| Author |
Message |
    
José_quiñones
| | Posted on Saturday, September 29, 2007 - 12:04 pm: | 
|
The problem here is that people have different tolerances to vibration, somebody's "tolerable" handlebar vibes is "excessive" or "annoying" to others.
To answer Jim's question, don't forget the VRod is both counterbalanced AND rubber mounted, thus it is very smooth at all rpm.
The 1125 engine is mounted directly to the frame. From idle to 5000 rpm the bike is very smooth, the problem is above that. What if feels like at normal highway speeds will tell the tale.
The 1125 felt buzzier above 5000 rpm than what I remember the Aprilias that I have ridden, whose Rotax is also bolted directly to the frame. But that was a while ago, I would like to ride them back to back to get a meaninful comparison.
As a further comparison, I demo rode a 07 VRod and a 07 Nightster Sporty last weekend, they are both rubber mounted, the V is counterbalanced as mentioned. The Vrod feels like buttah at all rpm; it has a 8,000 rpm "sweetspot" whereas the sporty still felt happiest between 3 and 4,000 rpm. The 1125 would fall in between these two, smoother than the sporty but less than the Vrod.
It is definetly something they can tune up to a point. To get it completely smooth at all rpm might require a fourth balancer. I believe they feel it is not needed. |
Paintballtommy
| | Posted on Saturday, September 29, 2007 - 12:30 pm: |
|
"It is bewildering how some folks imagine that the first cut at a new engine should be perfectly balanced cause that is what the engineering analysis predicts." I never said that. i basically that if there are any vibration issues which there seems to be, they should be doing something about it seeing as though its a new bike. |
Vagelis46
| | Posted on Saturday, September 29, 2007 - 02:09 pm: |
|
I have to agree that solving equations and modelling in computer programs, is not 100% the work. Testing is.
Also "annoying" vibration is very relevant, to different people. I have ridden motos (04' RSV) that were said to have "bad" vibrations and found them smooth. Also I have ridden motos (GSXR1000 K7)that were supposed to be super smooth, and found them to have annoying high frequency vibrations.
Unless each one of us rides the production 1125R, this discussion goes nowhere.
One last thing. The Greek reporter from the 0-300 mag, really liked the 1125R. He also said that there was no vibration issues, unless we comparing the 1125R to extra smooth IL4s touring bikes. |
Court
| | Posted on Saturday, September 29, 2007 - 08:03 pm: |
|
>>>My GUESS is that Buell might have different balance shaft variations to test among all the pre-production units.
Interesting.
(Message edited by court on September 29, 2007)
(Message edited by court on September 29, 2007) |
Jimidan
| | Posted on Saturday, September 29, 2007 - 08:29 pm: |
|
Thanks Jose`. I didn't realize the V-rod was rubber mounted.
It is bewildering how some folks imagine that the first cut at a new engine should be perfectly balanced cause that is what the engineering analysis predicts.
Are we really to assume that this is the "first cut" after analysis. I would think that there has been a lot of testing. Not that I am assuming that this is the final cut either, as these were pre-production machines, and therefore, still in the testing phase. I guess that they have been getting feedback from those who rode them, like Jose`? I know from the Cycle World article that a lot of thought has been given to this issue, and some very smart people are working on it. My bet is that they can fix it.
The level where vibrations become annoying is a very subjective thing. Shucks, I ride around on a paint shaker all the time that would put the 1125R to shame.
Blake makes a good point though in that it may just take some tweaking of the balance shafts to pull it all together. I can't wait to make my own analysis once the production bikes are released. |
Xb9
| | Posted on Saturday, September 29, 2007 - 09:15 pm: |
|
Court,
why did you remove the last sentence that you originally posted? 
Do I get a prize?? lol |
Jimidan
| | Posted on Sunday, September 30, 2007 - 12:07 pm: |
|
Opps, you weren't supposed to see that! |
Fresnobuell
| | Posted on Monday, October 01, 2007 - 11:55 pm: |
|
My GUESS is that Buell might have different balance shaft variations to test among all the pre-production units.
Interesting.
Now that would be comforting and brilliant. It would also explain the difference between the wildly different reports of vibrations. Hmmmm. I hope it is true. |
Donutclub
| | Posted on Sunday, October 07, 2007 - 09:08 am: |
|
My dealer indicated that Buell said that the vibation issue is due to the fuel map. The production models will have a revised fuel map.
Consequently, when I demoed the 1125R at Mid-Ohio I rodetwo bikes that were completely different. The first bike had little to no vibration above 8k while the second one was very "vibey" above 8k.
The extreme heat on the right foot peg was pretty bad also. Apparently, this is due to the catalytic converter. The production model will have increased heat shielding..........according to my dealer. |
Dave_bogue
| | Posted on Sunday, October 07, 2007 - 09:22 am: |
|
Unfortunately, dealers are generally not a good source of information. Plus they have a vested interest; they want to sell the product.
