Discussion:
Motors - which are your most impressive?
(too old to reply)
Sean
2005-12-31 17:57:26 UTC
Permalink
I am getting to really like the sound and feel of the motor on my
83 Shadow 750; with its good primary balance the vibrations are muted
and comfortable at all rpm's.

The character of each motor that I've experienced has been unique
and pleasurable: the roll-on response, the exhaust roar when you
punch it, even the vibes (at a tolerable level).

Here are some of my favorites; what are yours, and what is it
that impresses you about them?

Honda VTX1800 - very pleasing feeling of torque with pulsed "texture"

Suzuki LS650 - I've always liked thumpers

Suzuki DR250 - Another thumper, this dirt bike felt like it could
pull tree stumps and clear fields

Yamaha VMax - I've never ridden one, but the massive, brute-force
look and the authoritative sound of one passing my van on the hwy
this summer really got my attention

Sean Q
Steve T
2005-12-31 18:52:07 UTC
Permalink
Sean <***@no.spam> wrote:

:
:Here are some of my favorites; what are yours, and what is it
:that impresses you about them?

Triumph/BSA 650 vertical twin - lots of torque, light, quick
74ci HD Panhead - Looks great, tons of torque, never works hard
Triumph Rocket III - unreal torque and horsepower from idle to
redline
ZX13 - Crazy horsepower, insane acceleration
Vespa 150 2-stroke - runs forever, gets 90mpg
unknown
2005-12-31 20:01:43 UTC
Permalink
On Sat, 31 Dec 2005 17:57:26 GMT, Sean <***@no.spam> wrote:

...
Post by Sean
Here are some of my favorites; what are yours, and what is it
that impresses you about them?
...

Back in the '70's a buddy brought his little Kawasaki 350 triple over
for me to try. I start down the street at about half throttle, it was
accelerating smartly until it hit it's RPM range. At which point it
started producing ludicrous power and lifted the front wheel.
b***@my-deja.com
2006-01-01 23:56:57 UTC
Permalink
Post by unknown
...
Post by Sean
Here are some of my favorites; what are yours, and what is it
that impresses you about them?
...
Back in the '70's a buddy brought his little Kawasaki 350 triple over
for me to try. I start down the street at about half throttle, it was
accelerating smartly until it hit it's RPM range. At which point it
started producing ludicrous power and lifted the front wheel.
Had a similar experience on a 1971 500 triple in 1972, except I had it
WFO when all hell broke loose. Lucky I didn't end up on my back. I
must have been glassy eyed and foaming at the mouth when I got back
from the test ride and gave the guy a deposit.

My next bike was a 1977 KZ1000 purchased new. When everybody came out
with faster bikes the next year, I beefed up the KZ's internals and put
a turbocharger on it. 150 hp may not sound too impressive today, but
it sure was back then.

Honda's CBX was is impressive. Never owned one but have been on them.
The engine is just so massive for a bike.

Loading Image...

Then there's this ;)

http://www.bigbikeriders.com/48cyl.htm


A few years back I went up in a 1941 Waco biplane. It had a seven
cylinder radial engine like this one I found with a google search.

Loading Image...

It really suprised me how much power it had when we took off. And such
a beautiful engine to look at.

Another engine I have had the pleasure of climbing on is this one.

http://www.nps.gov/stea/bigboy.htm

The pictures don't do it justice. They should have put some people in
just to give you an idea of how big it is. This one doesn't run any
more but I have ridden on smaller ones and they are all impressive.

Bruce
Alan Moore
2005-12-31 23:53:16 UTC
Permalink
On Sat, 31 Dec 2005 17:57:26 GMT, Sean <***@no.spam> wrote:

<snip>

Back in high school, I helped make a motor that let a group of us
enthusiasts put a four foot long rocket up into the stratosphere.
That one went "Whoosh!", but early iterations went "Bang!"


Al Moore
DoD 734
Sean
2006-01-01 00:11:50 UTC
Permalink
Post by Alan Moore
<snip>
Back in high school, I helped make a motor that let a group of us
enthusiasts put a four foot long rocket up into the stratosphere.
That one went "Whoosh!", but early iterations went "Bang!"
They made a movie about you -- _October Sky_. I liked it a lot.

Sean Q
Alan Moore
2006-01-02 04:56:46 UTC
Permalink
Post by Sean
Post by Alan Moore
<snip>
Back in high school, I helped make a motor that let a group of us
enthusiasts put a four foot long rocket up into the stratosphere.
That one went "Whoosh!", but early iterations went "Bang!"
They made a movie about you -- _October Sky_. I liked it a lot.
Well, guys like me, anyway. I was on the other side of the country, a
few years later than those guys, but there were rocket clubs like
that, more or less successful, almost everywhere for a few years.
Nowadays, playing with rockets is too dangerous for real people, and
such things are discouraged.

In fact, some people find science in general too dangerous, which is
why we have the present attack on science education in the schools...

Al Moore
DoD 734
Tweak
2006-01-03 13:49:33 UTC
Permalink
Post by Alan Moore
Post by Sean
Post by Alan Moore
<snip>
Back in high school, I helped make a motor that let a group of us
enthusiasts put a four foot long rocket up into the stratosphere.
That one went "Whoosh!", but early iterations went "Bang!"
They made a movie about you -- _October Sky_. I liked it a lot.
Well, guys like me, anyway. I was on the other side of the country, a
few years later than those guys, but there were rocket clubs like
that, more or less successful, almost everywhere for a few years.
Nowadays, playing with rockets is too dangerous for real people, and
such things are discouraged.
?

http://www.nar.org
http://www.tripoli.org

We fly rockets, some quite sizeable for hobby rockets. The use of
commercially available motors using AP and following the rocketry safety
code allows the hobby to have an enviable safety record.

However, if by playing with rockets you mean people mixing sugar rockets
in their kitchens, those are "basement bombers" and have little to do
with science beyond what is neccesary to blow up their houses and create
more bad press.
--
Tweak
Alan Moore
2006-01-04 02:15:50 UTC
Permalink
On Tue, 3 Jan 2006 08:49:33 -0500, Tweak
Post by Tweak
Post by Alan Moore
Post by Sean
Post by Alan Moore
<snip>
Back in high school, I helped make a motor that let a group of us
enthusiasts put a four foot long rocket up into the stratosphere.
That one went "Whoosh!", but early iterations went "Bang!"
They made a movie about you -- _October Sky_. I liked it a lot.
Well, guys like me, anyway. I was on the other side of the country, a
few years later than those guys, but there were rocket clubs like
that, more or less successful, almost everywhere for a few years.
Nowadays, playing with rockets is too dangerous for real people, and
such things are discouraged.
?
http://www.nar.org
http://www.tripoli.org
We fly rockets, some quite sizeable for hobby rockets. The use of
commercially available motors using AP and following the rocketry safety
code allows the hobby to have an enviable safety record.
We paid attention to safety. A bunch of us eventually became rocket
scientists. Some clubs didn't pay so much attention to safety, and
got shut down right away. It's a curious fact that the large missile
firm I work for seems sometimes to pay less attention to safety than
the little high school club did. The results are sometimes
spectacular.
Post by Tweak
However, if by playing with rockets you mean people mixing sugar rockets
in their kitchens, those are "basement bombers" and have little to do
with science beyond what is neccesary to blow up their houses and create
more bad press.
I always thought of the "Caramel Candy" fuel as being one of the more
benign -- one of the few that could be safely mixed in the kitchen at
home.

If you think those are bad, you should see what happens when 40 tons
of high performance rocket fuel goes up at once. I keep a video on my
machine at work, to help me emphasize the importance when I warn the
design department managers when their engineers seem particularly
incompetant.

To quote Captain Bertrand R. Brinely (Rocket Manual for Amatuers):
"The only difference between a rocket and a bomb is that a rocket has
a hole in one end -- and the hole can be blocked."

