• Welcome, Guest! We hope you enjoy the excellent technical knowledge, event information and discussions that the BMW MOA forum provides. Some forum content will be hidden from you if you remain logged out. If you want to view all content, please click the 'Log in' button above and enter your BMW MOA username and password.

    If you are not an MOA member, why not take the time to join the club, so you can enjoy posting on the forum, the BMW Owners News magazine, and all of the discounts and benefits the BMW MOA offers?

wedge designer

I still don't get it:
A transverse crankshaft requires TWO sets of bevel gears from the engine to the real wheel. In engineering design class I learned that a set of bevel gears costs about 5% of power. So, we're losing 10% between the gearbox output and the rear wheel.
With the boxer and brick designs it makes sense - a longitudinal crankshaft lends itself to a driveshaft design.
But, why hold on to the driveshaft when it turns into an engineering fauxpas?
Why does BMW not simply put a belt on the wedge? A belt costs about 3% in transmission power. And guaranteed 20 pounds less weight. Plus, it would also solve the final drive problems :D
Or a chain??? No, that would be too Japanese :laugh
Something to get the crowds fired up...

So, here's my offer to BMW: If you put a belt on the wedge, I'll buy it. Till then, I'll ride my brick.
 
The wedge inline four is basically the type of engine called the UJM (Universal Japanese motor). The first engine of this type in a motorcycle is the 1969 Honda CB750. The K brick engine is a UJM mounted on it's side longitudinally.

Ralph Sims
 
I still don't get it:
A transverse crankshaft requires TWO sets of bevel gears from the engine to the real wheel. In engineering design class I learned that a set of bevel gears costs about 5% of power. So, we're losing 10% between the gearbox output and the rear wheel.
With the boxer and brick designs it makes sense - a longitudinal crankshaft lends itself to a driveshaft design.
But, why hold on to the driveshaft when it turns into an engineering fauxpas?
Why does BMW not simply put a belt on the wedge? A belt costs about 3% in transmission power. And guaranteed 20 pounds less weight. Plus, it would also solve the final drive problems :D
Or a chain??? No, that would be too Japanese :laugh
Something to get the crowds fired up...

So, here's my offer to BMW: If you put a belt on the wedge, I'll buy it. Till then, I'll ride my brick.

Oh heck...I could be going 192.22 mph instead of 173. Bummer.
 
The wedge inline four is basically the type of engine called the UJM (Universal Japanese motor). The first engine of this type in a motorcycle is the 1969 Honda CB750.
Ralph Sims
You wanna research that a tad Ralphie????
Das ist inkorrect.

Gilly
 
You wanna research that a tad Ralphie????
Das ist inkorrect.

Gilly

Since we are in the forum for the transverse inline four, I figured the 69 Honda 750 was the correct answer. I realize for aft inline fours have been around since the early 1900s.
So I give up, who had the first transverse inline four in a motorcycle?
 
Consulted with a real cycle expert, he says in the 50s there were a few race bikes with transverse 4's, mentioning Gilera and NSU. There was an MV Agusta shown to the public in 1965, first one not sold until 1967.
The first Munch was shown to the public in Feb 1966, was in the Cologne bike show in Sept 66 (where Honda saw it), and the first one was sold in Nov/Dec 1966, so the first transverse 4 sold to the public, in this guys opinion, was the Munch.

Gilly
 
Consulted with a real cycle expert, he says in the 50s there were a few race bikes with transverse 4's, mentioning Gilera and NSU. There was an MV Agusta shown to the public in 1965, first one not sold until 1967.
The first Munch was shown to the public in Feb 1966, was in the Cologne bike show in Sept 66 (where Honda saw it), and the first one was sold in Nov/Dec 1966, so the first transverse 4 sold to the public, in this guys opinion, was the Munch.

Gilly

I stand corrected. damn Wikepedia. The 1968 M??nch-4 TTS 1200 Mammut did have an inline 4 overhead cam engine.

Like it or not the, the K bike and 1000cc BMW liter bike is getting Japanese like. Wet clutch, transverse inline 4, chain on the liter bike. Some guys are gripping about the Jap like turn signal switch.

Ralphie Sims
 
I'd rather think that BMW finally caught up to Friedel Munch!
 

Attachments

  • a13.jpg
    a13.jpg
    101.4 KB · Views: 134
Like it or not the, the K bike and 1000cc BMW liter bike is getting Japanese like. Wet clutch, transverse inline 4, chain on the liter bike. Some guys are gripping about the Jap like turn signal switch.

Ralphie Sims[/QUOTE]

That turn signal switch would keep me from buying one - I'm serious! Vas vere dey tinking!?
 
That turn signal switch would keep me from buying one - I'm serious! Vas vere dey tinking!?

They are putting the TS switch back like it was on the Airheads in the last '70's and early '80's before BMW introduced the separate left/right switch design on the K-bikes. :stick
 
Last edited:
Mr Honda had already campaigned inline multi's in GP racing. So had Count Agusta.
Sochiro was the first with the vision to make it available to the common man.
Herr Munch bolted a car engine (NSU) into a motorcycle frame, an old american hot-rod tradition.
 

Attachments

  • ejpotter1.jpg
    ejpotter1.jpg
    33 KB · Views: 44
Back
Top