SuzukiHayabusa.org
TECHNICAL => ALL MOTOR TALK => Topic started by: MREDDIEB on November 25, 2011, 08:02:19 PM
-
I have a 2003 stock motor with full muzzy exhaust, PC III, K&N air filter, boosbysmith gear indicator. I was thinking of sending it out to get one of the 200 hp packages ( ported head, cams & remaping). I may have missed one of the details in the listed package. Here is my question, will the difference in feel of power be enough to notice from stock? I don't do any track time, just street riding. Is it worth it?
Looking for all opinions, good and bad. Thanks.
-
You're probably making 150-160hp now...with all the Gen II's and 14's putting out 180-195 with just a pipe and a tune...I would do it....well I did it....no regrets....keep it as a sleeper.....oh yeah it makes a difference if you reach 200 real hp. Got to get you a real good battery or go for the two batteries mod and add another fan.....
-
There is a point of diminishing returns in everything.
As pointed out above, a good-running stock Gen I is probably 150-155 horsepower, and a piped one like yours is probably 160-165 horsepower.
If it was me, that point would probably be removing the base gasket for a little additional compression, a stock OEM intake cam on the exhaust side (because the stock exhaust cam is proportionally much smaller than that of the Gen II bikes), degreeing the cams with a pair of adjustable cam sprockets for peak power, all short stacks, and removing the engine counter-balancer.
I would use ECU Editor to re-flash the ECU to raise the 6th gear rev limiter to the same as gears 1 through 5 (11,000 rpm I think?), effectively removing the top speed limiter, and to enable full ignition advance in the lower gears.
With the addition of EITHER a 39 tooth rear sprocket OR a 190/55 rear tire (I prefer the latter), you'd be a little shy of 200 horsepower, but the bike would be just barely capable of cracking the 200 mph barrier (the s. Florida 9/10 guys have been doing it for years on Gen I bikes with as little as 175 horsepower), in nearly stock condition (with no aftermarket parts other than the adjustable cam sprockets), on pump 87 octane unleaded. If your size and ability to assume a good body tuck causes you to fall short of 200 mph, a few little tricks like ceramic wheel bearings, low-viscocity full-synthetic motor oil, and/or oxygenated low-octane race gas like VP MR9 or MR12 might be needed.
It would probably get you most of the benefits of the "200 hp" package, for a fraction of the cost, but that's just me.
-
I have a 2003 stock motor with full muzzy exhaust, PC III, K&N air filter, boosbysmith gear indicator. I was thinking of sending it out to get one of the 200 hp packages ( ported head, cams & remaping). I may have missed one of the details in the listed package. Here is my question, will the difference in feel of power be enough to notice from stock? I don't do any track time, just street riding. Is it worth it?
Looking for all opinions, good and bad. Thanks.
Are you looking to stay with N/A and not go turbo? Is that you main priority, Eddie? And "sending it out" Are you willing to go into the bottom or are you trying to stay out and get there without addressing the possible Gen II 2mm over crankshaft. Without "going in", you will be stretching to achieve the 200whp marque with even a 1397cc scenario. There are ways of getting there with that bigger bore build, cams and head-work, large air-box mod, but without it, but not so easily.
-
Just built gen1 engine for a friend, with budget in mind. 84mm pistons, base gasket off, intake cam for exhaust, biggest cam for intake that fits without head work, no porting to head at all, counter-balancer removed and short stacks. It gave 194,4rwhp, 40hp more than before when he had only yoshi RS-3 installed.
-
Thanks for the input.
Cookie, I was looking at the engine packages offered by RC's Performance & Carpenter Racing. It is more of a money thing & reliability. Turbo set up is pricey. I don't have the skill or tools to do it myself. I figured 200 hp would keep my old girl running with the new stuff.
-
What size is the stock pistons?
Found it, 81mm
That means 84mm makes it a 1397cc motor right?
-
Just built gen1 engine for a friend, with budget in mind. 84mm pistons, base gasket off, intake cam for exhaust, biggest cam for intake that fits without head work, no porting to head at all, counter-balancer removed and short stacks. It gave 194,4rwhp, 40hp more than before when he had only yoshi RS-3 installed.
Pretty much what I outlined, except for the 3mm over pistons. And it's just me, but IF it's even needed, I'd rather pick up that last few mph with ceramic wheel bearings, low-viscocity oil, and possibly better gas, rather than to have to tear the engine down to do machine work and re-plating.