Al Moore
DoD 734
Tweak
2006-01-04 14:28:53 UTC
Permalink
Post by Alan Moore
On Tue, 3 Jan 2006 08:49:33 -0500, Tweak
Post by Tweak
Post by Alan Moore
Post by Sean
Post by Alan Moore
<snip>
Back in high school, I helped make a motor that let a group of us
enthusiasts put a four foot long rocket up into the stratosphere.
That one went "Whoosh!", but early iterations went "Bang!"
They made a movie about you -- _October Sky_. I liked it a lot.
Well, guys like me, anyway. I was on the other side of the country, a
few years later than those guys, but there were rocket clubs like
that, more or less successful, almost everywhere for a few years.
Nowadays, playing with rockets is too dangerous for real people, and
such things are discouraged.
?
http://www.nar.org
http://www.tripoli.org
We fly rockets, some quite sizeable for hobby rockets. The use of
commercially available motors using AP and following the rocketry safety
code allows the hobby to have an enviable safety record.
We paid attention to safety. A bunch of us eventually became rocket
scientists. Some clubs didn't pay so much attention to safety, and
got shut down right away. It's a curious fact that the large missile
firm I work for seems sometimes to pay less attention to safety than
the little high school club did.
Not terribly suprising, though. Familiarity breeds complacency.
Post by Alan Moore
Post by Tweak
However, if by playing with rockets you mean people mixing sugar rockets
in their kitchens, those are "basement bombers" and have little to do
with science beyond what is neccesary to blow up their houses and create
more bad press.
I always thought of the "Caramel Candy" fuel as being one of the more
benign -- one of the few that could be safely mixed in the kitchen at
home.
I just tossed it out there, insert BP (or red fuming nitric acid, or
etc. etc.) if you prefer. It doesn't change the point that some people
who are mixing up "stuff" in their kitchens to make "kool rockits" are
being neither safe nor scientific.
Post by Alan Moore
If you think those are bad, you should see what happens when 40 tons
of high performance rocket fuel goes up at once. I keep a video on my
machine at work, to help me emphasize the importance when I warn the
design department managers when their engineers seem particularly
incompetant.
But was the video done in a subdivision and featured on the 6 o'clock
news along with a story on the hazards of rocketry? That's the legacy
of the "basement bomber", and a stigma we in the hobby rocketry
community continually fight, as witnessed by your original statement
"Nowadays, playing with rockets is too dangerous for real people, and
such things are discouraged.". Our safety records prove that you are in
far more peril driving to and from a NAR or Tripoli launch than you are
at the event.
Post by Alan Moore
"The only difference between a rocket and a bomb is that a rocket has
a hole in one end -- and the hole can be blocked."
Al Moore
DoD 734
That is why we have the safe distances table based on impulse, where x
motor size = x minimum feet from launch, and also disallow any steel in
engine case construction.
--
Tweak
kirb
2006-01-01 17:26:45 UTC
Permalink
Post by Sean
I am getting to really like the sound and feel of the motor on my
83 Shadow 750; with its good primary balance the vibrations are muted
and comfortable at all rpm's.
The character of each motor that I've experienced has been unique
and pleasurable: the roll-on response, the exhaust roar when you
punch it, even the vibes (at a tolerable level).
Here are some of my favorites; what are yours, and what is it
that impresses you about them?
Honda VTX1800 - very pleasing feeling of torque with pulsed "texture"
Suzuki LS650 - I've always liked thumpers
Suzuki DR250 - Another thumper, this dirt bike felt like it could
pull tree stumps and clear fields
Yamaha VMax - I've never ridden one, but the massive, brute-force
look and the authoritative sound of one passing my van on the hwy
this summer really got my attention
Sean Q
40's Indian 74ci chief motor- looks, looks, looks decent power for the
day.

Kirb
Sheldon T. Hall - DO NOT MAIL
2006-01-02 02:56:48 UTC
Permalink
Post by Sean
I am getting to really like the sound and feel of the motor on my
83 Shadow 750; with its good primary balance the vibrations are muted
and comfortable at all rpm's.
The character of each motor that I've experienced has been unique
and pleasurable: the roll-on response, the exhaust roar when you
punch it, even the vibes (at a tolerable level).
Here are some of my favorites; what are yours, and what is it
that impresses you about them?
Honda VTX1800 - very pleasing feeling of torque with pulsed "texture"
Suzuki LS650 - I've always liked thumpers
Suzuki DR250 - Another thumper, this dirt bike felt like it could
pull tree stumps and clear fields
Yamaha VMax - I've never ridden one, but the massive, brute-force
look and the authoritative sound of one passing my van on the hwy
this summer really got my attention
Call me retro, but ...

Vincent V-twins
Norton Manx single

... and I really, really liked my BSA B-31.

-Shel
unknown
2006-01-02 03:03:24 UTC
Permalink
On Sun, 01 Jan 2006 18:56:48 -0800, Sheldon T. Hall - DO NOT MAIL
Post by Sheldon T. Hall - DO NOT MAIL
Post by Sean
I am getting to really like the sound and feel of the motor on my
83 Shadow 750; with its good primary balance the vibrations are muted
and comfortable at all rpm's.
The character of each motor that I've experienced has been unique
and pleasurable: the roll-on response, the exhaust roar when you
punch it, even the vibes (at a tolerable level).
Here are some of my favorites; what are yours, and what is it
that impresses you about them?
Honda VTX1800 - very pleasing feeling of torque with pulsed "texture"
Suzuki LS650 - I've always liked thumpers
Suzuki DR250 - Another thumper, this dirt bike felt like it could
pull tree stumps and clear fields
Yamaha VMax - I've never ridden one, but the massive, brute-force
look and the authoritative sound of one passing my van on the hwy
this summer really got my attention
Call me retro, but ...
Vincent V-twins
Norton Manx single
... and I really, really liked my BSA B-31.
-Shel
Yamaha Seca 650 Turbo. That thing was a blast!
--
I ride, therefore I am ...
an Actual Rider!
unknown
2006-01-02 14:13:08 UTC
Permalink
On Sun, 01 Jan 2006 18:56:48 -0800, Sheldon T. Hall - DO NOT MAIL
<***@tandem.artell.net> wrote:
....
Post by Sheldon T. Hall - DO NOT MAIL
Norton Manx single
....

An American company has bought the rights to the Norton Name and is
bringing out the Commando later this year:

http://www.nortonmotorcycles.com/default.asp

On a page on that site they mention bringing out the Manx platform in
the future. When I e-mailed them about whether this would be a single
they replied "I can't honestly say that is what we'll build given the
development hasn't started yet." You might let them know you have an
interest in seening the Manx resurected as the big single the name is
famous for.
kirb
2006-01-02 15:19:17 UTC
Permalink
Post by unknown
On Sun, 01 Jan 2006 18:56:48 -0800, Sheldon T. Hall - DO NOT MAIL
....
Post by Sheldon T. Hall - DO NOT MAIL
Norton Manx single
....
An American company has bought the rights to the Norton Name and is
http://www.nortonmotorcycles.com/default.asp
On a page on that site they mention bringing out the Manx platform in
the future. When I e-mailed them about whether this would be a single
they replied "I can't honestly say that is what we'll build given the
development hasn't started yet." You might let them know you have an
interest in seening the Manx resurected as the big single the name is
famous for.
That guy has been cranking out custom commandos for several years now.
I doubt you are going to see a single any time soon (or ever). His
commandos are $$$, that's for sure.

Kirb
Joe
2006-01-02 05:04:08 UTC
Permalink
Personally, I like the smooth, comfortable feel of my most recent purchase
which is the 6 cyl. Valkyrie's 1500. Smooth as can be with gobs of power
for my style of riding...

The first thing I ever rode was a Suzuki RM80 which was a two stroke... I
was a lot younger and smaller and the thing's power band was literally
uncontrollable for the first few months. That's what I learned to ride
on...

I had a Hodaka Dirt Squirt 100 which had more torque than any other two
stroke I've ever ridden. It felt as if it could tow a truck...
Post by Sean
Honda VTX1800 - very pleasing feeling of torque with pulsed "texture"
Love the power and speed... But It hits top end too fast and the rev
limiter kicks in... Plus, that constant "thump-thump" isn't my style... I
found myself lugging the engine too often.
Post by Sean
Suzuki LS650 - I've always liked thumpers
Is it anything like the VStrom's engine? The 'Strom is nice and smooth and
fast enough to be fun.
Post by Sean
Suzuki DR250 - Another thumper, this dirt bike felt like it could
pull tree stumps and clear fields
I've been thinking about one of these as a winter bike... But at 260 lbs,
I'm afraid I might overwhelm it.
Post by Sean
Yamaha VMax - I've never ridden one, but the massive, brute-force
look and the authoritative sound of one passing my van on the hwy
this summer really got my attention.
Had one make my Valk. look like it was standing still this past summer. I
REALLY want to test ride one of those... But the maintenance and
reliability issues worry me. I'll wait for the next generation of the VMAX
before I own one.
--
Joe in Northern, NJ - V#8013-R

Currently Riding The "Mother Ship"

Ride a motorcycle in or near NJ?
http://tinyurl.com/4zkw8
http://www.youthelate.com
Tim Kreitz
2006-01-02 07:04:24 UTC
Permalink
Post by Sean
I am getting to really like the sound and feel of the motor on my
83 Shadow 750; with its good primary balance the vibrations are muted
and comfortable at all rpm's.
There is nothing at all wrong with cruiser bikes, but if you want true
inspiration, dig on the sound and power delivery of any of the
following bikes' performance engines:

1. RC-45/VFR800
2. 1987 GSXR1100
3. 1973 KZ900
4. RC51
5. 1996 ZX7R
6. ZX12R
7. Triumph Daytona 955i/Speed Triple
8. Kawasaki H2/H3
9. Ducati S4R
10. Ducati 916

I went sportbike over a decade ago and haven't looked back since. To
each his own, but the above are my personal favorites.

