Quiet motorcycles/scooters

[sendler]

Originally Posted by The Atomic Ass

I think you might find that the DrPulley's do as I described: make the variator stay in it's highest ratio even when max throttle is applied.

Well again we disagree. I find that the transmission is more responsive with the sliders. Possibly just from the lighter weight but it also feels like the sliders move in the ramps with less sticktion than the rollers. Providing an efficient drop in rpm when cruising around town at 5,500 rpm but quickly revving up to 7,900 rpm any time you pin it.

Originally Posted by The Atomic Ass

Though, I'm willing to concede the possibility that the PCX is different from the Burgman. (I honestly don't know) On the latter, the pulley's simply did not move far enough to use up this virgin metal. I removed the rear spring to see how far they do move, and it's to the edge the belt makes in the pulleys, no further.

If you install sliders in a well used variator, the belt travel will get hung up on the groove even though the sliders have not reached the end of the ramps.
.
Anyway, I highly recommend the Honda PCX150 to anyone doing urban delivery that is fuel conscious and can get by with 65 mph. Maintainance costs will only be slightly less than the best car but it will use half the fuel. And even at the cheap price of $2.79 / gallonUS, you will save $2,000 per year over 80,000 miles. In Europe where gas is $8.00 / galonUS, riding a 125 class scooter instead of a car offers huge money savings.

[The Atomic Ass]

As an update, I ended up buying a 2006 Suzuki V-Strom that was cheap and now, and while the machine itself is well up to the task of carrying me around on my route, it's tall (I'm not), and not comfortable to be on for long periods for me. Though it's doing respectable for fuel economy, reaching for 70 mpg on a rev-happy 650cc engine.

Ergonomically, however, I'm pining for my Burgman again, because I know I could do the miles in that saddle. But sorry, no, Sendler, I still cannot get past my dislike of CVT's.

[stiletto2]

CVT's are not as efficient as chain drive, but the CVT's are simpler to operate and maintain. Just guessing, but probably also cheaper per mile than chains, oil & sprockets.
In their own right, CVT's are always in the correct gear. Again maybe not always at the most efficient ratio, but close enough for the task and it is all automatically done requiring no other input than simply changing the throttle. CVT's are simple, but effective - geared transmissions with chain drive are more complex, but more efficient. Another alternative with a geared transmission is a belt driven final drive. Nearly as efficient as chain drive, but cleaner with no oily mess, low maintenance and quieter than a chain. It's all about what works best for you. BTW, for scooters, insurance is likely to be less costly as well.

Prioritize your requirements to establish positively what you desire (plus the degree of flexibility in your criteria) Then do research. Ask about what are considered quiet bikes (as you are doing here since that seems a priority) find bikes with belt drives if you would consider them acceptable, consider bikes of acceptable engine size, initial and maintenance costs and any other criteria you deem most important in your decision. Weigh your options as you find them then decide which best meets your criteria.

What ever works best for you since the "best" is subjective. Unless there is a more specific objective like the objective of simplicity; then CVT would be the choice - objective of higher efficiency; then manual or automatic geared transmission with belt or chain final drive would be a better choice.

But getting good help in your decision would be easier if we knew more of your criteria and its order of importance. That way you wouldn't need to sound snippy when someone makes a suggestion that you think irrelevant or less important and people would be less inclined to question your motives in your choices. No sense in arguing semantics of what is better for you when you could already have it laid out.

Ideally, what I would like to see is a CVT that can be operated automatically or manually... ditto for the clutch.

Anyway, I think any bike could probably be modified with some sort of noise baffling after the muffler to make it quieter than it might already be.

EDIT: OH! I see you got a bike already anyway... but already seems you are not completely happy with it... later possibly come to regret getting it & utterly despise it because it is not comfortable.

[stiletto2]

Originally Posted by The Atomic Ass

Lack of ability to change final drive ratio, (and nearly ALL bikes, not just ones with CVT's, come with a "sportier" ratio by default, and higher revs than needed would just grind my gears constantly at this point), and maintenance.

I'll be doing 18,000 miles in 3 MONTHS.

I'll already be doing tire changes at least at this interval, unless the moto tire industry has a serious tire out there that competes with the lifespan of passenger car tires.

I've also ridden a Burgman 400 for 26,500 miles, I can say that the belt isn't the only thing you need to consider as far as maintenance goes.

My solution to tire longevity and lower rpms is to use passenger vehicle tires (commonly referred to as "car tires") on the rear of my scooters as I have done for the past 7 years. On my Honda Reflex 250 scooter I changed the tire at 35,000 miles only because I wanted to try a different size car tire. It could have lasted another 2 or 3 thousand miles more. Typical scooter rear tire life for the Reflex scooter is 5 to 8 thousand miles. Mine usually went 6K miles.

Bike tires are not likely to ever equal car tires in longevity for certain reasons.

#1 reason why not) A car tire uses the full width of its tread face and thus shares the load and wear across a larger tread area per revolution than a bike tire which, because of its arced tread face, can only use 1/4 to 1/3 of the available tread at any one time. And since bikes typically spend most of their life time upright, it is no surprise then that the center-line of the tire wears out first and most and faster than a car tire.

2) Car tires are often a larger diameter than the bike tire they replace. This gives a slight mechanical advantage in reduced rolling resistance. (along with the tread width advantage) A taller/larger diameter tire will last longer than a similarly designed and built tire of smaller diameter while carrying an equal load... even more so if it is wider as well. But a larger diameter tire is a geometry change that may have a less than desirable affect on handling qualities. On the plus side though, a larger diameter tire would effect a taller final drive ratio which would be better; fuel economy wise that is.
.
3) Even with dual compound tires, (harder along the center-line of the tire for longevity, softer compound outward from there for grip in turns) the center-line of a bike tire will wear out first. And that, even though car tire rubber compound is softer than bike tire compound; durometer number (a measure of material hardness) will show this difference in car tire VS bike tire compound hardness to be true. It is an often assumed misconception that bike tires have softer compound than car tires... they don't

4) Load capability for a car tire would typically be higher than that of the bike tire it would be replacing. Significant physical aspects of bike tires would need to be changed to increase load bearing capability; an attribute which would benefit longevity.