-
You guys make it sound easy :D
If I took a cam out, I'd never get it back in.
-
And yes, 84x63 = 1397. Bore squared, times one-quarter of pi, times the stroke, times the number of cylinders (four in this case).
Problem is, when you start hogging out the engine and making significant increases in compression, you can get into cooling problems, starting problems (requiring the additional cost, weight, and complexity of a dual-battery starting system), octane starts to become more of an issue, and you generally have to upgrade everything else to match if you want to get optimum benefits from it- bigger cams, stiffer springs (which cause more mechanical losses and don't last as long), retainers, shorter valve guides to clear the higher cam lift, porting to match the increased displacement, larger exhaust system... - you're basically re-engineering the whole engine.
-
You guys make it sound easy :D
If I took a cam out, I'd never get it back in.
It's not rocket surgery.
But a dry 40 shot of dope would get you 200 horsepower from a stock Gen I engine too. :tu:
-
Here's my 2ct , I would do the bottom first . I had Bob C do the port and Big 425/425 cams on my bike and it made like 186hp but it sucked the life out of the bottom end , So I went back and had it made into a 1397 . I got all the bottom back and then some :) Bike made 210+ on pump gas and 6 inch over at a different shop that is good on true dyno numbers 3 years later and a whole bunch of street and track ridieing I just cracked a head :( So I had it refreshed By Steve K and a new head from Bob , Just finished the break in and it feels alot stronger then before . I will get her on the dyno soon to see how much hp it's makeing now and a new race gas map with numbers for that too
-
I had Bob C do the port and Big 425/425 cams on my bike and it made like 186hp but it sucked the life out of the bottom end , So I went back and had it made into a 1397 . I got all the bottom back and then some :) Bike made 210+ on pump gas and 6 inch over at a different shop that is good on true dyno numbers 3 years later and a whole bunch of street and track ridieing I just cracked a head :( So I had it refreshed By Steve K and a new head from Bob , Just finished the break in and it feels alot stronger then before . I will get her on the dyno soon to see how much hp it's makeing now and a new race gas map with numbers for that too
Are you trying to talk him INTO engine work, or OUT of engine work?
Let me see if I got this right (I may have lost count): To get 186-210 horsepower, you've been into the engine three times in three years, including paying for two Carpenter cylinder heads? That sounds like about as much fun as intestinal flu. :roll:
How many "track" miles did you get out of all that (between engine failures, of course)?
-
So lets' get this in order : went with just head work first thinking I would get that 200hp number and did not got 186 and Lost the bottom end power it all went into the top of the power band ,Keep it that way for a month Then I went back as I was told by many racers that I should have done the Bottom end first Pistons/Bore had it made into a 1397 with the port and cams that were allready in it makes 210+ The crack in the head was just an unforeseen event after 3 years of use . As far as track time maybe 80 passes or so and allot of street 185mph runs . So If I was not clear: The Port and cams did not work for me and made my ride into a top end bike with very little street usefullness Running mid 9's So after all the motor work combined it will run 8's and is Very fun on the street as I use it all the time to go to work
-
...maybe 80 passes...
That's 20 miles, or almost 7 miles between engine jobs.
Just gassing you, man. I think you spent a bunch of time and money reducing the reliability of your bike. A stocker will go 185 mph, and if you only need that 200 horsepower for 20 miles, a couple hundred dollars will get you a dry shot of dope. That leaves you with a stock engine that will start on one battery and run great on pump 87 unleaded for the next 100,000 miles without overheating.
-
I'm still trying to figure out what you were trying to accomplish by pissing away what little cylinder pressure a low-compression stocker had, by installing a couple of giant cams like that. I mean, how many times does it say on Web's web site that those cams need more compression to work? That thing must have been miserable to ride. :lol:
-
gen2 crank,brock stock bore 12.3:1 pistons,ported head,gen2 cams,easy peasy.shave the head 10thou,set the squish around 40thou
cams around 106/108.balance the crank,pull the counterbalancer.that,ll give you basically a gen2 with a ported head and approx 13;1 true compression,maybe some gen2 valves as well will give another 0.4 comp.That,ll get you into the mid 190,s hp on a very low stress street motor.if you want more torque add a 84mm bore.the setup i described should net around 110-112ft/lbs mid 190,s hp.i did a 1340 with 13.8:1 comp with 395/278 webbs that made 208-210hp 116ft/lbs on m109 vp oxy unleaded fuel with mixed gen1 stacks,106/106 dial in.It actually mphd showing 212hp at the strip.
