What's your take on the Buell XB9s and XB12s

[Big Dave]

>>I'm sorry, come again; did you just imply that Buells don't go, stop or handle as well as the sort of road bikes which are taken to trackdays?<<


No - that they handle beautifully at real world speeds and that accordingly the maximum speed characteristics are not as good as longer wheel based machines at terminal speed.



>>High-quality suspension components can't compensate for inferior geometry.<<

True - but in this case it doesn't have to.


You used the example of a 600 sportsbike on the track. That's what a 600 sportbike is designed for - subsequently they aren't particularly good on the road. Their mojo is beyond disqualification speeds now for starters.

XB series Buells are designed for road use - they are particularly good at it. The converse applies.

[Badcat]

Still. Why don't you try arguing the topic on its own merits, instead of simply implying that other people are somehow unqualified to comment?

Also, don't be silly; I'm not 'completely panning' Buells. Just being realistic about what they are in the face of a bunch of fanboi ejaculation over keyboards about them being TEH AWESUM.

Gosh, if we can't have a good old hammer-and-tongs discussion about the awesomeness and/or drawbacks of a particular brand of motorcycle without some snide cunt popping up and telling us that we should shut up because we're not experts, this forum really is going to the dogs.



Like I said. Argue topic on merits, or STFU.

errr - yeah.
where did i tell you to shut up?
thanks for your conditions on the discussion, i'll be sure to abide to your instructions on any more posts to YOUR thread.
together we'll make KB a better place.

[jrandom]

No - that they handle beautifully at real world speeds and that accordingly the maximum speed characteristics are not as good as longer wheel based machines at terminal speed.

Define 'real world speeds'.

I found that the XB12R got very twitchy simply braking and tipping into 55kph-marked sweepers. That's not exactly World Land Speed Record stuff.

True - but in this case it doesn't have to.

Well, when I say 'inferior', I'm simply referring to the instability and aforementioned inability to turn stably under brakes or put the power down smoothly at a normal open-road-riding pace.

Surely your 'real world speeds' aren't limited to kph in double digits?

The 12R's brakes were very good, by the way. Must be mentioned. No complaints there.

[jrandom]

together we'll make KB a better place.

[Max Headroom]

My position on Buells remains that, yes, they're interesting bikes, but that their lauded handling characteristics are a result of design decisions that go off at a tangent from the direction that decades of motorcycle development has led more established marques in. Other motorcycle designers aren't stupid; there are good reasons why most bikes don't handle like Buells.

Take an XB12R out on the track with a bunch of 600s, and you'd see what I mean. You'll get lapped so fast that the arse of your leathers will flap from the breeze. (That is, if you don't crash first.)

Of course, you Buell owners are welcome to stipulate that, yes, they're inferior in their handling and power delivery, and need to be ridden more gingerly from A to B than other motorcycles, and that you get a masochistic buzz from having a bike like that.

Heck, I know I'd get a masochistic buzz from a hardtail chopper; I'll have one someday. If Buells do it for you in the same fashion, more power to you!

I just take issue with the starry-eyed fans who hold the XB models up as some kind of advance in motorcycle frame and suspension design, when, in fact, they're a step backwards. A fun step backwards, but a step backwards nonetheless.

JRANDOM, call me thick but I don't follow your logic at all. Your statements are eloquently formed, yet fundamentally flawed IMHO. Last time I checked, the Buells weren't being advertised or marketed as a racebike. They have never been advertised or marketed as the fastest bike on the market. They only put out 100hp out of the box for a start...yet your perception of Buells reveal that they can reasonably be described as punching well above their weight.

The XB series is "fit for purpose". That purpose wasn't to compete with R1's or GSXR1000's. Or GSX1400's for that matter. It was to provide a competent platform for street riding, not a racebike with lights.

So if I follow your argument, you criticise the XB series for being what it is, and failing to measure up to your hypothetical standard. Is that right? And that's based on one ride on a shop bike with suspect suspension settings?

