cruiser design weirdness

[Oaksong]

Doing research on bikes in order to make my upcoming new cruiser purchase, I have discovered something that I think is weird:

Bikes really aren't implementing new tech at ALL.

Hydraulic valve adjustment? -nope
Belt drive instead of chain? - nope
Dual front disk brakes for all bikes - nope


I don't get it. For instance, the v-star 650 would be a great beginner bike, and in a lot of ways, it is... except you need to do valve adjustments every 4k miles. At the same time, I see bikes that cost similarly in the 80s had no such maintenance BS issues.

What gives?

[frostbitevinnie]

C90: self adjusting hydraulic valves, shaft drive, dual front disks.

[shelby322]

Originally Posted by Oaksong

At the same time, I see bikes that cost similarly in the 80s had no such maintenance BS issues.

What gives?

you answered your own question, it's all about cost cutting and keeping things very afordable for everyone

[05HDRAM]

If you want to spend $10K plus, you can buy a cruiser with all the tech you mentioned. The V-Star 650 and Suzuki M & C50s are made as affordable cruisers, and are usually a good choice for new riders. They can put all that tech into the smaller bikes, but it will drive the price up so much they would not sell.

[Oaksong]

Originally Posted by 05HDRAM

If you want to spend $10K plus, you can buy a cruiser with all the tech you mentioned. The V-Star 650 and Suzuki M & C50s are made as affordable cruisers, and are usually a good choice for new riders. They can put all that tech into the smaller bikes, but it will drive the price up so much they would not sell.

see, that is what I don't get... what is so expensive about hydraulic valve adjustment and a second disk brake. I don't see what it is about a disk brake that is so pricey...

Similarly, while that tech exists, it tends to exist on bigger, heavier bikes like the C90. I don't see it on middleweight bikes, which is a shame.

Also, with the tech so old (80s, 70s...), I can't see why it is so expensive to put in a bike. Cars are made, with far more raw materials, to similar price points as some of the c90 level bikes. Given that bikes have half or less the raw materials, It seems like it would be quite cheap to put in there.

For instance, the old vulcan 750had all these things, and was a middleweight, non-expensive bike.

[05HDRAM]

Cars and trucks from the 70's and 80's also had sheetmetal thicker than a piece of paper. It's all about perspective. Yes, earlier bikes had some of this tech, but they were also cheaper to produce. The tech was also not fully developed, and some actually ended up being a hinderance rather than a plus.$100 to $200 additional on a single bike might not sound like a big deal, but add those numbers up when you are talking thousands of bikes.

[DaveAlvarado]

Originally Posted by Oaksong

Doing research on bikes in order to make my upcoming new cruiser purchase, I have discovered something that I think is weird:

Bikes really aren't implementing new tech at ALL.

Hydraulic valve adjustment? -nope
Belt drive instead of chain? - nope
Dual front disk brakes for all bikes - nope


I don't get it. For instance, the v-star 650 would be a great beginner bike, and in a lot of ways, it is... except you need to do valve adjustments every 4k miles. At the same time, I see bikes that cost similarly in the 80s had no such maintenance BS issues.

What gives?

You know new liter sportbikes have fly-by-wire and all kinds of other cool tech, right?

The problem in the cruiser world is that Harley doesn't use new tech, and other manufacturers emulate the style of Harley because it sells.

[Oaksong]

Originally Posted by DaveAlvarado

You know new liter sportbikes have fly-by-wire and all kinds of other cool tech, right?

The problem in the cruiser world is that Harley doesn't use new tech, and other manufacturers emulate the style of Harley because it sells.

See, that is what I don't get. Harleys used to look cooler than metric bikes, but the new Kawasakis, Suzukis, etc, all look cooler to me than anything Harley makes, with the possible exception of the VRod. Twice the bike, half the cash.

I am surprised that HD isn't out of business.

I have been looking at the Hyosung GV650. I hope they sell a billion of them and light a fire under the other manufacturers to get that stuff in gear.

My real belief, after thinking about it, is that these features don't exist because if they did, they would cannibalize the sales of bigger, more expensive, higher margin bikes. Big huge bikes people don't need.

[DrBob]

All the features you want are available, but not in the price range you are looking at (V-star 650 range).

Step one in designing a new bike is to determine the price it will sell at. Then the designers put in the features that they can without breaking this price point. So you are not going to see a lot of fancy, high-tech, expensive features on a low-end cruiser. Small cruisers are also light, so features like rear drum brakes and single from disks work just fine, so there is no need to add extra disk brakes and jack up the price to the point where no one would buy them. Would you be looking at a V-star 650 if it cost $10,000, even if it had 3 disks, a belt drive, self-adjusting valves, and lots of other features? Of course not. For $6000, you are not going to get the latest and greatest. If you want all the modern toys, be prepared to shell out 20-25K for a Harley or Goldwing.

