cafe'd brick
Posted: Wed May 09, 2012 12:19 pm
Page 1 of 3
Re: cafe'd brick
Posted: Wed May 09, 2012 1:20 pm
That 2nd one is really something!
Re: cafe'd brick
Posted: Wed May 09, 2012 2:24 pm
#2 is the wasserkopf,no?
Re: cafe'd brick
Posted: Wed May 09, 2012 8:19 pm
Criminy, 2 is wild.
I recognize tires, brakes....that's about it.
I recognize tires, brakes....that's about it.
"WasserBoxer" – not a caf'd brick
Posted: Wed May 09, 2012 9:05 pm
2nd bike is the 1992 BMW designed and built R1 prototype.
A 2-cylinder liquid-cooled opposed twin and not a "Flying-Brick" in any stretch of the imagination ...
Tech specs:
Performance: 135 -140 Hp (100 - 103 KW). max rpm 11.000
Engine: 4-stroke two-cyl, Four valves per cyl, liquid cooled, DOHC DESMODROMIC
Bore-stroke: 98 x 66 mm. 996 ccm.
Bosch Fuel injection; electronic ignition, 6 gear, cardan.
Dry weight 165 kg.
4 prototypes were made.
Only one of them is functional.
A 2-cylinder liquid-cooled opposed twin and not a "Flying-Brick" in any stretch of the imagination ...
Tech specs:
Performance: 135 -140 Hp (100 - 103 KW). max rpm 11.000
Engine: 4-stroke two-cyl, Four valves per cyl, liquid cooled, DOHC DESMODROMIC
Bore-stroke: 98 x 66 mm. 996 ccm.
Bosch Fuel injection; electronic ignition, 6 gear, cardan.
Dry weight 165 kg.
4 prototypes were made.
Only one of them is functional.
Re: cafe'd brick
Posted: Wed May 09, 2012 9:35 pm
I thought it looked familiar, Vanzen.
I realize it's a protype, but just don't see the point of a boxer configuration in a watercooled motor? Nostalgia or functional?
I realize it's a protype, but just don't see the point of a boxer configuration in a watercooled motor? Nostalgia or functional?
Re: cafe'd brick
Posted: Wed May 09, 2012 11:18 pm
Well, the design never made it to production, eh ?lrz wrote:I thought it looked familiar, Vanzen.
I realize it's a protype, but just don't see the point of a boxer configuration in a watercooled motor? Nostalgia or functional?
Yes, without the need of air to cool the cylinders & heads ...
there would be no good reason to have them hanging out like that
and a list of good reasons not to do so !
Re: cafe'd brick
Posted: Thu May 10, 2012 2:03 am
So, if water-cooling is a necessity to meet current performance and emissions levels, the boxer should just die - rather than meet those levels?
This sounds a lot like the Luddite arguments against the introduction of the Oilhead.
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.
This sounds a lot like the Luddite arguments against the introduction of the Oilhead.
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.
Re: cafe'd brick
Posted: Thu May 10, 2012 5:02 am
The next GS is going to be watercooled, the pictures i have seen are not very pretty as it has the bottom facing exhaust pipes of the R1
Re: cafe'd brick
Posted: Thu May 10, 2012 5:14 am
Thanks for that reminder vanzen - I'd forgotten all about that article. I have that magazine stuffed away around here somewhere.
Charles - I think GS' are supposed to be utilitarian and looks come second.
Besides, the Goldwing got by with down-facing exhausts all these decades, with pretty good sales numbers.
Charles - I think GS' are supposed to be utilitarian and looks come second.
Besides, the Goldwing got by with down-facing exhausts all these decades, with pretty good sales numbers.