-
...and I'm not going to pick on Glenn, because he is obviously an expert at this, and I'm not. Glenn will be the first to admit that a complete ground-up engine build like this is way beyond the depth of anything that we've talked about so far. That said, Glenn's well-balanced engine build(s) may actually cost less, live longer, and make more power than the hack approach of randomly throwing a Carpenter cylinder head (or two) and a pair of giant cams on a low-compression stock engine.
To me, the cost of buying a Gen II crank, a set of 84mm pistons, a pair of cams, a set of 16 titanium Gen II valves, valve springs, retainers, and a pair of adjustable cam sprockets, PLUS the expense of boring and re-plating the cylinder block, balancing the crankshaft, head milling, porting, and valve guide machining, PLUS what it costs in terms of parts, labor, and fluids for a complete high-performance engine overhaul, demonstrates the appeal of simply slapping on a $3,000 Stage I turbo at 6psi, and instantly making 240 horsepower on pump gas without even lifting the valve cover. And Glenn's 13.8:1 race-gas stroker motor would probably need dual batteries to start- the turbo motor would start fine on one.
-
no argument a turbo will be better hp/dollar value.
i agree though a head cam package is a waste
of money without a good increase in compression,they become
soggier than a wet sock under 6000rpm without
compression.i saw a mates bike.a gen1 with gen2
crank,ported head,redialled gen1 cams. 180hp/106ft/lbs
with torque everywhere.comparably it made 157-160hp
98ft/lbs ,before the build.work out how much you honestly
want,then people can tell you how much it will honestly
cost,as owners who,ve paid themselves.just remember though,
choose carefully because unless its over 200hp, you will
get used to it,and the rush will subside.on that basis
turbos and nos can recharge the adrenalin gland
like no other,if thats the objective,good luck.
-
Glenn, this appears to be his goal:
I figured 200 hp would keep my old girl running with the new stuff.
Several reputable sh.org engine guys have claimed 200 horsepower with the addition of an OEM intake cam on the exhaust side, along with a few other odds and ends (all shorts, full box mod, etc.). I'm not going to claim quite that, but I think he can come close enough to put him on an even basis with the new bike, which is all he's really looking for. Given his limited goals, I don't think I could justify going much further.
-
Thanks guys, I learning something here.
Where can I find a stage one turbo setup for 3 grand. Just to think about.
I saw the RCC turbo for almost 5 grand, then it has to be installed. (another 2 grand)
One guy I spoke to suggested that I get a used turbo. Not really my thing since I don't know anything about them. I could be had.
-
http://www.rcsperformanceonline.com/Hayabusa_Stock_Bore_Engine_Packages_s/60.htm
this is what I was considering. Drop off, pick up.
Will I lose the bottom end grunt? The torque should still be there right?
-
I'm still trying to figure out what you were trying to accomplish by pissing away what little cylinder pressure a low-compression stocker had, by installing a couple of giant cams like that. I mean, how many times does it say on Web's web site that those cams need more compression to work? That thing must have been miserable to ride. :lol:
Yea it was , But at the time money was the thing and I just went with the head package ,for the most part they don't work with out the bottom end done The bike now has 13:1 and not just 20miles on it ,I got 15,000 before she cracked and most likely would have gotten way more as the internals on the bike were in good shape , And yes Nos would have been cheeper but as we all know you can't stay off the bottle and BLAM! is allways the likely end to that motor LOL
-
Thanks guys, I learning something here.
Where can I find a stage one turbo setup for 3 grand. Just to think about.
I saw the RCC turbo for almost 5 grand, then it has to be installed. (another 2 grand)
One guy I spoke to suggested that I get a used turbo. Not really my thing since I don't know anything about them. I could be had.
$3195, brand new:
http://www.shop.stedmanmotorsports.com/Suzuki-Hayabusa-Stage-1-Turbo-Systems-99-07-SRP13s19-7.htm (http://www.shop.stedmanmotorsports.com/Suzuki-Hayabusa-Stage-1-Turbo-Systems-99-07-SRP13s19-7.htm)
Installing a Stage I turbo kit (without a spacer plate) would be no more mechanically challenging than installing your Muzzy pipe was and certainly not a $2,000 job.
Plus, you can sell off your used Muzzy pipe afterwards.