Cheers,

Tim Kreitz
2003 ZX7R
2000 ZX6R
DoD #2184
http://www.timkreitz.com
_Bob_Nixon
2006-01-03 16:55:39 UTC
Permalink
Post by Tim Kreitz
Post by Sean
I am getting to really like the sound and feel of the motor on my
83 Shadow 750; with its good primary balance the vibrations are muted
and comfortable at all rpm's.
There is nothing at all wrong with cruiser bikes, but if you want true
inspiration, dig on the sound and power delivery of any of the
1. RC-45/VFR800
2. 1987 GSXR1100
3. 1973 KZ900
4. RC51
5. 1996 ZX7R
6. ZX12R
7. Triumph Daytona 955i/Speed Triple
8. Kawasaki H2/H3
9. Ducati S4R
10. Ducati 916
I went sportbike over a decade ago and haven't looked back since. To
each his own, but the above are my personal favorites.
Tim's list speaks volumes to the low tech, low RPM, narrow angle twin
cylinder "mostly neophyte" cruiser crowd. My list is similar to Tim's
with the 955/1050 Triumph triple up top.

1) Current Hinkley triples: Fastest 955 Daytona, most Torque'y, the
new 1050cc Sprint /S3 engines. Also that V12 sounding intake of the
Daytona and S3 are nothing short of eargasmic and with a good pipe
there's nothing like the sound of a three banger. Additionally,
they're nearly as smooth running as a Valk 6 and way smoother than any
I4.

2) The current GSXR 1000K3-K6 engine has mayor grunt all the way from
3K that turns into and sounds psychotic at above 8000RPM.

3) The old RD/RZ 350/400's were the most exhilarating engines I've
ever experienced. Instant power above 3500-4000RPM is the only way to
describe that little engine. The entire package worked much better
than the Kawasaki H1, H2 as well, with good handling/braking for that
70's era and top speed and acceleration better than the original
CB-750.

4) The SV-650 engine is without a doubt, the sweetest, smoothest twin
cylinder bike I've even experienced. The engine pulls off the bottom
like no inline 600 I4 could even dream of doing which makes it one of
the most usable bikes sold today. It's the incarnation of the best
traits of the old Triumph Bonneville combined with the Yamaha RD-350
but in a modern package.

5) Honda CBX six cylinder. I rode a friends extensively (including
drag racing) and although an overall ungainly package that six was
very powerful (for that era) and had a sound all it's own. Smooth
compared to the I4's of the day as well.

6) The old 78+ two valve Suzuki GS-1000's. They were civilized; much
like the Hinkley triples but with more vibration and not quite the
flatness in the torque or the HP of today's Hinkley triples.

7) The original Z1 was a jeckel and Hyde engine. Smooth, torque'y and
docile below 6000RPM that turned to a shaky, wheelie monster up to red
line. The Z1 made the CB-750 seem like the Clark Kent side of superman

8) Only ridden pillion at 10 years old on an old 1956 Triumph T-bird
but it surely put the hook in me compared to the rum...dumb....
Sportster of the 60's with power, vibration, acceleration. It was all
there in spades for that ten-year-old passenger.

9) Most mediocre engines: The old 60's 50cc Honda cubs followed by the
Honda 305 Scrambler I learned to ride both dirt & street on. They just
never seemed too impressive at anything. Same thing with the 70cc
Honda three wheel ATC I bought for my kids back around 1977. I also
know a single does not have to be so dull as I picked up a used
Kawasaki 250cc quad that seemed to rev to the moon and pulled well
from down just off idle. It also was fairly smooth compared to those
old Honda singles.

10) Most hated, rough running and low power engine I've ever ridden
would have to be a HD Sportster of the AMF mid/late 70's era. Later
1450cc balanced Road Kings were better but still way underpowered and
flaccid feeling for a motorcycle package of 60 peak HP and 900 pounds.
Gees you cruiser guys don't know what you've been missing. The
mystique thing is just a joke that's been passed on from one
generation to another. It's all a lie:)

11) New engine with the most future potential; the 675cc Daytona
Triple being introduced this year. Look for this bike/engine to make
major waves in the 600cc Supersport club racing classes as well as
street buyers who are tired of the one dimensional 600cc I4 currently
being sold by the big four Japanese in this market.


Bob Nixon, Chandler AZ
01 Sprint ST "RED" 50K miles
http://bigrex.net/pictures
Rayvan
2006-01-04 04:52:31 UTC
Permalink
Post by _Bob_Nixon
10) Most hated, rough running and low power engine I've ever ridden
would have to be a HD Sportster of the AMF mid/late 70's era. Later
1450cc balanced Road Kings
You don't know shit about bikes or engines. All you have is your newby
opinion
_Bob_Nixon
2006-01-04 20:37:06 UTC
Permalink
Post by Rayvan
Post by _Bob_Nixon
10) Most hated, rough running and low power engine I've ever ridden
would have to be a HD Sportster of the AMF mid/late 70's era. Later
1450cc balanced Road Kings
You don't know shit about bikes or engines. All you have is your newby
opinion
35 yeaars a newbee???

FU moron! At least I've ridden bikes besides your unique experience of
antiquated farm tractor HD's. BTW, you frightened f*ck, when was the
last time you rode a bike that had an engine other than a HD or any
bike with more than two cylinders? You need to get away from that low
life, trailer trash, existence you call a life, butt head.

As to "who knows" what about engines, here's a few for you:

1) What is the pressure ratio of a GE90 high bypass turbofan engine
that powers the Boeing 777 series?

2) Explain in detail how the following series of four cycle engines
function.
http://www.rcvengines.com/

3) What metal is used for the intake valves of the 05 &> GSXR 600, 750
& 1000cc MC's.

4) At what RPM is the peak volumetric efficiency of your HD and what
is the number in %?

5) Explain the detailed operation, advantages & disadvantages of the
Napier Delta 2-stroke Diesel engine. Also, what is the ~BSFC of that
design?

6) What is the primary disadvantage of the Wankel engine design?
Hint: Concept= >surface to volume ratio but why?

7) Why do more cylinders generally develop more HP and what is the
practical limitation and RPM on said concept? Hint: engine CC & RPM
are key to this axiom? Also, if you comprehend any of the above, what
part does gas velocity play in the concept?

8) What NA IC piston engine develops the greatest HP/liter and why?
Also, what is the fuel for said engine?

9) Explain the term "multi-spool" as it applies to Gas turbine IC
engines.

10) Explain the relationship between VE, Compression ratio and turbo
boost in PSI above atmospheric?

That should do it you frightened fool;)


Bob Nixon, Chandler AZ
01 Sprint ST "RED" 50K miles
http://bigrex.net/pictures
Rayvan
2006-01-04 23:41:48 UTC
Permalink
Post by _Bob_Nixon
Post by Rayvan
Post by _Bob_Nixon
10) Most hated, rough running and low power engine I've ever ridden
would have to be a HD Sportster of the AMF mid/late 70's era. Later
1450cc balanced Road Kings
You don't know shit about bikes or engines. All you have is your newby
opinion
35 yeaars a newbee???
Nope. You're going on about five years now, but the newby attitude
still rules you. I'd have thought that you'd grown up by now.
Post by _Bob_Nixon
FU moron! At least I've ridden bikes besides your unique experience of
antiquated farm tractor HD's. BTW, you frightened f*ck, when was the
last time you rode a bike that had an engine other than a HD
Like this one?

http://www.pbase.com/rayvan/image/24422727
or this one?
http://www.pbase.com/rayvan/image/43470859


or any
Post by _Bob_Nixon
bike with more than two cylinders?
Yep! Been there done that.
Post by _Bob_Nixon
You need to get away from that low
life, trailer trash, existence you call a life, butt head.
You need to grow up, little boy.... Name calling is for children, but I
know it's all you've got.

Have you ever torn down a Hinkly triple yet? I have. The one behind and
to the right of my buddy in the below pic, Bob. Gave the owner an
estimate for the repair and he parted out the bike. It was literally
cheaper to buy a used bike than to repair the engine.

http://www.pbase.com/rayvan/image/24423038

Threw a rod at only 20,000 miles. Almost killed him when the oil got on
the rear tire. Great engines. Not. Owner also hated the fact that the
bike was only confortable for about 40 minutes tops. He rides a 919
standard now.
BTW, Lack of comfort is why I didn't keep the 929 around

<sophmoric tripe for some attempt to prove something snipped>
Post by _Bob_Nixon
That should do it you frightened fool;)
No. It only makes you out to be more of the same newby that you are.
One day you'll grow out of that, but the more I know you the more I
have doubts about your little insecure brain ever growing up past that
of a 13 year old attitude.
Tim Kreitz
2006-01-05 01:35:04 UTC
Permalink
Nope. You [Bob Noxon] are going on about five years now, but the newby attitude
still rules you. I'd have thought that you'd grown up by now.
Judging from Bob's photo collection, I'd say you were wrong. But I
suppose I don't really have dog in this fight, so I'll just let you two
duke it out.