Regarding the excessive heat on the right boot, I don't believe we've heard the proposed solution from Anonymous.
After riding two very smooth Aprilias, I think the 1125 will be smooth also.
Dave |
Jaimec
| | Posted on Monday, October 08, 2007 - 08:30 am: |
|
"Ultra smooth IL4 touring bikes."
Other than the K1200LT (which does have some buzz at different RPMs) I don't know of ANY IL4 touring bikes let alone "ultra smooth" ones.
The only ultra smooth touring bike of which I'm aware is a flat-six...
Reference: I own a 1999 K1200LT with 113,000 miles (not kilometers) on the odometer... all mine. |
Fresnobuell
| | Posted on Thursday, October 11, 2007 - 02:28 pm: |
|
can someone please explain how fuel injection mapping could be causing this vibration that many people are speaking of? I would assume this would be the best case scenario regarding the vibes, ie the easiest for Buell to fix. |
Anonymous
| | Posted on Thursday, October 11, 2007 - 11:14 pm: |
|
It's not the mapping. |
Paintballtommy
| | Posted on Friday, October 12, 2007 - 12:34 am: |
|
so ill assume you guys are testing a number of different ballance shafts. |
Fresnobuell
| | Posted on Friday, October 12, 2007 - 03:18 am: |
|
Anony, Buell is telling the public that the vibration issue will be fixed on the production bikes...what exactly is the fix? |
Reepicheep
| | Posted on Friday, October 12, 2007 - 08:07 am: |
|
Could be balance shafts, could be some sort of isolators I suppose.
I loved the way the 1125r felt whacking the throttle open along the back straight at mid ohio. I could feel every piston firing with an authoritative "whump", and the bike launched me like I was in a giant rubberband...
So how fast is the bike going as it approaches redline in 4th and 5th gear? My GPS (in retrospect) said 178... but I don't think that can be right. Another reading was 154... which sounds more plausible. |
Zac4mac
| | Posted on Friday, October 12, 2007 - 08:31 am: |
|
Sounds like the "fix" is the right pair of balance shafts from the customer prefs trials aka Track Days.
Possibly a further tuned version, but sounds like they've had several sets out there. Pure genius IMO.
Z |
Coal400
| | Posted on Friday, October 12, 2007 - 08:39 am: |
|
Reep:
Sounds like even your GPS was excited to be on the 1125 |
Reepicheep
| | Posted on Friday, October 12, 2007 - 09:15 am: |
|
I believe the 154, but I pulled up the track log that shows 178... and the points are dead on (east to west) with all the other points, implying I had an accurate lock (15 feet or so). And the distance covered was .3 miles. So if they were wrong, they were only wrong north south, not east west, and at both points, which seems a bit unlikely.
On the other hand, 178 mph seems even *more* unlikely... unlikely to the point of being more or less impossible.
Let me play with some math... lets assume worst case, and the two points were off 25 feet on both ends error towards showing a faster time...
That's only 3%. So that would be 172 MPH. That still can't be right.
Lets assume both points were off by 120 feet... I don't even think my GPS will cut a log point when it has that bad a lock. That puts me at 151 MPH... Which is approaching rational.
I know I never touched 6th, and that engine has such a HUGE powerband that I don't know for sure if I was in 4th or 5th. I do remember being close to redline.
I bet redline in either 4th or 5th gear is 160 or so, and thats close to what I was going. It was fairly terrifying at the time... but in a good way |
Ccryder
| | Posted on Friday, October 12, 2007 - 09:52 am: |
|
Heck my GPS on my ST1300 has indicated 185mph a few times. It got me in trouble when I left that max speed showing. I had a conversation with a LEO one afternoon and he was looking over my 50+ farkles. He noticed the 185 max speed and got this REAL curious look on his face ;+}. I noted that you can't believe all you read but, I leave that on there sometimes just for the shock value!
If the signal gets briefly interupted (my theory) it can be estimated by the GPS to be higher speed than actual. Seems like the 185 is a common number for something since it shows up every once in awhile, more than any other.
Time2Work
Neil S. |
Jaimec
| | Posted on Friday, October 12, 2007 - 10:18 am: |
|
One time my GPS had a recorded max speed of over 200 mph while I was using it in my Subaru Station Wagon! I kept that up for a long time for the shock value.
It occasionally happens when the GPS loses satellite communication while traveling, and then reestablishes communication. I think the computer thinks you've instantaneously jumped to your new position or something... |
Court
| | Posted on Friday, October 12, 2007 - 10:29 am: |
|
I left the 540MPH from a flight to KC on mine from last week . . . I can't wait to get pulled over and have someone ask "any idea how fast you were going?" . . . to which I'll reply . . . "let's take a look officer". |
Ccryder
| | Posted on Friday, October 12, 2007 - 10:51 am: |
|
Just like that 200+mph RC51 a few years ago. Wonder if that guy ever got off of that speeding charge. The other charges were a given but,if he could prove the RC51 was not capable of that speed.........
