vanzen@rockerboxer.com wrote:Major Softie wrote:So, if water-cooling is a necessity to meet current performance and emissions levels, the boxer should just die - rather than meet those levels?
Water-cooling is not necessary – and the boxer lives to this day.
Pardon me. My point was the current planning they are doing for future models. To be clearer, I should have said: "if water-cooling is a necessity to met performance and emissions levels in the future."
vanzen@rockerboxer.com wrote:Major Softie wrote:This sounds a lot like the Luddite arguments against the introduction of the Oilhead.
As you would want to think ...
I have no idea what this means.
vanzen@rockerboxer.com wrote:Major Softie wrote:The boxer still has weight distribution advantages, as well as advantages in providing room for fuel and airbox issues. Then there's the inherent vibration cancelling qualities. The boxer has ALWAYS offered certain compromises and certain advantages. So does every design.
"So does every design." Very good point, Major.
... And in considering all of those advantages and disadvantages,
even BMW has attempted to shelve and / or side-step
the (no longer technologically relevant) boxer design & shaft drive.
And the compromises of those (early K) designs were judged less favorably by the buying public - all the buying public. BMW has succeeded more recently in creating new designs which have filled out their lineup substantially. However, they have still not succeeded in coming up with replacements for the GS or the RT Boxers. The new 1600 is a wonderful heavy tourer (light-years better than their earlier attempts), and the 800's are fine mid-weight adventure bikes, but they still haven't come up with a better light tourer or heavy adventure bike than the boxer models. They may yet, but they haven't, and they may replace them with more modern (WC) Boxers. If they design an engine that fulfills those requirements better than an improved Boxer, that will be fine too.
While I may not entirely agree, I understand the point you are attempting to make regarding the boxer engine. I do not, however, understand your comments about a shaft being "no longer technologically relevant." How many other companies followed BMW's lead and built shaft-drive large touring machines? How many of those companies have left the shaft behind on those models?