Cheers,

Tim Kreitz
2003 ZX7R
2000 ZX6R
DoD #2184
http://www.timkreitz.com
unknown
2006-01-05 01:47:59 UTC
Permalink
Post by Rayvan
I'd have thought that you'd grown up by now.
Growing up is overrated.
--
I ride, therefore I am ...
an Actual Rider!
Greek Shipping Magnets
2006-01-05 17:39:45 UTC
Permalink
Post by unknown
Post by Rayvan
I'd have thought that you'd grown up by now.
Growing up is overrated.
Stop stealing my lines bitch!
Rayvan
2006-01-05 17:41:52 UTC
Permalink
Post by unknown
Post by Rayvan
I'd have thought that you'd grown up by now.
Growing up is overrated.
Sorry. Bad choice of words. How 'bout: I'd have though you'd have moved
past the insecure bigotry and hatred that you posessed when you started
in this newsgroup five years ago.

Is that better? :-)
Greek Shipping Magnets
2006-01-05 17:40:03 UTC
Permalink
Post by _Bob_Nixon
35 yeaars a newbee???
FU moron! At least I've ridden bikes besides your unique experience of
antiquated farm tractor HD's. BTW, you frightened f*ck, when was the
last time you rode a bike that had an engine other than a HD or any
bike with more than two cylinders? You need to get away from that low
life, trailer trash, existence you call a life, butt head.
Why does someone who exhibits a certain intelligence as yourself get
so easily riled up?

Stop casting your pearls before swine and start casting some casings
for that turbodiesel engine I can drop into my sportbike frame. Ever
since you've went into retirement it's been obvious you have to
channel your abilities someplace more productive.
kirb
2006-01-04 20:53:49 UTC
Permalink
Post by Rayvan
Post by _Bob_Nixon
10) Most hated, rough running and low power engine I've ever ridden
would have to be a HD Sportster of the AMF mid/late 70's era. Later
1450cc balanced Road Kings
You don't know shit about bikes or engines. All you have is your newby
opinion
There you go. Had to poke the bear so he could flex his brain. good
job.

Kirb
Rayvan
2006-01-04 23:06:34 UTC
Permalink
Post by kirb
Post by Rayvan
Post by _Bob_Nixon
10) Most hated, rough running and low power engine I've ever ridden
would have to be a HD Sportster of the AMF mid/late 70's era. Later
1450cc balanced Road Kings
You don't know shit about bikes or engines. All you have is your newby
opinion
There you go. Had to poke the bear so he could flex his brain. good
job.
Kirb
I just want to know where the f*ck the lying dork found a balanced Road
King!!! :-)
_Bob_Nixon
2006-01-05 00:55:53 UTC
Permalink
Post by Rayvan
Post by kirb
Post by Rayvan
Post by _Bob_Nixon
10) Most hated, rough running and low power engine I've ever ridden
would have to be a HD Sportster of the AMF mid/late 70's era. Later
1450cc balanced Road Kings
You don't know shit about bikes or engines. All you have is your newby
opinion
There you go. Had to poke the bear so he could flex his brain. good
job.
Kirb
I just want to know where the f*ck the lying dork found a balanced Road
King!!! :-)
Loading Image...

This one, you trailer trash, backyard mechanic.

Why are MY answers you low life Hardley dirtbag?


Bob Nixon, Chandler AZ
01 Sprint ST "RED" 50K miles
http://bigrex.net/pictures
Rayvan
2006-01-05 17:31:12 UTC
Permalink
Post by _Bob_Nixon
Post by Rayvan
Post by kirb
Post by Rayvan
Post by _Bob_Nixon
10) Most hated, rough running and low power engine I've ever ridden
would have to be a HD Sportster of the AMF mid/late 70's era. Later
1450cc balanced Road Kings
You don't know shit about bikes or engines. All you have is your newby
opinion
There you go. Had to poke the bear so he could flex his brain. good
job.
Kirb
I just want to know where the f*ck the lying dork found a balanced Road
King!!! :-)
http://bigrex.net/pictures/Old%20bikes/Tom_TTF.jpg
This one, you trailer trash, backyard mechanic.
Why do you feel the need to lie about Harleys, Bob.

No Roadking has EVER been built with the counter-balanced TC88 engine.
TC88B engines don't fit in the FL frame. Admit it, Bob. You have
*never* ridden a Harley. If you had in fact simply rested your hand on
the grip as the the RoadKing was simply idling you would have instantly
known that it was a non-counterbalanced TC88A motor.
Post by _Bob_Nixon
Why are MY answers you low life Hardley dirtbag?
Do you ever read what you've written? Apparently not. You should really
calm down. A long period of not posting like last year was nice.
Tim Kreitz
2006-01-05 01:31:36 UTC
Permalink
Post by Rayvan
You don't know shit about bikes or engines. All you have is your newby
opinion
Nixon a noob? WTF? The guy's been actively motorcycling since before I
was born. I hope you were being sarcastic.

Or something.

Cheers,

Tim Kreitz
2003 ZX7R
2000 ZX6R
DoD #2184
http://www.timkreitz.com
Rayvan
2006-01-05 17:38:55 UTC
Permalink
Post by Tim Kreitz
Post by Rayvan
You don't know shit about bikes or engines. All you have is your newby
opinion
Nixon a noob? WTF? The guy's been actively motorcycling since before I
was born. I hope you were being sarcastic.
Or something.
Yep. Or something. I've just caught him lying about riding a *balanced*
RoadKing even though one has never been built. How can one really
believe anything he says?
Basil
2006-01-05 20:00:04 UTC
Permalink
Post by Rayvan
Yep. Or something. I've just caught him lying about riding a *balanced*
RoadKing even though one has never been built. How can one really
believe anything he says?
I believe Bob way before I would believe an asshole like you. I met him and
he knows more than 99% of reeky combined. Now, STFU.
Rayvan
2006-01-05 20:32:33 UTC
Permalink
Post by Basil
Post by Rayvan
Yep. Or something. I've just caught him lying about riding a *balanced*
RoadKing even though one has never been built. How can one really
believe anything he says?
I believe Bob way before I would believe an asshole like you. I met him and
he knows more than 99% of reeky combined. Now, STFU.
LOL!
In other words, Duh! Yup! Harley duhs make balanced RoadKings kuz the
reeky bigot sez so... Too funny!
_Bob_Nixon
2006-01-06 07:27:00 UTC
Permalink
Post by Rayvan
Post by Basil
Post by Rayvan
Yep. Or something. I've just caught him lying about riding a *balanced*
RoadKing even though one has never been built. How can one really
believe anything he says?
I believe Bob way before I would believe an asshole like you. I met him and
he knows more than 99% of reeky combined. Now, STFU.
LOL!
In other words, Duh! Yup! Harley duhs make balanced RoadKings kuz the
reeky bigot sez so... Too funny!
What's this idiot! I may have error'd in calling it balanced as in
Counter rotating balance shaft but it was smoother than the old
sportster I rode in the 70's. All tolled I've ridden five different
Harleys since 1975. The latest in the picture below.

http://bigrex.net/pictures/Old%20bikes/Tom_TTF.jpg
#5
I swapped off with this rented Road King from the SV shown with my
Niece's husband while he was visiting AZ from Mass. It may just have a
rubber-mounted engine but it seemed smoother than the older Harley's
I'd ridden.
#4
1991: a homologated soft tail with a 5-speed transmission added after
the fact. This was my sister's last Husband's Harley.
#1,2,3
1977 AMF Sportster owned by at friend in NORCAL around Hayward named
Mike. The four and fifth were owned be another Mike but he had two
different prebought choppers (both pan heads as I recall), with raked
out Springer front ends and no front brakes. This was around he
1974-76 time frame.

Main Harley engines to the best of my recollection:
Flathead with valves in the block pre 1947.
Pan Head OHV post 1947.
Knuckle head, post AMF. Don't know the date.
The 1st EVO 1450cc came out in the late nineties.
There are variations of the evo-twin or four cam and balance shaft or
not.

The last Haley engine beside that Italian two-stroke company that was
bought out back in the 70's is the 1150cc Vrod engine (Porsche
designed, liquid cooled twin). Please feel free to correct or expand
of my list.

I view Harley a bit like Hinkley Triumph engines in that there are
only a few engine changes other than below:

800cc Bonneville parallel twin.
900cc Thruxton parellel twin.


855 first generation triple.
955-second generation Sprint, S3 & Daytona engine. The biggest
difference since 02 has been changing the Daytona engine which now has
about 20 more real wheel HP, a 12,500 red line and shim UNDER bucket
valve adjustments. All the triples got new (injection molded) cases
and other refinements in 02, including the coating on the piston
liners on the Daytona's. Finally, in 05 both the Sprint & S3 were
stroked to accommodate the larger 1050cc displacement, plus
compression ratios are a fixed 12:1 now instead of 11.7:1.

