VOG Forum banner
1 - 20 of 21 Posts

·
Lone Rider of the Apocolypse
Joined
·
6,677 Posts
It's an intriguing idea. This isn't t real, right? This is just some photoshopped rendering?
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
17,114 Posts
I think they have enough ugly bikes in the lineup already. If they ever do release a Four it should be something cool, sporty, and good looking.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
12,828 Posts
What they have now in the 108 is good enough. Now they need to work on styling.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
17,114 Posts
Some air-cooled W3 Motorcycle were made in the past, that was some cool design... Never prodution though
I remember reading something about a W-3, but that was a long time ago. As a general rule, more cylinders makes it easier to produce more horsepower. Polaris seems to be moving away from trying to cash in on the original Indian Motorcycle Co's heritage, and I have no opinion yay or nay on doing so. But the Four was a pretty notable Indian. Most modern sport bikes use a 3 or 4, mounted perpendicular to the frame, and tilted forward to lower the center of gravity and create space for the tank. I think the economics of today probably don't justify the R&D, but if I was in charge of Polaris and I went along with purchasing Indian...how about an in-line four, mounted longerudily like the original Indian Four. But instead of a Sport bike we put it in a more sporting cruiser, like the original. What if we took a bike like a Gunner and put a 1300 cc water cooled four, mounted like that, 80-90 ft-lbs of torque and 150 hp? The thing with mounting it longituduly like the original is you sacrifice some performance, center of gravity is higher and space is wasted. But does that matter in a power cruiser? Because what does matter in a cruiser is the feet forward comfort. Mounting perpendicular like a sport bike blocks that, longitudinal preserves that.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
4,841 Posts
I remember reading something about a W-3, but that was a long time ago. As a general rule, more cylinders makes it easier to produce more horsepower. Polaris seems to be moving away from trying to cash in on the original Indian Motorcycle Co's heritage, and I have no opinion yay or nay on doing so. But the Four was a pretty notable Indian. Most modern sport bikes use a 3 or 4, mounted perpendicular to the frame, and tilted forward to lower the center of gravity and create space for the tank. I think the economics of today probably don't justify the R&D, but if I was in charge of Polaris and I went along with purchasing Indian...how about an in-line four, mounted longerudily like the original Indian Four. But instead of a Sport bike we put it in a more sporting cruiser, like the original. What if we took a bike like a Gunner and put a 1300 cc water cooled four, mounted like that, 80-90 ft-lbs of torque and 150 hp? The thing with mounting it longituduly like the original is you sacrifice some performance, center of gravity is higher and space is wasted. But does that matter in a power cruiser? Because what does matter in a cruiser is the feet forward comfort. Mounting perpendicular like a sport bike blocks that, longitudinal preserves that.
I like that, seems a 106 air cooled V-4 sould sell it..... what's the difference, V-Twin or V-quatro, the cylinder casing would only be 10 Cm wider due to smaller pistons

How awsome would that be...
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
302 Posts
The V-4 was/is more a metric thing , maybe a touch of HD as they did play with em some. I know when Yamaha announced that their "turn the touring world upside down" new Venture was coming out, droves of people were waiting inline to buy thinking they were going to see the newer 1700cc 180 horse V-Max motor put to work. When Yamaha uncovered the slug of a thing they came out with they lost a lot of customers and now they can't give the things away (left over 28000 dollar SVTC's can now be had for under 15 and they still do not sell). I am sure the folks at Yamaha are regretting everyday not having stayed with their heritage in some form of watercooled V-4 for their Venture line.
My opin is that, in staying with the longitudal Indian 4 design of yesteryear, Indian would be crazy to not reup a modern version like they did with their Thunderstroke. I went from Victory to Gold Wing and I can honestly say that if Polaris ever did this I would definitely be interested!
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
299 Posts
Jim Feuling made that W3 motor. It was HD like: air cooled, 2 valve heads driven by triple gear driven cams & pushrods. 4" bore and 4"stroke, 150 cubic inch displacement. Alleged make 150 hp and 170 ft-lbs. of torque at the rear wheel.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
8,075 Posts
In the fifties, Sunbeam had a twin in line 500 cc bike. Massive engine but rode smooth (yes first hand experience with one). they had square tyres, meaning car tyres fitted both front and rear..... When one went round corners, I at least was always wary of only having like 1/2 inch at most of rubber on the road.... Great bikes....

I have also had the privilege of riding both models of the aerial square fours. Now that was a bike way ahead of it's time if you ask me.... Sunbeam Cycles - Wikipedia

