Posted by JayC on August 29, 2008, 2:05 pm
http://www.motorcycledaily.com/28august08_kmcpatentdesigns.htm
JayC
Posted by XR650L_Dave on August 29, 2008, 2:12 pm
> http://www.motorcycledaily.com/28august08_kmcpatentdesigns.htm
> JayC
Prior art, schmier schmart.
Dave
Posted by Rowdy on September 1, 2008, 7:53 am
JayC wrote:
> http://www.motorcycledaily.com/28august08_kmcpatentdesigns.htm
http://www.motorcycledaily.com/06august08_2009husaberg450enduro.htm
"Husaberg has attempted to place crank inertia precisely at the
center of the rolling axis of the new bike."
Plain, hot, PR air, in both cases:
I don't know how these cracks ride but my bike's axis for rolling
maneuvers is the connecting line between front and rear tires'
ground contact. The change of angle "felt" by the gyroscopic crank
when banking the bike is identical, no matter how high or low the
crank is. The path of the heavy crank high up, however, is greater;
thus tossing the bike from left turn bank angle to right turn bank
angle will be harder than with the GC down low (near the axis of bank)
Yaw axis is not existent, except for front and rear wheel sliding
into different ruts and the third, the "nod-axis" is parallel with
my crank hence irrelevant for gyroscopic inertia considerations.
clearly, someone is worng here
right?
Rowdy
Posted by Michael Baldwin on September 1, 2008, 9:30 am
Rowdy says;
>Plain, hot, PR air, in both cases:
And for the most part I agree. Every good racer hides a trick behind,
under, inside, outside or over the _real_ trick. This seemingly "new"
engine configuration is simply lowering the CG _period_.
BMW's 450X is accomplishing the same objective with a much more
radical approach IMO. They've opted for the forementioned under/inside
approach.
In the end, it's still just about turning money into noise or aka
racing. And all races end in results which are publicly displayed.
So until Dirt Rider Magazine (the modern day marketing Bible for the
Church of the Uninformed) tells me otherwise, I'll keep my money on Team
Newton.
Best Regards - Mike Baldwin
Posted by XR650L_Dave on September 1, 2008, 12:40 pm
> JayC wrote:
> >http://www.motorcycledaily.com/28august08_kmcpatentdesigns.htm
> http://www.motorcycledaily.com/06august08_2009husaberg450enduro.htm
> "Husaberg has attempted to place crank inertia precisely at the
> center of the rolling axis of the new bike."
> Plain, hot, PR air, in both cases:
> I don't know how these cracks ride but my bike's axis for rolling
> maneuvers is the connecting line between front and rear tires'
> ground contact. The change of angle "felt" by the gyroscopic crank
> when banking the bike is identical, no matter how high or low the
> crank is. The path of the heavy crank high up, however, is greater;
> thus tossing the bike from left turn bank angle to right turn bank
> angle will be harder than with the GC down low (near the axis of bank)
> Yaw axis is not existent, except for front and rear wheel sliding
> into different ruts and the third, the "nod-axis" is parallel with
> my crank hence irrelevant for gyroscopic inertia considerations.
> clearly, someone is worng here
> right?
> Rowdy
Dirt bike dynamics may be a bit different, but the ELF roadracing team
learned the hard way the bike pivots around its center-of-mass when
entering a turn. When you turn left, the top of the bike goes left,
the contact patch (and the lower part of the bike) goes to the right.
Countersteering, in fact, gets the bottom of the bike going right,
which of course means the top goes left.
They (elf) thought they were going to have an uber-sweet turn-entering
bike by putting the fuel tank in the under-engine fairing just above
the ground.
The turn-in characteristics of the bike were destroyed, it turned-in
very slowly.
Dave
> JayC