The new longitudinally mounted Rocket III 2.3 liter triple.

Finally. No longed made are the inline fours of 1200cc in the Trophy,
Daytona 650 and Speed 4. These will be replaced this year with the new
675 Triple.



Bob Nixon, Chandler AZ
01 Sprint ST "RED" 50K miles
http://bigrex.net/pictures
Wakko
2006-01-06 15:32:33 UTC
Permalink
Post by _Bob_Nixon
Knuckle head, post AMF. Don't know the date.
Should be: "Knuckle head, *PRE* AMF. 1936-1947"

http://www.harley-davidson.com/wcm/Content/Pages/Engines/hall_of_engines.jsp
or
http://tinyurl.com/c7ut5
--
Wakko NTXNS TOMKAT SENS PHS BS#Pending
_Bob Nixon_
2006-01-06 17:37:23 UTC
Permalink
Post by Wakko
Post by _Bob_Nixon
Knuckle head, post AMF. Don't know the date.
Should be: "Knuckle head, *PRE* AMF. 1936-1947"
Post by _Bob_Nixon
Knuckle head, post AMF. Don't know the date.
Should be: "Knuckle head, *PRE* AMF. 1936-1947"
Right! Knuckle and flathead are the same but the name I was trying to
convey was the "Shovelhead" and it was built in between the time of the
Pan head and EVO HD engine. All beyond the Knuckle or valve in block
engines have been cam in block and tappet, pushrod & rocker arm to valve
actuation in the cylinder head. Finally, the VROD engine uses modern
DOHC /4vavles per cylinder on, I believe, a 60-degree V-twin platform.
BTW, the EVO may have roller tappets and rockers but I'm no expert on HD
engine designs; mostly because they're about 30 years behind the rest of
the motorcycle industry (except V-ROD) still using air cooled pushrod
designs dropped back in the 60's by the Japanese/Italian/British in
favor of modern liquid cooled OHC, mostly 4 valves per cylinder designs.

Some current Japanese metric cruisers HAVE gone backwards to compete
with the aberrations of HD (moronic down trending retro, American
stupidity) but one innovative pushrod design came from Honda in the form
of the CX-500/650/turbo-650. This was a Guzzi type design of sorts but
with only the longitudinal 90-degree twin and shaft drive in common. The
Honda CX was liquid cooled, had 4 valves per cylinder but the valves
were activated with short pushrods and it had a redline of 10,000 RPM.
They may have also employed hydraulic lash adjustment like the Honda
Nighthawk 650/700/750 DOHC I4 but I'd have to look it up.

Also back on the Triumph (Hinkley) engines, the changes make in 02 gave
~10 more RWHP to the Sprint and S3 as well as the Daytona. However it's
not at all uncommon for 02+ Daytona's to put out 140 or > RWHP with only
minor fuel system remapping and a better flowing exhaust. In addition,
the new twins only look like old OHV pushrod engines but in reality are
modern OHC designs.


Bob Nixon
01 Sprint ST "RED" 50K
Chandler,AZ
http://bigrex.net/pictures
Mark Olson
2006-01-06 17:55:20 UTC
Permalink
Post by _Bob Nixon_
Right! Knuckle and flathead are the same but the name I was trying to
convey was the "Shovelhead" and it was built in between the time of the
Pan head and EVO HD engine. All beyond the Knuckle or valve in block
engines have been cam in block and tappet, pushrod & rocker arm to valve
actuation in the cylinder head. Finally, the VROD engine uses modern
Are you saying the knucklehead is a flathead? It looks like you're
trying to say that.

A knucklehead is definitely an OHV pushrod engine, and is not a flathead
(valve in block) design.

--
'01 SV650S '99 EX250-F13 '86 GL1200A '81 CM400T
OMF #7
~
kirb
2006-01-06 19:04:54 UTC
Permalink
Post by _Bob Nixon_
Right! Knuckle and flathead are the same
Knuckle was a OHV, Flatheads are not. I won't lace this with post with
name calling which might point out this fact to you.
Post by _Bob Nixon_
convey was the "Shovelhead" and it was built in between the time of the
Pan head and EVO HD engine.
That part you got right.
Post by _Bob Nixon_
All beyond the Knuckle or valve in block
engines have been cam in block and tappet, pushrod & rocker arm to valve
actuation in the cylinder head.
HD is sticking with what sells- classic sounding air cooled push rod
engines. If HD switched to the revolution engine overnight you would
have a backlash of buyers and a surge in aftermarket aircooled engines.
HD is smart enough to know what sells.
Post by _Bob Nixon_
DOHC /4vavles per cylinder on, I believe, a 60-degree V-twin platform.
BTW, the EVO may have roller tappets and rockers but I'm no expert on HD
engine designs; mostly because they're about 30 years behind the rest of
the motorcycle industry (except V-ROD) still using air cooled pushrod
designs dropped back in the 60's by the Japanese/Italian/British in
favor of modern liquid cooled OHC, mostly 4 valves per cylinder designs.
The japanese didn't have any history to live up to, Italians stick to
old designs almost as bad as US (ducati, moto guzzi), The new Triumphs
are building from scrach bikes while latching on to history that isn't
theirs. The old Tri's don't have any history with the new outside of
the name.
Post by _Bob Nixon_
Some current Japanese metric cruisers HAVE gone backwards to compete
with the aberrations of HD (moronic down trending retro, American
stupidity)
Well, if HD is stupid, stupid is selling more than anyone else.

Kirb
Rayvan
2006-01-06 21:53:31 UTC
Permalink
Post by _Bob Nixon_
Post by Wakko
Post by _Bob_Nixon
Knuckle head, post AMF. Don't know the date.
Should be: "Knuckle head, *PRE* AMF. 1936-1947"
Post by _Bob_Nixon
Knuckle head, post AMF. Don't know the date.
Should be: "Knuckle head, *PRE* AMF. 1936-1947"
Right! Knuckle and flathead are the same but the name I was trying to
convey was the "Shovelhead" and it was built in between the time of the
Pan head and EVO HD engine. All beyond the Knuckle or valve in block
engines have been cam in block and tappet, pushrod & rocker arm to valve
actuation in the cylinder head. Finally, the VROD engine uses modern
DOHC /4vavles per cylinder on, I believe, a 60-degree V-twin platform.
BTW, the EVO may have roller tappets and rockers but I'm no expert on HD
engine designs; mostly because they're about 30 years behind the rest of
the motorcycle industry (except V-ROD) still using air cooled pushrod
designs dropped back in the 60's by the Japanese/Italian/British in
favor of modern liquid cooled OHC, mostly 4 valves per cylinder designs.
I was wondering why you didn't comment on my Sportbike Larry. It
contains one of your favorite engine designs.

http://www.pbase.com/rayvan/image/43470859

While I own(ed) it, I can't say I rode it alot. Mostly for recreational
stuff for when I feel the need for extreme fun.

My Harley is run pracically every day of the year rain or shine to work
and back and every errand I run that doesn't require a cage. It's just
there. I don't look at how it looks *on paper* as you do. It performs
well enough and it never requires much of my time. I just start and it
just runs and runs and runs and runs. That's all I've ever asked of it.

I think the difference between you and me Bob, is that your main bike
is *only* for recreation and mine (at least the Harley) is my *main*
transportation device. I can see why you think the way you do as I used
to be the same way. But please understand that just becuase you think
that way does mean *every* one does.
Post by _Bob Nixon_
Some current Japanese metric cruisers HAVE gone backwards to compete
with the aberrations of HD (moronic down trending retro, American
stupidity)
But for some strange reason all of them still require more maintenance
and are more thirsty than the HD Pushrod engines! They're all harder to
work on. That HD motor is extremely easy to maintain with a few basic
hand tools. Most items can be serviced without removing half the bike
like you must do with "modern" designs as well.
Post by _Bob Nixon_
but one innovative pushrod design came from Honda in the form
of the CX-500/650/turbo-650. This was a Guzzi type design of sorts but
with only the longitudinal 90-degree twin and shaft drive in common. The
Honda CX was liquid cooled, had 4 valves per cylinder but the valves
were activated with short pushrods and it had a redline of 10,000 RPM.
They may have also employed hydraulic lash adjustment like the Honda
Nighthawk 650/700/750 DOHC I4 but I'd have to look it up.
Here you go:

http://www.turbomotorcycles.org/TMIOA/TechHelp_Honda_ValveTrain.html

No hydraulics, BTW. Inovative? Okay, but the bikes were junk like
Honda's first V4's were. (I owned one and it *was* junk)

http://www.math.uwaterloo.ca/~rblander/V4_PB.html

I owned an '84 VFR that I purchased new. It became obvious in the
first 10,000 miles (cams were shot) that Honda no longer cared about
making bikes that are easy and fun to work on. How I longed for that
simple CB750four I sold to make room for the VFR. At least I could
adjust valves without pulling the valve covers!
If you ever wonder how one gets away from all of that marvelous
engineering and reverts back to an antiquated Harley Davidson, well
Bob. That VFR was that reason. That bike had so many engine problems
that you can blame Honda for steering me towards the purchase of an
almost new Harley FXR in 1988. I ran that FXR up over 130,000 miles in
the next ten years. I was in heaven as I also learned that wrenching on
these new EVO bikes was just plain *FUN*. Like the folks who designed
'em were the ones that were going to be maintainting 'em. This is very
much unlike anything from Japan. Airhead BMW's and my old CB750 are the
same way. Simple and fun. Anyhow, I've been riding Harleys ever since
and have not missed all that horsepower one teeny tiny bit. While it
may be true that the newer bikes aren't as bad as my VFR, it doesn't
matter anymore. I'm in love with my Harleys. They've never let me down.

