ESE's works engine tuner

[2T Institute]

Thanks Husa -yeah, that was the article. Moot point anyway now - I elected not the buy the bike, though it was well put together from known components. 83-85hp as a 350 wouldn't be a huge advantage in the world I live in, though as a 500 it could make 110, which is where I wanted to be. Cost of making the 350 into a 500, plus the purchase price premium over a good 350 was just too much...would have ended-up on the NZ$30k+ realm.

There is a 3 cylinder TZ/ADM based machine that races regularly here it's both fast and reliable

[husaberg]

Re using the driveshaft to flex and absorb some of the rotational shock load - in a World Champs winning 1080cc twin SeaDoo making over 230Hp
I designed a shaft made from a special steel grade ( no I cant remember ) that was only 12mm dia.
This replaced a 35mm tube that ran thru behind the water intake grate and made a huge difference to the performance, and no it didnt break even with many
jumps out of the water where it hit the limiter then snapped the rpm down again on contact after a wave.

.

As an aside Velocette used to design their bevel drives waisted for a similar reason.......from memory it worked like a torsion bar.
pretty sure I posted the Roarer story on the oldies thread. later maybe not.......

http://www.kiwibiker.co.nz/forums/at...7&d=1411967633


Velocette Roarer
http://www.kiwibiker.co.nz/forums/at...0&d=1411967639
http://www.kiwibiker.co.nz/forums/at...9&d=1411967637
http://www.kiwibiker.co.nz/forums/at...8&d=1411967635
http://www.kiwibiker.co.nz/forums/at...7&d=1411967633
http://www.kiwibiker.co.nz/forums/at...6&d=1411967631
http://www.kiwibiker.co.nz/forums/at...5&d=1411967628
http://www.kiwibiker.co.nz/forums/at...4&d=1411967626
http://www.kiwibiker.co.nz/forums/at...3&d=1411967624
http://www.kiwibiker.co.nz/forums/at...2&d=1411967622
http://www.kiwibiker.co.nz/forums/at...1&d=1411967619

[husaberg]

Twin cylinders with the big carb on the central through the crank type rotary valve, then reed valve and piston port carbs.

To anyone who takes a look at the Anzani racing outboard, above, the big carburetor, which feeds the rotary valve, is a Vacturi taken from some early (1930s-'40s) Evinude production motor. Vacturis were used (in place of a single small Amal) by a few people on these 1960s racemotors because their intenal passages could be enlarged sufficiently to flow large quantities of methanol (with castor oil) and nitro. Note how big the supply hose is. The other three small carbs are Tillotson kart carburetors; the one feeds through piston-ports, the pair through reeds into the crankcase. The long aluminum device atop the Vacturi is a home-fabricated rack-and-pinion that opens/closes the main mixture needle, adjustable from he cockpit. When the engine was started, the mixture was set lean so that plugs didn't foul while the boat was planning-off, with the engine bogged down. Once the boat was on plane and engine revs were coming up, the driver moved a lever to reset the mixture rich for racing.

That the plugs (Autolite AE 403 or 203 recessed-gap, very cold) fouled so easily was due to the gear-driven device that you can see forward of the rope-plate/flywheel . . . a Lucas magneto.

For you, I knew I had this somewhere.
http://www.kiwibiker.co.nz/forums/at...8&d=1411462358

[seattle smitty]

Wonderful!! I'll print a copy and give it to Jim Hallum, who did so much development work on the outboard version. For anyone who looks at that article, the drawings of the cylinder block are of the motorcycle version, which is different (and of more limited potential) from the outboard blocks.

Can you tell me the source of the article, so I can find and print the whole thing?

[husaberg]

Wonderful!! I'll print a copy and give it to Jim Hallum, who did so much development work on the outboard version. For anyone who looks at that article, the drawings of the cylinder block are of the motorcycle version, which is different (and of more limited potential) from the outboard blocks.

Can you tell me the source of the article, so I can find and print the whole thing?

I am not sure, it looks like I have cut and pasted it together. It could have been from the net?

[Grumph]

I am not sure, it looks like I have cut and pasted it together. It could have been from the net?

Original style is similar to two British motorcycle mags of the 50's and 60's - if I had to guess i'd say "Motorcycling" as they tended to use more illustrations.

