I am trying to decide what bike to get i really wanted the 1199 Ducati Panigale but when i started researching about it i read that it has all the performance but none of comfort. which makes the commuting suck. So basically i want the performance of the Panigale or at least close to that but with more comfort included.
Answer by Tight Squeeze
Doesn’t exist. Either you want a comfy seat, heated grips, thumb windscreen control, backrest, etc… or you want to corner on rails.
Maybe the BMW 1000 is the right answer for you.
Ducati and KTM both makes a 1,200cc V-Twin Super Bike but why no one is making one in parallel twin engine layout. I mean they’re simple to work on and cheap to manufacture. The fastest twin cylinder sports bike thats not a V-Twin is the BMW HP2 Sport which uses an 1170cc air/oil cooled Boxer Twin engine (not precisely a parallel twin but pretty close) also used in BMW R1200GS, R1200RT and R1200R and it makes around only 120BHP at the rear wheel. I’m not saying 120BHP is slow but its far from impressive by today’s standards as 1199cc Ducati Panigale makes claimed 200BHP at the crank, about 165BHP at the rear wheel. So what do you think the reason might be? Sure parallel twins sounds boring but thats not a good enough reason, right?
Answer by curmudgeon55
By parrellel twin you mean the classic both piston up and down side by side cylinders like the old BSA and Truimphs? and by super bike you mean a over 1 liter/1000cc engine? 125+ hp or so? Not a likely marketing or engineering project for various reasons- and I’ll concentrate on the engineering factors first: The older classic biggest road engine was the norton 850 with close to 100hp with fuels, topped 130mph on tracks. This critter at 80/90 hp had street use but watch for the overheating heads and the engine shake. BSA and Truimphs had some 750/800cc big bores on road- and again some shaking, heating problems, starting problems. BSA crank with a 90 degree pin offset was smoother running and with bore kit 750cc did some desert racing in that class size and won- this in 1970s. Something like the Laverda twin with a 3 inch stroke, 4 inch bore, 4 valve heads and a center bearing crank with90 degree offset would be able to do maybe 8000 rpm before valve clash and piston skirt failure from metal fatigue- this would give you a 1250 or so engine about as wide as the old Kaw 900 4 cylinders. A ‘parallel’ twin without the center bearing, no 90 degree offset crankpins will have crank flex problems likely- the 750 Tiger Triumphs got a new crankshaft because the old crank flexed a bit and sometimes broke- and without a counter balancer would shake some. Take the curent Suzuki GS500 engine- 2 cylinders but the crankshaft has the 90 degree offset pins for less shake. now take that design and increase stroke and bore, enlarge crankcase, beef up tranny and electric starter- ou’ll be loosing 1000 rpm at least for red line and have a heat problem as aircooled. So go to Kaw liquid cooled engine in 500 Ninja pattern- add a bit more weight. The next to each other cylinders will have a heating problem that would have to be addressed for higher power. your Vtwin examples Duc and KTM and the BMW flat twins seperate the cylinders to handlle the heat transfer between cylinders and have a balance factor without counter balance shafts. A 1 liter street twin of about 80 to 100 hp air cooled might be possible- the new Triumphs and old Nortons are about 3/4 that size and power so getting close– but they are also about to limit of twin heat handling capabilities without redesign. The old production superbike twin racers were fairly fast– but the 2 cylinder only rule was a favor to Harley and the older English makers, meant a spectical on tack for paying viewers but was not the engineers peferred way to get power- remember BSA and Triumph Triples were the old twin designers next steps. Now for a market possible- a road law that taxes by number of cylinders without regard to engine size and has moderaet 2 cylinder cost but a BIG jump for triples, 4s. This would get a market about like the old twin race class- and English road tax and insurance laws can be used as possible example of influence on engine designs. Remember the old engine tax based on bore and number of cylinders but not stroke? The BMC 89mm stroke with smaller bore was not best performance design- the VW 64 stroke/77mm bore gave more valve area, safe rpm potential– but the VW Beetle had twice the tax due per year and that with the insurance was a sales factor. The 948 engine had tax of 7hp? same as 750 Renaults, Fiats and it had torque advantage so good street performance if any 25/30hp car could be called a performer. See if you can make a decent,high power twin of old design and sell it – think of what I said about the offset crankpin, bore/ stroke ratios, piston skirt limiting speeds, valve designs from the current 500 design expanded– and then the cost of making it and sales potential.
Answer by Dan H
There is a LOT of difference between a parallel twin and a boxer and most of it has to do with balance.
A boxer motor has the pistons at 180 degrees to each other. As the pistons move and, more importantly, come to an abrupt stop before going the other way, they create a lot of force and vibration. Twin cylinder pistons have twice the weight and mass of the same assembly, same displacement, in a four cylinder engine and they create quite a lot of vibration. When you put the two pistons opposite each other, one side tends to cancel out the forces of the other side. Same thing, different degrees, on 90 degree twins.
Parallel twins, on the other hand have two pistons moving in the same directions from the crank. They often are timed to move up and down at the same time. That’s a LOT of force moving in one direction. Even if the move in opposite directions, they are both on the same side of the crank and different force vibrations start to wander in. Because of the large pistons and long strokes necessary for large displacements, they have to run at lower RPM’s, so they tend to create a lot of torque, but less HP. HP is necessary for fast bikes.
Answer by Vitaly
Too much high center of gravity, around a corner its going to lose out. Simple comparison of the best v-twins and inlines; ktm rc8r vtwin is extremely agile but with the right skill the s1000rr is faster, just for the simple fact of weight distribution. Btw, the rc8r is only 175 bhp and is used in wbsk and ama sbk, where the panigale is in neither.