 
  • Like
Reactions: Ghostrider25

·
Registered
Joined
·
12,828 Posts
I remember reading something about a W-3, but that was a long time ago. As a general rule, more cylinders makes it easier to produce more horsepower. Polaris seems to be moving away from trying to cash in on the original Indian Motorcycle Co's heritage, and I have no opinion yay or nay on doing so. But the Four was a pretty notable Indian. Most modern sport bikes use a 3 or 4, mounted perpendicular to the frame, and tilted forward to lower the center of gravity and create space for the tank. I think the economics of today probably don't justify the R&D, but if I was in charge of Polaris and I went along with purchasing Indian...how about an in-line four, mounted longerudily like the original Indian Four. But instead of a Sport bike we put it in a more sporting cruiser, like the original. What if we took a bike like a Gunner and put a 1300 cc water cooled four, mounted like that, 80-90 ft-lbs of torque and 150 hp? The thing with mounting it longituduly like the original is you sacrifice some performance, center of gravity is higher and space is wasted. But does that matter in a power cruiser? Because what does matter in a cruiser is the feet forward comfort. Mounting perpendicular like a sport bike blocks that, longitudinal preserves that.
Let's talk a minute about Indian going in a different with this new 108. Funny how the chieftains are more like Harley than Indians but the 111 TS is unique to the Indian MC heritage.
That same motor imo should stay in the line up with the traditional styled Indians from the first Polaris generation. The full fender bikes and the Chief and Springfield. The new redesigned Chieftain can get the 108. How hard would it be to have both in different models. Kind of like my old thinking that Polaris was taking Indian and Victory together down two different roads.
Looks like they're actually doing it now and it's not such a bad thing. Here's to hoping their new motor finds its way into a few different styles Indians. Maybe the 116 TS will still be available ? I think it should stay but that's up to the EPA I guess.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,033 Posts
Let's talk a minute about Indian going in a different with this new 108. Funny how the chieftains are more like Harley than Indians but the 111 TS is unique to the Indian MC heritage.
That same motor imo should stay in the line up with the traditional styled Indians from the first Polaris generation. The full fender bikes and the Chief and Springfield. The new redesigned Chieftain can get the 108. How hard would it be to have both in different models. Kind of like my old thinking that Polaris was taking Indian and Victory together down two different roads.
Looks like they're actually doing it now and it's not such a bad thing. Here's to hoping their new motor finds its way into a few different styles Indians. Maybe the 116 TS will still be available ? I think it should stay but that's up to the EPA I guess.
I agree. Go with both type of models and incorporate that Victory DNA into a new type of Chieftain and other models. I imagine we will get a clearer picture come next fall and in 2021.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
9,144 Posts
Discussion Starter · #18 ·
Let's talk a minute about Indian going in a different with this new 108. Funny how the chieftains are more like Harley than Indians but the 111 TS is unique to the Indian MC heritage.
That same motor imo should stay in the line up with the traditional styled Indians from the first Polaris generation. The full fender bikes and the Chief and Springfield. The new redesigned Chieftain can get the 108. How hard would it be to have both in different models. Kind of like my old thinking that Polaris was taking Indian and Victory together down two different roads.
Looks like they're actually doing it now and it's not such a bad thing. Here's to hoping their new motor finds its way into a few different styles Indians. Maybe the 116 TS will still be available ? I think it should stay but that's up to the EPA I guess.
I agree, but before Polaris decides to do that, they will test the waters to see how well the Challenger bike sells.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
17,114 Posts
Let's talk a minute about Indian going in a different with this new 108. Funny how the chieftains are more like Harley than Indians but the 111 TS is unique to the Indian MC heritage.
That same motor imo should stay in the line up with the traditional styled Indians from the first Polaris generation. The full fender bikes and the Chief and Springfield. The new redesigned Chieftain can get the 108. How hard would it be to have both in different models. Kind of like my old thinking that Polaris was taking Indian and Victory together down two different roads.
Looks like they're actually doing it now and it's not such a bad thing. Here's to hoping their new motor finds its way into a few different styles Indians. Maybe the 116 TS will still be available ? I think it should stay but that's up to the EPA I guess.
I'm just not that enamored with the PP108. It's a low revving engine, 105-110 hp/tq to the wheel. No better than the 12 yr old Freedom 100" I already have. Not saying it isn't good, just that less than what I already have doesn't strike me as anything all that remarkable. Now Harley re-releasing the Revolution engine with 145 hp at the crank has me very curious. As for the TS111 and it's future, I doubt it has one. Sales are down for the brand, after adding the FTR. So we can deduce from this that the TS111 engined bike's are tanking worse than the brand overall. It will be sales that kill it. BMW just came out with an 1800 cc flat twin, air cooled, Euro 5 compliant, which is stricter than epa regs. I would also note that the Freedom 106 with a design that dates back to the late 90's was able to pass Euro 4. So as much as we like to bash the epa for screwing with our fun, it won't be them that kills the Titty Stroke 111.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
12,828 Posts
There you go throwing a bunch of logic into this stuff again. Well we know the PP108 is nothing spectacular but according to many it moves down the road with authority. Tranny gearing ? Idk but there still is a bunch of performance stuff to be developed for this new engine. Who knows how’s its gonna perform .... react to mods. The new bike to me sits there and just looks like it means business. It’s functional and it has form. I’m real interested to see what other styles of bike surround this new motor.
As far as the TS111? Your probably right. Too bad cause the 1st gen Indians looked like Indians and I think the engineers did a fine job.
Today’s new Indian may be a hit. So many I’ve talked to like it and wouldn’t mind owning it till they hear the cost of admission.
 
  • Like
Reactions: crosscountryla
1 - 20 of 21 Posts
This is an older thread, you may not receive a response, and could be reviving an old thread. Please consider creating a new thread.
Top