The problem in the cruiser world is that Harley doesn't use new tech, and other manufacturers emulate the style of Harley because it sells.

OK, now THAT is a funny comment! I laughed out loud at that!

Harley doesn't use new tech? Every single bike Harley makes is fuel injected, even the crappy bottom-end Sportster 883. Harley started fuel injecting their cruisers in 1998. Suzuki, for example, did not fuel inject their first cruiser until 2004, and still puts carbs on 3 out of 8 cruiser models. All HDs use the most modern final drive system available(patented two years ago), a carbon-fiber, completely maintenance-free belt good for 150,000 miles. Suzuki cruisers use chains (which date to the 1800s) or shaft drives (which date to the 1930s). Those Japanese makes that do use a belt use the older, wider, not nearly as strong rubber and kelvar belts HD has already abandonded. All HDs use three disks. All HDs can be had with an electronic security system and keyless ignition, not available on any Suzuki. Harley offers several models with 6 speed transmissions, ABS brakes, GPS systems, CD players, XM radio, and electronic cruise control, all options not available from Suzuki on any model, and hard to find on any Japanese cruiser short of the GoldWing. The Sporster still uses the old Evo motor (1986), but even that old thing will soon to be updated with an electronically controlled active air intake system, similar to what is found on the Yamaha R1. The V-rod motor was designed in 2000, and makes a whopping 125HP from only 1250ccs. All the other Harley models use a motor designed in 2006. All meet all current and projected air quality laws without the use of catalitic converters, and al except the V-rod do it without water cooling (first found on bikes in the 1930s).
So what you said is completely inaccurate. In fact, the truth is nearly the exact opposite: Harley uses a LOT of new tech, and most other manufacturers DON'T copy Harley (other than styling) so that they can sell their bike at a price well below what Harley has to charge for their bikes. Harley does not sell a bike below $7000, so as long as other manufacturers are able to keep using old tech like drum brakes to keep costs down, they will be able to sell a lot of bikes beow that level.

I am surprised that HD isn't out of business.

Harley sells 4 times as many cruisers as Suzuki, Yamaha, Kawasaki, Honda, Triumph, Victory, and BMW COMBINED. They aren't going anywhere. And of the competitors, the one doing the best right now is Victory, who's bikes are arguably the most like HDs than the others on the list.

I have been looking at the Hyosung GV650

Not a bad beginner bike, but they suffer from poor quality control, poor quality components, and a shortage of spare parts on dealer shelves. So if you can get one cheap and don't plan to keep it long, it might be an OK bike to learn on. But don't plan on getting one for the long haul. They ones I have seen have not hled up well, and the first company that imported them to the US went bankrupt already, so warrantee work, support, and resale may be an issue down the road.

A Honda VLX 600 is a great entry level cruiser, or the V-Star 650 or Suzuki S50/ Intruder 800. All hold up well, and they re-sell easily whne you are ready to trade up to something bigger.

[Cactusjack]

Originally Posted by frostbitevinnie

C90: self adjusting hydraulic valves, shaft drive, dual front disks.

Ditto for the Nomad.

I think you'll find the lower-end or entry-level cruisers lack some of the refinements mentioned. How much are you willing to pay to not have to deal with valve adjustments or to have dual front disks?

[DaveAlvarado]

Originally Posted by DrBob

All the features you want are available, but not in the price range you are looking at (V-star 650 range).

Step one in designing a new bike is to determine the price it will sell at. Then the designers put in the features that they can without breaking this price point. So you are not going to see a lot of fancy, high-tech, expensive features on a low-end cruiser. Small cruisers are also light, so features like rear drum brakes and single from disks work just fine, so there is no need to add extra disk brakes and jack up the price to the point where no one would buy them. Would you be looking at a V-star 650 if it cost $10,000, even if it had 3 disks, a belt drive, self-adjusting valves, and lots of other features? Of course not. For $6000, you are not going to get the latest and greatest. If you want all the modern toys, be prepared to shell out 20-25K for a Harley or Goldwing.



OK, now THAT is a funny comment! I laughed out loud at that!

