Why the inline 4 and why not the inline 4?

Curious why the 2 cylinder XS became an inline 4. Later there were the the XJ in-line 4 & The MaximX inline 4. Nowadays its back to the two cylinder V Twins which have the large CC & inline 4 is not in vogue in new bikes.

So why the inline V4 that we have come to love originally made & why was it banished from the assembly line?

 

I thought the XS was a parallel twin.

 

kawasaki made a 750 twin that turned into a 4, cb hondas started as twins then went to 4's
that probably has a lot to do with it

 

people think v twins look cooler

 

Half the machine work at the plant for the same retail price??
Larger components built to slightly less critical tolerances??
The V-Star 1100 I had made peak torque at 2,500 RPM.

 

isn't every new jap sportbike over 600cc an inline 4?

 

I think the V-4 Engine, especially the early V-MAX Setup, was found to be the Engine Yamaha put into a Sporty-Bike that became know as a Widow-maker.

Lot's of fine young men died trying to tame a V-MAX.

An overpowered, unstable, rattletrap with Cam Shafts seemingly outsourced to the Company that brought you "I Can't Believe It's Not Butter" costing Yamaha a black-eye and numerous "Make-goods" should have buried the Vee-Four.

But Yamaha is always there to offer something that short-money can buy to compete with High-Line Limited Editions. So when MV Agusta sold-out the entire run of F-4's; the V-MAX got reintroduced in it's "New and Improved" packaging.

The new bike offers "Throttle-by-wire" technology, to make it faster and easier to kill yourself.

Best suited for short outings of one-eighth or one-quarter mile in a straight line; some guys will still try to make them go around corners.

Much to the dismay of local coroners.

 

The whole Japanese industry moved to inline 4s. They all started out at 1 cylinder then went to inline two and then inline 4 (with a brief run through three in the late 70s). There have been a few models that had V4s and Honda has used a Boxter four and six in the Goldwing. Some models of Cruisers used, and continued to use V-Twins (see below).

The nice thing about inline engines is if you stick with a short stroke you can run them at insane RPMS and get large power from a small package. That design has the drawback of high pitched noise and poor low end torque.

If you want lots of low end torque a long stroke is the way to go. The drawback to that is you can't spin it particularly fast so it takes a big package to get the HP up. The V-Twin lets you get that big stroke in a narrow package without raising the tank. It's the way to go for cruising where you don't want to shift all the time. That's why you tend to see them on the cruisers.

As pointed out earlier, the inline 4 is pretty much standard in sportbikes where lots of power from a small package is the goal.

Harley on the other hand has always built radial engines which was the standard engine for the Sopwith Camel. That design gives the potato-potato-potato sound that Harley enthusiasts love. It also tends to shake dental work loose (the Sopwith Camel had enough cylinders to make a full circle - keeping vibration down).

Lots of the Japanese manufacturers are building their bikes to look like Harleys. They add bolt on cooling fins that are cosmetic because their engines are water cooled. In the case of the Venture, which is a V4, Yamaha has tried to make it look like a big twin. This is all marketing and has nothing to do with what works for a particular riding style.

 

I can't see the draw to a v-twin. Other then the look and Ricks point of
lowered RPM range at cruising speeds. My xj700 sucks for rides
over about 100 miles due to the 5-6k engine speed on the highway. :evil:

In fact thats way she's going up for sale here shortly. I do (did) a lot of
200-400 mile rides and just cant stand the thought of another season
with such a small motor.

But what to buy?????????????? I don't want a v-twin rattle trap.And since
my knee replacement last summer I need to watch the overall weight.
I climed on my buddies aspencade and it was way easier to right it off
the side stand then my 700! That blew me away as I thought it would
be much harder. 8O

So any in put from you guy's would be great in helping me choose my
next ride.

Thx, Ron.

 

Ron,

I see you had a XS1100. FWIW, my XJ1100 runs at markedly lower RPMs than my XJ650J and mechanically I think the XS1100 engine & trans are essentially the same as mine. On my 650J I'm somewhere around 5.2K rpm to go 65 but on the XJ11 I'm around 4.4K to go 65. Also the seat on the XJ1100 is much more comfortable than the 650J.

Maybe back to a XS1100 for your long trips?

Gary

 

Well, my two'penneth is that the manufacturers built what the customers would buy.

I thought it was Honda who had issues with buttery cams - only to produce the VFR which will last forever!

