Motus custom Bike Exif

[42Below]

http://www.bikeexif.com/custom-motus-mst-r-fuller-moto

I hadnt heard of the brand. From what I see online most of them need to fall over but this one is nice.
But pushrods? Really!

 

[Fire-medic]

Motus is a boutique brand. You can buy something less-expensive that does the same thing, but if you can afford the price of entry, you are part of a small group of enthusiasts with similar taste. Think of it like buying a Ferrari or a Mclaren. You aren't gonna see yourself across the intersection at a bike rally.

As to pushrods, Roger Penske won the Indy 500 with a pushrod engine, there's nothing the matter with a well-designed pushrod engine.

http://www.racer.com/indycar/item/1...that-shocked-the-racing-world-at-the-indy-500

https://www.motorsport.com/indycar/news/1994-indianapolis-500-an-all-in-gamble-pays-off/

________________________________________________

http://www.bikeexif.com/custom-motus-mst-r-fuller-moto

I hadnt heard of the brand. From what I see online most of them need to fall over but this one is nice.
But pushrods? Really![/QUOTE]

 

[42Below]

Ferrari or McLaren? Come on, not even close.
A pink and purple striped Prius is rare to but is not a McLaren.
We are rather proud of our boy Bruce and his legacy.

I dont see too many super cars with pushrods. They work but are primitive tech. Someone wins at any given drag strip with them every weekend, doesnt mean they are good. They are a mechanical compromise which is why I dont like them.
I dont mind them in a period vehicle but for what a Motus goes for I expect better. My Buell Cyclone had primitive tech but I didnt expect any better. It was fun when it was going.....

 

[Itgoes]

It sounds beautiful on the dyno with those race pipes!

Not real impressed with the power numbers though....I thought it would do better than that.

 

[42Below]

I see that Ilmor engine won with much more displacement (209ci vs 161, thats 500cc difference) and boost (27 vs 22psi) allowed under the rules too. Thats no level playing field.

 

[Fire-medic]

Actually 209-161=48 cu.in.=800 ml or cc.

Roger Penske looked at the rules, realized that with proper execution, that a competitive pushrod engine had a chance. You undoubtedly read that the development was lagging on longevity for a 500 mile race, right-up to the race date.

Pushrod engines have been allowed under the rules at Indy for decades, and because they are expected to be at a power disadvantage, they have been allowed more displacement and higher boost. There was a guy from the midwest who ran a Chevy V8 he removed from a school bus and refurbished, qualified, and ran at Indy. Not much hope of a win, but for a shoestring budget, he had the opportunity to run alongside people he knew had a chance to win, where he didn't, but he beat-out many others to legitimately claim a spot in the grid of competitors. Americans love to root for the underdogs. Unproven technology in race situations makes any new idea an automatic underdog, and we love to support the effort.

Do we put a * next-to Muhammed Ali's boxing record when he loosened the ring ropes, allowing him to use the 'rope-a-dope' defensive technique against George Foreman? He studied the competitor's combative style, and let him tire himself-out while leaning backwards against the slackened ropes, fending-off Foreman's punches with his forearms, until he could pick-apart Foreman later in the fight. Brilliant defensive and offensive strategy, and within the rules.

FYI, I saw 'Black Jack' Brabham and Bruce Mclaren racing F1 in the 1960's, using a London Fire Brigade portable fire pump engine (!) in their light mid-engined chassis designs (Cooper-Coventry-Climax). Was there grumbling about not using a 'proper' car engine? Probably, but the prescient competitors like Sir Jack Brabham and Colin Chapman saw that using lightweight chassis/engine combinations, where the engine was a stressed member of the chassis, allowed for much-less weight and that resulted in several advantages: a better power-to-weight ratio, better, more-nimble handling, less wear & tear on the car's driveline and suspension, less-fatiguing for a driver to control, meaning faster reflexes to take advantage of openings in traffic, or to avoid cars out-of-control; less fuel consumption, a real advantage at Indy because if you can eliminate a fuel stop, you gain a significant advantage over the competition; tires last longer again possibly eliminating a pit stop for tires, or shortening a pit stop for gas. You get the idea.

Brabham had first run a Cooper mid-engined car at the Indy 500 in the very early 1960's, and while there was a lot of derision from the traditional Meyer-Drake Offenhauser competitors, in their front-engine roadsters, within a few years, all the competitors ran mid-engine chassis designs.