I don't miss the coolant and the hoses and the pumps. I don't miss
chain maintenace, I don't miss the valve adjustments. I don't miss the
carb syncs, I don't miss removing half the bike to do simple things
like changing air filters. I don't miss the horsepower and as such I
don't miss the expensive speeding tickets. Harleys are even fun when
you're obeying the law!

Now you know where I come from.
Have a nice weekend, Bob
Hank
2006-01-07 01:10:22 UTC
Permalink
Post by Rayvan
I owned an '84 VFR that I purchased new. It became obvious in the
first 10,000 miles (cams were shot) that Honda no longer cared about
making bikes that are easy and fun to work on. How I longed for that
simple CB750four I sold to make room for the VFR. At least I could
adjust valves without pulling the valve covers!
If you ever wonder how one gets away from all of that marvelous
engineering and reverts back to an antiquated Harley Davidson, well
Bob. That VFR was that reason. That bike had so many engine problems
that you can blame Honda for steering me towards the purchase of an
almost new Harley FXR in 1988. I ran that FXR up over 130,000 miles in
the next ten years. I was in heaven as I also learned that wrenching on
these new EVO bikes was just plain *FUN*. Like the folks who designed
'em were the ones that were going to be maintainting 'em. This is very
much unlike anything from Japan. Airhead BMW's and my old CB750 are the
same way. Simple and fun. Anyhow, I've been riding Harleys ever since
and have not missed all that horsepower one teeny tiny bit. While it
may be true that the newer bikes aren't as bad as my VFR, it doesn't
matter anymore. I'm in love with my Harleys. They've never let me down.
I don't miss the coolant and the hoses and the pumps. I don't miss
chain maintenace, I don't miss the valve adjustments. I don't miss the
carb syncs, I don't miss removing half the bike to do simple things
like changing air filters. I don't miss the horsepower and as such I
don't miss the expensive speeding tickets. Harleys are even fun when
you're obeying the law!
Now you know where I come from.
Have a nice weekend, Bob
Wow. That bit was almost enough to get me to
consider a Harley! But I have to say, I road with
a coworker last summer when she took her anniversary
edition Low Rider to get the oil changed, because
she wasn't sure how to do it herself. She wanted to
watch as the shop did it. I went along, too, just for
the ride and to check out the custom bikes they were
building at the shop. Holy shit, before they could drain
the oil, something had to be removed from the front of
the engine so the oil didn't drip on it since it was directly
below a drain plug (can't remember what it was, but it seems
like it had wires going to it) and after that, they had to
remove tow more drain plugs and put three different kinds of
oil in the thing! On my Valkyrie, I remove one easily accessed
drain plug, and one easily accessed spin on filter. She spent
over $90 to get the three oils changed.
I rode her bike and I did like it, though...

-


Here's what happens to steel framed buildings exposed
to raging infernos for hours on end.

http://davesweb.cnchost.com/nwsltr69c.html

On 9-11-01, WTC7, a 47 story steel framed building, which
had only small, random fires, dropped in perfect symmetry
at near free fall speed as in a perfectly executed controlled
demolition.

http://911research.wtc7.net/talks/wtc/videos.html
http://www.physics.byu.edu/research/energy/htm7.html
http://911review.com/articles/griffin/nyc1.html
http://wtc7.net/articles/FEMA/WTC_ch5.htm


Ever wonder who benefits from the 150 MILLION
U.S. taxpayer dollars spent each DAY in Iraq?
http://www.commondreams.org/views04/0223-08.htm
http://www.corpwatch.org/article.php?list=type&type=21

"They are waging a campaign of murder and destruction. And
there is no limit to the innocent lives they are willing to
take... men with blind hatred and armed with lethal weapons
who are capable of any atrocity... they respect no laws of
warfare or morality."
-bu$h describing his own war crimes in Iraq.
http://www.robert-fisk.com/iraqwarvictims_mar2003.htm

"Our lives begin to end the day we become silent about things
that matter." -- Martin Luther King Jr.

"God told me to strike at al Qaeda and I struck them. And then
he instructed me to strike at Saddam, which I did."
-- George W. Bush

"Hence today I believe that I am acting in accordance with the
will of the Almighty Creator: by defending myself against the
Jew, I am fighting for the work of the Lord."
-- Adolf Hitler

"Brutal and sadistic? By what girly-man standards? Compared
to how Saddam treated his prisoners, a bit of humiliation was
a walk in the park. AFAIK, No one died or even lost any blood."
-Albert Nurick, a usenet kook, on the rape, torture and murder
at bu$h's Abu Ghraib prison in Iraq.
(http://www.commondreams.org/headlines04/0512-10.htm)


George W. Bush: "Intelligence gathered by this and other
governments leaves no doubt that the Iraq regime continues
to possess and conceal some of the most lethal weapons ever
devised." March 17, 2003.

http://www.commondreams.org/
http://www.truthout.org/
Rayvan
2006-01-07 01:39:50 UTC
Permalink
Post by Hank
Post by Rayvan
I owned an '84 VFR that I purchased new. It became obvious in the
first 10,000 miles (cams were shot) that Honda no longer cared about
making bikes that are easy and fun to work on. How I longed for that
simple CB750four I sold to make room for the VFR. At least I could
adjust valves without pulling the valve covers!
If you ever wonder how one gets away from all of that marvelous
engineering and reverts back to an antiquated Harley Davidson, well
Bob. That VFR was that reason. That bike had so many engine problems
that you can blame Honda for steering me towards the purchase of an
almost new Harley FXR in 1988. I ran that FXR up over 130,000 miles in
the next ten years. I was in heaven as I also learned that wrenching on
these new EVO bikes was just plain *FUN*. Like the folks who designed
'em were the ones that were going to be maintainting 'em. This is very
much unlike anything from Japan. Airhead BMW's and my old CB750 are the
same way. Simple and fun. Anyhow, I've been riding Harleys ever since
and have not missed all that horsepower one teeny tiny bit. While it
may be true that the newer bikes aren't as bad as my VFR, it doesn't
matter anymore. I'm in love with my Harleys. They've never let me down.
I don't miss the coolant and the hoses and the pumps. I don't miss
chain maintenace, I don't miss the valve adjustments. I don't miss the
carb syncs, I don't miss removing half the bike to do simple things
like changing air filters. I don't miss the horsepower and as such I
don't miss the expensive speeding tickets. Harleys are even fun when
you're obeying the law!
Now you know where I come from.
Have a nice weekend, Bob
Wow. That bit was almost enough to get me to
consider a Harley! But I have to say, I road with
a coworker last summer when she took her anniversary
edition Low Rider to get the oil changed, because
she wasn't sure how to do it herself. She wanted to
watch as the shop did it. I went along, too, just for
the ride and to check out the custom bikes they were
building at the shop. Holy shit, before they could drain
the oil, something had to be removed from the front of
the engine so the oil didn't drip on it since it was directly
below a drain plug (can't remember what it was, but it seems
like it had wires going to it)
Strange. I've changed oil on lot's of Dynas and the plug is simply in
the oil pan. Perhaps they were mucking with the oil filter?

On my own bike the oil is in a sump. There's a hose that leads to the
bottom of the bike with plug. Don't have remove anything.
Post by Hank
and after that, they had to
remove tow more drain plugs and put three different kinds of
oil in the thing!
I use the same stuff in all three holes.

She must have been changing out the break-in oil. Once the bike is past
the first oil change it's much like a car. You can ignore the oil in
the transmission for much longer than the engine oil interval. I go
about about 20,000 for the transmission (same as the car) and about
10,000 on the primary (clutch debris gets the oil dirty kind of fast)
Post by Hank
On my Valkyrie, I remove one easily accessed
drain plug, and one easily accessed spin on filter.
Yeah, that does make it easy. You do have to worry about the final
drive at some point.