-
http://www.rcsperformanceonline.com/Hayabusa_Stock_Bore_Engine_Packages_s/60.htm
this is what I was considering. Drop off, pick up.
Will I lose the bottom end grunt? The torque should still be there right?
You will not lose your bottom end grunt if you match your new cams with additional compression via removing the baseplate gasket and/or milling the head. If you try to run the larger cams, you're going to need even more compression, via new high-compression pistons.
My point was, you can get most of these gains for a fraction of the money, without a bunch of aftermarket parts and machining / porting.
-
I'm still trying to figure out what you were trying to accomplish by pissing away what little cylinder pressure a low-compression stocker had, by installing a couple of giant cams like that. I mean, how many times does it say on Web's web site that those cams need more compression to work? That thing must have been miserable to ride. :lol:
Yea it was , But at the time money was the thing and I just went with the head package ,for the most part they don't work with out the bottom end done The bike now has 13:1 and not just 20miles on it ,I got 15,000 before she cracked and most likely would have gotten way more as the internals on the bike were in good shape , And yes Nos would have been cheeper but as we all know you can't stay off the bottle and BLAM! is allways the likely end to that motor LOL
I'm guessing that building the motor once would have been less expensive than doing it three times, and although a 13:1 1397 is not as bad a match for those cams as the 11:1 1300 was, you still have too much cam for too little engine. You realize that you're using 277 degrees advertised duration and more importantly 250 degrees duration at .050" lift on BOTH sides of your engine? Who told you that was a good idea for riding back and forth to work? Carpenter and Knecum both know better than that. I'm guessing it was YOUR idea.
The OP is looking for help on improving his motorcycle, not on how to blow a bunch of money messing it up. I'm guessing that in real round numbers here, that you've probably burned through around $6,000 or so, to arrive at your current Franken-motor, to obtain results of about 10 PEAK horsepower more than could have been obtained from a simple $350 OEM intake cam and a few odds and ends, and I'm guessing that the two-intake stocker would make more power from idle all the way up to almost 10,000 rpms.
-
lol. :hys:.
my first foray into my motor was factory pros
cam set for a stock gen1 motor.basically 2 megacycle
385,s.i fitted them and went and did a roll on with
a mate with a stock motor,we rolled on at 3000 in
3rd gear,he dissapeared so fast he was in the next town
by the time mine came on cam.it went massively worse
than stock until 8000rpm,i was in 2nd gear for the next roll
on,lol.build it smart and get it right the first time,undercam,
good compression,high velocity porting and
cc,s make for lots of grins on the street,youll always
get the jump in a rollon.
-
My unrestricted Gen I Hayabusa had a nearly stock 170 horsepower engine and weighed about 75 pounds less than stock. It out-ran numerous 200+ horsepower bikes, endured HUNDREDS of full-throttle track miles (as a student, novice racer, expert racer, and finally instructor), got over 40 mpg, started on one battery with snow on it, ran great on pump 87 regular unleaded, never got hot, and served me well for over 30,000 miles of commuting, interstate travel, road racing, track days, drag racing, top speed runs, wheelie gatherings, Starbucks runs, camping trips, recreational mountain rides, and anything else I could think of doing with it, and it seemed to run better the day I sold it than the day I bought it.
-
...Installing a Stage I turbo kit (without a spacer plate) would be no more mechanically challenging than installing your Muzzy pipe was and certainly not a $2,000 job...
JOTD
:hys: :hys: :hys: :hys: :hys:
but getting it to actually run smoothly and reliably will be easy?
:no:
-
...Installing a Stage I turbo kit (without a spacer plate) would be no more mechanically challenging than installing your Muzzy pipe was and certainly not a $2,000 job...
JOTD
:hys: :hys: :hys: :hys: :hys:
but getting it to actually run smoothly and reliably will be easy?
:no:
He will have to pay someone to map whatever combination he ends up with, whether it's two intakes, or a bolt-on turbo kit.
And what's hard about installing a Stage I kit with no spacer plate?
-
Kirk,
I am a NA guy and have no hands on knowledge of installing/stting up turbos.
But i have a ton of friends who have done it or had it done.
NONE of those folks have ever said it's simple to install even a low boost turbo and get it running like a stock machine.
Perhaps you's like to share your experiences mounting/tuning turbos???
Maybe it's simpler than I thought.