Oh, well not something I'll have to worry about any time soon.
Neil S. |
Spike
| | Posted on Friday, October 12, 2007 - 10:57 am: |
|
quote:Just like that 200+mph RC51 a few years ago.
I was wondering if that one would come up.
If I recall correctly the LEO clocked him at 205mph. He was on a near-stock RC51. Sheer logic should have gotten him out of that one. |
Coal400
| | Posted on Friday, October 12, 2007 - 11:03 am: |
|
My post was originally joking a bit but since we're on a literal path
I think that your second value is entirely possible:
Here's what I got from an online calc... Its not 100% accurate but should give an idea of the speeds (mathematically speaking)
1125R GEAR-Speed in MPH
RPM 10500
1st-66
2nd-93
3rd-118
4th-139
5th-157
6th-170
RPM 7500
1st-47
2nd-66
3rd-84
4th-99
5th-112
6th-121
RPM 3500
1st-22
2nd-31
3rd-39
4th-46
5th-52
6th-56
. |
Ccryder
| | Posted on Friday, October 12, 2007 - 11:07 am: |
|
Coal:
Thanks, that at least answers what could happen.
Logic and what could get him out of that ticket??? Oh yeah $'s, $'s and more $'s.
Neil S. |
Reepicheep
| | Posted on Friday, October 12, 2007 - 12:18 pm: |
|
Maybe my tires grew from the inertia, effectively increasing the gearing ;) |
Donutclub
| | Posted on Friday, October 12, 2007 - 04:50 pm: |
|
If it's not the mapping, then what is the cause of the vibration? Curious minds want to know. I've got a 1125 ordered and I want to be sure that the vibration will be fixed. |
Zac4mac
| | Posted on Friday, October 12, 2007 - 05:49 pm: |
|
It's a good theory Reep, stick to it.
Suppose an engineer could do an FEA in Pro-E on a tire if they knew the compound numbers. I do know my little R-C car's wheels almost double in size at full throttle.
I like to think you went that fast.
Z |
Diablo1
| | Posted on Friday, October 12, 2007 - 08:51 pm: |
|
"If it's not the mapping, then what is the cause of the vibration? Curious minds want to know. I've got a 1125 ordered and I want to be sure that the vibration will be fixed."
If they know what's causing the vibration, they're not telling. If they don't know what's causing the vibration, they're not admitting it. I don't believe the theory that they've been intentionally building engines with different weight balance shafts at this late stage in the build schedule to get rider feedback. |
Xb984r
| | Posted on Friday, October 12, 2007 - 11:49 pm: |
|
"I don't believe the theory that they've been intentionally building engines with different weight balance shafts at this late stage in the build schedule to get rider feedback."
Diablo1,stranger things have happened. |
Coal400
| | Posted on Saturday, October 13, 2007 - 12:39 am: |
|
I'm particularly worried about the source of the vibes, not as much about the comfort factor at 8k and up (although comfort is a legit concern too)
If the vibes are a result of rocking couple, I would be concerned about bearing life.
Its also not something I could ethically test on a new 1125R because I don't want to thrash the dealers bike during the break-in, and I don't like the idea of purchasing a bike that's been thrashed in the event that there are no vibes.
If there ever was to be an anony post, on any topic going forward, I would feel better getting a response to this particular topic. |
Fresnobuell
| | Posted on Saturday, October 13, 2007 - 07:29 pm: |
|
Sort of a catch 22 on a test ride--I want to see what it feels like 8-10K RPM, but that is certainly going against the break-in procedure. The Inside Pass bikes are pre-production, so they aren't exact replicas of the production bikes. I too am concerned about the vibes and the implications, both ergonomically and mechanically.
Anony could put some people at ease if there is a fix in store. |
Jimidan
| | Posted on Monday, October 15, 2007 - 09:38 am: |
|
I left the 540MPH from a flight to KC on mine from last week . . . I can't wait to get pulled over and have someone ask "any idea how fast you were going?" . . . to which I'll reply . . . "let's take a look officer".
That is a good one, a very good one. Please let us know what the officer says.
These new GPS machines should make for some interesting traffic court scenes. The GPS is soooo much more accurate than radar (which is why the FAA is considering reducing the in-air distances that jet airliners have to keep from each other to 3 miles instead of 5 miles), so a reasonable argument can be made that the officer's antiquated radar system was wrong in detecting your speed. If enough publicity is generated from speed discrepancies between the the GPS and radar methods, it will effect the credibility of the radar machines even when their is no GPS data available. |