Harley doesn't use new tech? Every single bike Harley makes is fuel injected, even the crappy bottom-end Sportster 883. Harley started fuel injecting their cruisers in 1998. Suzuki, for example, did not fuel inject their first cruiser until 2004, and still puts carbs on 3 out of 8 cruiser models. All HDs use the most modern final drive system available(patented two years ago), a carbon-fiber, completely maintenance-free belt good for 150,000 miles. Suzuki cruisers use chains (which date to the 1800s) or shaft drives (which date to the 1930s). Those Japanese makes that do use a belt use the older, wider, not nearly as strong rubber and kelvar belts HD has already abandonded. All HDs use three disks. All HDs can be had with an electronic security system and keyless ignition, not available on any Suzuki. Harley offers several models with 6 speed transmissions, ABS brakes, GPS systems, CD players, XM radio, and electronic cruise control, all options not available from Suzuki on any model, and hard to find on any Japanese cruiser short of the GoldWing. The Sporster still uses the old Evo motor (1986), but even that old thing will soon to be updated with an electronically controlled active air intake system, similar to what is found on the Yamaha R1. The V-rod motor was designed in 2000, and makes a whopping 125HP from only 1250ccs. All the other Harley models use a motor designed in 2006. All meet all current and projected air quality laws without the use of catalitic converters, and al except the V-rod do it without water cooling (first found on bikes in the 1930s).
So what you said is completely inaccurate. In fact, the truth is nearly the exact opposite: Harley uses a LOT of new tech, and most other manufacturers DON'T copy Harley (other than styling) so that they can sell their bike at a price well below what Harley has to charge for their bikes. Harley does not sell a bike below $7000, so as long as other manufacturers are able to keep using old tech like drum brakes to keep costs down, they will be able to sell a lot of bikes beow that level.


Harley sells 4 times as many cruisers as Suzuki, Yamaha, Kawasaki, Honda, Triumph, Victory, and BMW COMBINED. They aren't going anywhere. And of the competitors, the one doing the best right now is Victory, who's bikes are arguably the most like HDs than the others on the list.



Not a bad beginner bike, but they suffer from poor quality control, poor quality components, and a shortage of spare parts on dealer shelves. So if you can get one cheap and don't plan to keep it long, it might be an OK bike to learn on. But don't plan on getting one for the long haul. They ones I have seen have not hled up well, and the first company that imported them to the US went bankrupt already, so warrantee work, support, and resale may be an issue down the road.

A Honda VLX 600 is a great entry level cruiser, or the V-Star 650 or Suzuki S50/ Intruder 800. All hold up well, and they re-sell easily whne you are ready to trade up to something bigger.

Heh, I think we found a Harley owner.

Did they get that timing issue fixed with their engines yet?

I'm fully aware of the tech that Harley puts into their bikes now. Of course, a lot of the tech you listed has only become standard on Harleys in the last few years, and there's still some tech that they refuse to do because of aesthetics, like water cooling. They know an open engine is a classic design that gets spoiled by a radiator and extra hoses, so they still don't include them on anything but the V-Rod. I'm not saying it's a bad choice, it works for them and they sell a boatload of bikes. But the only people who think that Harley is a pioneer of motorcycle technology is the H-D marketing department.

[DrBob]

How is water cooling high tech, or even desireable? It was developed in the 1930s for engines that did not get enough air flow. It adds complexity, maintenance, and more things to break, rust, and wear out. It also adds weight and cost, so designers generally only use it when they HAVE to. It is in no way, shape, or form a high tech feature, and in many applications it is a serious drawback.

Oh, I curently own two Harleys, two Suzukis, and one Chinese bike.

[Tucuma]

I'd heard a few comments pro and con about belt drive bikes (and there were belt drive bikes in the 19-teens), and then one day at Motorcycle Safety Class, they rolled out a Harley with a belt drive and fired it up, put it in gear, released the clutch and the belt exploded and shot across the shop like a snake run over by an 18-wheeler. 150 000 miles my foot. I can at least fix a chain, and a shaft drive is sealed away in its own little oil soaked world where it can't get hurt. Belts are a very poor third best bet, in my considered opinion.

[DrBob]

Now THAT is a funny story!








You might want to do a little checking about how that belt is installed, what covers it is behind, find out from Harley owners how long their carbon-fiber belts last, and how a belt really acts when it breaks before you tell that story again though.

[DaveMc]

Originally Posted by DrBob

How is water cooling high tech, or even desireable? It was developed in the 1930s for engines that did not get enough air flow. It adds complexity, maintenance, and more things to break, rust, and wear out. It also adds weight and cost, so designers generally only use it when they HAVE to. It is in no way, shape, or form a high tech feature, and in many applications it is a serious drawback.

Oh, I curently own two Harleys, two Suzukis, and one Chinese bike.