I must admit that the mirrors on my xj600 were just a blur at 70 mph, despite the bar-end weights.

 

Most of the Japanese or metric brands switched to inline 4s because they just plain out performed the older parallel twins and run higher rpms. Then the V-twin idea became so popular with Harleys, the foriegn manufacturers decided to refine the v-twin and offer it in a more cruiser type frame configuration. The V-twin has always been a good idea because of the narrow engine design and low end power with less RPMs for the long haul. An no, the newer metric V-twins do not rattle your filling out. Some use a daul pin crank or a counter balancer to keep the vibes down. Harley has even jumped on the idea now and offers counter balancers, more rubber mounted engines and one with water cooled engine (V-Rod) So it looks like the metrics have the upper hand when it comes to keeping up with technology.
But there will still be sportbikes which are geared more toward performance and not so much loping down the road like most cruisers are designed for. That's why the inline-4 is still around, as well at the V-4 which has a bit more power at lower RPMs.
Personally, I still like the sound of the V-twin or parallel twin over any 4 cylinder engine mainly because that's what I grew up with and am not into all that big power thing so much anymore.

 

Part of this debate is because Yamaha decided in 1980 to introduce a new "genre" to motorcycling with the introduction of the 650 Maxim:

The "Power Cruiser." They took the high-performance inline four and for the first time put it into a more "cruiser" styled bike.

Turns out the high-revving I-4 was a bit of a mis-match for the "cruiser" style, so market forces have driven product evolution to where we are today. Most "cruiser" riders don't want a motor that's spinning 5K or 6K when it's "cruising," so the V-twins have become the most popular configuration for that type of bike.

Meanwhile, more "sporting" riders (crotch-rocketeers) who appreciate the high-revving qualities, get the inline fours.

Personally, I like "cruising" at 5K rpms and having a 10k redline.

 

I'm confident that the Manufacturers are going to introduce a bike that meets the needs of the "In-between" market Segment that can't find a bike that fill the bill for their lifestyle.

There is a need for a model that is not a huge Heavy-weight Cruiser and not a Plastic-wrapped Bullet.

A Middleweight.
Nimble and comfortable.
Able to ride 2-up and go someplace.

"The Pony-Car" of Motorcycling. With the features that made Mustang and Camaro attractive to the car-buying public.
Seat two comfortably on a platform that will accept a couple of different optional drivelines.

Let the buyer dress it up or select a basic version.
And, ... some way to make it either Manual, Automatic -- or both.
5-Speed / 6 Speed.

Find a balance between Performance and Comfort and offer "Goodies" to buy that will Individualize the Customization.

Fuel Inject the damn thing so the owners can hand Pods on it and monkey around with how the exhaust sounds without needing to do anything more than change software profiles and find a niche.

 

The problem here Rick is that they DO make such motorcycles, and quite a few of them.

THEY WON'T BRING THEM HERE!!!! They think we don't want them...

 

That boxter engine keeps the weight very low so you've got more leverage on it. That makes the bike feel much lighter than it is. The boxter is so smooth you need to feel a pipe to make sure it's running too. The downside is they can feel cramped because the engine forces the foot position rearward. A clutch or stator is a major repair on that design.

I got the Venture because the V4 will cruise at 70 spinning 4200rpm - much easier on the ears. It'll still wind up and really scoot at 6krpm like the inlines, but it red lines at 7500. The longer stroke, coupled with the sheer size (1300) makes it a little more tolerable at low RPM. It still doesn't pull like a v-twin. The weight is fairly high in it though, if you get it inclined much it's tough to hold up with good knees.

 

I guess I thought having the performance of an in-line 4 with the comfort of a cruiser is the best of both worlds. That's pretty much the reason I transformed the Seca into a cruiser. I guess I'm particualar to the low swung, feet forward kinda seating position and don't need to lean into the wind so much. And when I do feel the need to open the throttle, it transforms into a screamer even though I'm layed back in full control.

 

I really love the smoothness of the inline 4 in all of my xj's. I also like the sheer grunt, torque, low rumble, etc... of my v-twin Intruder VL1500. Each one serves a different purpose, and I all of mine. I don't care for the parallel twin of the xs400, though. Too puny.

Dave Fox

 

Sorry for the late return, and thanks to all for their opinions.

Yes, I loved my xs1100 and have been looking around for a replacement.

Trouble is, most of the one's I've looked at have good paint jobs and bad
motors. Just the opposite that I'm looking for.

