a dandy ole laugh.(but with bitchin headlights) for the broom. ya know...gotta see good while ur flyin n all . | ||
| Teddagreek |
I think the frame is flawed... I've never seen so many bikes so damaged by just falling over or low speed crashes.. Pucks Suck.... Yes they are better than nothing.. Its a odds game. If my bike falls over I should not have to replace a 1100 dollar frame.. I can see some scratches, bars, pegs, mirrors but a frame? Here is something interesting... While my bike was getting worked on there was bike getting worked on that needed a frame.. Buell has no frames and this had to come vender direct. Its very interesting that the frame still has the weld patch where the snorkel hole was.. Hell even the XBRR is that way.. | ||
| Ridrx |
FLAWED?? It was not designed to be dropped. Buell has no frames because they probably built bikes out of them. I doubt seriously they would redesign the mold for the XB to fill one little hole. IIRC the frame is cast in pieces and welded together anyhow, so it was probably cheaper, easier, and faster. | ||
| Ft_bstrd |
Buell factory bastards! Yeah, they probably got some sort of price break on quantity if they bought a certain number of frames. They sold us those piece of crap left over quantity-discount frames! Oh wait.....I have a Uly! Never mind. |
