Topic: Reign of the V-twins

[eigenvector]

When did the V-twins take over as the engine of choice?  I'm ignoring the baggers and cruiser bikes for now, since the CBx50 bikes aren't in that same category.  But at some point the inline 4's faded out and the V-Twins took over as the default engine configuration for street bikes.  Was it something that came from the track or one of those industry fads that caught on and took off?

For the record, I don't have a strong preference for one style of engine or another - except parallel twins which I can't stand.

[Retro Rocket]

When did the V-twins take over as the engine of choice?  I'm ignoring the baggers and cruiser bikes for now, since the CBx50 bikes aren't in that same category.  But at some point the inline 4's faded out and the V-Twins took over as the default engine configuration for street bikes.  Was it something that came from the track or one of those industry fads that caught on and took off?

For the record, I don't have a strong preference for one style of engine or another - except parallel twins which I can't stand.

Exact opposite in Australia, your market has always been V2 cruiser centric...

[eigenvector]

Well maybe, but the golden era of motorcycling was 1970's through the late 80s and those were definitely inline 4s, but at some point they stopped making them and switched the V-twins.  I'm just curious why and when that happened.

[Terry in Australia]

I don't know if V Twins are the current default engine configuration for most street bikes, inline 4's are still the big sellers from most manufacturers, but V twins became popular in early superbike racing, because Ducati dominated for two reasons; they were much narrower than their inline four cylinder opponents which gave them increased lean angles and faster cornering, and were allowed extra capacity to compete with inline fours BHP, so could run up to 1000cc bikes against 750's, which gave them a torque advantage that won races on tight circuits. 

Suzuki and Honda quickly built V twins to compete with Ducati, and after some initial teething issues, Suzuki turned their V twins into a successful franchise, with both road and "dual purpose" 1000cc and 650cc twins, which are very popular today. A friend of mine has a Honda VTR1000 and I rode it for the first time last weekend, and loved it. Apart from the riding position which I find a little cramped, it's a great bike, and now on my bucket list. Cheers, Terry.    

[Retro Rocket]

Well maybe, but the golden era of motorcycling was 1970's through the late 80s and those were definitely inline 4s, but at some point they stopped making them and switched the V-twins.  I'm just curious why and when that happened.

90% or more of the modern street superbikes {crotch rockets} are inline 4's, most of the next level, Like Kawasaki Z and ZX series, Honda's CB and CBF series, Suzuki's gsf / gsr series, Yamaha FZ series , BMWs1000R and plenty more are almost all inline 4's, some inline 3's are making a comeback but i think that there is still a majority of 4 cylinder motorcycles in production... Then you have the V4's...   I think because the US market is so different you guys just don't see a lot of the bikes we get here and in Europe..

[eigenvector]

Either that or I'm just looking in the wrong places.  After your post I decided to look up all the bikes available in V-twin or inline 4 (http://motorcycles.axlegeeks.com/d/t/Inline-.-4) - and I was amazed at just how many of the large displacement sport bikes were inline 4s.  I must just be monumentally ignorant about the newer sportbikes (no comment!).  Of course I'm 6'2", so I don't ride sportbikes - they just don't fit me.

As for Europe - I won't argue with you about the selection of bikes.  There have been quite a few offered abroad that you just can't find in the states.

[754]

One of the reasons, you can use torque more times in a day without tickets..than horsepower..
Around here, wind a sportbike to redline in second, and on a lot of streets they can take your bike away..

[calj737]

EV - perhaps it's just what you're seeing being ridden (V-twins) as a popular bike versus what are produced. America is Hog crazy (Harley) over a large displacement thumper. But as pointed out, inline and V4s far exceed the number of twins produced.

There are lots of folks who prefer twins (parallel or V) and still lots of manufacturers that limit their engineering to that platform. They're slim, can make great torque, and save on weight. BMW as you know, still offers opposed and parallel twins, but also inline 4 and 6 motors. The orientation of the inline 4 has changed some over time too to aide in weight distribution and center of mass for handling and servicing of the engine.

I don't know about anybody else, but I like them all (twins and fours) regardless of their alignment! As long as it powers 2 wheels, it's rideable in my book 

[eigenvector]

What started the whole discussion for me was some time killing at lunch yesterday.  I was poking around at the history of the Kawi Z1000 and sort of fell into the inline 4 thread.  I stumbled onto a forum discussion on V-twin vs. inline 4 and it took off from there.

I was a bit annoyed at the sheer number of people who just completely dissed the inline 4 ("they're anemic" "have no throttle feel" "too quiet", etc) and that there were hardly anyone who actually defended it.
There was one laughable argument that just blew me away "I have to be aware of what my RPMs are when I go into a corner on an inline 4 - it's too much work."  We're talking more than a dozen people agreeing with that sentiment.

That's when I made the (erroneous) assumption that maybe the inline-4s were just a thing of the past.  I'm happy to be wrong.

[754]

I could be wrong here but Honda 4. Was known for its flat torque curve..
But in the late 70,s things had changed.. The horsepower race was on..full steam..
Everyone went to dohc 4 design that made more hp but less torque...and it was that way for quite a while..
 Eventually. Manufacturers started to seek more torque, and now it is a bit better....
 So going from VTwin,  not having to worry about what gear you were. In, then getting on a four with the revs down, it could feel pretty sluggish coming out of a corner..
 You just have to ride it a bit differently.

[eigenvector]

If you're riding for speed or performance rather than just getting from point A to B, then any bike you have to know what you're doing.  Maybe that's why the squids all choose V-twins - but now we're veering into hating and I don't want to do that.  Cause I don't hate V-twins (really!).

