MOTUS: New Sport Tourer built in Alabama

....the riding position combined with the V-4, make this a really desirable machine. If it had the original direct injection and ABS, it would be a no-brainer.

Without.....

I still can't get over how PERFECT the riding position was when I sat on one in Houston:


Motus by Shooter158, on Flickr

I have a 29 inseam and could flat foot that bike with Piloti driving shoes on.

It does have a "built from pieces" hot rod look to it that is very attractive. Not smooth and seamless like the Japanese or BMW sport tourers. I don't see it being a boring bike, but oh that price. That price is way above many very capable machines from several different manufacturers that have proven reliability, an established dealer network, and local service and parts availability.

Can y'all quit quoting him, so he's easier to ignore.

What a sad, sick joke 1970's power, weight, and handling levels for 125 grand....plus if the guy decides to dump the 10 bike project you're sol for parts. Is he mentally ill? :huh

At this point I'll be suprised if one can ever be bought......they really seem to be dragging their feet on this bike, makes me wonder if there's problems behind the scenes.

wait a sec - I thought that was the whole thing behind this bike?? When did the Direct injection and ABS get dropped? The ABS I kinda get but wasn't half the point of this bike that it was going to have a super modern American motor in it?

Define "Super Modern".

If pushrod V4 based on a Corvette's engine meets that criteria, then I guess they have it...

GM's V-8 engines can reasonable be called "super modern". They are competitive in every way (power to weight, BSFC, flexibility) to other "super modern" V-8 engines (Ford, Toyota, Nissan, Chrysler). Even BMW, Audi and Mercedes have little advantage unless you look at M, RS or AMG engines and those engines cost a lot more to manufacture and service.

Interesting article link comparing the GM V8 to the AMG V-8.

I'm not a GM guy, I'm a Ford guy, but the Ford OHC V8 engines have no advantage over the GM pushrod engines and they are much harder to service and package in the vehicle. I think it is funny that pushrods are such a hot point for people. 40 years ago, the lowly pushrod was a mark of shame but not today. BMW R-bikes had pushrods up to the camhead. Guzzi has always had pushrods.

I do think it is unfortunate that Motus dropped the DI system, though - GM's new V8's do have that, along with cylinder deactivation.

The whole selling point for the Motus seems to be the engine, which is a sweet piece indeed
But why couldn't they base a much more cost effective bike around that same engine, bring the price down around 10 grand, and still have a VERY unique bike that piques everybodies interest, and that more folks could actually afford? If it was competitively priced with its competitition, it would sell like hotcakes based on its uniqueness alone.

Something tells me the engine in the MOTUS would set you back ten grand. Plus.

I have three Guzzis and a V8 powered Chevrolet Suburban.

Unfortunately for those wanting a 65 per cent discount on this bike, the producers do not want it to sell like hotcakes.

If it sold like hotcakes, they would have to build it like hotcakes. Which would mean investing enough money in plant, parts and people that they could cast, weld, screw together and ship 10 or more bikes a day instead of just one a day.

Suddenly they have a lot more at stake and are selling bikes with cheap cycle parts that they would not want to own and ride themselves.

Sure, IF all went well for long enough they could possibly rake in more money that way, eventually.

But something tells me they are not doing it just for the money.

Good article. Pushrods sure seem to be having renewed respect in the automotive world. Five inches in height difference between a GM and an AMG V8? that's a lot. Sure makes it easier to have a lower hood on the Vette.

I've got four GM v8s in my garage. Two cars, a suburban, a ski boat... Never a single problem with any of them. Couldn't be simpler to maintain. I wonder how much money it would cost to keep the valvetrain on an AMG v8 in spec over say, 150,000 miles? (Yeah, I know...i know...most of those are garage queens, but still). I know how much it's cost on my suburban: zero dollars.

Judging engines by displacement has always been silly imho. It's generally for tax reasons. Who cares what the internal size of the cylinder is? What matters is the external size of the motor, and the fuel economy, power, etc. I saw another article that a Vette v8 had better power to weight compared to a Ferarri engine. Pushrods are light, compact, simple and durable as hell.

Yes, you give up higher RPM, and a tad less torque for same CC compared to overhead cams etc. But If govt's taxed engines by external volume you'd see more of 'em on the road. That will never happen, of course.

I've said it before and I'll say it again, I would LOVE to ride the Motus. That kind of torque (and HP) down low would be addicting on the street. I hope they make money and stay in business.

Cakeeater

Good point and nicely stated.

In the bike world, the other reason for the focus on displacement, of course, has been racing.

Four-valve DOHC heads and six cylinders worked for Honda in the 60s because the point of the exercise was to get maximum propulsion out of 250cc. If he could have made the engine as big as he wanted, likely he'd have done something different.

The Japanese (and a lot of European) automakers got VERY good at small displacement because of tax reasons. Ever wonder why the 1.8 liter is so prevalent in Japanese cars? At 2.0L they are in a different tax bracket that makes them significantly more expensive.

In the US we never really had that, so the classic "bigger is better" mentality always held sway. You still see it, how many premium models have +6.0 liter displacements?

If GM is getting 30mpg from 6.3L great. I have bikes if I want a high revving barely steetable engine.

I'd argue in the US we had the mentality of Customer is King. In europe and japan, it has long been avoid the tax man.

I've got a 6.2 liter v8 in a (Holden) Pontiac g8, manual trans. It's a big car, holds five adults, monster trunk. If I baby it on the interstate I can get 27 mpg. That's about the same as a five-passenger mid-size FWD 'crossover' with much smaller engine. However, my car is a blast to drive. Such a fantastic kick of power from idle to redline. (I rarely come close to spinning the engine fast...it's just not needed to really haul).

I like high-revving engines too. But I like engines that produce more power at all RPMs. This motus is cool. the corvette endurance racers that used this engine would clean up against the competition.

cakeeater

I had a 2005 GTO (Holden Monaro to your 4dr Commodore), also with the 6 liter LS-2 400hp aluminum block 'vette motor.

Excellent car....and also capable of motoring down the interstate in 6th gear at 1800 rpm getting 26mpg.

pushrods does not mean low tech.

I test drove a GTO. Loved it, but I needed more space (three kids) That's when the g8 gxp came out I vowed I'd get one.

You are correct. Pushrods do not mean low tech. Pushrods are just a way of transmitting force to a valve to open it.

Interesting vid here.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7bWqpiV3wCY

Nothing wrong with pushrods. Top fuel dragsters making 8,000 HP (the most power automotive engine in the world) have pushrods. NASCAR uses pushrods. I have a Chevy with a pushrod V8 in it. Makes plenty of power. I also have a '72 Ford Pinto with a 2.0L OHC in it. Runs fine, but it has no advantage over pushrods, other than it is easier to change the timing belt than it is a timing chain on a V8 (my hand built V8 has a geared cam drive). You're on the wrong thread. Go over to the CB1100 thread. Now there is a real sweet bike, that you can actually buy for $10,000. And it's DOHC, though hardly a modern design.

Well if NASCAR uses them they must be the way to go. I heard NASCAR started using fuel injection last year.