As to a 'level playing field,' that's exactly why the allowances were given, specifically to create just-that. If someone has the engineering expertise to spend in development to accomplish a breakthrough, and it's under the rules, it is eminently fair, under the rules, isn't it?

Talking about Indy 500 competitors, what about the STP turbine cars? Andy Granitelli took a chance on the prospect of developing a new form of power trnasmission for the race, and it eventually gave him a win. Mario Andretti, early in his career drove for Granitelli, and Mario could arguably be considered the greatest race driver of all-time, given his successes in different forms of motorsports competition, not bad for an Italian immigrant to the USA as a kid. Do you penalize a team because they have the best talent, by making them run an intake restriction, or something? Hire the best, give them a tested, developed piece of equipment, the best trackside support, and turn them loose.

The Novi cars had a significant Indy roadster advantage in power for many years, but no Novi ever won the 500. Power alone is no guarantee of success. Remember the first time the STP turbines ran, they both had a < $5 bearing fail at the end of the race, costing them the win.

A Motus is exactly like a Ferrari or a Mclaren, it's an essentially hand-built piece of transportation, expensive to manufacture, typically over-designed, using bespoke engineering, materials, and design to create something most people cannot afford to own or to operate. Did you know the price of a 1990's Mclaren
F1 road car windshield wiper? Fifteen hundred dollars USA! Ask Jay Leno. Supposedly when he was informed about the cost, he said, "well, I guess I just won't drive it in the rain!" Like the MV Agusta's, the Bimotas, a Ducati Panigale R, and other $$$$ bikes, the Motus is in a class of higher-cost bikes that have an entry point likely to prevent most of us from considering buying them. Snobbery, exclusivity, cutting-edge engineering, cost of purchase, vehicles like this sell themselves because most people cannot justify the cost of admission. That alone makes them in a different class. Even if you could afford $45,000 USA would you? I wouldn't. Could I? Yes, if I wanted to, but I have other priorities of greater precedance. One would be staying within the bonds of matrimony. :biglaugh:

I see that you are considering the Italian and British sports cars as different from the intent of the sport-touring Motus, but they both 9the cars and the bike) are for use on public roads, have some functional capacity to be used daily, if you're willing to chance the crummy cellphone-using, texting inattentive drivers, poor parking attempts and other daily hazards we all encounter.

I have a pic of a Motus I saw at Daytona Bike Week in the Speedway parking lot, and it had a constant stream of bikers stopping to examine it, proof to me of its exclusivity, even if it's not for the same purpose as an AUDI R8 V-10 mid-engine coupe, a Lamborghini Gallardo cabriolet, or a laFerrari.

I see that Ilmor engine won with much more displacement (209ci vs 161, thats 500cc difference) and boost (27 vs 22psi) allowed under the rules too. Thats no level playing field.

 

[Fire-medic]

My fire/rescue friend's Lamborghini Gallardo.

Oops, dunno about the Southern hemisphere view!

Fixed.

 

[Traumahawk]

Do we put a * next-to Muhammed Ali's boxing record when he loosened the ring ropes, allowing him to use the 'rope-a-dope' defensive technique against George Foreman? He studied the competitor's combative style, and let him tire himself-out while leaning backwards against the slackened ropes, fending-off Foreman's punches with his forearms, until he could pick-apart Foreman later in the fight. Brilliant defensive and offensive strategy, and within the rules.

Here is a pic of a man that played "within" the rules. I always did like reading up on his history. unk:

 

[Donny Daughtry]

My fire/rescue friend's Lamborghini Gallardo.

Oops, dunno about the Southern hemisphere view!

Fixed.

Nice car- i would have paid for the covered parking myself.:ummm:

 

[Donny Daughtry]

Actually 209-161=48 cu.in.=800 ml or cc.

Roger Penske looked at the rules, realized that with proper execution, that a competitive pushrod engine had a chance. You undoubtedly read that the development was lagging on longevity for a 500 mile race, right-up to the race date.

Pushrod engines have been allowed under the rules at Indy for decades, and because they are expected to be at a power disadvantage, they have been allowed more displacement and higher boost. There was a guy from the midwest who ran a Chevy V8 he removed from a school bus and refurbished, qualified, and ran at Indy. Not much hope of a win, but for a shoestring budget, he had the opportunity to run alongside people he knew had a chance to win, where he didn't, but he beat-out many others to legitimately claim a spot in the grid of competitors. Americans love to root for the underdogs. Unproven technology in race situations makes any new idea an automatic underdog, and we love to support the effort.

