buell woes
 

So as someone so kindly pointed out the rear brake light on the 1125R is not working, looks like its going back to the shop for warrenty work.
When I came home I pulled the bulb out and put it in securely and now it stays on constantly and pulling the brake level has no effect, since its still under warrenty I decided to not mess with it, button it back up and take it in. Let's hope my bad luck does not continue....

It's a bueelllllll

Check the charging system too just ot be sure. On my futura when the regulator starts to crap out odd things happen sometimes. And goo dluck with the dealer, mine goes in on thursday.

Damn dood. I don't know you but it seems like you have the worst luck with vehicles. That sux.

Well at least he has a smoking hot Gf to drive him around in her car!

Silver Lining!

if it stays on all the time... Imma gonna ask a dumb question: did you check the switches? I just had to adjust the one on my SV because it was on all the time...

Same here, on my SV. I had to adjust the rear brake switch when I adjusted the lever where I wanted it, or the light was always on.

It was always off and now on, while I have a warrenty, I'm using that sucker

Yeah, you got something else going on, not brake pedal adjustment.

Blown flasher relay?

Man, you fucking guys and your defective 1125s.

:lol:

What's wrong with yours?

I think it was an issue with the charging system/wiring harness. First the check engine light came on then the battery light, then the bike died a short time later. its going to the dealer tomorrow so we will see what happens.

Gotcha.
I'm waiting on a diaphram. Hopefully they get it in. I guess no dealer in the US has one in stock (per the online inventory)... so yeah, we'll see.

I was gonna say something at the Rally, But I thought it was a Buell thing to ride without brake lights...LMAO

I would check the wires to see if they have that crazy ex mod.

No doubt.

You got the 1125 GE, Geriatric Edition for those old ladies that roll around with their foot on the brake constantly.

Actually the only issue I have with my 08 is front end handling. It tried to kill me. The electrics, bulbs, fueling, no worries. But I cannot drive off into a 25 mph corner at 50 as + am want to do. I installed the EBR steering head kit for another half degree on rake, but it still isnt 'sweet'

You're afraid of getting your bike pregnant?

Not really, it was gone when Ebbs stopped by :lol:

I just hope this part shortage isn't going to be a constant.
My next bike choices dealerships are even farther away :(

Why can't they make any good V-twins anymore?

I was the one who pointed it out to drewpy and everybody else following him. Didn't want anybody to run into him or crash due to it.

What's weird is I never noticed it before so there is no telling why it happened or what is causeing it

Damn drewpy. I hope the dealer finds it is an easy fix.

Because I4s totally rule and companies only make V twins to satisfy cavemen like yourself!!!:wink::lol:

Aka, I4's make HP cheaper...

I'll be a barbarian too then!

Conan the Buellian.

You've met Drewpy then....

:lol:

:idk: I prefer torque.

Same. But, most people don't. That's why some people drive Miatas and Civics.

hey, i resemble that comment:boobs:

Most 'people' wouldnt know torque if it threw them thru the back window.

HP makes speed, torque wins races...

Yea...against 600s maybe.:lol: Tell that to the guys running the Buell in Superbike.

I agree that your bike makes as much torque as mine earlier but it doesn't make "more" torque. In fact if you'd like to compare two bikes with the same CCs, I believe that I4 come out rather well torque-wise AND provide significantly more HP... You'd like to compare a GSXR 1000 vs a Ducati 1200 but what if you use a 'Busa's motor? The problem with comparing V twin bikes vs I4s is you guys ALWAYS cheat!:lol: You always want to compare bikes that have more CCs and/or cost twice as much as our bikes!!!:lol:

Well lets talk. First I wasnt referring to my Buell, more to the V Twin and V Fours like the RC31, Duc's, and RC51's that ruled WSBK for decades. The Duc WSBK effort when allowed to run without weight breaks or air restrictors kick serious I4 ass. The V fours did the same back in the day. Then they became twins too in form of the RC51s. Even GP racing was dominated by V twins and V 4s until the advent of the electronic rider aids.

secondly peak torque is an easy number to judge by in comparisons BUT the spread of torque and application of that torque is harder to measure. You have to look back at histories results in competition.

I stand by my statement, HP brings speed to the table, Torque is what wins races consistently and decisively. Before the electronic rider aids big screaming I fours were good but were as likely to put you in the hospital as on the podium.

Last, My Buell 1125R is a sporty street bike, That is about all. Sure it can suprise a GSXR squid from time to time, but the engine didnt really break new ground did it?

The RC51 never was never matched up with I4's evenly. Ever. The 1000's had restrictor plates and before that it was running with the 750's.

Hence the reason I have always owned V-twins. haha

:boobs:

All the WSBK twins were given displacement advantages and then either carried extra weight or restrictors or both, but somehow manage to win more championships than any other config. V4s, RC30 & 45, had little restrictions but were of same displacement as the I4s.

Basically my theory is proven by the fact that you have to handicap a twin or V4 by weight or restrictors in order to get a fair race with the I 4s.

And you have to go no further than the Ape RSV4 to see what inherent advantages the V4 layout produces...

