| Author | Message | ||
     Thepup |
Blake,so now when it is pointed out how tall the Buell engine is and how high it carries weight, it is advantageous to have weight up high,interesting.Why has the rim mounted rotor been around 30 years but never used?Blake the ZTL does seem to make the front wheel slightly lighter than a conventional system,but what about the centrifugal force of a wheel mounted rotor?Blake,lets talk about the dry sump oil system.Why would any other sportbike need a oil tank in the swingarm,they don't.I see many people say that a water cooled bike can get a hole in the radiator or the hose,what about the oil cooler and lines on the Buell system.The oil tank in the swingarm is an innovation on a bike with a dry sump,but not to motorcycles in general,in fact it is not needed in any other sportbike.Blake,do you really think that there is an advantage with the primary system on a Buell,or could it be that this is just the way H-D builds engines,except for the Revo.Sorry Blake,I don't think Buell is the"be all end all"of motorcycles.Buell does things different not necessarily everything they do is better. | ||
| Blake |
Steve, Are you certain that the top MotoGP machines aren't using a dry sump? Where would you put the oil tank on other street going sport bikes? I know! In the swingarm! Ooops, Buell has that patented. You said Buell doesn't take advantage of all the benefits of a dry sump? You say there is room under the engine? I don't see it. The muffler resides there. | ||
| Thepup |
Blake,what bike has a maintenance intensive valvetrain except the Duc's.Yamaha has a check at 26,000,Suzuki at 14,500,Honda 16,000. | ||
| Spatten1 |
"The next Buell will have even more advanced engine technology. I'm betting it will be aimed at reduced weight and improved sporting performance. Then we'll all be happy!" Amen brother! Blake, First, you mischaracterized my statements. I don't care about cc vs HP at all. I care about bike weight, handling, and sufficient power to ride like I want to ride. The nine was perfect at sea-level, but sucks wind here at altitude. It is hard to pass cars at 8000 feet, literally. That is insufficient power. I'm a bit frustrated now because I missed the last two months of the last riding season due to my engine being down. The weird thing is that the only parts that broke were HD only items: Primary chain, drive gear, and drive belt (chain now). I know it is a coincidence, but those "extra" or "different" parts are what put my bike out of commission. That is why it is driving my nuts when people talk about the simplicity and lack of things to go wrong with the proven HD design. Now that the snow is melting I have a badly broken tib/fib. I'm losing my mind. If I could just get some miles on the bike again, the frustration with the mechanical issues will melt away. However, I sit here thinking about how many months riding I've missed, and how much money this bike has cost me in repairs. The "simplicity" isn't helping me at all, and the HD only features are what has killed my bike, and my season, and my wallet. Bad luck, I guess. But this is my second Buell, and the other had it's share of problems too. How can I not get frustrated? My overly complicated Japanese bikes never broke. | ||
| Spatten1 |
Blake, Maybe the Moto GP teams do use dry sump. I don't know. I do know that my engine has enough clearance for a 6 quart oil pan under the engine, so forget that advantage. I do not know what the HP loss is due to the crank churning through the oil. That alone may be enough for MotoGP to go dry sump. I'd love to know how much HP a GSXR1000 gives up in friction due to the wet sump. It would be great info. | ||
| Ducxl |
I do not know what the HP loss is due to the crank churning through the oil. I think Ducati solved that with the "Deep V" sump | ||
| 45_degrees |
Kawi H2... "considered" fast? Not just considered, but officially declared THE quickest production motorcycle on the planet by a long shot by every single motorcycle publication on the planet! Really quick back then was mid to low 13 second 1/4 miles for a bike, the H2 did it in 12. It was a missile. Was still the quickest even when the original Z1 900 came out with it's "sophisticated" DOHC, 2 valve/cylinder inline-4 and higher redline. The XB9 comes close to 11, and the quickest bikes today are around 10... who cares?? If I want hp, thats what I buy. Or, if I want retro, I buy it. If I want the best innovation and handling, I look to Buell and thats what I've been buying, as are a lot of other people that don't know any better. We're all hoodwinked.  I don't think you understand my point. But that's ok.  Didn't expect it. I guess certain people will never be satisfied even if we got 5000 hp motorcycles, 'cause the competition will have 5500 hp. Just an interesting piece of trivial info... the H2 has a 7500 rpm redline. Makes huge torque down low. Ever ridden one of these highly non-"sophisticated" beasts? Absolute joy. I know that the sophisticated Rotax oil reservoir is pretty much exposed and vulnerable compared to my tough swingarm/oil reservoir that most people don't even realize is anything other than a swingarm. For all that are pissed with their Buell and feel hoodwinked because they could have bought a super sport instead and they can't justify their Buell in the company of their friend's sophisticated 180 hp machine, despite being able to keep right on his back tire in a twisty canyon... No one here said they are the "be all end all" of bikes... They are truly amazing and innovative bikes though! I for one am sick and tired of the whining. This is an enthusiast forum, not a bashing/whining forum. Go rant and rave on some super sport forum and you will have a smile from ear to ear as people agree 100% with you. You won't feel like you're fighting a mob to get your point across. | ||