My spin-on oil filter is easy but it drains it's contents all over the
front of the motor so you gotta use a hunk of carboard or something to
re-direct 'most' of it. Why they couldn't just point the thing downward
instead of horizontal escapes me....Grrrr!
Post by Hank
She spent
over $90 to get the three oils changed.
I rode her bike and I did like it, though...
At least she can do it herself now and save some bux.
Syncing six carbs on the otherhand........ ;-)
--
Rayvan
Robert Bolton
2006-01-07 07:20:41 UTC
Permalink
....
Post by Rayvan
Post by Hank
Wow. That bit was almost enough to get me to
consider a Harley! But I have to say, I road with
a coworker last summer when she took her anniversary
edition Low Rider to get the oil changed, because
she wasn't sure how to do it herself. She wanted to
watch as the shop did it. I went along, too, just for
the ride and to check out the custom bikes they were
building at the shop. Holy shit, before they could drain
the oil, something had to be removed from the front of
the engine so the oil didn't drip on it since it was directly
below a drain plug (can't remember what it was, but it seems
like it had wires going to it)
Strange. I've changed oil on lot's of Dynas and the plug is simply in
the oil pan. Perhaps they were mucking with the oil filter?
......
Post by Rayvan
Post by Hank
On my Valkyrie, I remove one easily accessed
drain plug, and one easily accessed spin on filter.
Yeah, that does make it easy. You do have to worry about the final
drive at some point.
My spin-on oil filter is easy but it drains it's contents all over the
front of the motor so you gotta use a hunk of carboard or something to
re-direct 'most' of it. Why they couldn't just point the thing downward
instead of horizontal escapes me....Grrrr!
To change the oil on the Concours, you remove the two side fairings, one bottom
fairing, two drain plugs, and the internal oil filter bolt/plate/check valve.

Robert
Hank
2006-01-07 14:15:49 UTC
Permalink
Post by Rayvan
Post by Hank
Wow. That bit was almost enough to get me to
consider a Harley! But I have to say, I rode with
a coworker last summer when she took her anniversary
edition Low Rider to get the oil changed, because
she wasn't sure how to do it herself. She wanted to
watch as the shop did it. I went along, too, just for
the ride and to check out the custom bikes they were
building at the shop. Holy shit, before they could drain
the oil, something had to be removed from the front of
the engine so the oil didn't drip on it since it was directly
below a drain plug (can't remember what it was, but it seems
like it had wires going to it)
Strange. I've changed oil on lot's of Dynas and the plug is simply in
the oil pan. Perhaps they were mucking with the oil filter?
Maybe that was it. It was at the front of the engine,
and on second thought, too high to be a drain plug. But
it was not designed well, since you couldn't remove it
without first removing some electrical component that
was mounted below it.
Post by Rayvan
I use the same stuff in all three holes.
She must have been changing out the break-in oil.
She was indeed. It was the first oil change.


-


Here's what happens to steel framed buildings exposed
to raging infernos for hours on end.

http://davesweb.cnchost.com/nwsltr69c.html

On 9-11-01, WTC7, a 47 story steel framed building, which
had only small, random fires, dropped in perfect symmetry
at near free fall speed as in a perfectly executed controlled
demolition.

http://911research.wtc7.net/talks/wtc/videos.html
http://www.physics.byu.edu/research/energy/htm7.html
http://911review.com/articles/griffin/nyc1.html
http://wtc7.net/articles/FEMA/WTC_ch5.htm

"They are waging a campaign of murder and destruction. And
there is no limit to the innocent lives they are willing to
take... men with blind hatred and armed with lethal weapons
who are capable of any atrocity... they respect no laws of
warfare or morality."
-bu$h describing his own war crimes in Iraq.
http://www.robert-fisk.com/iraqwarvictims_mar2003.htm
_Bob_Nixon
2006-01-08 18:42:35 UTC
Permalink
On 6 Jan 2006 13:53:31 -0800, "Rayvan" <***@cachevision.com>
wrote:

[...]
Post by Rayvan
http://www.pbase.com/rayvan/image/43470859
While I own(ed) it, I can't say I rode it alot. Mostly for recreational
stuff for when I feel the need for extreme fun.
My Harley is run pracically every day of the year rain or shine to work
and back and every errand I run that doesn't require a cage. It's just
there. I don't look at how it looks *on paper* as you do. It performs
well enough and it never requires much of my time. I just start and it
just runs and runs and runs and runs. That's all I've ever asked of it.
I think the difference between you and me Bob, is that your main bike
^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
Post by Rayvan
is *only* for recreation and mine (at least the Harley) is my *main
^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
Post by Rayvan
transportation device. I can see why you think the way you do as I used
^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^

Look, I can't disagree with your everyday transport ride vs. sport
riding (weekend warrior) analogy. But does quantity = quality, I think
not.
Post by Rayvan
to be the same way. But please understand that just becuase you think
that way does mean *every* one does.
I know that Rayvan but it wouldn't make interesting reading if
everyone in this NG agreed with your POV, either. I'll admit to being
opinionated against the old and that it sends a signal to the rest of
the world that were getting weaker by the day but I'm an idealist and
you're not.
Post by Rayvan
Post by _Bob Nixon_
Some current Japanese metric cruisers HAVE gone backwards to compete
with the aberrations of HD (moronic down trending retro, American
stupidity)
But for some strange reason all of them still require more maintenance
and are more thirsty than the HD Pushrod engines!
That's a matter of opinion. Do you have some data to back up your
claims?
Post by Rayvan
They're all harder to
work on. That HD motor is extremely easy to maintain with a few basic
hand tools. Most items can be serviced without removing half the bike
like you must do with "modern" designs as well.
Let's put it this way. A motor should not have to have much work on it
at all in my way of thinking. Also, if you're exceeding 100,000 miles
on any particular ride, IMO you're putting yourself in more danger
than need be. In the US & Canada commuting by cage is far safer than
on a MC. Also there are more and more cages that equal to exceed the
fuel economy of a MC. And let's not even get into $ spent on tires. My
Sprint with 52,000 miles has gone through 16 sets of tires with low
mileage from 2500 miles to a high of 5000 miles. Then I mostly ride in
the canyons and wear the softer sides off 1st. (see photo below)

Loading Image...
Loading Image...

That 1st one is amislabel as it's actually a 020 rear. But my point is
tires alone can greatly offset the cost of riding a MC compared to a
cage.
Post by Rayvan
Post by _Bob Nixon_
but one innovative pushrod design came from Honda in the form
of the CX-500/650/turbo-650. This was a Guzzi type design of sorts but
with only the longitudinal 90-degree twin and shaft drive in common. The
Honda CX was liquid cooled, had 4 valves per cylinder but the valves
were activated with short pushrods and it had a redline of 10,000 RPM.
They may have also employed hydraulic lash adjustment like the Honda
Nighthawk 650/700/750 DOHC I4 but I'd have to look it up.
http://www.turbomotorcycles.org/TMIOA/TechHelp_Honda_ValveTrain.html
No hydraulics, BTW. Inovative? Okay, but the bikes were junk like
Honda's first V4's were. (I owned one and it *was* junk)
http://www.math.uwaterloo.ca/~rblander/V4_PB.html
I owned an '84 VFR that I purchased new. It became obvious in the
first 10,000 miles (cams were shot) that Honda no longer cared about
making bikes that are easy and fun to work on. How I longed for that
simple CB750four I sold to make room for the VFR. At least I could
adjust valves without pulling the valve covers!
If you ever wonder how one gets away from all of that marvelous
engineering and reverts back to an antiquated Harley Davidson, well
Bob. That VFR was that reason. That bike had so many engine problems
that you can blame Honda for steering me towards the purchase of an
almost new Harley FXR in 1988. I ran that FXR up over 130,000 miles in
the next ten years. I was in heaven as I also learned that wrenching on
these new EVO bikes was just plain *FUN*. Like the folks who designed
'em were the ones that were going to be maintainting 'em. This is very
much unlike anything from Japan. Airhead BMW's and my old CB750 are the
same way. Simple and fun. Anyhow, I've been riding Harleys ever since
and have not missed all that horsepower one teeny tiny bit. While it
may be true that the newer bikes aren't as bad as my VFR, it doesn't
matter anymore. I'm in love with my Harleys. They've never let me down.
The very 1st Honda V4's had Cam "line bore" problems in the design.
Later V4 Honda's were stone axe reliable and even had gear driven cam
drives until 02 when they went back to a chain and that VTEC 2/4 valve
operation at low and high RPM.
Post by Rayvan
I don't miss the coolant and the hoses and the pumps. I don't miss
chain maintenace, I don't miss the valve adjustments. I don't miss the
carb syncs, I don't miss removing half the bike to do simple things
like changing air filters. I don't miss the horsepower and as such I
don't miss the expensive speeding tickets. Harleys are even fun when
you're obeying the law!
But again obeying the law 100% of the time implies your using a bike
only as a means of transportation. Where's the fun in that and
maintenance is all-relative? I'm on my third drive chain, sprockets
and third valve check/adjustment. Also on my bike, only the tank need
be lifted and four screws removed to clean my K&N filter every couple
of years. Also coolant is no big deal, like modern cages. You're over
stating problems that I don't see as issues. Additionally Rayvan,
liquid cooling is just something you're going to have to learn to live
with, even on future Harleys. Then... they could do air/oil cooling
like the old Katana's I4's or current oil head BMW's.
Post by Rayvan
Now you know where I come from.
Have a nice weekend, Bob
You too and sorry to not answer sooner. I was busy with my weekend
warrior MC riding :)