Do we put a * next-to Muhammed Ali's boxing record when he loosened the ring ropes, allowing him to use the 'rope-a-dope' defensive technique against George Foreman? He studied the competitor's combative style, and let him tire himself-out while leaning backwards against the slackened ropes, fending-off Foreman's punches with his forearms, until he could pick-apart Foreman later in the fight. Brilliant defensive and offensive strategy, and within the rules.

FYI, I saw 'Black Jack' Brabham and Bruce Mclaren racing F1 in the 1960's, using a London Fire Brigade portable fire pump engine (!) in their light mid-engined chassis designs (Cooper-Coventry-Climax). Was there grumbling about not using a 'proper' car engine? Probably, but the prescient competitors like Sir Jack Brabham and Colin Chapman saw that using lightweight chassis/engine combinations, where the engine was a stressed member of the chassis, allowed for much-less weight and that resulted in several advantages: a better power-to-weight ratio, better, more-nimble handling, less wear & tear on the car's driveline and suspension, less-fatiguing for a driver to control, meaning faster reflexes to take advantage of openings in traffic, or to avoid cars out-of-control; less fuel consumption, a real advantage at Indy because if you can eliminate a fuel stop, you gain a significant advantage over the competition; tires last longer again possibly eliminating a pit stop for tires, or shortening a pit stop for gas. You get the idea.

Brabham had first run a Cooper mid-engined car at the Indy 500 in the very early 1960's, and while there was a lot of derision from the traditional Meyer-Drake Offenhauser competitors, in their front-engine roadsters, within a few years, all the competitors ran mid-engine chassis designs.

As to a 'level playing field,' that's exactly why the allowances were given, specifically to create just-that. If someone has the engineering expertise to spend in development to accomplish a breakthrough, and it's under the rules, it is eminently fair, under the rules, isn't it?

Talking about Indy 500 competitors, what about the STP turbine cars? Andy Granitelli took a chance on the prospect of developing a new form of power trnasmission for the race, and it eventually gave him a win. Mario Andretti, early in his career drove for Granitelli, and Mario could arguably be considered the greatest race driver of all-time, given his successes in different forms of motorsports competition, not bad for an Italian immigrant to the USA as a kid. Do you penalize a team because they have the best talent, by making them run an intake restriction, or something? Hire the best, give them a tested, developed piece of equipment, the best trackside support, and turn them loose.

The Novi cars had a significant Indy roadster advantage in power for many years, but no Novi ever won the 500. Power alone is no guarantee of success. Remember the first time the STP turbines ran, they both had a < $5 bearing fail at the end of the race, costing them the win.

A Motus is exactly like a Ferrari or a Mclaren, it's an essentially hand-built piece of transportation, expensive to manufacture, typically over-designed, using bespoke engineering, materials, and design to create something most people cannot afford to own or to operate. Did you know the price of a 1990's Mclaren
F1 road car windshield wiper? Fifteen hundred dollars USA! Ask Jay Leno. Supposedly when he was informed about the cost, he said, "well, I guess I just won't drive it in the rain!" Like the MV Agusta's, the Bimotas, a Ducati Panigale R, and other $$$$ bikes, the Motus is in a class of higher-cost bikes that have an entry point likely to prevent most of us from considering buying them. Snobbery, exclusivity, cutting-edge engineering, cost of purchase, vehicles like this sell themselves because most people cannot justify the cost of admission. That alone makes them in a different class. Even if you could afford $45,000 USA would you? I wouldn't. Could I? Yes, if I wanted to, but I have other priorities of greater precedance. One would be staying within the bonds of matrimony. :biglaugh:

I see that you are considering the Italian and British sports cars as different from the intent of the sport-touring Motus, but they both 9the cars and the bike) are for use on public roads, have some functional capacity to be used daily, if you're willing to chance the crummy cellphone-using, texting inattentive drivers, poor parking attempts and other daily hazards we all encounter.

I have a pic of a Motus I saw at Daytona Bike Week in the Speedway parking lot, and it had a constant stream of bikers stopping to examine it, proof to me of its exclusivity, even if it's not for the same purpose as an AUDI R8 V-10 mid-engine coupe, a Lamborghini Gallardo cabriolet, or a laFerrari.