| Ducxl |
I'd love to know how much HP a GSXR1000 gives up in friction due to the wet sump See...now you've gone and did it! What the heck are you comparing a Buell to a GSXR1000?? What's the matter with you?? When comparing a 1200cc Buell YOU MUST compare against other bikes' with 600ccs'............or less  | ||
| Spatten1 |
Sorry dude, I forgot. | ||
| Spatten1 |
In 2003, the 600 comparo would have been a very valid point. Problem is that the 1000s are now lighter than the Buells. I just focus on handling and weight for comparissons, and now the 1000s are in the same weight category. Too much power for me though. I'm old. Just give me 110 or 120 at the wheel and I'll be thrilled to death. Sounds like that may be coming, from Blake's comment. | ||
| 45_degrees |
Duc... you have failed to realize that Buells make equal or more torque than the 1000s at a lower rpm and the 600s don't even compare in torque... 40-45 ft. lbs. @ 13-14,000 rpm is silly! Torque is something ACTUALLY MEASURABLE produced by an engine. Horsepower is not. Horsepower is an arbitrary figure in the first place, and without a torque figure, it cannot be calculated. If you have wimpy torque at a high rpm, then the horsies are puny, even though you might have the same number of horses or even more than a bike that has bigger, huskier horses... I hope that is understandable. | ||
| Spike |
On the contrary, a dynamometer only reads horsepower, and it has to calculate torque based on that horsepower and the RPM input. Don't believe me? Try doing a dyno run without telling the dyno the engine's RPM, see if the graph plots horsepower or torque. | ||
| Ridrx |
A dyno only reads hp? Perhaps you may have seen the following formula somewhere...hp=(torquexrpm)/5252. Torque is ALL you feel as rider/driver. If two engines made the same torque at the same rpm,but one of them makes 50 more hp up top they would FEEL exactly the same. The motor w/+50 would not accelerate any faster but its higher hp will delay inertial deceleration for a longer period thus giving you a higher top speed As this applies to my Buell, I'll take my mountain of torque over big hp #'s anyday. I've seen both sides of the argument firsthand. A big hp bike,great track bike...big torque,just a great bike. | ||
| 45_degrees |
Spike... The dyno computer is calculating the hp from the torque measured from the wheel(s)... horsepower is not a twisting force. | ||
| Jwhite601 |
Yea, Spike dynos measure torque and calculate hp | ||
| Old_man |
An engine that makes the most horsepower is, by definition, more powerful. If this horsepower is generated at twice the rpm, it is still more powerful. Each engine must be geared to take advantage of where, on the rev. band, it makes the most power. If an engine only makes great horsepower in a narrow part of this band, it will necessitate more gears and thus shifting to keep the engine in this narrow band. I, personally, prefer an engine that makes good power throughout the rev. band that I can ride without constant shifting. Most of the new fours make good power throughout, If you check their specs. You'll find they make great torque. My XB9S makes more than enough horsepower for me and good torque throughout. If I was not satisfied I would buy one of the very many others with more power, and not complain about the Buell that I have. | ||
| Pushrodpete |
My H2 is still fast. Well, when it's running -- seems to have a lower MTBF than even my X1 did...  C'mon Erik! Build a 2-stroke! Ya know ya wanna! Ning-ying-ying!!! | ||
| Molly_hatchet |
god i would love to have one of those... a good friend of mine had one when we were in high school it was scary fast...been lookin for a while now...i miss my RD...2 strokes were the shiznit. | ||
| Spike |
Perhaps someone with access to a dyno would like to dyno their bike without telling the dyno the RPM of the bike and post the results here. If the dyno measures torque, it should plot a graph of torque but be unable to plot horsepower because it can't calculate it without the RPM. If the dyno measures horsepower, the opposite will happen. I already know what happens since I've done it before, but since you guys don't believe me maybe one of you could try it for yourself and post the results here. No opinion there, just a fact. If you'd like to rate this post 1 star, be honest enough to disprove the fact first. | ||
| Reepicheep |
It's confusing and an honest mistake. Horsepower is what you feel, period. However, people always quote peak horsepower, which is horsepower near the engines redline. This is a fairly silly thing for most street bike riders to worry about, as it measures something that you can't have anymore (at the moment you have it, you then have to shift gears and start over). What we are interested in, and what people often confuse with "torque" is the overall shape of the horsepower versus RPM curve. A bike that makes great horsepower when the engine is revving *really fast*, but makes less power then your average moped when the engine is only half way to redline, would suck. So instead of saying our Buells have great torque, we should say our Buells have really good power at both low and high RPM's. | ||
| Spike |