The flat fours are a possibility but the goldwing (naked) just dont have
the shape I want....My xj700 is as close to showroom now as I care to
go and have tired of the weekly wash and polish routine. For my next
daily rider I want a comfortable long distance semi rat/bobber so I dont
mind a bit of road grime and dirt.
As it is now,the 700 has 55000 on the clock and will be losing value
for every mile added without any room left for improvement.

 

why the inline 4, because its high revving and makes lots of power at those high revs.

why not the inline 4, because you can have more comfortable to ride v twins with heaps more low end torque and sound more thunderous then a inline 4. the inline 4 will creat more power, but at revs that most people never wind their bike up to, otherwise they look like idiots driving down a suburban road at 10,000rpm.

comparing them to car engines, the v twins are a bit like old american v8s, and the inline 4s are, well like high performance inline 4 jap cars.

inline 4 are probably the least desirable of engines on both cars and motorcycles.

id like to try a xs850 triple. apparantly it meets halfway a v-twins low end torque and an inline 4s power.

on my yamaha xj, the one thing i hate about it, and i mean really hate it, is how high it is revving at highway speed, when i just want to be crusing at that moment, and am wishing for a 6th and 7th gear. the other thing is the gutless performance under 3000rpm, making me ride harder then i want to in traffic.

i also think v-twins have much more character and people love them for that, its like old american v8 cars, they have character, but an inline 4 bike is a bit like owning a japanese run of the mill 4 cyl sports car, which dont have much character.

you will find most bike riders dont care about maximum power, and would rather a comfotable ride with a great sound and many such people go for v twins, and thats why so many companies make them.

 

The reason the manufacturers went to a inline 4 from an inline twin was for more power and smother running. The reason most manufacturers went to the v 4 was because it was much narrower and for the most part smoother. V 4s turn rpms look at the hondas v65s 10k redline v max has the same redline as the xjs do. The main reasons they went for a v twin was the old mighty dollar. People wanted harleys but couldn't afford them. The manufacturers saw that cha ching lets compete. Some they even ofset the the crank so it would sound like a harley and shake. And the low end grunt appealed to people the useable power was right where you cruise at. I have a 700 virago the same chassis design as my maxim x. Lets say a roll on in top gear 2k or so there isnt an xj out there that would stay with me. The 1100 would run me down first with a bunch of speed in hand 750s and smaller would watch me pull away for quite a while till they got wound up and the virago turns just over 4k at 60. most people do not want to have to downshift when they ride. Everyone with an xj doesn't mind we like the top end rush. That's why the 1100 was so popular it made so much more torque at lower rpms. The thinner motor when you compare my virago to my maxim x makes it feel like a mini bike. The four feels like a gyroscope with the long crankshaft spinning. But would much rather ride my xj then the virago anyday it feels more like a motorcycle should.

kpcart go ahead ride an xs850 don't think you will like it. Bike does make more low end torque they are rough huge motorcycles very tall center of gravity thats why they never caught on when yamaha came out with the fours they were quickly forgotten. When i was working for the dealership in the mid 80s i was sent to get a customers bike 45 miles away. Drove me seca 750 to go get it and drove it back. I was glad to get my bike back.
And as far as 4 cyl cruisers They had them as far back as 76 with the kawasaki ltd then came the suzuki l hondas were always taller with the k series

 

i only meant id like to try the engine characteristics of a xs850 triple. i have also just heard from someone else that the actual bike is big and rough and not as nice to ride as an xj. id like to test ride a triple one day of approx 750cc or bigger on a bike around the size of an xj, i just think it would be nicer to ride in normal commuting, and might actually sound better at lower rpms. but i may be wrong on all that!

what do people think of the xs1100s? are they similar to xj bikes in anyway? (its the same 4 cyl engine right?) id imagine they are more comfortable and have more low end torque, but heavier, and possibly no gain in low end tractability to say an xj750 because of the extra weight?

 

The XS1100 has more torque the XJ750 through all ranges of the RPM's. It's a fun bike to ride. I only get about 29 to 30 MPG on the XS but I'm still dialing everything in. The XS11 is more top heavy and is harder to "flick" around and while in a hard turn hitting the throttle too soon can break the rear tire loose and send you sliding across the road.

The XJ750 handles much better the XS11. It's lighter and more responsive in the twisties. Still has plenty of power. It will be blown away by the XS11 in the straightaway but will hold its own on the twisties. I'm also getting 50 MPG with the XJ.