Talking about Indy 500 competitors, what about the STP turbine cars? Andy Granitelli took a chance on the prospect of developing a new form of power trnasmission for the race, and it eventually gave him a win. Mario Andretti, early in his career drove for Granitelli, and Mario could arguably be considered the greatest race driver of all-time, given his successes in different forms of motorsports competition, not bad for an Italian immigrant to the USA as a kid. Do you penalize a team because they have the best talent, by making them run an intake restriction, or something? Hire the best, give them a tested, developed piece of equipment, the best trackside support, and turn them loose.
I remember these fellows hand built cars at Indy--------:clapping:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Chaparral_Cars

 

[Fire-medic]

I used to ride past his place next to the Halifax River in Daytona Beach, "The Best Damn Garage in Town."

His 7/8 scale Chevy is what made NASCAR start to measure the cars using the longitudinal templates to check for the size of the body.

Then there's the time in tech inspection they removed his gas tank to check for its capacity, since he wasn't pitting for gas as-often as the competitors, they couldn't find any excess capacity, so they told him, "get this car out of the tech inspection area," and he hopped-in, started it up, and drove it to his spot on Pit Row, without a gas tank!

As one of the early Superbike competitors said, upon seeing the championship-winning Butler & Smith BMW's roll-out of their transporter at the race, "I can see we've fallen well-behind on our cheating!"

That pic of the Gallardo was taken at the college faculty parking lot. He has enough room at home to park it out of the weather (pic). His home would make an "Occupy" activist whine mightily about "income redistribution!"

Here is a pic of a man that played "within" the rules. I always did like reading up on his history. unk:

Quote: Nice car- i would have paid for the covered parking myself.

 

[Donny Daughtry]

I used to ride past his place next to the Halifax River in Daytona Beach, "The Best Damn Garage in Town."

His 7/8 scale Chevy is what made NASCAR start to measure the cars using the longitudinal templates to check for the size of the body.

Then there's the time in tech inspection they removed his gas tank to check for its capacity, since he wasn't pitting for gas as-often as the competitors, they couldn't find any excess capacity, so they told him, "get this car out of the tech inspection area," and he hopped-in, started it up, and drove it to his spot on Pit Row, without a gas tank!

As one of the early Superbike competitors said, upon seeing the championship-winning Butler & Smith BMW's roll-out of their transporter at the race, "I can see we've fallen well-behind on our cheating!"

That pic of the Gallardo was taken at the college faculty parking lot. He has enough room at home to park it out of the weather (pic). His home would make an "Occupy" activist whine mightily about "income redistribution!"





Quote: Nice car- i would have paid for the covered parking myself.

I meant the cover parking across the street instead of under the tree-unk:

 

[Traumahawk]

I used to ride past his place next to the Halifax River in Daytona Beach, "The Best Damn Garage in Town."

His 7/8 scale Chevy is what made NASCAR start to measure the cars using the longitudinal templates to check for the size of the body.

Then there's the time in tech inspection they removed his gas tank to check for its capacity, since he wasn't pitting for gas as-often as the competitors, they couldn't find any excess capacity, so they told him, "get this car out of the tech inspection area," and he hopped-in, started it up, and drove it to his spot on Pit Row, without a gas tank!

As one of the early Superbike competitors said, upon seeing the championship-winning Butler & Smith BMW's roll-out of their transporter at the race, "I can see we've fallen well-behind on our cheating!"

Another Smokey Yunick story: NASCAR mandated how much a gas tank could hold, which Yunick once circumvented by placing a basketball in the tank and inflating it with air. NASCAR checked the tank's capacity and cleared it. Then, when no one was looking, Yunick deflated the basketball.

 

[Fire-medic]

That's the student parking garage, the faculty lot where his car is, is closer to the Health Sciences Simulation Center, across the street to my right, where we sometimes work.

If it gets something on it, he'll just pay to have the car detailed. ALso, he has a lot of insurance. One form of insurance he has is for his open cockpit fisherman, I think it's a 35' Contender w/2 big outboards & the insurance is a Barrett, a SS Browning shotgun, & an Uzi. Then there's the 'adjuster' kind, who sits in an office, waiting to file your claim. He recently had to make use of that when his boat was snatched from the business that was working on it, and later recovered, stripped of propulsion and electronics.