I've got a fairly similar article which is in a Classic Bike mag of the 80's and is obviously a rewrite of an original - These oddball technical articles get recycled as filler for the classic bike mags.

[seattle smitty]

For anyone who looks at that article, the drawings of the cylinder block are of the motorcycle version, which is different (and of more limited potential) from the outboard blocks.

Quoting myself, that's pretty bad! But I wanted to add something on the very slim chance that somebody might get an irrational 2-stroke urge to build a bike with an Anzani engine, not a restoration but a Kustom, a contrarian ride that would never be duplicated, would get all the attention at any gathering of motorheads, and might get some ink in a magazine. The world's coolest café racer.

So, for what it's worth for the 2-stroke lunatic who might actually consider this, if you are serious I might be able to find you a water-cooled cast-iron outboard block and water-cooled aluminum head for such a project. While heavier and more complicated, water-cooling would let you get some respectable power out of the engine (either 250 or 322cc). Just from looking at the photos (I've never seen one of the motorcycle blocks) it appears to me that the outboard block can be made to have better flow through the tranfers than the motorcycle version, by some margin. As mounted in a bike, the exhaust ports in the outboard block would aim out to either side, which would add to the novelty of the thing, if you can figure out a way to route the pipes away from your legs.

Uh, don't retain the Lucas magneto . . . .

[seattle smitty]

"NOISE" is the word non-enthusiast neighbors use when referring to the lovely music produced by unmuffled racemotors of many kinds. Because non-enthusiasts greatly outnumber us and have infinitely more political clout, our tracks and race courses get legislated out of existence because of "NOISE," so it's a subject in which we have some reluctant interest.

I'm at about page 440 in my "catching up" on this mega-thread, and found this in a short discussion of silencers:

I spent forever working weekends for the NZ Kart Federation with a Db meter hung above the track trying to find a way to quieten down the 250s.
On the meter the sound level was always less when using a bigger muffler core - to the ear it was alot "louder".

My immediate reaction to this is, are we trying to please the meter? Or human ears? I'm not at all diminishing the effort, but wondering if we are getting the right answers from it.

A few questions come to mind. Have studies been done plotting various kinds of racing noise (measureable, analyzable) against human irritation (subjective, but very important to us)? Has anyone related noise intensity and make-up measured at the track (as Wobbly was doing) to the noise as it is received out in the neighborhoods near the track? In other words, the folk who want to shut us down are not at the track. They're in their backyards or in their houses. So what are the amplitudes/ frequencies/harmonics/etc. that are most irritating where they are?

I have an example of supposedly scientific understanding that is at odds with subjective human experience (mine): We in the States are told that the new blue-tinged headlights for cars are less bothersome to human eyes than the traditional headlights. I think this is a load, and I hate those blue headlights with their beams boring into the back of my skull!!

With this example in mind, might it be that we don't yet have a good idea of exactly what sound qualities are most irritating to the neighbors? Every one of us has remarked that those who don't like OUR noise are not complaining about delivery trucks driving by, or about chainsaws, weed eaters, barking dogs, and other noise pollution. Maybe setting up Db meters at the track isn't telling us as much as we need to know. Mufflers can be designed to be effective against particular frequency ranges (and therefore at particular harmonic combinations), and I'm wondering if efforts in that direction might be more helpful that what's being done now.


Now, before you tell me, "It isn't really the noise, mostly they just hate us and want us shut down completely," I am well aware, personally VERY well aware that that is often true, and that THOSE people will not be mollified by anything we do. Neither will the hordes of land speculators and developers and tax-collecting agencies that covet our tracks, our little airports, etc.. But if we can show a good-faith effort to answer their stated complaints (noise), at least it give our lawyers something to work with.

[Yow Ling]

Smitty , have a look at this post http://www.kiwibiker.co.nz/forums/sh...post1130229157

It is Frits's FOS cylinder concept it has the exhausts exiting either side or front and rear from a single cylinder,

Frits has this worked out well ?

[Frits Overmars]

My immediate reaction to this is, are we trying to please the meter? Or human ears?

The meter, definitely, because you will never please those ears.
I have a simple definition: noise is a sound that people don't like. If you halve the amount, they still won't like it.