THE XB series can be summarised as being a clean sheet design, copying nobody else. The points of difference are well thought out, and result in a strong chassis, low COG and low total bike weight. Nobody could mistake a Buell for anything else. Try that with most of the current crop of universal jap bikes that can only be differentiated by a sticker.

I wouldn't describe myself as starry-eyed. Quite the opposite in fact. I see the XB as well thought out, well made, reliable, competent, and very good value, based on two years of ownership-based experience. If your perception is different, no logic-based debate will change it.

[kiwifruit]

Buells are poo

U
R

[jrandom]

So if I follow your argument, you criticise the XB series for being what it is, and failing to measure up to your hypothetical standard. Is that right?

I kicked off my train of thought in response to someone making the comment that Buells were 'better' than other motorcycles.

Should I perhaps state once again that I could see myself owning one? Just not an XB12R?

THE XB series can be summarised as being a clean sheet design, copying nobody else.

Indeed. All I'm arguing for is the fact that 'different' does not mean 'better'. When a bike is less comfortable to ride, slower, and more likely to crash, that, in my book, means 'worse'. Set off against that is the fact that some Buells are quite uniquely attractive and sound great, and that it can be fun to ride something that wants to spit you off.

Like I've already said, I suspect that the 'S' models are where it's at, and, of course, the Ulysses is undoubtedly another matter entirely.

I'll be going back to test-ride something other than an XB12R very soon.

[Big Dave]

>>I found that the XB12R got very twitchy simply braking and tipping into 55kph-marked sweepers. That's not exactly World Land Speed Record stuff.<<

It was improperly set up or damaged or faulty in some way.


>>Well, when I say 'inferior', I'm simply referring to the instability and aforementioned inability to turn stably under brakes or put the power down smoothly at a normal open-road-riding pace.<<

It was improperly set up or damaged or faulty in some way.

>>Surely your 'real world speeds' aren't limited to kph in double digits?<<

'Generally' sub 140kph seems sensible in the current conditions.

>>The 12R's brakes were very good, by the way. Must be mentioned. No complaints there.<<

---->Insert my profile pic here

[jrandom]

U
R

Words cannot express my disgust, sir, at your spineless and craven lack of comment on what you thought of the XB12R on that test ride.

[jrandom]

It was improperly set up or damaged or faulty in some way.

You'd think that AMPS would be more careful with their demo bike, wouldn't you?

Inasmuch as having it badly set up could cost them sales, etc.

[Big Dave]

I'll be going back to test-ride something other than an XB12R very soon.

Should be some 1125r demos going shortly I'd guess. There were 16 press bikes on the launch.

[jrandom]

Should be some 1125r demos going shortly I'd guess.

Yes, the nice man promised us a go when they arrived.

[Max Headroom]

Indeed. All I'm arguing for is the fact that 'different' does not mean 'better'. When a bike is less comfortable to ride, slower, and more likely to crash, that, in my book, means 'worse'. Set off against that is the fact that some Buells are quite uniquely attractive and sound great, and that it can be fun to ride something that wants to spit you off.

Like I've already said, I suspect that the 'S' models are where it's at, and, of course, the Ulysses is undoubtedly another matter entirely.

I'll be going back to test-ride something other than an XB12R very soon.

Your comments again reinforce the fact that the bike you rode hadn't been set up for your body weight. If it had, you would have found it to give a surprisingly compliant ride, and very stable predicatable handling. It's a bike that thrives on being cornered "on the throttle" without requiring the frenetic gear-changing necessary on many jap bikes to maintain revs in the power band. Torque is a wonderful thing......

You'd be welcome to ride our bike on the B & C roads where we live and judge for yourself. It may or may not change your opinion, but I'm open to that.

[jrandom]

You'd be welcome to ride our bike on the B & C roads where we live and judge for yourself. It may or may not change your opinion, but I'm open to that.

That's a very kind offer, which I'd love to take up some time.

Yes, it'd be nice to have my negative impressions erased.

[Max Headroom]

That's a very kind offer, which I'd love to take up some time.

Yes, it'd be nice to have my negative impressions erased.

Send me a PM and we can hook up.