Riding two up or long distance, between the two I would take the XS11. Any other time I would take either bike.

 

Major difference between the 750s and the 1100. The xs 1100 has so much more low end. The XS is just the older model 1100 maxim. They are quite heavy but drive really nice. The XS is a lot taller then the 1100 maxim. And much wider then the 700s are lots of crankshaft hanging out of both sides If i remember correctly it turns 3500- 4k at 60 mph but Don't quote me on that. They are getting harder and harder to find as they get older as most bikes are. Honestly since you are trying to not have to heavy of a bike and want low end power you might be better off with a v twin. The inline 4s are going to have to have a large displacement to give you low end punch but you will be looking at much more weight. Like i was saying earlier i have a maxim x and a 700 virago they both are built off the same chassis design the virago seems much smaller then the maxim does

 

no they don't. that has nothing to do with it. Its all about torque and traction. Not revs like a 4-banger. Also there are plenty of high displacement inline 4's available still, both air and liquid cooled. As far as someone saying 4's make more power, that is inaccurate as well. Big Twins make gobs of horsepower and are planted in both sport and cruiser style bikes, i.e. ducati and KTM, Guzzi, etc.

 

I think that is a very overgeneralized statement. It seems as though 98 percent of drag bikes use inlines 4s. I see a lot of KZ1000 motors in those bikes. I have never seen one of these crotch rockets that did not have an inline 4 or less. Inline's are still the way to go in my opinion, I don't care for a bike that is loud but has no power like the Vs.

As far as cars, inlines 4s are very desirable to the right crowd. With the low compression, I have seen some crazy turbo set ups that get over 400 hp. In a car that light, what can an old muscle car do with its big block with the same hp? It is easier to put HP into a big block sure, but getting HP out of an inline 4 is efficient HP. (I love muscle cars and hate ricers with a passion but I just know what can be done with these motors on cars)

 

What I think would make a nice mid range cruiser is a bobbed venture keep the air ride system and loose all the luggage and plastics would take a lot of imagination and ingenuity but I think it would be well worth it. Mono shock, water cooled fat front tire oh and its a Yamaha

 

My cousin has a V-Star 1100 classic and I have the XJ1100.
V-Star 1100 HP 53.5 @ 5,900 rpms
Torque 57.9 @ 2,500 rpms
XJ1100 HP 95
Torque 65 ft/lbs @ 6,500
my bike is just starting to eat when his is nearing redline. I will take the inline 4 any day.
Having rode both bikes my xj is easier to corner and is every bit as comfortable as his crusier.

 

apples to oranges...the ducati Diavel or any 1100cc Duc for that matter would eat your XJ for breakfast

 

sorry i didnt mean to knock them. i know you can have great 4 cyls, and obviously i own one too with the xj 750. but you must agree, even though great things can be done with inline 4 cyls, they dont have much character appeal to other engine configurations.

 

but how much torque does the xj have at 2,500 rpms, where the v-star is making quite a bit. probably half. to me that is important (and obviously to millions of other bikers too) as that kind of rev range is normal bike riding, not racing. who actually rides there bike at 6,000rpm on public roads? its uncomfortable and annoys everyone else on the road. those numbers to me show that the v-star would be much nicer to ride in normal commuting and much nicer to cruise on, and its only deficency compared to the xj is that it wont beat it in a race. (im only talking about engine drivability, not cornering or sitting comfort). id imagine the v-star sounds much better too.

 

I do, for one. I regularly run my box-stock Seca 550s to 7K or even 8K in traffic, and nobody gets "annoyed." Neither bike is uncomfortable with 6K on the clock; but it is something that takes a little getting used to if you're used to slower-revving twins. But then I'm also running the stock exhausts...

The XJ is a "racebike for the street" and one of the pioneers for that matter. Comparing them to V-twins is simply apples and oranges; it depends on your riding style and what you like.

 

But you can also say the V motors are much the same way. Less character than that of an inline 4 due to it is all bark and no bike so to speak. I guess it depends what you are wanting in a bike. Me personally, the closest thing I would ever consider for a V motor is a Virago or one of those random old V Kwakas.

