Yamaha plan new crossplane twin

General Discussion Forum for TRX Enthusiasts...

Moderators: trixynut, Mincehead, dicky, phuk72, Jak, Kevtrx849

User avatar
Skip6752008
TRX-Enthusiast
Posts: 17
Joined: Tue Jul 06, 2010 11:03 pm
Location: Northampton
Contact:

Yamaha plan new crossplane twin

Post by Skip6752008 » Thu Jul 04, 2013 8:32 am


User avatar
Kayla
Site Sponsor
Posts: 1670
Joined: Fri Jul 04, 2008 7:49 am
Location: County Durham

Re: Yamaha plan new crossplane twin

Post by Kayla » Thu Jul 04, 2013 8:36 am

Skip6752008 wrote:Check out the link

http://www.visordown.com/motorcycle-new ... 22957.html
Please please please please please please please please please please please please please please please please please please please please give us a TRX650 Mr Yamaha :D
Image

Just because you're breathing, it doesn't mean you're alive.

User avatar
Killerwhale
Site Sponsor
Posts: 3797
Joined: Tue Aug 22, 2006 8:41 am
Location: GBG/Sweden
Contact:

Re: Yamaha plan new crossplane twin

Post by Killerwhale » Thu Jul 04, 2013 12:59 pm

Kayla wrote:
Skip6752008 wrote:Check out the link

http://www.visordown.com/motorcycle-new ... 22957.html
Please please please please please please please please please please please please please please please please please please please please give us a TRX650 Mr Yamaha :D
Please give us a Yamaha R7-R8 with either the triple or a 4 cross....R7 would be better for insurance over here.
Would not be disappointed if it looked somewhat like the OW-2....
Maybe take up a battle with sucki in the 750 segment....
Also the day 675...

sanddune51
Site Sponsor
Posts: 399
Joined: Sun Oct 11, 2009 6:07 am
Location: Kent, UK.

Re: Yamaha plan new crossplane twin

Post by sanddune51 » Thu Jul 04, 2013 5:09 pm

I the 'kinky' pipes reminiscent of a late '70s 400/4 :) .

I can't much see the point of a Trx650 other than it 'fitting' the minitwin race category nicely :wink: .

I think I'd much rather have a smooth, torquey , injected 270 degree 900 - 950cc Trx in a lightweight chassis with characteristics and styling for today. Top notch suspension not required (got to leave something to tinker with and upgrade over time),leaving the cost relatively low initially.


Mark.

User avatar
fung
Site Sponsor
Posts: 1605
Joined: Mon Aug 23, 2010 2:00 am
Location: Gold Coast. South East Queensland.

Re: Yamaha plan new crossplane twin

Post by fung » Thu Jul 04, 2013 10:00 pm

Perhaps a common bottom end and lightweight, middleweight and a thou would be nice :)
I WOULD RATHER WEAR OUT THAN RUST

User avatar
Yoozy
Site Sponsor
Posts: 534
Joined: Sun Dec 16, 2012 4:06 pm
Location: NOBville Manchester.

Re: Yamaha plan new crossplane twin

Post by Yoozy » Thu Jul 04, 2013 10:03 pm

Just replicate the one one we've got with a tad more giddyup.
A GUT FULL OF ALE AND A HEAD FULL OF MAGIC

Image

www.tuonoworld.com

NWS870R
Site Sponsor
Posts: 610
Joined: Thu Apr 08, 2010 2:59 pm
Location: Redditch UK

Re: Yamaha plan new crossplane twin

Post by NWS870R » Fri Jul 05, 2013 1:14 am

Ummm.... it's hardly new is it? Whatever the capacity is it's still basically a tweaked/revised TRX motor.

Happy enuff with my 'old girl' ta!
Life is not about finding yourself, it's about creating yourself.

cobbadiggabuddyblooo
Site Sponsor
Posts: 6809
Joined: Thu Aug 28, 2008 9:19 am
Location: Brisbane,Australia

Re: Yamaha plan new crossplane twin

Post by cobbadiggabuddyblooo » Fri Jul 05, 2013 3:20 am

I'm happy with my old dog too, no need to teach her any more tricks, just have to do the tricks we do faster so motor & suspension tweaks take care of that. :wink: this all can be done for half the price of a new machine and you don't just have a off the showroom bike like any joe blow close to 100hp and over 80ft/lb .. I'll stick with my dark horse from MY FACE RACING. :wink: :lol: :lol:
laughter is the best medicine

User avatar
Kayla
Site Sponsor
Posts: 1670
Joined: Fri Jul 04, 2008 7:49 am
Location: County Durham

Re: Yamaha plan new crossplane twin

Post by Kayla » Fri Jul 05, 2013 9:13 am

sanddune51 wrote: I can't much see the point of a Trx650 other than it 'fitting' the minitwin race category nicely :wink:
That's it isn't it? Yam are missing a huge market there, not only for the mini/supertwin racers but people new to bikes in general.
Image

Just because you're breathing, it doesn't mean you're alive.

