"Mass Centralization" was good engineering, or better as marketing hooks?

[Endopotential]

Happy Holiday folks! As we couch surf in our post-turkey haze, thought I'd stir the pot and give us something to debate. And for me to learn more about our bikes.

First off, please don't take this post wrongly as a rant against Buells. I actually love the rumble, the torque, and the quirky soul of the design. So much so that I have two - an '09 XB9SX and Nic's XB12R cafe racer. Motorcycle reviews breathlessly talk about how "light and nimble" these bikes are. Yes, maybe compared to a 1,000lb Harley cruiser... but compared to an R6 or Triumph Daytona, my bikes still feel very top heavy and deliberate.

So were Buells really designed optimally from an engineering perspective, or were these more flashy ideas to capture marketing headlines?

1) Fuel in the frame - OK, this one I'll buy. The frame spars do sit lower than a typical gas tank, so a lower center of gravity (CoG) here. But at the expense of a widened frame, which makes it harder for a height-challenged rider to flat foot. But overall 1 star to Erik!

2) Oil in the swingarm - another cool idea. More sprung weight for the rear suspension, but lower CoG and unique design. 2nd star to Erik.

3) ZTL / perimeter brakes - A very thorough discussion here:https://www.southbayriders.com/forums/threads/44780/
If you buy the calculations, a Buell front wheel is about 4.5lbs lighter than a typical dual disk design, which is a significant decrease in sprung weight for the fork. But overall moment of inertia and angular momentum are about the same, so no advantage in acceleration / deceleration. And supposedly more brake fade from the decrease in surface area of the rotors, especially if you push them hard track riding. If it was such a great idea, then why don't top tier MotoGP bikes adopt / license this technology? @Cooter and @outthere - as our resident racers, what say you?

4) Underslung muffler - Sure, it's better sitting down there that up on the side or under the tail. But if lower CoG was the prime objective, wouldn't it have been better to mount the engine down lower? An engine block is full of heavy metal and oil, while a muffler is basically a hollow tube stuffed with cotton candy. For a similar volume, I gotta guess an engine block has 5-6 times the density of a muffler. If there's concern for scraping the engine, then just install some light metal plate beneath it instead.

So overall, I score two valid claims and two debatable design ideas. Still makes for a fun ride any day.

Let the flame war begin!!!