NOT
-
I didn't say it was "simple", I just said that it was not mechanically challenging. Here's the online instructions for a Stage I ( Dennis' old "Ghetto" kit) with no baseplate spacer, to include the FMU installation and adjustment, completely illustrated. You don't even have to take the valve cover off:
http://suzukihayabusa.org/Ghetto_Install2.pdf (http://suzukihayabusa.org/Ghetto_Install2.pdf)
Do step one, then step two, and so on, until you run out of steps.
-
Kirk,
what is kinda sticking in my craw is you giving a mixture of good advice and bad advice (REALLY bad wrt turbo) to a guy who is just starting out.
You come off as an expert on engine mods. This guy might just believe all the stuff you are saying
Had you ever been inside that 30,000mi motor which ran so well????
Have you ever flashed an ECU?
Have you ever ridden even a well buily 1397 compared with a stock motor gen1?
I am not attacking you whatsoever, just cautioning new guy to get advice from someone who has been there, done that.
Even a simple pipe & powercommander are not without their issues (admitedly minor)
Karl
BTW: my advice ito Eddie is to call Carpenter or Knecum, tell them his objectives, get pricing.
There are a zillion options.
-
I am always for the cubics. Maybe there should be some meditation to solve what one wants, the cheapest few horses, strong usable street engine, turbo power or just joy what building engine yourself gives, that`s me :lol:
-
I am looking to spice up my ride without breaking the bank. Another factor is reliability. I had a friend of mind blow past me with his 1507 busa. Then it broke down. Blow the oil plug right out. It's a fine line when building a motor.
I was passed three times in one day by an 09 busa with full pipe and a night of the ECU editor. I had nothing on the guy, he had me buy at least 25 horses and 100 lbs lighter. I had only been passed like that once. I wanted at least 200 hp. Three thousand for the build ( drive in/ drive out) didn't sound bad. $2400 sounded even better. I'm not gonna be doing any of the wrenching. I don't even know any that knows how too locally. I know a couple of people that think they know, but there bikes don't show it.
-
Kirk,
what is kinda sticking in my craw is you giving a mixture of good advice and bad advice (REALLY bad wrt turbo) to a guy who is just starting out.
Not trying to sell him on the idea of a turbo. Maybe I should make myself clear on that point. I was simply using the economic arithmatic of a really basic turbo to illustrate that it's easy to surpass the expense of one, when going into the engine.
You come off as an expert on engine mods. This guy might just believe all the stuff you are saying
The OP asked a question, and was given an incredibly bad "solution". Just out of empathy for the OP, who would NOT have spoken up to save him from the hassles and heartache of a mess like that. Is there something that I told him that was wrong? Glenn appears to be on the same page, and I think he knows what he's doing.
Had you ever been inside that 30,000mi motor which ran so well????
Have you ever flashed an ECU?
Have you ever ridden even a well buily 1397 compared with a stock motor gen1?
I am not attacking you whatsoever, just cautioning new guy to get advice from someone who has been there, done that.
Even a simple pipe & powercommander are not without their issues (admitedly minor)
Karl
Karl, I've never HAD to go inside a 30,000 mile engine. I've ridden a lot of bikes, and I've ridden (and raced) alongside a bunch more, including numerous 1397s, and I have no idea why someone would have issues with a simple pipe and Power Commander install.
If you're questioning my credentials to give advice of this nature, I was born into the industry, coming home from the hospital in a brand new 409-powered Chevrolet, with an interest in performance from the time I became old enough to understand, eventually using my crayons at age six to draw an accurate suck/squeeze/bang/blow sequence based on my knowledge. I've been inside motorcycle racing engines since puberty, and began automobile racing engine development in competition on the 1320' chassis dyno on my 16th birthday. I worked for a full-service race car fabrication facility with a dyno, and built all of my own racing engines, as well as engines for family, friends, and my customers. These engines ranged from NHRA Stock Eliminator type builds, to fuel-injected roller-cam intercooled turbo builds with no rules, cost-no-object aluminum-head engines using hundreds of horsepower's worth of nitrous, to (literally) fire-breathing NHRA Pro ET Rotary Mazda engines. My personality type causes me to not exactly be the life of the party when it's time to do this stuff, but I learn from the mistakes of others, and to tend to not make mistakes myself. I'm nearing AARP membership age, and I have NEVER had an engine fail due to anything I did wrong. I understand the principles, I have an extensive background in racing engine math, I have held multiple ASE certifications, I am factory-trained by more makes than I could list, and have received numerous awards, including being appointed to a manufacturer's National Advisory Board.
