Total Motorcycle Community Forums

Ok... grampi... one more post... I am not sure what V-max you have but here are the numbers for a 2003: 11.30 @ 119.84 for the quater mile... The buell...11.38 @ 117.6 ... so you consider .08 seconds faster in the 1/4 mile being eaten for lunch?

Someone's looking a little defensive...

hahaha, you bet I am... very defensive... but for good reason I don't want people reading that nonsense and actually believing it! He hit a nerve

Sevulturus wrote:Someone's looking a little defensive...

earwig wrote:Ok... grampi... one more post... I am not sure what V-max you have but here are the numbers for a 2003: 11.30 @ 119.84 for the quater mile... The buell...11.38 @ 117.6 ... so you consider .08 seconds faster in the 1/4 mile being eaten for lunch?

Nice job digging up the slowest 1/4 mile time ever posted for a V-Max. Everyone knows a Max will easily run 10's all day long. And I highly doubt a Buell will outhandle a hawk. It may have something to do with the big, cast iron engine bolted to the Buell's frame.
_________________
Smoking Cessation Forum

I got the numbers from Motorcyclist Magazine... and they were actually a little better than a few others that I found on the vmax! How do you figure they are the slowest 1/4 mile times anyway? Why are the numbers for your bike from the same source "slow"... but the the numbers for the Buell correct? Who is this "everyone" that knows that the v-max will run 10s all day? The way the Buell frame is built and the engine is mounted actually keeps the Buell very stable... the frame doesn't twist or flex like the Hawk's probably does.... Wow... when you are hit with facts you get very testy It's cool if you want to ride a big heavy bike with fake air scoops that can't handle very well or outperform or out accelerate a nimble Buell.

grampi wrote:Nice job digging up the slowest 1/4 mile time ever posted for a V-Max. Everyone knows a Max will easily run 10's all day long. And I highly doubt a Buell will outhandle a hawk. It may have something to do with the big, cast iron engine bolted to the Buell's frame.

Grampi, since you asked specifically about a particular bike... the Hawk is a very impressive machine. No, I've not ridden one, but I was ogling one in the parkin lot yesterday. There is a superhawk forum online somewhere, I saw it yesterday. Made by Honda (can't go wrong there), great numbers, and from the looks of it I'd say it would be a comfy bike to ride (although some bar risers might help for longer rides, dunno for sure). I just love the looks, period. The only negative thing I have heard, and it's a fairly consistent gripe, is that it's a very thirsty bike, like in the 30-33 mpg range. That superhawk forum had a poll about mileage and I'd say 33 or 34 was about average.

Try this, but know they owner's (as with any bike, as we have seen) are probably going to be a bit biased. http://www.superhawkforum.com/


Hope this helps get your thread back on track and off of a buell advertisement/debate.

Having ridden both the VTR (going on ten seasons) and an XB-9 Firebolt I will say that the Buell handles very well. On the XB-9 the suspension with the stock settings needed a lot of work and the bike became very unsettled when hitting bumps mid-corner. I believe I could have tuned most of that out given enough time and it was a very well balanced bike especially at lower speeds.
The main issues that I had were the narrow powerband (yes you read that right), the tractor-like clutch and gearbox. They neeed to take a lesson from Ducati on how to take an older design aircooled twin and make it shift and clutch like a modern Japanese bike. Other than that, they have come a long way...

earwig wrote:I got the numbers from Motorcyclist Magazine... and they were actually a little better than a few others that I found on the vmax! How do you figure they are the slowest 1/4 mile times anyway? Why are the numbers for your bike from the same source "slow"... but the the numbers for the Buell correct? Who is this "everyone" that knows that the v-max will run 10s all day? The way the Buell frame is built and the engine is mounted actually keeps the Buell very stable... the frame doesn't twist or flex like the Hawk's probably does.... Wow... when you are hit with facts you get very testy It's cool if you want to ride a big heavy bike with fake air scoops that can't handle very well or outperform or out accelerate a nimble Buell.

grampi wrote:Nice job digging up the slowest 1/4 mile time ever posted for a V-Max. Everyone knows a Max will easily run 10's all day long. And I highly doubt a Buell will outhandle a hawk. It may have something to do with the big, cast iron engine bolted to the Buell's frame.

As usual, Harley people feel they have to justify to everyone else the purchase of their overpriced ride. While I'm not currently in the market for a V-Max, I am for a Superhawk, so I'll leave the Max out of the discussion for now. To ease the tension of the argument, I'll give you the benefit of the doubt in saying the Buell will handle at least as well and is as fast as a Superhawk. I can pick up a very nice used SH for around $4K. I would have to spend 4-5 times that much to get a Buell. If I'm not happy with the performance of the hawk, I could spend $2K-$3K in mods which would make it a far better performer than the Buell. Knowing this, why in the hell should I even consider a Buell?
_________________
Attention Deficit Disorder (ADD) Forum

V4underme wrote:Grampi, since you asked specifically about a particular bike... the Hawk is a very impressive machine. No, I've not ridden one, but I was ogling one in the parkin lot yesterday. There is a superhawk forum online somewhere, I saw it yesterday. Made by Honda (can't go wrong there), great numbers, and from the looks of it I'd say it would be a comfy bike to ride (although some bar risers might help for longer rides, dunno for sure). I just love the looks, period. The only negative thing I have heard, and it's a fairly consistent gripe, is that it's a very thirsty bike, like in the 30-33 mpg range. That superhawk forum had a poll about mileage and I'd say 33 or 34 was about average.

Try this, but know they owner's (as with any bike, as we have seen) are probably going to be a bit biased. http://www.superhawkforum.com/


Hope this helps get your thread back on track and off of a buell advertisement/debate.

I have been posting in that site for some time now. I'm getting closer to finding a hawk to test ride as there is a Honda mechanic in the Dayton, OH area who has one and I'll be getting in touch with him. Hopefully it'll result in a test ride.
_________________
Powerlet

Actually... I have just been busting your chops... since you said the Buell would get "eaten for lunch"... That is why I was doing the "justifying". You can also find used Buells for cheap. I bought mine as a leftover and saved over 2000. You wouldn't be spending 4-5 times as much... the 06 XB12 costs 10,500... not 16,000-20,000 (which would it would be if you were correct with your "4x5 times more"). I bought the Buell for all of the other reasons I stated earlier that you ignored... and because it is different/unique and fun. Ride whatever you want, I never "put down" your choice I just made a suggestion, you are the one that started saying Buells are over priced, underperforming machines that would get "eaten for lunch". One more thing... Harley purchased Buell, they are still a separate company, there aren't knuckle dragging Harley guys (hehehe) designing these bikes.

grampi wrote: As usual, Harley people feel they have to justify to everyone else the purchase of their overpriced ride. While I'm not currently in the market for a V-Max, I am for a Superhawk, so I'll leave the Max out of the discussion for now. To ease the tension of the argument, I'll give you the benefit of the doubt in saying the Buell will handle at least as well and is as fast as a Superhawk. I can pick up a very nice used SH for around $4K. I would have to spend 4-5 times that much to get a Buell. If I'm not happy with the performance of the hawk, I could spend $2K-$3K in mods which would make it a far better performer than the Buell. Knowing this, why in the hell should I even consider a Buell?