Bob Nixon, Chandler AZ
01 Sprint ST "RED" 50K miles
http://bigrex.net/pictures

Rayvan
2006-01-06 16:47:20 UTC
Permalink
Post by _Bob_Nixon
Post by Rayvan
Post by Basil
Post by Rayvan
Yep. Or something. I've just caught him lying about riding a *balanced*
RoadKing even though one has never been built. How can one really
believe anything he says?
I believe Bob way before I would believe an asshole like you. I met him and
he knows more than 99% of reeky combined. Now, STFU.
LOL!
In other words, Duh! Yup! Harley duhs make balanced RoadKings kuz the
reeky bigot sez so... Too funny!
What's this idiot! I may have error'd in calling it balanced as in
Counter rotating balance shaft but it was smoother than the old
sportster I rode in the 70's. All tolled I've ridden five different
Harleys since 1975. The latest in the picture below.
http://bigrex.net/pictures/Old%20bikes/Tom_TTF.jpg
#5
I swapped off with this rented Road King from the SV shown with my
Niece's husband while he was visiting AZ from Mass. It may just have a
rubber-mounted engine but it seemed smoother than the older Harley's
I'd ridden.
#4
1991: a homologated soft tail with a 5-speed transmission added after
the fact. This was my sister's last Husband's Harley.
#1,2,3
1977 AMF Sportster owned by at friend in NORCAL around Hayward named
Mike. The four and fifth were owned be another Mike but he had two
different prebought choppers (both pan heads as I recall), with raked
out Springer front ends and no front brakes. This was around he
1974-76 time frame.
Flathead with valves in the block pre 1947.
Pan Head OHV post 1947.
All Knuckles are PRE AMF.
Post by _Bob_Nixon
Knuckle head, post AMF. Don't know the date.
The 1st EVO 1450cc came out in the late nineties.
The 1450cc engines are called TC88, not EVO.
Post by _Bob_Nixon
There are variations of the evo-twin or four cam and balance shaft or
not.
EVO bikes are 1340cc single cam unless the bike is a Sportster. Then
they're either 883cc 1100cc (no longer made) or 1200cc with four cams.
The only TC88s with balancers are all installed in Softails. All others
are rubber mounted.
Post by _Bob_Nixon
The last Haley engine beside that Italian two-stroke company that was
bought out back in the 70's is the 1150cc Vrod engine (Porsche
designed, liquid cooled twin). Please feel free to correct or expand
of my list.
The 1130cc VROD engine was actually designed by Harley but *refined* by
Porsche. Porsche did design the heads on the motor and helped a ton
with getting the thing as bullet proof as one of thier cars by aiding
with the strength of the bottom end.

The Aermacci built small bikes of the 60's and 70's not only had two
stroke bikes, but 250 and 350cc four stroke singles as well.

Have a nice weekend, Bob.
Rayvan
2006-01-06 19:36:14 UTC
Permalink
Post by _Bob_Nixon
Post by Rayvan
Post by Basil
Post by Rayvan
Yep. Or something. I've just caught him lying about riding a *balanced*
RoadKing even though one has never been built. How can one really
believe anything he says?
I believe Bob way before I would believe an asshole like you. I met him and
he knows more than 99% of reeky combined. Now, STFU.
LOL!
In other words, Duh! Yup! Harley duhs make balanced RoadKings kuz the
reeky bigot sez so... Too funny!
What's this idiot! I may have error'd in calling it balanced as in
Counter rotating balance shaft but it was smoother than the old
sportster I rode in the 70's. All tolled I've ridden five different
Harleys since 1975. The latest in the picture below.
http://bigrex.net/pictures/Old%20bikes/Tom_TTF.jpg
#5
I swapped off with this rented Road King from the SV shown with my
Niece's husband while he was visiting AZ from Mass. It may just have a
rubber-mounted engine but it seemed smoother than the older Harley's
I'd ridden.
#4
1991: a homologated soft tail with a 5-speed transmission added after
the fact. This was my sister's last Husband's Harley.
#1,2,3
1977 AMF Sportster owned by at friend in NORCAL around Hayward named
Mike. The four and fifth were owned be another Mike but he had two
different prebought choppers (both pan heads as I recall), with raked
out Springer front ends and no front brakes. This was around he
1974-76 time frame.
Flathead with valves in the block pre 1947.
Check
Post by _Bob_Nixon
Pan Head OHV post 1947.
Nope. Late fifties
Post by _Bob_Nixon
Knuckle head, post AMF. Don't know the date.
Knuckle head was first OHV. 1947
Post by _Bob_Nixon
The 1st EVO 1450cc came out in the late nineties.
No such engine. You may mean the TC88 as no EVO was ever 1450cc unless
someone stroked one. All the big-twin EVO bikes were 1340cc.
Post by _Bob_Nixon
There are variations of the evo-twin or four cam and balance shaft or
not.
No such engine as an EVO twin cam. You're thinking of the TC88/95/103.
The EVO four cams were (are) only in Sportsters and Buells. 883cc
1100cc (no longer made) and 1200cc. Buell has a 1000cc and 1200cc of
same basic engine.
Post by _Bob_Nixon
The last Haley engine beside that Italian two-stroke company that was
bought out back in the 70's is the 1150cc Vrod engine (Porsche
VROD is 1130cc. Porsche didn't design it, they helped as design
consultants to get the engine streetable and as bullet proof as their
cars.
The Aermacchi built bikes from Italy also had some four stroke singles.
Greek Shipping Magnets
2006-01-05 17:39:45 UTC
Permalink
Post by Tim Kreitz
Nixon a noob? WTF? The guy's been actively motorcycling since before I
was born.
I heard he reproduces through asexual budding.
Hank
2006-01-06 01:06:30 UTC
Permalink
Post by Sean
Here are some of my favorites; what are yours, and
what is it that impresses you about them?
The V-4 on my V-65 Magna never ceases to impress me.
Very smooth and strong from 2K rpm to it's 10K redline.
I've owned and ridden faster bikes, but the power of
that 16 valve 4 cam V-4 still impresses me.
But I think I was most impressed as a teenager by the
engine on my Honda SL100. I ran out of gas once and
had to push the thing up the driveway, which had a slight
incline. I was tough going and I had to recruit my little
brother for help.
Later, I burnt the exhaust valve by running it with no
exhaust pipe - just open at the head. That's an unforgettable
sound. When I got the engine apart and held the piston
in my hand, it was smaller in diameter than my wrist. I looked
at the thing and wondered how the hell it can shoot my SL100
up that driveway with the front wheel in the air and gravel
spitting off the back tire. That's when I found a real appreciation
for the power of the internal combustion engine.
Post by Sean
Yamaha VMax - I've never ridden one, but the massive, brute-force
look and the authoritative sound of one passing my van on the hwy
this summer really got my attention
I owned one of those for about 4 years, and sold it to my brother
who still has it. Before I bought my Valkyrie, I was considering
a new V-Max. It will do long low wheelies on the 1-2 shift with
a 130 lb passenger. <g> It's also comfortable, and I like the
unique look of it. Not much of a handler, though...

-

Here's what happens to steel framed buildings exposed
to raging infernos for hours on end.

http://davesweb.cnchost.com/nwsltr69c.html

On 9-11-01, WTC7, a 47 story steel framed building, which
had only small, random fires, dropped in perfect symmetry
at near free fall speed as in a perfectly executed controlled
demolition.

http://911research.wtc7.net/talks/wtc/videos.html
http://www.physics.byu.edu/research/energy/htm7.html
http://wtc7.net/articles/FEMA/WTC_ch5.htm


"You're doin' a heckuva job, Brownie!" - bu$h, a few days
before his FEMA chief, Micheal Brown was forced to resign
because of his gross incompetence.

"The tools that enable Cuba to save lives and preserve
human dignity during hurricanes are socialist values
and organization." - Dr. W.T. Whitney Jr

Ever wonder who benefits from the 150 MILLION
U.S. taxpayer dollars spent each DAY in Iraq?
http://www.commondreams.org/views04/0223-08.htm
http://www.corpwatch.org/article.php?list=type&type=21

"They are waging a campaign of murder and destruction. And
there is no limit to the innocent lives they are willing to
take... men with blind hatred and armed with lethal weapons
who are capable of any atrocity... they respect no laws of
warfare or morality."
-bu$h describing his own illegal invasion of Iraq.
http://www.robert-fisk.com/iraqwarvictims_mar2003.htm

http://www.commondreams.org/
http://www.truthout.org/
Continue reading on narkive:
Loading...