So if Mr. 250@.050" stocker starts sending the OP down the wrong road, I'm gonna call "time out". It's much easier and less expensive to do it now, than to have to help un-screw it up after he's already blown his entire budget and has less power than when he started out.
You are correct that some engine combinations can have "teething" issues when it comes to set-up, and I have found that these generally become an issue based on the complexity of the set-up, the depth of the program, and the distance from which one strays from common combinations. For that reason and others, I'm always looking for the simplest, most efficient, most reliable, most proven, and least invasive path to the stated goals. And the OP's stated goals aren't much.
BTW: my advice ito Eddie is to call Carpenter or Knecum, tell them his objectives, get pricing.
That is EXCELLENT advice, Karl. Those guys have probably learned more stuff on accident, than I have learned on purpose.
-
2400 isnt going to overcome 100lbs and 25hp,keep
saving buddy,and buy a gen2,then lose 100lbs.Then no one
has to touch your bike,the changeover price 2nd hand
isnt that much.its all simple maths,6.6lbs more needs
1ft/lb more to accelerate the same.you can gear it to help
but thats not the complete answer as you change up to
a higher gear sooner.
-
2400 isnt going to overcome 100lbs and 25hp,keep
saving buddy,and buy a gen2,then lose 100lbs.Then no one
has to touch your bike,the changeover price 2nd hand
isnt that much.its all simple maths,6.6lbs more needs
1ft/lb more to accelerate the same.you can gear it to help
but thats not the complete answer as you change up to
a higher gear sooner.
I cannot argue against this course of action.
-
You want to see a REAL eye-opener, spend that same $3,000 on wheels/tires, suspension, and brakes, and there won't be enough horsepower in the world to keep up with you, unless there are no corners where you ride.
* A pair of Marvic Penta II wheels with a pair of Supercorsa SPs with a 55 on the back
* 1" raising links, re-spring and re-valve both ends for your weight, properly adjusted
* HH front pads, steel front brake hoses, and high-temperature front brake fluid
And then go take a class at a track day. :tu:
-
Kirk : realize that you're using 277 degrees advertised duration and more importantly 250 degrees duration at .050 .It's 252 Duration and I did not have anything to do with the build , It's one on Bob's 1397 packages and I really think he knows what he is doing , Do you have a shop like him ? do you cnc Port? I did not list all the parts to my build but I will tell you that the bike will put any Frankin Bike you put together to shame :) So yes I put out $3500 on the first build That's Porting and 1397 Yes I went 2 times But that's My Problem , And yes this time It cost me 3 years later a Head at a reduced price and my choice to have Steve do the refresh on the Motor this Bike will rip a New asshole out of most Backyard modded Busa"s from people that don't have the money to do it right and spend it on the best , Oh yes don't build up your motor and just put a 30 shot on it and it will be just as fastLOL Seen a pile of those motors with the hole in the pistons , Not trying to flame ya here but it seems like you have all the answers , My point was that Bigger cams and a port did not do it for me , There is no replacement for displacement
-
Have you taken it off any sweet jumps, Napoleon? :lol:
-
Have you taken it off any sweet jumps, Napoleon? :lol:
Don't understand your statement.
-
Just gassing him. It's a line from the movie "Napoleon Dynamite". :lol:
I'm kind of wondering what his best ET / MPH has been since all this, if he's put his 64.5" bike in the eights yet?
...it will run 8's...
-
Oh, well I gonna save my money and buy a new bike. But I an't losing a 100lbs 8)
Gonna buy a Harley!
-
Kirk :Don't keep my slips but found some time slips for ya , How do I reduce them down to fit here ? these were with a cracked head
-
Sorry, man, I'm not much of a geek. Just tell us what YOU have run. Not interested in other people's time slips, lol. :wink:
-
Very Funny 9.097@ 150.88 1.482 60ft 9.149 @154.94 1.546 60ft
-
Come to Atco or Island and bring your walker and I will help you up on my bike so you could take it for a ride ,Just get a Dr's Note for me that the plastic hip you got will be ok for the G's :P
-
Very Funny 9.097@ 150.88 1.482 60ft 9.149 @154.94 1.546 60ft
I don't know, man, these guys put one into the 8s at over 155 mph with a lowered/piped stock (stock wheelbase, foot-shifted, valve cover never been off) Hayabusa. I'm not sure I see the point of your stretched, ported, big cam, big bore.