Reep remains more eloquent than I. I distinctively remember the first time I was told by a dyno operator that the dyno could not tell you torque output unless you gave it the engine RPM. I told him that couldn't be the case since torque was the only "real" number, and horsepower had to be calculated based on torque and RPM. The thing is, he didn't fully understand it either, so he just stared at me blankly for a minute and again informed me that without RPM input the dyno was not going to tell me the torque output. Clearly, my understanding of the relationship between torque and horsepower was wrong. | ||
| 45_degrees |
I don't make a habit of believing wiseacres and their perception of reality... http://auto.howstuffworks.com/horsepower1.htm http://auto.howstuffworks.com/horsepower.htm Did you miss Ridrx's equation above?? Did you ever wonder about the ROTATIONAL or TWISTING FORCE (torque) that causes a V8 to strain at it's engine mounts and actually cause the car to rock when you blip the throttle? Did you know that when you turn a screwdriver, you are applying torque to turn the screw??? | ||
| Spike |
I don't even know what a wiseacre is, but if you strap your bike to a dynojet and run it without telling it the engine RPM, it will only give you horsepower. Even more fun is hooking it up to a spark plug lead and then telling it your bike has a different number of cylinders than it actually has. It'll give you the same horsepower reading as the run with no RPM input, but the torque reading will be completely bogus. Now if you can explain to me how a device that measures torque and calculates horsepower based on that torque measurement can give a accurate horsepower reading and an inaccurate torque reading you're smarter than I am. The dyno does not know that hp=(torque*rpm)/5252. The dyno knows that torque=(hp*5252)/rpm. | ||
| Spike |
I was ignoring this because I thought the dyno evidence alone was enough to settle the issue, but since this is turning into a real debate I'll feel it's important to address it. If two engines have the same torque but one makes 50 more horsepower up top. They both will indeed accelerate at the same rate up until they reach the RPM where the 2nd engine is making more power, at which point the 2nd engine will start to walk away from the first. This will happen long before they reach their respective top speeds. The 2nd engine will walk away because it has . . . wait for it . . . 50 more horsepower. So, anyone scheduled any dyno time yet?  | ||
| Ridrx |
Spike, If the dyno knows torque=(hp*5252)/rpm how does it give you a hp value without the rpm? Slice it up anyway you want the math don't lie. As for thew second engine "walking away" because it has 50 more horses/try slapping a 1ton trailer on both and run the same test. Eveyone in this debate shuold look at this site vettenet.com, good explanations of the relevance between tq/hp how they are measured etc. | ||
| Reepicheep |
And another example just to beat a dead horse... I could take my dremel tool, and with the right gearing, produce 1000 foot pounds of torque (probably at 1 RPM... One revolution per month ). No matter how I gear it however, it will never produce more then whatever fraction of a horsepower it produces today. | ||
| Spike |
It can give you a horsepower value because it measures horsepower. The only thing the dyno knows prior to a run is how much work it takes to spin the roller. The only thing new it learns during the run is how fast you can spin the roller. It knows how much work you've done and how fast you've done the work, thus it knows your power output. It then has to calculate torque based on the RPM input. If you don't give it RPM, it can't give you torque. How has anything I have stated implied that the math lies? Are you implying that the dyno lies? We seem to be in agreement on one part of this, that the dyno measures one thing and calculates another. It needs RPM to calculate the other, so without giving it RPM it can only give you what it measures. The only thing left do to is make a dyno run without the RPM input to see what it gives us. If it gives us torque, it measures torque. If it gives us horsepower, it measures horsepower. I've already done this, I know it will give us horsepower. Your options from this point are either to think I am lying about it giving us horsepower output, or explain how it could give us a calculated horsepower output without the other information needed to make the calculation.
As long as both engines have enough torque to make the trailer move, the one with 50 more horsepower will still walk away. | ||
| 45_degrees |
Not trying to say I'm smarter than you, I haven't even run a dyno before!! I don't know what the software is doing or requires from the operator. But you must understand that the rule of physics applies here. Horsepower is calculated, not measured. It is an arbitrary measurement. http://209.161.33.50/dictionary/wiseacre http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dynamometer http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Horsepower My H2 has never broke down on me!! First year... 1972!  | ||
| 45_degrees |
If you actually read the links I have provided, you might understand what torque is. I don't believe wiseacres, just as I don't believe Al Gore and his "inconvenient truth" crap. | ||
| 45_degrees |
You can't calculate your dremel's horsepower when it's not producing a rotational force (torque). Did you know that you can measure torque at zero rpm?? Like how an electric motor or a steam engine provide maximum torque at zero rpm. |