User avatar
Satoru
TRX-Enthusiast
Posts: 45
Joined: Sun May 06, 2012 10:33 pm
Location: Turate (CO), Italy
Contact:

Re: Yamaha plan new crossplane twin

Post by Satoru » Sun Jul 07, 2013 10:04 pm

NWS870R wrote:Ummm.... it's hardly new is it? Whatever the capacity is it's still basically a tweaked/revised TRX motor.

Happy enuff with my 'old girl' ta!
Doesn't look like the TRX' engine: wet sump instead of dry sump.
And I doubt that they'll have 5 valves per cylinder.
Sooo happy moving from Carbon Lorraine A3+ to SBSRS on my gold spots!

User avatar
Con Rod
Site Sponsor
Posts: 1126
Joined: Wed Nov 16, 2011 11:48 pm
Location: Sydney, Australia

Re: Yamaha plan new crossplane twin

Post by Con Rod » Mon Jul 08, 2013 12:50 am

interestingly it looks like it might have a uni-cam arrangement like the Honda VFR1200

Looking at the head I can only see space for a single camshaft


http://powersports.honda.com/experience ... a9fc2.aspx
Paul

User avatar
Kayla
Site Sponsor
Posts: 1670
Joined: Fri Jul 04, 2008 7:49 am
Location: County Durham

Re: Yamaha plan new crossplane twin

Post by Kayla » Mon Jul 08, 2013 9:47 am

Satoru wrote:
NWS870R wrote:Ummm.... it's hardly new is it? Whatever the capacity is it's still basically a tweaked/revised TRX motor.

Happy enuff with my 'old girl' ta!
Doesn't look like the TRX' engine: wet sump instead of dry sump.
And I doubt that they'll have 5 valves per cylinder.
Both of those are good things, surely? It'll make checking the level easier for the uninitiated and the whole five valves thing didn't work anyway, Yam have gone back to four valve heads.
Image

Just because you're breathing, it doesn't mean you're alive.

User avatar
Satoru
TRX-Enthusiast
Posts: 45
Joined: Sun May 06, 2012 10:33 pm
Location: Turate (CO), Italy
Contact:

Re: Yamaha plan new crossplane twin

Post by Satoru » Mon Jul 08, 2013 9:57 am

Kayla wrote:
Satoru wrote:
NWS870R wrote:Ummm.... it's hardly new is it? Whatever the capacity is it's still basically a tweaked/revised TRX motor.

Happy enuff with my 'old girl' ta!
Doesn't look like the TRX' engine: wet sump instead of dry sump.
And I doubt that they'll have 5 valves per cylinder.
Both of those are good things, surely? It'll make checking the level easier for the uninitiated and the whole five valves thing didn't work anyway, Yam have gone back to four valve heads.
I don't mind the number of valves or the wet sump.
My point was that I disagree with the statement that the new engine is basically a revised TRX motor.
Sooo happy moving from Carbon Lorraine A3+ to SBSRS on my gold spots!

User avatar
Mincehead
TRX-Enthusiast
Posts: 6345
Joined: Sun Jan 25, 2009 1:40 pm
Location: West Sussex

Re: Yamaha plan new crossplane twin

Post by Mincehead » Mon Jul 08, 2013 9:17 pm

I personally don`t give much of a fook about new bikes as I will NEVER buy new, total rip-off as far as I`m concerned.
LOUD PIPES SAVE LIVES

NWS870R
Site Sponsor
Posts: 610
Joined: Thu Apr 08, 2010 2:59 pm
Location: Redditch UK

Re: Yamaha plan new crossplane twin

Post by NWS870R » Tue Jul 09, 2013 12:41 am

Doesn't look like the TRX' engine: wet sump instead of dry sump.
And I doubt that they'll have 5 valves per cylinder.[/quote]
Both of those are good things, surely? It'll make checking the level easier for the uninitiated and the whole five valves thing didn't work anyway, Yam have gone back to four valve heads.[/quote]

I don't mind the number of valves or the wet sump.
My point was that I disagree with the statement that the new engine is basically a revised TRX motor.[/quote]

I meant the principle of the 270 degree 'now called crossplane' crank not every component thereafter :roll: Just saying it's nothing to wet yer pants over that's all :dontknow:
Life is not about finding yourself, it's about creating yourself.

Post Reply