http://www.youtube.com/v/wrsIt_I6hqw?version=3&hl=en_US
-
Yea you can do that with a good hand and a suited weight of 120lbs I weight 200 in gear and am no expert ,so give my a Jockey and let see low 8's , My buddies all run gen 2 Vmaxs Same bike owner runs 9.9 ,Jockey on bike back to back 135lbs ran 9.35 sooooooooooooo Hey by the way what's your fastest time you have run with that 24volt wheel chair :hys:
-
Hey by the way what's your fastest time you have run with that 24volt wheel chair :hys:
It hasn't been real impressive, but I've learned that the key to a good launch is in having a fresh pair of Depends. I think even on my best day, you'd still have me covered.
-
Gadson weighs 155 suited, not 120. The bike he's riding is at stock weight, less the stock exhaust and mirrors. There's a bunch of stuff that you can take off of yours, if you haven't already, that would go a long ways towards making up that 45 pounds. In any case, that 45 pounds will get you probably another two MPH, but it's not like it's going to make it go 160.
And Gadson's left hand certainly makes the most of the horsepower that's available, much better than I could anyways. He can do things at stock wheelbase that mere mortals could not do at 64.5" like your bike. I'm assuming that your skill level probably falls somewhere between his and mine.
But this discussion isn't about the rider- it's about the bike. Your ported, big-cam, big-bore engine is probably making 205 horsepower, and they're getting probably 200 horsepower without even lifting the valve cover. To me, that makes the second cooling fan, the second battery, the scheduled valve spring replacements, and all the other hassles not worth it, not to mention the amount of money that you spent getting to this point. Just my humble opinion.
-
No 209 On Jeff's At Action Cycle in Spring Valley NY It did make 220 On Bobs But I don't take much on dyno numbers as tire height when spun up and Chain tightness and so much more can make you get what ever number your customer want's to see Any way I am getting old here and this post has become a train wreck LOL you can bust my balls all you want I know what i have and am happy with my BIG CAMS and so is my wife :thumb:
-
Yes 24 volt no second fan Bike does not overheat and bobs springs last a very long time
-
Okay... :lol:
-
I'm still trying to figure out what you were trying to accomplish by pissing away what little cylinder pressure a low-compression stocker had, by installing a couple of giant cams like that. I mean, how many times does it say on Web's web site that those cams need more compression to work? That thing must have been miserable to ride. :lol:
Yea it was , But at the time money was the thing and I just went with the head package ,for the most part they don't work with out the bottom end done The bike now has 13:1 and not just 20miles on it ,I got 15,000 before she cracked and most likely would have gotten way more as the internals on the bike were in good shape , And yes Nos would have been cheeper but as we all know you can't stay off the bottle and BLAM! is allways the likely end to that motor LOL
I'm guessing that building the motor once would have been less expensive than doing it three times, and although a 13:1 1397 is not as bad a match for those cams as the 11:1 1300 was, you still have too much cam for too little engine. You realize that you're using 277 degrees advertised duration and more importantly 250 degrees duration at .050" lift on BOTH sides of your engine? Who told you that was a good idea for riding back and forth to work? Carpenter and Knecum both know better than that. I'm guessing it was YOUR idea.
The OP is looking for help on improving his motorcycle, not on how to blow a bunch of money messing it up. I'm guessing that in real round numbers here, that you've probably burned through around $6,000 or so, to arrive at your current Franken-motor, to obtain results of about 10 PEAK horsepower more than could have been obtained from a simple $350 OEM intake cam and a few odds and ends, and I'm guessing that the two-intake stocker would make more power from idle all the way up to almost 10,000 rpms.
I just repaired what the guy had, what he has works, i'm not saying it would be my choice for a built motor of that size.. But like i said i repaired what he had. His head developed a crack in the port that went into the cooling system.Carpenter said he couldn't fix it and sold him a new head at a reduced price. Half of the shops wouldn't been able to even diagnose it. It even took me an hr after assembly as i just sumed it up to a h.g. issue as i took it apart. Please don't question my skills or assume that i did this or recommend that unless you know the facts. Let me get back to the dozen of engines i have to attend to!
-
Don't worry, Steve, I would never question your skills, and I didn't assume that you did this or recommended it. :wink:
Clearblue- This is just as I suspected. All Steve did was take the mess that you brought him, diagnose your mechanical concern, and repair what was broken.