Smitty , have a look at this post http://www.kiwibiker.co.nz/forums/sh...post1130229157 It is Frits's FOS cylinder concept it has the exhausts exiting either side or front and rear from a single cylinder, Frits has this worked out well ?

I drew this solution for 50 and 125 cc engines only. More cubic capacity will require longer and fatter pipes.

[seattle smitty]

I saw those photos, Yow.

In fact, I ran into that post about an hour after I had been sitting with a notebook full of blank paper, making drawings of how I might "carve" a cylinder of Frits' FOS concept in my own shop. Frits' photos of his friend's "carved" prototype showed that his friend had come up with a better idea for doing this than I had at that point.

But I was and am much saddened to see those photos, for more than one reason.

In the corner of the photo is a tag that informed me that Frits' friend doing the carving is Giuseppe Rossi, who is one of only three manufacturers currently producing racing outboard motors of the type I have described elsewhere (in my self-introduction): alcohol-burning, race-only engines of motorcycle-sized displacement (125 to 1100cc). Rossi's motors are the most popular; well-made, up-to-date designs that are fast right out of the box.

My disappointment in seeing the photo is two-fold. Personally, I thought that carving a version of Frits' FOS design might give me a chance to get an edge on the competition for a little while. But someone, maybe more than one person since at least one other boatracer is a member here, already had the idea two years ago. Rossi is surely well along with the process of building and troubleshooting the concept, something he can certainly do far faster and far better than I could hope to do. But this isn't a great big deal to me, because I haven't raced in decades and even if it turns out that I'm able to drive a raceboat in competition at my age, I'll never be more than a local club-racer, never nationally-competitive as a driver.

What bothers me is what it does to the sport I used to know and love. Alky outboard racing used to be one of the best cheap sports for the 2-stroke do-it-yourself gearhead, the mechanically-skilled guy with maybe some machining and/or welding capability. In the 1950s and early '60s this was because we raced production-based Mercury outboards that had to be heavily modified to go fast. From the mid-'60s to mid-'80s we got purpose-built race engines from Quincy, Konig, Anzani, Crescent, and Yamato, but they were designs which were already semi-obsolete or otherwise inadequate and left a lot of scope for the gear-heads in the sport to be creative. And if the gear-head wanted an engine of a current design, he could build one using motorcycle engine components. All this was a lot of fun, and none of us particularly envied the bike guys, who could go to their dealerships or the big aftermarket and just write checks for a big variety of speed parts that bolted on, and required no knowledge or shop-skills.

But now Mr. Rossi and another engine-maker, Carlo Verona, are shipping engines that are close enough to state-of-the-art that the gearhead is as likely to slow them down as find more power. State-of-the-art engines are what we used to think we wanted, but today maybe some of us better understand the saying, "Be careful what you wish for." Alky outboard racing today has become little more than a faster and much more expensive version of stock outboard racing . . . you write checks and run what came out of the box. This is fine for those, probably the large majority, who just want to be raceboat drivers. But it is not so good for the hands-on gear-head, the mechanical individualist whose joy is winning races while making chips in his home shop late into the night.

So Rossi is working on an FOS engine. He'll put it on the market sooner or later, and everything else will become obsolete, and everybody will have to buy new motors . . . for a little hobby sport with no prize money and a lot of trailering your outfit all over the USA, burning thousands of dollars on gas for your tow vehicle. More guys who have only blue-collar incomes, on which they may be raising famiies, will be pushed out of the sport. This is in no way meant to diminish the work of Rossi and Verona, to whom we are most grateful for the beautiful engines they build, which they surely do for the love of it and not for the little money they can make. Those two, like Frits and Jan Thiel, could be thought of as the ultimate racing gear-heads, and like us little guys they do it because they love it.

I don't know that there are any answers to the problems. As of now there remains a (very) small amount of scope for a good mechanic-tuner to do little things with the new engines, and possibly this will be so when everybody has to write big checks for Rossi's FOS engines. Meanwhile, outboarders are trying to find sponsors for races and racers, to defray some of the expenses. But with our numbers small and declining, sponsors understandably have little interest.

If you happen to see this, Frits, maybe you'll understand why there's a group of guys here on KB and elsewhere who get their kicks, cheaply, by trying to get the most out of old, crude engines that you haven't even thought about in decades. Even though we know that this is not your bag, at least it is something WE can DO with our own two hands.

[Frits Overmars]

If you happen to see this, Frits, maybe you'll understand why there's a group of guys here on KB and elsewhere who get their kicks, cheaply, by trying to get the most out of old, crude engines that you haven't even thought about in decades. Even though we know that this is not your bag, at least it is something WE can DO with our own two hands.

I understand it very well Smitty. I am driven, as is Jan Thiel, by the desire to understand what goes on in a two-stroke engine. I spent 50 years of my life pondering, and testing my ideas, and Jan had a 10 year headstart on me. But I haven't forgotten how I started. I try to promote moped racing in Holland and Germany by drawing up technical regulations that are intended to give youngsters with little means a fighting chance, and both Jan and myself try to spread the understanding of two-strokes that we gathered.
I wasn't going to tell what Giuseppe Rossi is doing, but since you found out for yourself: you've seen the pictures; there isn't anything fancy that you can't do with your own hands. And creating something new can sometimes be simpler than trying to extract power from an old engine that was never meant to deliver that much.

[FastFred]

But I was and am much saddened to see those photos, for more than one reason.

I guess that proves the truism, "Things Change".

We are fortunate here, Bucket rules require the engine to come from a "Non Competition" motorcycle, no race engine parts allowed, this and the fact we are a very small market seems to protect us from the packaged engine supplier and their check book racing customer. And F4/F5 (Buckets) is fairly self governing, a home made cylinder would be applauded but don't try to sell them. Aftermarket purpose built parts are a very grey area that probably wouldn't be allowed to flourish.

Like Democracy and the Freedom to be yourself, things can change, so I guess, be vigilant so as to enjoy it for as long as you can.

[wobbly]

Just got back from the Karting World Final in Vegas where we were fastest in every session, won the heats, won pole by 4/10s, got fastest lap,and got smashed into
the wall by a mad bastard driver intent on taking us out of the final.
Lost the championship, lost 10,000USD,and wreaked a brand new prototype chassis.
Happy,NO.
The impact ripped the front wheel off the kart and ripped a hole in our collective nighty's.
Anyway, no more to say really.

In answer to a couple of questions - re the noise issue.
I agree that we should have been trying to placate the neighbours not the meter, but the meter is the tool by which the legislation was enforced for sound level at the boundary.
We easily complied, so the council enforcement team told the howling complainants to shut up and or go somewhere else - my job done as asked..

Re the B port wall, yes getting rid of the axial duct twist is far more important for flow bench numbers as well as power delivered, as it would seem the duct entry/exit ratio has little effect.
Re stagger in a Banshee style cylinder - yes, I tested the CPI monoblock 8 port with the A port lowest to allow a much bigger Aux Ex port size, and got back alot more total STA
by having the B,C, and Boost higher.
Power went up from 88 to 96, with a much wider power band width.

Re the VF3 tip deflection, I use the average lift.
But in most cases the curtain area of the reeds far exceeds the port effective area, so tip lift isnt the limiting factor at all.

Re Banshee crank bearings.
Using the HiCap balls in the centre isnt really needed as the two bearings side by side have way more load capacity than is needed.
Running the rollers ( with double the radial load capability ) on the outside is a great idea as the highest load seen is from the drive teeth deflection force, and when running a large stock flywheel there is a huge force from precession.
Yamaha TZ250/350 ran this system for decades with absolutely no issues with unreliability from excess stiffness or any other wank idea about crank dynamics at 11,000 to 12,000 rpm in GP racing.

Ok, I will get back to slashing my wrists.

[peewee]

wobbly what you think so far. i got a dummy engine to practice on before i grind into my good engine. i have all the STA numbers lined up well in engmod. the intake is looking appropriate sized and the boyesen ports really helped. vf4 showed a good improvement over the standard reed block also. likely ill use weld instead of epoxy next time on a few areas though. forgot to mention some wanker on another site suggested the trench in the trasfer area of the cases is to collect oil and it drains down to the bearing. my response was: i dont see that happeneing when the oil only stays in the crankcase for .024 of a second