I meant the cover parking across the street instead of under the tree-unk:

 

[42Below]

But the motus has no technology in it. Ferrari, McLaren etc use cutting edge tech, thats my point. If folks want one then go for it. The same as the Wraith bikes. Low tech in the motor dept but they look fun.

Id love Hemi in all its carb'd pushrod glory but I accept them as they are.

I rode a Gen II Vmax yesterday for the first time. Awesome but all a bit clinical to ride for me. Id have the suspension , HP and brakes though. Its technically a 'better' bike than my Gen1 but less 'fun'.

 

[42Below]

And Lambos are cool if for no other reason than why Ferruccio started building them - Enzo offended him after he questioned the tractor clutch in his Ferrari.
And the Miura has to be one of the coolest cars ever! The brand has gone a bit tacky though.

 

[Fire-medic]

Where we live, I drive every day past the Ferrari, Porsche, AUDI, and Mclaren dealer. They have a lot of eye candy in those windows. I don't believe I'm ever going to own any of those, new. My brother had an AUDI TT quattro I could have bought, garage-kept, maybe 50K miles, but it wasn't the right time.

Same with the Motus, I could afford one used, but in that case, I really didn't want something like that, though I'm sure they are fun to ride, and are well-built.

I'm familiar with the story of the reason Lamborghini decided to build his own GT, a front-engined V-8. The Miura came later (1966). I have a poster I bought probably 48 years ago of the Muira that went over my bed in college. That's the closest I've ever-come to 'ownership' of a Lamborghini. They were several years old then and upset the applecart of what made a premium sportscar. It was contemporary with the release of the 911S, but who expected a mid-engined car? Chevy had done some 'dream cars' like that, but nothing was even close in production, anywhere.

I'll still take the time to examine anyone I see at a car show, because it was a first of its kind, and set the standard to an entire different spec. The Lamborghini models since then are stars themselves, some burning brighter than others, but I couldn't afford the service on one if you gave it to me.

 

[Fire-medic]

The July 2017 Cycle World issue has a Motus article in it. Bryan Fuller crashed his, and re-did it as a streetfighter, making it 100 lbs lighter, and ending up with what the reviewer called, "a giant motor with a seat on it."

No performance figures, but the description of the engine's qualities would make most gearheads want to twist the grip, and throw it into a corner.

 

[BorgBiker]

I like Double Over Head Cams and I like pushrods.

DOHC can allow higher rpm due to the the lower reciprocating mass, and higher rpm can yield more power. However, the extreme high rpm allowed by DOHC doesn't seem to be really taken advantage of on bike engines of more than 1000cc. There is typically more work involved in maintenance on a DOHC motor.

Due to the relatively large amount of reciprocating mass (when compared to DOHC motors), pushrod motors (2 or 4 valves) cannot match the ultra-high rpm potential of a DOHC motor, in most cases I know of they stay below 10,000 rpm. But pushrods do allow the engine package to be more compact, allowing more choice in engine location and packaging. This can allow better handling, more ergonomic design, etc...And without the high rpm goals, the pushrod motor often delivers lots of power right where you need it, in the low end and midrange while still having a nice strong kick on top.

Engineers can meet their target development goals with either design, but each one has its challenges. Powerwise or economy-wise, it is really up to the engineering to decide which one wins. Either way, we win :eusa_dance:

When talking large displacement street bikes, I see DOHC as more of a marketing feature than a truly needed feature. It's cool to have, cool to say, but probably not truly necessary on a motorcycle (or car) that never sees over 10,000rpm. Just because Harley's have pushrods and very modest horsepower for their size doesn't mean pushrods can't make good power. That's just not what HD buyers want.

If money were no problem, then I'd serious consider a Motus. The motor sounds fantastic, looks fantastic, and makes plenty of power at the speeds I ride. I'd LOVE to have a musclebike version.

The Vmax (and a precious few other bikes) has what I call 'The Garage Factor'. This is where you open the garage and just stare. Even when you can't ride for whatever reason. Just go out there and stare, maybe fire it up for the hell of it. A silly grin that you can't get rid of often accompanies this.

For me, the Motus might just have some of that 'Garage Factor' BECAUSE of the pushrod 'baby block' motor. However, the styling reminds me of the 1st gen 'new' Triumphs in the early '90's. Alright, but a step behind the competition styling-wise. When they do a refresh with more contemporary styling, the desirability might just go off the charts.