| Author |
Message |
    
Diablobrian
| | Posted on Tuesday, July 31, 2007 - 12:27 am: | 
|
Thank you for the positive response Dave, I kind of expected a silent affirmation since there are so many sore
points in this whole sad tale.
I thought that control of the VR-1000 project was wrested away from Erik and the bike suffered a slow death
by committee instead of being competitive as it would have been had it not spent years in development hell while
the japanese raised the bar.
I also understand that many features that appeared on the XB series were originally slated to be for the VR1K.
Ah well, these are some of the things that have forged the Man and the Machines. |
Jlnance
| | Posted on Tuesday, July 31, 2007 - 06:12 am: |
|
True. All require some sort of material, and will be internal combustion engines.
Actually what I meant was there are always financial constraints. Engineers always fantasize about getting to work on a project where cost doesn't matter, but those don't really exist.
Both the Sportster and Helicon engines represent what can be done given the necessity to sell the bikes and make a profit. |
Court
| | Posted on Tuesday, July 31, 2007 - 06:25 am: |
|
>>>It is a fact that a VR-1000 was shipped to Porsche for adaptation.
UNTRUE
>>>It is a fact that the Archetecture of the 2 engines is virtualy identical.
UNTRUE
It is a fact that the V-Rod was well under development before HD bought Buell.
UNTRUE
The VR-1000 was more development Mule than racer
UNTRUE
>>>as well as it did, and it provided a wealth of information for HDI.
TRUE - Scheibe learned how to change a rear tire in 4 minutes while a 1,000,000/yr rider who was in 3rd place before handing his bike over to Scheibe for " a few seconds" stood watching in disgust.
>> Buell had nothing to do with its early development, and its course was long set by the time BMC was brought on board.
UNTRUE - I've got a raft of documents here that contradict that. A friend has the "hardware".
Essentially, that post was 3 swings, 3 strikes . . .
Erik Buell is indeed bitter. I recorded his presentation at Homecoming. I'd say, in terms of what can be publically discussed, he pretty well provided a glimpse at the facts. Business is business but the reason I, personally, am pissed off is that some really dumb folks did some just downright mean things in a effort to denegrate the efforts of some really smart people.
There are people in this world who try to look tall by tripping those taller than themselves. |
Ft_bstrd
| | Posted on Tuesday, July 31, 2007 - 08:01 pm: |
|
Actually what I meant was there are always financial constraints. Engineers always fantasize about getting to work on a project where cost doesn't matter, but those don't really exist.
Both the Sportster and Helicon engines represent what can be done given the necessity to sell the bikes and make a profit.
Agreed. There are always financial constraints as to what can be produced at what price.
Other than the sportster engine, which I am assuming we can all agree was not a clean slate design, what might an engineer have done with the Helicon engine that wasn't done in development?
I would be interested to know (and get your opinion), from an engineering standpoint, what the engineers might have done differently, assuming no exotic components like diamond encrusted, kevlar laced, ceramic doo dads.
It seems to me, and I have never been accused of being the brightest bulb in the box, that the Helicon engine is about 90%+ of what the engineers wanted. |
Spatten1
| | Posted on Tuesday, July 31, 2007 - 09:28 pm: |
|
The VR-1000 was more development Mule than racer, brought on line by a small in house shop with limited funds (HRC employs more people than HDI in its entirety even now)
Yeah, but Ducati is smaller than Harley and they are dominating GP. It is a bullshit excuse. If you compete, try your best to win. |
Jaimec
| | Posted on Tuesday, July 31, 2007 - 09:58 pm: |
|
In the mid 80's Honda did make a fairly hi-revving IL4 engine with double overhead cams and four hydraulic valves per cylinder. I would've liked to have seen something similar twenty years later in the new Buell engine, but there's nothing wrong with a 12,500 mile adjustment interval either. It's just that a guy gets spoiled after awhile...  |
Jlnance
| | Posted on Tuesday, July 31, 2007 - 10:24 pm: |
|
I would be interested to know (and get your opinion), from an engineering standpoint, what the engineers might have done differently, assuming no exotic components like diamond encrusted, kevlar laced, ceramic doo dads.
I'd call the Helicon a clean slate engine. I've certainly have no criticisms to level against it. I fully expect it to be great. But that wasn't the point I was trying (and failing  ) to make.
I don't disagree with your original statement, but I'm looking at it from a different angle.
The difference in my mind between the Sportster engine and the Helicon engine isn't the cleanness of the slate, but the financial position of the company. Using the Sportster engine was a brilliant move for Buell. It saved them the development and tooling cost of the engine, and turned the vast number of motorcycle shops capable of working on Sportster engines into a service network that Buell didn't have to pay for. If they had had more money, I'm sure they would have prefered to design an engine suited for their specific needs. But hell, if they had more money now, I sure they could have designed diamond coated cylinder walls, magnesim cases, and direct injection into the current Helicon engine. But cost is always a constraint, and being a great designer means making the most of what you have.
I've got similar views on stand alone Buell dealerships. Sure it would be nice if they just appeared out of the sky, but in reality the cost of building all those dealerships has to ultimatly be added into the cost of the bikes. Someday the numbers will make sense, and we will all look back in horror at the days when you had to go to a Harley dealer to buy a Buell. But that doesn't mean it's not a good idea to have them in there right now.
(Message edited by jlnance on July 31, 2007) |
Ft_bstrd
| | Posted on Wednesday, August 01, 2007 - 01:12 am: |
|
Agreed. It's the same process for Roehr and Fisher using existing powerplants to get a head start in the creation process. |
Adrian_8
| | Posted on Thursday, August 02, 2007 - 12:11 pm: |
|
I rode the 06 Street Rod and own and Aprilia Tuono with the 988 /rotax V-twin...the Rotax motor gets my vote. The Tuono has been at the top of the list for Naked Bikes since its inception partly due to the rotax motor.. The 1125 Rotax in the new Buell will be beastly. The fun will be outrageous. |
Cityxslicker
| | Posted on Wednesday, August 08, 2007 - 02:29 am: |
|
Sold an 2006 VRSCR new because the customer couldnt wait for the new 1125R to show up. To him, water cooled Harley sport bike now in Summer versus Buell watercooled bike when it is WINTER. Really they should time the release of the bikes in ads closer to them coming to the shop. I thought that the TT would have showed that.  |
Jimidan
| | Posted on Wednesday, August 08, 2007 - 11:04 am: |
|
FB sez:
It seems to me, and I have never been accused of being the brightest bulb in the box, that the Helicon engine is about 90%+ of what the engineers wanted.
What was the other 10% that the bean counters nixed? Please elucidate.} |
Ft_bstrd
| | Posted on Friday, August 10, 2007 - 02:04 am: |
|
I have no idea (see "dim bulb").
I would say that the Rotax legacy systems (oil filtration, oil sump, slipper clutch mechanism, finger followers, etc.) that were in existence and available with no additional developmental costs were the last 10%. Were they exactly what the engineers wanted? Probably not, but they were not bad compromises to keep from having to completely start from scratch. |
|