 

The 4 cyl engine, eiher inline or v (like honda magna) is he perfect balance in 4 stroke combustion, a twinn 4 stroke only makes power on two strokes (except some bmw's where both cyls fire at the same time and he old 454ltd Kawi's). You see between power strokes, a twinn has one cyl on compresion which slows he crankshaft while the other is coasting with the exhaust valve open (making no power). An evenfire 4 cyl engine always has one cyl making powerwhile one is making compression and the other two are coasing with open valves, thus a 4 cyl engine is ALWAYS making power. If the compression is fairly even, and everything is dialed in pretty good it can't help but make it run smoother (all the time) and produce more power in the upper rpm's. HD and honda has odd fire v-twinns which have a boat load of torque down where our 4cyls are just above fast idle, but they hyperventilate when the 4's are just starting to make peak torque. Then we can run away from them.
Honestly, I wish yamaha would make an affordable 90* v-4, (maybe 2 cyls horizonal and two vertical} that would run like an r6 or r1 for the same reason that HD made the sportster, which was a slightly longer wheelbase & a narrow chassis. Of corse the HD was designed in he 50's (thus any immiation sportster is retro)
By the way, Suzuki makes an excelent 650 v-twinn (Bandit/Gladius), I wish they'd put it in the S-40 rather than that lame thumper motor.

 

Having the XJ650J & the XJ1100J I can say there's a whale of a difference in the two bikes.

The 650 is nimble, feels light as a feather when going into turns compared to the 1100. I keep looking for a 6th gear on the 650, not that there's a lack of power but I'm still not accustomed to higher RPMing bikes. The 1100 is a completely different engine and to the rear wheels, the RPM to MPH is not the same as the 650, the 1100 most definitely runs at a lower RPM at a given speed and more to what I am expecting.

my 650 is in excellent mechanical condition but the 1100 was horribly out of tune with abused carb settings, saturated air filter and needing cam tensioning adjustments. I have yet to check the shims but I expect to find them needing some replacements. With the lousy tuning of the 1100 I can tell you it was still one of the finest highway rides I've been on in a long time; power up the wazoo and acceleration whenever I wanted it and plenty of it. The cornering is less agile than the 650 but when going up a hill, the 1100 has no hills compared to the 650 and it's pretty amazing. I'm looking forward to having it in as good running condition as the 650 by spring. The 650 can get 55 mpg tops and the 1100 in it's untuned condition only got 35 but I know that value will be improved when I get it running properly.

I'll keep my 650J because of the gas mileage and the ease of physical dimension & weight but the 1100 absolutely will become my choice on most moderate trips and probably on all long trips.

Someone mentioned the Ducati; they are quite the bike and I'd love one, same with a Moto Guzi but to my thinking, I could buy quite a few XJs for the price of one of those Ducatis. Considering the way I drive, the Ducati would serve me no better than the XJ.

Now my friend Victor... He would use the Ducati as it was meant to be run...

 

I have had a few inline twins and inline 4s and I will take an inline 4 over an
inline twin, V twin, any twin, any day. Its like night and day. On my 4 I just
ride away and leave them. Beautiful smooth power its like riding on a turbine.

 

anything after iron head v twins makes me snooze looking at them...

im kinda surprised some people who rode gutless 90's and 200s and smaller as a kid would complain about any size inline 4....

 

DW- How many ducati v-twins do you see on the road here in the Dallas Tx area I have only seen 1 or 2. But I have seen thousands of V-Twins from all the other makes. On any given saturday or sunday around here you see groups af 15 to 20 bikes riding together all riding v-twins and no one really looks at the bikes as they are so common. But when I take my XJ1100 out after doing work on it everyone looks at it. Yes my cousins V-Star does have more torque thru 1st and 2nd gears but when I hit 3rd and get up around 3,500 to 4,00 rpms he is suckin hind tit.

 

KA1J- To answer your original question. With similar displacement, design, and cam timing, an inline 4 cyl vs. a 360 deg parallel twin like the xs (which is a lot like a single cylinder engine, really) will provide more total power and a LOT less vibration, at the expense of a little torque. The reason torque is lost is because the same displacement divided by only two cylinders, each cylinder has twice as much force acting on the crankshaft. That force is called torque because it's acting rotationally. The I4 has more power because the same displacement is spread over twice as many cylinders with the same piston diameter (by the definition of a similar design, above). The pistons in I4 can travel faster due to both the lower mass and less vibration (mostly less vibration). More bangs per second, with slightly less torque due to mechanical losses (half times two is the same, right) means more overall power FOR THE SAME BASIC ENGINE DESIGN AND DISPLACEMENT. Period.