5) Tires could be made to last longer by using even harder rubber compounds, but as a result would have less grip. A bike tire could possibly be made to get near to the longevity of a car tire, but it would look an awful lot like a car tire (wide, flat tread section) and it would likely have similar handling attributes that car tires exhibit when used on bikes. Those attributes may be found to be unacceptable by many riders and the manufacturers are not going to make tires that don't sell very well because they don't have desired handling qualities that most riders want.

There is no conspiracy by bike tire manufacturers to make tires that have poor longevity to a captive group of bike tire buyers/users. Bike tire manufacturers make the best tires they can for bikes and car tire manufacturers make the best tires they can for cars. It is the rounded profile of the bike tire that makes them so smooth and consistent in turns, but it is also the very thing that causes them to have limited wear life. As it is with most things, changes are trade offs... gain this but lose that. C' est la Vie. (that's life)

[pwillikers]

Using automobile tires on any two wheeled vehicle is a very bad idea.

EDIT:
I will not debate this as I consider doing so tantamount to arguing with a potted plant. Following is an in depth, rational analysis that should dissuade any reasonable individual from considering this practice.

http://www.ridermagazine.com/browse-...torcycles.htm/

[sendler]

It seems like using a small car tire on the rear of a motorcycle would be a bad idea by those that have never tried it but the reports by those few who actually have are very positive even with regards to handling. You are not going to have the same consistant performance when dragging a knee but for general commuting lean angles, a car tire on the rear seems to work out very well.

[cRiPpLe_rOoStEr]

I wouldn't feel confident to use a square-treaded tyre in a motorcycle, unless it had a side-car

But until a few years ago it was not unusual to see some folks using VW Beetle tyres in the rear of the Honda CB400/CB450 from the 80's.

[The Atomic Ass]

Originally Posted by stiletto2

My solution to tire longevity and lower rpms is to use passenger vehicle tires (commonly referred to as "car tires") on the rear of my scooters as I have done for the past 7 years. On my Honda Reflex 250 scooter I changed the tire at 35,000 miles only because I wanted to try a different size car tire. It could have lasted another 2 or 3 thousand miles more. Typical scooter rear tire life for the Reflex scooter is 5 to 8 thousand miles. Mine usually went 6K miles.

I wrote about doing tire changes at that interval when my short list included only bikes that had no suitable darkside available, such as the CBR250.

Yes, I'm crazy enough to darkside, but thanks for trying to convince me nonetheless.

Speaking of which, a CT is sitting on the bench right now, waiting for the last vestiges of rubber to disappear from the rear on the 'Strom.

[The Atomic Ass]

Originally Posted by stiletto2

Prioritize your requirements to establish positively what you desire (plus the degree of flexibility in your criteria) Then do research. Ask about what are considered quiet bikes (as you are doing here since that seems a priority) find bikes with belt drives if you would consider them acceptable, consider bikes of acceptable engine size, initial and maintenance costs and any other criteria you deem most important in your decision. Weigh your options as you find them then decide which best meets your criteria.

EDIT: OH! I see you got a bike already anyway... but already seems you are not completely happy with it... later possibly come to regret getting it & utterly despise it because it is not comfortable.

Yep, it was definitely an impulse purchase. Regret? No. I feel happier in pain than I do driving my car, so worth it. (Now, my helmet, which is also giving me grief, THAT I regret, but it's not an expensive mistake, and one I can more easily rectify, next paycheck) I'd still like to address the pain, though, as my body does demand the use of the car more frequently than the 'Strom.

To outline my requirements more clearly, of course silence is my most important requirement. The 'Strom, while not as quiet as I'd like, still seems to be acceptable, as I hear no echoing coming from buildings in city environments, or closely packed neighborhoods. A ride along with my father has him describing it as "barely audible" with his windows down. I suspect my riding style of "lugging" the engine at 25-35 mph speeds contributes to this, so perhaps a great many more models than I thought would satisfy my quiet requirements.

I'm unwilling to use a CVT, from the point of first-hand experience with it's durability, and the "disconnected" feeling it has which is not totally dissimilar to an automatic in a car. (This contributes partially to my greater happiness on the 'Strom, over the car, which has a hideous automatic, even for a car) Efficiency factors into that, but as there is no engine which appears (unmodified) in both a manual and CVT form that I'm aware of? difficult to get accurate numbers on what an engine COULD do if not ham-strung by the CVT.

Insurance no longer seems to be an issue for me. Those grey hairs are starting to come in handy. Progressive quoted $75 each per year for my 1983 Nighthawk 550 (more of a toy than a serious ride at this point), and the 'Strom. This is liability only, but I doubt I'd get coverage on a newer bike anyway. (Financing is for fools, and I've outgrown my foolishness )

The ultimate in simplicity would probably be a chain in a proper chain case. I could see that going for a hundred thousand miles, without maintenance.

[sendler]

Originally Posted by pwillikers

Following is an in depth, rational analysis that should dissuade any reasonable individual from considering this practice.

Tales From the Dark Side: Putting Car Tires on Motorcycles | Rider Magazine

HE NEVER TRIED IT! HA ha. I read the whole thing, waiting for him to mount a car tire on the back of his bike and test it but he never did.