Water cooling conserves engine power and makes the engine last longer. Take two engines the same displacement; the water-cooled one will put out a little more power, because they do not like to run too hot (for motorcycle engines, the magic number is about 200 degrees). Better temperature management means that water-cooled engines are also a little more efficient (and there is talk that the EPA will mandate all bikes have water-cooled engines in the very near future). Also, the reason Harley engines have to be rebuilt far sooner than others is due in large part to the fact that Harley engines are air cooled, and the heat takes a toll on the engine components. This is true especially because the heat is not even over the engine (the rear cylinder usually gets hotter than the front one). With water cooling, the heat is more evenly managed over the engine surfaces.

I have a friend with a Harley who tells me that he is going to need his engine rebuilt at about 150K, but he expected my Suzuki water-cooled to go at least to 200K. A water-cooled engine will last longer. Also, when we come to a stop light on a hot day, he has to shut his off; on my C50T, the fan kicks in and everything is good.

[DrBob]

You can't mmake a blanket statement that water cooled motors make more power or last longer, because it simply isn't true. There are many, many factors that determine power output and longevity. And it's not like you could find motors that are identical other than the presence of water, oil, or air cooling, because you simply could not design a motor the same way with just that change. There are bikes with all three types of cooling that have reputations for lasting forever, and bikes with all three types that have reputations for being short lived. For example, both liquid cooled BMW and air-cooled BMW twins have reputations for longevity that approach god-like status, while the miriad of Chinese makes have reputations for being junk no matter if they are liquid or air cooled. Water-cooled Suzuki Intruder 800s have the reputation for lasting longer than air cooled Intruder 1400s, but the water cooled V-rod does not have the reputation for lasting nearly as long as the air-cooled Twin Cam 96. It all goes to show that there is no single factor, like type of cooling, that makes one design better than another.

The good news for your friend is that my local HOG chapter alone has at least 12 or 14 members with more than 150,000 on their original Twin Cam motors, and I personally know 2 with over 250,000. Your C50 should last a gool long time also, though I think 200,000 is a bit optomistic for a Suzuki 805cc, based on what owners here, Volusia riders, and Intruder Alert report for engine life. But if you take care of it, I would be very surprised if it did not reach at least 100k- 130K. I got 135K trouble-free miles out a Suzuki Intruder 800, which has a somewhat similar motor.

Oh, and the EPA is NOT going to mandate water cooling. And if you check, their webpage specifically states that all the do is dictate how much junk comes out the tailpipe, and unlike cars they do not care or even recommend what technologies the motorcycle manufacturer uses as long as their bikes pass. That rumor started a few years ago when the EPA said they were going to tighten emmissions standards for motorcycles for the first time since 1979. The ABATE folks stired up a bunch of hub-bub about it year before last, and how air cooled motors would go away and all bikes would have to have a catalitic converter, in an effort to get people to lobby to prevent the change in standards. But the new standards actually kicked in last year, with another increase in a couple years. The Harley Twin Cam 96; the Victory Freedom 100; the Indian Power Plus; and the S&S X-Wedge, Pandemonium, and Twin-cam; are all air cooled motors that were designed after the new standards were passed. And other air cooled offering from BMW, Suzuki, Honda, Kawasaki, and Yamaha all meet both the new and coming standards just fine, even though they were designed before the standards. So there is absolutely no truth that air cooled motors are going away.

Ride safe- time to go home.

[Alan_Hepburn]

Originally Posted by DaveMc

...This is true especially because the heat is not even over the engine (the rear cylinder usually gets hotter than the front one). With water cooling, the heat is more evenly managed over the engine surfaces.

I've heard from a few people that HD has the engine computer actually shut down the rear cylinder at idle to keep the temps down - I have no idea if that is true or just people thinking they know what they're talking about?

[DaveMc]

Dr. Bob -- sounds like you have all the answers already. Makes me wonder why you even asked a question in the first place.

[omegajim]

he asks these questions to see if anybody will bite.

I have seen belt failures, and usually they just flop off the pulley.

A chain on the other hand, usually gets bound into something.

Carbon fiber, you can use it for everything.

I expect to see in the not too distant future, carbon fiber rims, carbon fiber belt, carbon fiber frame, and some kind of fancy non ferrous engine block (magnesium alloy, I would think) feeding power through fancy high strength polymer gears.

just to prove that it can be done.

btw, Victory may have the "harley look" but as such as more options available should they feel the need to change their style or engine.

[Cactusjack]

Originally Posted by Alan_Hepburn

I've heard from a few people that HD has the engine computer actually shut down the rear cylinder at idle to keep the temps down - I have no idea if that is true or just people thinking they know what they're talking about?

Yes, they do. My buddy just bought an '08 Softail Heritage that does that. I can't remember what they call the process, though.