[fmctm1sw]

What started the whole discussion for me was some time killing at lunch yesterday.  I was poking around at the history of the Kawi Z1000 and sort of fell into the inline 4 thread.  I stumbled onto a forum discussion on V-twin vs. inline 4 and it took off from there.

I was a bit annoyed at the sheer number of people who just completely dissed the inline 4 ("they're anemic" "have no throttle feel" "too quiet", etc) and that there were hardly anyone who actually defended it.
There was one laughable argument that just blew me away "I have to be aware of what my RPMs are when I go into a corner on an inline 4 - it's too much work."  We're talking more than a dozen people agreeing with that sentiment.

That's when I made the (erroneous) assumption that maybe the inline-4s were just a thing of the past.  I'm happy to be wrong.

Sounds like that forum's version of an oil thread...

[Killer Canary]

and were allowed extra capacity to compete with inline fours BHP, so could run up to 1000cc bikes against 750's, which gave the

I've known this for a long time but what makes this engine layout so hot if it needs a displacement advantage to be competitive?
Please make me understand!

[Killer Canary]

One of the reasons, you can use torque more times in a day without tickets..than horsepower..

Standard Harley Response no.17 duly noted Frank.
Everyone here understands that BIG inline fours have h.p. and torque.

[Killer Canary]

No offense intended.

[754]

All bikes have some torque..but some have way more than others... Which can mean less shifting, better rollon power.. Things like that..

[JWExperience]

I used to own a hayabusa 1300 and it made more torque than any Harley. Had 100 ft lbs at 9000 rpms if I remember correctly and produced 80ft lbs at 3000 rpms. Talk about a nice flat torque curve! Imo, these torque comments from the Harley guys are more mythical than anything. It only applies to the 600cc sport bikes that you really have to wind up, but even then I would be willing to bet that on paper the 600s are close in torque to a lot of big twins.
Twins give that sensation of torque because you don't have to be as mindful of what gear your in. I was surprised when I actually looked up the torque specs on Harley's a few years ago, not impressed when you consider their displacement.
I'll take a smooth, not annoying, more efficient and better handling I4 any day over a twin.

[754]

I think you mean than any stock Harley... There is many rolling around here that are way above that and as high as 170 ft lbs.. So just imagine if the Busa had say 140.. Bet you would notice that..
 Its not a myth on the dynos around here.. Besides that the torque to hp ratio is higher than yours, so I can see it being described as torque.

[Retro Rocket]

I think you mean than any stock Harley... There is many rolling around here that are way above that and as high as 170 ft lbs.. So just imagine if the Busa had say 140.. Bet you would notice that..
 Its not a myth on the dynos around here.. Besides that the torque to hp ratio is higher than yours, so I can see it being described as torque.

Lets keep it to stock Frank, any one can build a torque monster. You should have ridden a few of the late 70's/ 80's 1100's and 1000's mate, they had more torque than Harley knew how to make in any stock bike, {and they start, stop and go round corners, concepts still foreign to HD at the time}why do you think the GS1100's are so popular in drag racing mate..?  Idiots will always get tickets , no matter what you ride, saying a HD is more useful round town is laughable , big awkward, heavy, compared to light maneuverable and responsive, I know what i'd take...

[Killer Canary]

I'm one of those idiots, Retro.

[Retro Rocket]

I'm one of those idiots, Retro.

Been there, done that....

[SOHC4 Cafe Racer Fan]

I have ridden Honda inline 4s and V-twin (RC51 and cruisers), and a V4 (VFR).  Lately, I've been impressed with Yamaha's triple 850.  Lots of power and torque in a slim and lightweight package.

[Retro Rocket]

  Lately, I've been impressed with Yamaha's triple 850.  Lots of power and torque in a slim and lightweight package.

Best of bot worlds Don, they sound great as well...

[754]

I never said a Harley is more useful around town..you did..
 I said torque can be used more times in a day than horsepower. And get less tickets.... In other works torque is useful.. My buddies M109 and some late Wings come to mind as well as HD..

 If you really think the fours make monster torque, try racing them with a single speed trans in the 1/4 mile.. Plenty of 8 second single gear twins out there....soo tell me why that would be..

 Look at the torque to hp ratio..
The Busa rider said he has 100 foot lbs... To what....140 or + hp..
And a 836 sohc. Can make around 65 ft lbs..(I am guessing ). To say 75 hp..

So of the last two example which is the torquier motor..?

Which is why I like my 836 with webers and a 315 cam..very torquey, which is why it pulse good in a rollon..

[Retro Rocket]

I never said a Harley is more useful around town..you did..
 I said torque can be used more times in a day than horsepower. And get less tickets.... In other works torque is useful.. My buddies M109 and some late Wings come to mind as well as HD..

 If you really think the fours make monster torque, try racing them with a single speed trans in the 1/4 mile.. Plenty of 8 second single gear twins out there....soo tell me why that would be..

 Look at the torque to hp ratio..
The Busa rider said he has 100 foot lbs... To what....140 or + hp..
And a 836 sohc. Can make around 65 ft lbs..(I am guessing ). To say 75 hp..

So of the last two example which is the torquier motor..?

Which is why I like my 836 with webers and a 315 cam..very torquey, which is why it pulse good in a rollon..

I don't want to argue Frank but you said "streets", streets are around town, roads are out of town....   Once again, you are talking modified bikes while we are talking stock, your comparisons fail when talking stock. Busa has around 200 hp stock...