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So why the inline V4 that we have come to love originally made & why was it banished from the assembly line?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