-
Don't worry, Steve, I would never question your skills, and I didn't assume that you did this or recommended it. :wink:
Clearblue- This is just as I suspected. All Steve did was take the mess that you brought him, diagnose your mechanical concern, and repair what was broken.
No problem Kirk..Just want to clearblue things up :hys:
-
Very punny... :lol:
-
So Kirk you understand that This (Cam Size) was Carpenter's Package not my pick but what works for him with his port on his builds Weather you agree with it or not as Steve said not his choice but it works , I went to Steve as he was recamended to me By my friend Bill W as a good st right up guy
-
I would be more than a little surprised if Carpenter came on here and said that he thought that a pair of .425" lift cams with 252 degrees duration at .050" lift were the best choice for installing one of his ported cylinder heads on your stock 11:1 1300 short block, for you to use as a commuter vehicle back and forth to work with .001% drag strip use (20 miles divided by 15,000 miles- your numbers). I really don't see it happening.
That's just so absurd, to anyone that knows ANYTHING about engine building, I feel dumber for having even typed it.
I'm guessing a more likely scenario is that you just "wanted" the biggest cams possible, because you thought "bigger is better", and all of the rest of this crap came out of ancillary issues relating to that choice.
If Carpenter signed off on this AT ALL, I suspect that your representation to him of your intended usage and your ACTUAL usage, lacked any semblence of continuity, in this or any alternate dimension. Like, for example, if you told him that you were building a grudge bike with a license plate, instead of telling him that you were using it primarily as a commuter vehicle but wanted to go to try it out at the drag strip a few weekends a year at the hobby level.
-
I would be more than a little surprised if Carpenter came on here and said that he thought that a pair of .425" lift cams with 252 degrees duration at .050" lift were the best choice for installing one of his ported cylinder heads on your stock 11:1 1300 short block, for you to use as a commuter vehicle back and forth to work with .001% drag strip use (20 miles divided by 15,000 miles- your numbers). I really don't see it happening.
That's just so absurd, to anyone that knows ANYTHING about engine building, I feel dumber for having even typed it.
I'm guessing a more likely scenario is that you just "wanted" the biggest cams possible, because you thought "bigger is better", and all of the rest of this crap came out of ancillary issues relating to that choice.
If Carpenter signed off on this AT ALL, I suspect that your representation to him of your intended usage and your ACTUAL usage, lacked any semblence of continuity, in this or any alternate dimension. Like, for example, if you told him that you were building a grudge bike with a license plate, instead of telling him that you were using it primarily as a commuter vehicle but wanted to go to try it out at the drag strip a few weekends a year at the hobby level.
Kirk that was Bob's recommendations i can promise you that.Bob runs either a 443/425 or a 425/425 in everything he builds.no matter what the size or application...that's a fact, i use to work for him for 5 yrs..
-
Kirk: I really don't know why you think i had anything to do with the cam size ? Thanx Steve for clearing that up
-
Well, Steve, I'm not going to question you, and I don't think I'd question Bob either, so I guess that leaves me "more than a little surprised".
I must give this thread a rhetorical "Whiskey Tango Foxtrot!" (military phonetics for "WTF!"). I think it's safe to say that I don't understand using giant cams on everything, regardless of the engine that they were going into or the intended usage.
I do feel for this kid. My reasoning was sound, but I guess I owe clearblue an apology for blaming him for the cam choice, because I was wrong. I'm sorry.
I have what I feel is a long and reasonably successful background based on my own anecdotal experiences. I fed myself for two years back in the '80s out of my winnings from racing NHRA Pro ET at two different local drag strips, twice a week (Wednesday evening 1/8 mile and Sunday morning 1/4 mile) in my N/A stick-shift rotary Mazda, that I built the engine for on a kitchen chair in my dining room at home. Again, I'm not questioning Bob, I'm just saying that I would NEVER have put those cams in a stocker, and I would have explained to him why, as I was talking him out of spending his money with me. At the WORST, I would have let him "lay away" his project, by paying for the parts up front, until he had all the parts purchased and had saved up enough for the labor.
Just wow.
-
Thanx Kirk , Also I am no kid 49 years young :) I spent my youth building Chevy motors with my dad and I am handy with tools But as I get older money is not a problem time is , I could have dropped 10 grand at the time but I felt I was spending what I wanted to , Bob was stright up with me and I told him what the bike would be used for . Kirk you are not the first that have been like "What size cams" :eek: but it is what it is :thumb:
-
I guess so. :wink: