mgold wrote:I was wondering what people's experiences here are with Side-by-Side Engines vs. V-Twins? I've heard Side-by-Side mounted engines and single piston engines tend to be more reliable than V-Twins. Is this true? Are Side-by-Side Engines more Reliable than V-Twins?
You left out the "flat/opposed twins" ie boxer engines: BMW airheads, oilheads, hexheads, and Ural motorcycles.
P
For that matter, you could also include transverse V-Twins such as the Honda CX series and the Moto-Guzzi. Then there are the various L-twins out there.
mgold wrote:I was wondering what people's experiences here are with Side-by-Side Engines vs. V-Twins? I've heard Side-by-Side mounted engines and single piston engines tend to be more reliable than V-Twins. Is this true? Are Side-by-Side Engines more Reliable than V-Twins?
You left out the "flat/opposed twins" ie boxer engines: BMW airheads, oilheads, hexheads, and Ural motorcycles.
P
For that matter, you could also include transverse V-Twins such as the Honda CX series and the Moto-Guzzi. Then there are the various L-twins out there.
CXs & Guzzis are longitudinally mounted V-twins. Transversally mounted V-Twins are Harley and Ducatis. The V faces the front in longitudinal engines ala CXs and old american V8s.
HYPERR wrote:In case you misunderstood me, this isn't a knock on Harley.
I didn't think it was. King Robb, however, seems to be looking to make an issue out of it.
I'm just curious as to what you think the "inherent flaws" are and why. As for the 45 degree angle of the cylinders, it actually has nothing to do with function following form. If you trace the history of motorcycle engines back to the early 1900's, you'll find that narrow angled v-twins were a very popular motor for racing applications because they allowed a small but relatively powerful unit to be installed in a small frame. The drawback to the design is that it requires heavy flywheels to dampen the vibration from unequal firing pulses (modern fixes include the counterbalancer and rubber mount systems), thus restricting the RPM's. But the advantage is that it allows for lots of torque in the low to mid range - which is right where you want it when riding two up on a loaded, heavy motorcycle. It is not, however, the best design for a sport bike... but then we get into the whole apple vs oranges thing.
It certainly has everything to do with form over function.
The 45 degree angle has limitations and no torque advantage over a 60 degree angle or a 90 degree angle. The angle of the V makes no difference in where they want the peak torque to occur. Harley chooses to continue with the 45 degree angle for 2 reasons. 1. They feel it is the most aesthetically appealing visually. 2. With the unique crankpin design, it produces that unique HD sound and feel.
High_Side wrote:Why not have the best of both worlds with side by side V-Twins?
I miss my '98 VFR.
Put the '98-'01 VFR engine and suspension(leave out the quirky linked brakes) into the '97 body, and you would have the perfect VFR. Make mine red please.