To all: With different displacement, design, and cam timing all bets are off. That is why Ducati L-twins have so much POWER (desmodronic valve control). That is why Harleys have so much torque but no power (ridiculusly huge engines that can't rev high without vibrating apart, but FEELS right when driving around town), and that's why a Triumph 675 and a Triumph Street Triple have totally different engine specs (almost exact engine, but different valve timings).

And whoever said an inline 4 is least desirable in both cars and bikes (and I really don't mean to flame) is nuts. Inline 4s have great primary harmonic balance, and are second only to inline 6's in their secondary balance. They have a good power to weight ratio, too. Sure, they're not as good as I6's or F6's, but they're a lot smaller, too. And far superior to any twin out there, i.e. V, Inline, or Flat (not Ducati or Harley, or whatever).

If anyone has any doubts, Wikipedia has a LOT of really good information about engines HERE

 

Rick, I am disappointed in you! :lol: Automatic? :roll:
When I arrived in Israel two years ago I called it "a country of pussies" - all I could see were scooters, from the tiny 50cc, two-stroke, to yamaha sofa-beds @ 500cc, four-stroke. And the ultimate shame? automatic! p**** rides!!
I explain: I came from Sao Paulo. 15 million people moving around mostly in four wheels (cars, trucks, buses). To survive in a bike you need to ride as if you are playing a chess match (anticipating the "enemy"'s moves) and shifting gear as needed. Manly shifting gear, I mean! :twisted:
Ok, ok, I know you are talking about cruisers, it's another equation. But I could not resist to put on you a little.. and mostly to berate scooters. They are not very manly, really! :wink:
My I4 XJ400 is about to come alive. Israel's highways are smooth as a carpet. I will let you guys know my "first impressions".

Aharon

 

I HATE Sao Paulo, traffic sucks and the motoboys are unforgiving... but at least you can see the occasional 900 or better here or there. Rode a CB900 there once, only once. I'll never ride there again.
And it's 22 millon now. And they all drive crazy!

 

I hear you Robert!
Motoboys (delivery boys) there are called "motoqueiros", while the rest of us sane riders call ourselves "motociclistas". Most MCs (like the one I belong there, "Cavaleiros do Asfalto" (roughly Tarmac Riders) wear a badge that say "Motoqueiro e a puta que o pariu" - exactly "motoqueiro is the whore that brought you to life, or 'that bore you' - , a heavy swearing as you can tell.
The last encounter I had with the local police, the officer talking to me looked at my patch, understood and stood mum.
It is all a matter of attitude - and maturity. I always thought that, if I am riding at 50Km/h in the "corridor" between the cars in those kilometers-long traffic jammings, I am already winning!
Proof of what I am saying is that car drivers will make an effort to help you get through if you are riding a big bike, but will not move one finger to help a motoboy...
I really do not miss that crazy town. And carnaval? I have Purim in Israel, where people dress up, not 'undress'. Morals are a treasure.
Aharon

 

I had more than a few motoboys clip my car mirrors and just keep on going. My wife told me not to do anything about it, pointing out they would likely gang up on me, drag me out of the car and beat me sensless. I chose to listen to her advice.
Eu conese puta senior, a very vulgar saying but funny regardless. The Police Militare are not anyone I would want to have anything to do with, even if they are trying to improve their reputation.
Morals are a treasure but I've no problem with the Brasilian point of view, I think it is healthy. Purim is enjoyable too, just not the same. And the food is better at carnival! Fejioada sempre!

 

Robert, your wife was right and you were wise to heed her advice: they gang up on anyone - they see themselves as the underdogs before cars, so in their minds their mates are "always right".
I think of "The Midnight Express" when I look at them military police (it's an old movie - have you watched it?). Speaking of movies, "Tropa de Elite" (Elite Troops) bares their corruption naked.
Feijoada is not kosher! My brazilian (and jewish) wife makes a mean cassoulet, and that is feijoada for me.
Back on this thread path, the consumption dream of my generation was to own a Honda 750K. Four in line, 4-into-1 exhaust... Always way out of our shallow pockets reach. I am extremely happy today that I own a XJ400. It is the right size, and the right price for a mature family man.
In Line Fours are the thing for me!
Aharon

 

Henry Ford would beat the crap out of anyone who says that an inline 4 is undesirable. So much so that he only built engines in multiples of 4.

 

Personally, I love the smooth ride of my xj550 ,but my next bike will only have two cylinders and ONE CARB. That is my only gripe with inline 4's.

 

My next bike will be new, and be FI for SURE lol.