And again, in AMA, when Hayden won. He won with an advantage. The 1000 I4's had restrictor plates. And before that it ran against 750's.

A V4 has no real disadvantage over an I4 when it comes to revs. The valve area, and piston weight/size should be roughly the same.

Twins very rarely compete evenly. Only when Ducati came out with the Desmo valve arrangement (mechanically linked the entire time, as opposed to being closed with a spring) have they made comparable power to the equivalent I4. Even now, they use an 1198 instead of a 1000. And the Desmosidici ( based off of the gp bike, therefore gp specs are why it's a V4) is outrageously priced and make the same power if not slightly more than a Gixxer 1000, and costs seven times as much.

I love twins. I dislike I4's. But, facts are facts. Four cylinders can usually rev higher, therefore do more work, which gives them an advantage.

I hear what your saying. I4s can rev higher produce more HP and speed, but i guess we have to disagree. I still feel the torque spread and throttle connection of a V will beat the all out HP of an I4 head to head, cc for cc.

And yeah, there have been many formulas for what is considered a fair fight between WSBK favoring Ducs and one certaim AMA boss handing Buell a championship. The twin loses out somewhat in rpm but gains in tractibility which in my racing history usually means money.

It has beared out for me in roadracing MC's, Stock car racing, and drag racing, torque means more than HP.

Now I am quick to agree on the performance to dollar facts of I4 vs V twin orV four.

Um have you seen the reviews of the non-cheater/non-heavily modified street version of that bike? Oh and who's talking about V4s? I love V4s, I had a V-Max!

Oh and come on broham, really? Everybody knows that the RC51 was so heavily modified and even so, it barely beat out the GSXR750 for the AMA championship.

Give me a break, it is no secret that WSBK has been kissing Ducati's ass for decades...

Okay, get two bikes of the same weight, same CCs, same caliber riders, no restrictions...one a V-Twin and one a I4. Tell me that you don't think that the I4 will win on the track.

Me on a stock 1198 vs anyone short of Leon Hasam on a oem GSXR1000. LOL, I come up smiling, T Hee.
I was arguing torque vs HP, not really anything else. You can build a good torquey I4 and cheap too, but in the last 20 yrs a I4 has won only 4 championships in WSBK and 7 Championships in GP Rossi and Lawson not withstanding. I rest my case on torque fellas.

What? You can't do it can you? You can't even contemplate a CC for CC race. Again, you want to pit a 1200cc Vtwin vs a 1000cc I4 and you consider it a "fair" race.:lol: 20 years? I'll give you all the 2 stroke years which were not V-Twins,btw you keep cheating and bringing in the V4 (and the V5!) like it's the same thing. Okay 4 cylinder bikes are better than 2 cylinder bikes regardless of configuration. Argue that!:lol:

I told you I am arguing Torque Vs HP. Read the whole thread again. That is why the V4 and the Twin both show up. My original statement was Torque beat HP!!! I can and would put an OEM twin against an OEM 4. Over 8, 24, or 70 laps the torquey motor will beat the HP motor, config be damned...
..

Well, why not a single then? ;) We both know that the more CCs you have, the more torque you'll most likely have. So a V-Twin will beat a V4/5 of the same weight and CCs?.... NO WAY!!! Never happen. I don't think V-twins have ever raced 4 cylinders cc for cc... heck, even this year in the 600 class, Ducati is racing the 848 and losing miserably! I think the complaint is that they have to carry 16 more lbs but they get 250 more CCs!:lol: I love to argue this debate but I guess we'll agree to disagree... There will never be a way to prove it until some sanctioning body says screw it and starts a run what you brung class, all OEM, NO MODS, no limits!!! 'Busa? Okay. Ninja 250? Okay. Whatever. Totally stock. Now that would separate the men from the boys! Maybe set a price cap to keep crazy exotics out of the picture but otherwise...

Your missing my point Lamps, I NEVER said V Twins would beat V4/5s of same cc or an I 4 of same cc. I said WHOMEVER Makes the config with THE MOST TORQUE WINS. Period. I4s have done it with the advent of electronic rider aids and riders like SPIES and TOSELAND X1 , ROSSI, LAWSON. x2. BUT not regulary against V 2s, V4s, And V5s. 20 years of run what you brung. I4s havent brought it.

Oh.....hmmm but V-Twins don't win in MotoGp either and that's what we were talking about to begin with...this is a Buell thread, right?:lol: I started out arguing against V-twins and you came in with more torque wins races and.... ah who cares? It was a fun argument anyway!

I was just trying to say torque rules.
V Twins and V4s and V5s make gobs of quality torque. for 20 yrs GP/MotoGP was ruled by V4s and V5s, same 20 yrs WSBK has been dominated by twins.

I raced in a very competitive SV650 class and with all the identical twins we worked real hard to find an advantage. Turns out the mildly tuned engines with the good mid range would lap better
than the highly modded and cammed up peak HP engines. They were more tractible and easy to make gearing compromises for different tracks, turned lap times that put them squarely mid pack of the 600 middleweight classes. So then we experimented with our 600s and same thing. Torquey was better save with the high rpms of the 4 cy inline the difference wasnt as great lap time wise.