New engine development - your input into layout requested.

[Speedo-cop]

Hi!

INTRO
Looking for some input – some marketing information in essence – the central question being: What would you want?

The major issue here is to the v-twin cachet versus single ie whether the benefits implied by the first option may or may not outweigh those of the second.

Design balances road cruising with off-road capability – in neither case intended as a specialist or high performance powerplant – and with a high focus on reliability, ease of maintenance, and light-weight.

TWO OPTIONS
I'm developing a particular engine for motorcycle application. The designs themselves being advanced enough that I need to focus increasingly on the potential marketing – especially as this begins to impact on design.

There are two avenues down which to continue development:

The first being based on a single cylinder 400cc engine and an 800cc v-twin product line
- the production benefit here is in utilising many of the same components in each unit – at the most basic, the 800 could use exactly the same components as the 400, with one extra cylinder. This simplifies maintenance of the range, reducing production complexity, and cost to customers of around 20%.

The second option is based on a 400cc v-twin and 800cc v-twin
- the two engines would be unlikely to share more than a bare minimum of components – with costs increased accordingly, as well as increasing the lead time to market – essentially, I'd be developing two different engines, as opposed to the one (with options) in the first case.

QUESTIONS
My main questions are these:

Whether you chose a 400 or 800 model, how strongly would the v-twin aspect of it's design feature in your decision?

Would the single cylinder aspect of the 400 put you off – as opposed to a 2+ cylinder 400?

Finally, I'd be very interested in your thoughts on the subject – as they may not fall into those two questions.

FORMAT FOR CLARITY
:) If you please, format your answers:

Q1 “your answer”
Q2 “your answer”
Followed by anything else you'd like to mention.

At the end, thanks for reading! :)

[Dave-]

800 vtwin
yes

my mentality (naive, young and probably wrong) tells me I wouldn't want a single 400cc

[FilthyLuka]

800cc, bigger is better... kinda... would be more fun
No, singles are fucken sexy

i want an 800 single... do it, big oversquare thumper MONSTER! man that would kick galactic ass!

But that probably wont happen cause its not sensible :(

I would seriously say knock 150 cc off the 400 single and make MILLIONS in the NZ market

[FilthyLuka]

I wouldn't want a single 400cc


but, but, but... why not?! singles are so mega super sexy-awesome

[xwhatsit]

Hey! Who's disrespecting thumpers?

400cc single for sure :D

You mention offroad. Surely the thumper has packaging benefits too?

[cowpoos]

how about a 250cc single...500cc twin...1000cc v-four???

lord knows we need more options in the learner catagoriy..so a 250 would be a good plan... 500 v-twin..awesome option for a supermotard or niche sports bike...two small pistons...should have a high rev ceiling capability for horsepower...and a 1000cc V-four...well...nothing needs to be said about the application of that!!


anyway...I'll pop back tomorrow and tyr to answer your questions genuwinly with a lower blood alchol level..lol

[zooter]

Depends on the bike it's going in.
A 400 v-twin seems a waste of engineering in any case. 400 cc thumper is fun, 600 is more fun. 800cc might be OTT or not??

[Romeo]

A 250cc setup coupled with a <acronym title="Virual marketing with close consumer interaction">Quasimoto</acronym> style marketing system and you'd be rollin' in it.

Or you could just create a great big stonkin' single<acronym title="800cc single cylinder, water-cooled 4-stroke">...</acronym>


//EDIT: I love how people neg rep for the most innocent posts - <img src="http://www.kiwibiker.co.nz/forums/images/bgold/reputation/reputation_neg.gif" alt="u aer teh suck idot dnt have bike1!"/>

[FilthyLuka]

i vote for the great big stonkin' single

[Bonez]

Hi!

INTRO
Looking for some input – some marketing information in essence – the central question being: What would you want?

The major issue here is to the v-twin cachet versus single ie whether the benefits implied by the first option may or may not outweigh those of the second.

Design balances road cruising with off-road capability – in neither case intended as a specialist or high performance powerplant – and with a high focus on reliability, ease of maintenance, and light-weight.

TWO OPTIONS
I'm developing a particular engine for motorcycle application. The designs themselves being advanced enough that I need to focus increasingly on the potential marketing – especially as this begins to impact on design.

There are two avenues down which to continue development:

The first being based on a single cylinder 400cc engine and an 800cc v-twin product line
- the production benefit here is in utilising many of the same components in each unit – at the most basic, the 800 could use exactly the same components as the 400, with one extra cylinder. This simplifies maintenance of the range, reducing production complexity, and cost to customers of around 20%.

The second option is based on a 400cc v-twin and 800cc v-twin
- the two engines would be unlikely to share more than a bare minimum of components – with costs increased accordingly, as well as increasing the lead time to market – essentially, I'd be developing two different engines, as opposed to the one (with options) in the first case.

QUESTIONS
My main questions are these:

Whether you chose a 400 or 800 model, how strongly would the v-twin aspect of it's design feature in your decision?

Would the single cylinder aspect of the 400 put you off – as opposed to a 2+ cylinder 400?

Finally, I'd be very interested in your thoughts on the subject – as they may not fall into those two questions.

FORMAT FOR CLARITY
:) If you please, format your answers:

Q1 “your answer”
Q2 “your answer”
Followed by anything else you'd like to mention.

At the end, thanks for reading! :)



Q1 My answer- I'd go with this. As you've mentioned components will be common and 400cc fits the Jap market well.

Owning a 400 single myself I do see the benifits. Once you're in production and things are going well the 800cc line could be scaled down (or up for that matter) like Ducati did. Make sure the crank/gearbox assy is over engineered and you'll be right I should imagine.

Q2 My answer- See question one although a v-twin 400 would be a hoot.


All the best in your venture.

Oh and seasons greetings.

[DEATH_INC.]

q1 with the 800, a fair bit. With the 400 not at all
q2 no, i'd see it as an advantage
400 single and 800 vtwin.
With the off-road capability anyone focusing on this will go with the 400 single, and anyone looking at the road side of it will go with the 800 twin. I don't believe that a 400 twin would be enough of an advantage to warrant the extra engineering...

[disenfranchised]

QUESTIONS
My main questions are these:

Whether you chose a 400 or 800 model, how strongly would the v-twin aspect of it's design feature in your decision?

Would the single cylinder aspect of the 400 put you off – as opposed to a 2+ cylinder 400?



People don't really read the questions do they?

Q1: The v-twin aspect would definitely be a factor in me choosing either model.
When time come for me to upgrade to a larger bike, I will definitely be looking for a v-twin...and at present options in the new sports bike market are limited....you've got the Suzuki SV, the Hyosungs, and a bunch of european models I can't afford...I can't think of any others.

Q2: Yes
Although I should quantify this, as I've never ridden a single cylinder bike...so I've managed to form an aversion purely based on heresay.

Surely a lot of the design decision should come down to final application and the NZ market.
What types of bikes will actually sell using a 400cc engine?
I've read comments on here from people suggesting that in the road bike space, going to 400cc after the 250 learner period is a waste of time.
Which suggests that the decision should be based on what the offroaders want.

[davereid]

Great project. 800cc + V Twin please. Smaller bikes ie 400cc.. not on the radar.. too big for a learner, same rego as an 800, ...hmm, like cowpoos said, look at a 250 maybe?

[kave]

I would be more interested in a 500cc thumper and a 1 litre v-twin. A 500cc modern thumper would be awesome as a commuter, I think that the extra 100cc would make a real difference.

[GSVR]

V-Twins have been done to death.

I reacon a big inline twin 800cc would be a better choice as it would be alot lighter and more compact powerplant. But then Laverda has already done it (but they no longer exist)

If you are a NZ bike builder forget building motors and build a good bike for existing motors to go into like TIGcraft, Fisher etc have already done.

[AllanB]

Questions for you - whats the engines going into - naked, sports, cruiser styled bikes? or do you plan an across platform engine - say 800 V-Twin in all three styles? Water/air cooled?

400 = irrelevant for me as I am on a 900 now. However -
maybe just maybe a sweet 250 starter bike? The thing here is if you are starting as a rider are you going to invest your bucks in an unknown brand?

Yamaha had a nice water cooled 400 v-twin in the 80's (Jap market version of the 550), plus Suzuki sold zillions of the 400/4 thingies in the same period. Kawasaki did fine with the Z400/440, and Honda the 400 twins (the blandest of the above).

So -what happened to the 400 range? the 600's took over. Killed the 750's as well the bastards.

Unless your proposed 400 is very well priced or a cheap dirter ......

800 V-twin - take on the Ducati Monster and Japanese cruisers and you may do well. $ will be the big break point and shop support.

I'd go for a sweet very clean bobber style cruiser - get rid of all the fat crap on the HD and their copies and strip it down to a light traffic-light rocket. That Sporster nightster is getting there.

[thehovel]

Cowpoos is on the right track ,single 250, twin 500, triple 750 & inline four 1000. All motors to use the same pistons & internals. the twin would not be a v but in line. Water cooled ,all naked bikes sport or custom. there could also a trail option. My preferance would be the triple. I had a k75 BMW the best all round bike I have had. :beer: Thats enough thinking for today. MERRY CHRISTMAS EVERY ONE. Richard

[Ivan]

Yip as mentioned tig craft etc,

I would love an engine if you could make it to fit into a RS125 Honda chassis and race in F3

[dmouse]

will this motor have a long or short stroke as this will really determine barrel/piston size and so on ?

but what about a 250 with heavier crank and cases that can be upgraded to a 500 or push the length of the stoke and port out the heads and make it a 600 special, with the 250 being able to be upgraded to the 500 or a special 600 just my two cents

[homer]

personally i think the most important is going to be cost

the ride away price
lets say you do a 800 v twin
and the price is say $9000 new
while you have bandits anywhere between say $8000 - 10500 second hand

Now i know there not new ,but there a proven brand ,proven engine \
after all the engines like 20 years old
but its bigger going to have more grunt ,and 4 cylinders

so if your toying with say $9000 which would you buy ?

[homer]

Questions for you - whats the engines going into - naked, sports, cruiser styled bikes? or do you plan an across platform engine - say 800 V-Twin in all three styles? Water/air cooled?

400 = irrelevant for me as I am on a 900 now. However -
maybe just maybe a sweet 250 starter bike? The thing here is if you are starting as a rider are you going to invest your bucks in an unknown brand?

Yamaha had a nice water cooled 400 v-twin in the 80's (Jap market version of the 550), plus Suzuki sold zillions of the 400/4 thingies in the same period. Kawasaki did fine with the Z400/440, and Honda the 400 twins (the blandest of the above).

So -what happened to the 400 range? the 600's took over. Killed the 750's as well the bastards.

Unless your proposed 400 is very well priced or a cheap dirter ......

800 V-twin - take on the Ducati Monster and Japanese cruisers and you may do well. $ will be the big break point and shop support.

I'd go for a sweet very clean bobber style cruiser - get rid of all the fat crap on the HD and their copies and strip it down to a light traffic-light rocket. That Sporster nightster is getting there.

Totaly agree its all price today
You dont need a huge range
it just has to see its self

[Ocean1]

Q1: Fairly high. I like big V twins, but the extra weight’s a negative for the 400.
Q2: Not at all, I’d prefer a single at 400cc.
Q3: Yes thanks, I’d love a 1200 radial triple sprots tourer.

Want a hand?

[Mikkel]

Q1: I'm still on my learners so anything above 250 ccm is dreaming atm. But when on my full it would depend upon application...

Q2: No/yes, depending upon application!

You need to make sure you identify your target market. There will always be someone who can see the merits of a certain engine: Single 400, V-twin or IL 800, IL triple 1200... etc ad nauseum.
For a sports bike on the road both an inline 4 and a V4 1000 ccm would always be appreciated. However, if you're looking at off-road applications I don't think anyone could put a finger on a single-cylinder engine...

[Sketchy_Racer]

Yip as mentioned tig craft etc,

I would love an engine if you could make it to fit into a RS125 Honda chassis and race in F3

Because there is a HUGE market for a motor like that aye Ivan. (heavy sarcasm)

Cowpoo's theory of a 250 single, 500 twin and 1000V4 is great.

engineer one extreemly good top end and piston config, and all you have to worry about for each motor is bottom ends. It amazes me that less motor lines are designed like this. Less time sorting the niggly bits out on each idividual motor.

Oh and fuel injection for all of the configs. Do it once do it right :woohoo:

[homer]

Q1: I'm still on my learners so anything above 250 ccm is dreaming atm. But when on my full it would depend upon application...

Q2: No/yes, depending upon application!

You need to make sure you identify your target market. There will always be someone who can see the merits of a certain engine: Single 400, V-twin or IL 800, IL triple 1200... etc ad nauseum.
For a sports bike on the road both an inline 4 and a V4 1000 ccm would always be appreciated. However, if you're looking at off-road applications I don't think anyone could put a finger on a single-cylinder engine...

If its for off road most would be happy with a xr400cc engine and jet it so its the equivelent of a 450 cc.....there an absolute rocket
most would pull up 180 km
which is heaps of grunt

[Speedo-cop]

Hey all - thanks very much for the replies and thought.

I'm noticing several themes:

- up the capacity and add a 250 to the line.
- really define the market ie road/offroad.
- there ARE a few people who seem happy with the 400single/800v-twin layout!

To design: By it's nature, the engine will have higher than average low-end torque for it's capacity, though I'll have to work hard to maintain high-range power, especially without pre/post combustion supercharging - which will be an option at a later date - though not at first, as one of the first major focuses to start is extreme simplicity. And fuel injection is inherent.

If anyone else would like to add their two cents - please do!

[FilthyLuka]

Make the 250 cheap and bullet proof, doesn't matter if it skints a little on performance. The punters need a learner bike that is cheap to run and damn solid!

[smoky]

What about a rotor? :whistle:


And while you're talkin about marketing - think about colour, the cat yellow your typing in is reeeeally hard to read.

[davejenknz]

Of my last 5 bikes, 3 have been V-twins (two 800s), a 400 single and a 600 il4. So:
Q1 V Twin and would have to be an 800
Q2 Don't like singles.

[Pixie]

V-twins are a well developed bad design.
2 valve trains 2 coolant circuits
awkward intake and exhaust tracts.

Parallel twins much better and don't give me the narrowness arguement.
ER6 with alternator behind the cylinders is as narrow as an SV 650

[Oakie]

Hey all - thanks very much for the replies and thought.

I'm noticing several themes:

- up the capacity and add a 250 to the line.
- really define the market ie road/offroad.
- there ARE a few people who seem happy with the 400single/800v-twin layout!

To design: By it's nature, the engine will have higher than average low-end torque for it's capacity, though I'll have to work hard to maintain high-range power, especially without pre/post combustion supercharging - which will be an option at a later date - though not at first, as one of the first major focuses to start is extreme simplicity. And fuel injection is inherent.

If anyone else would like to add their two cents - please do!


Sounds like you've got a good handle on this Speedo-cop. Hey you're not going to build these at Emma's place are you? She'll be pissed off if you get her carpet dirty.

[paturoa]

How about something completely new?

I've searched a lot and never seen this before, which is something I've been thinking about for a long time since reading about a Chrysler inverted V aero engine for WW2. Google it, you will be surprised!

Imagine an upside down Guzzi 90 degree V twin. Dry sump it - benefits are many, mostly power!

Now, put a single plate dry clutch on the end of the crank shaft.

Rotate the sucker so the clutch is at the front.

Put a longitudinal gear box below that so that it is BETWEEN the cylinders and the drive shaft still comes out the back.

There is plenty of room for the exhaust out the front and intake / carbs behind.

Water cooling would be a must with this layout.

The only thing I haven't worked out is where the starter motor goes!

[FilthyLuka]

paturoa

Please tell me thats a piss take...

[Squiggles]

q1 with the 800, a fair bit. With the 400 not at all
q2 no, i'd see it as an advantage
400 single and 800 vtwin.
With the off-road capability anyone focusing on this will go with the 400 single, and anyone looking at the road side of it will go with the 800 twin. I don't believe that a 400 twin would be enough of an advantage to warrant the extra engineering...

I agree with this, a 400 single sounds right for off road, a 400 twin would be a waste for offroad, and not enough for those who want on road

[xwhatsit]

How about something completely new?

It seems nice and space-age, but how are you going to lean the fecker over in corners without carving up your cylinder heads?