Oddball engines and prototypes

[husaberg]

Nice reaction to the question, what sort of engine the above specialists would like to work on, given a free choice.
Jack Williams, best known for his development of the 350 cc AJS 7R four-stroke single, named a 250 cc two-stroke four .

Jack asked management for a flow bench to develop the 7R he was told unless it was made by AJS or the AMC parent company it was not going to happen.
He resorted to using a spraygun and some dye and blotting paper in the inlet to track and map the airflow.
he latter became that disinchanted with the company that went on (with a substainal drop in pay) work for Dr Joe at EMC to learn about two strokes. (although that last bit in hindsight might have been peter?)

[WilDun]

1966 was really the time (as far as motorcycles were concerned) that Britain finally realised that it had lost it's way and these guys wanted to do something radical to counter Japan. Vincent (an Aussie I believe) was responsible for some great innovations, Jack Williams seems to have been a methodical plodder who did everything thoroughly but never really got the chance to use his talents properly. Steve Lancefield was well known as a tuner and his bikes were always immaculately turned out. I wasn't really familiar with Bob Gayler though.

I guess that talk was a bit of a swansong and really they were grasping at straws, their masters having left them to it on the sinking shio!
Then, in those days we äll thought that the two stroke was the way forward - look what has happened to that idea when politics stepped in and "scuppered" it, so really it's now a "sunken" ship, except for a few strong swimmers I guess.

Jack Williams (around 1972 I think) tried to go it alone and built a 250cc four (four stroke) but it really didn't have a chance - there was nothing radical about it and I think it was intended to be a production racer like the 7R was in the fifties.
I did actually see it in the flesh at the Earls Court show but it disappeared from the scene after that - I wasn't impressed with the appearence of the bike and the chances of laying it over without tearing the pipes off were zero! - dunno what they were thinking!
Does anyone remember that?- Husa, got any photos?

[Grumph]

Nice reaction to the question, what sort of engine the above specialists would like to work on, given a free choice.
Jack Williams, best known for his development of the 350 cc AJS 7R four-stroke single, named a 250 cc two-stroke four .

As Will says, by '66 the tide had turned - and it probably gave rise to the saying that inside every fourstroke tuner, there's a twostroke tuner waiting for an opportunity...

But earlier, as i've posted before, at a club night around '59 -'60, when George Todd the very well known Bantam tuner was asked how to make a Bantam quicker,
he replied "convert it to OHV" and resumed puffing his pipe...

[WilDun]

around '59 -'60, when George Todd the very well known Bantam tuner was asked how to make a Bantam quicker, .........he replied "convert it to OHV" and resumed puffing his pipe...

Having said that, many people have had a lot of fun screwing more power from the old Bantam than it's real designers (at DKW) could ever have imagined - even I (in my youthful mad naive tuning days) managed to achieve over 75 mph on one with three speed gearbox and all! You revved it really hard, dropped it into the next gear and hoped like hell that it hadn't dropped below the rev band.
....and I did use George Todd's famous 12:1 head!
Much the same fun as the bucket guys are having today, all good fun so long as everyone has similar machinery - KISS remember!

However, it is human nature to try and complicate and improve stuff too and that's good fun as well.
Some like riding, some like engineering and the two can work together - even better when both attitudes are combined in the same person, not always possible, as in my case! but a lot of the bucketeers fit this profile ...... all good fun!

[Michael Moore]

WilDun, that's the KRM 350 that Peter's father was involved with:

http://cybermotorcycle.com/euro/wikig/KRM.html

http://2.bp.blogspot.com/-jap8-OAB0A...orldbeater.JPG

https://www.gracesguide.co.uk/images...01109-KRM1.jpg

[WilDun]

WilDun, that's the KRM 350 that Peter's father was involved with:

Yes Michael, that's exactly the one I was talking about!

Kinda sad to see it go down, but at that time, it still needed a massive amount of development I do think that even MV were struggling against the two strokes and that wasn't even close to the MV, with 4 valves per cylinder - this I believe only had two!
I think Jack Williams was a gentleman and deserved a better result for his last project but I guess he was paid to produce what was wanted by others, however misguided!
But you do see what I meant by the exhaust clearence! (I'm sure that could have been addressed easily enough though).

[Frits Overmars]

However, it is human nature to try and complicate and improve stuff ...

Then I should be asking myself if I'm human. I cannot for the life of me imagine that anyone in his right mind would deliberately complicate anything.
KISS, remember? Life is complicated enough as it is.

[WilDun]

Then I should be asking myself if I'm human. I cannot for the life of me imagine that anyone in his right mind would deliberately complicate anything.
KISS, remember? Life is complicated enough as it is.

FRITS,
I certainly would agree with that, but assuming that we are in a similar age bracket, we no longer want anything complicated.
However it took a long complicated process to make us realize that the best answer to all our problems is simplicity!

That looks like a bloody complicated picture but I have just woken up and haven't found my glasses yet!

[WilDun]

Just foumd my glasses! ........ goodness gracious, - I thought it was a sidecar race or something!

[Frits Overmars]

Just foumd my glasses! ........ goodness gracious, - I thought it was a sidecar race or something!

You were not far off Will .

[WilDun]

........

Yes I've often heard that sidecars will scare the pants off you!

Happy Christmas everyone!

[Grumph]

Bought a book in a secondhand shop for holiday reading...Granville Bradshaw - a flawed genius ? By Barry M Jones, Panther publishing, 2008.

And buried amongst the experiments and patents is the Bradshaw pulsation motor. As the pic shows, a trunk piston using a very short rod with mixture compressed to a high degree under the piston. As drawn, poor transfers - but plenty of well cooled exhaust area.
The crosshead at the top of the rod looks easier to seal and lube than the Ryger homologated arrangement too.
The project design is dated Autumn 1957.

I put it here as I'm going to say the Ryger speculation is pretty well over on ESE's thread - bar the shouting....

[WilDun]

Bought a book in a secondhand shop for holiday reading...Granville Bradshaw - a flawed genius ? By Barry M Jones, Panther publishing, 2008.

And buried amongst the experiments and patents is the Bradshaw pulsation motor. As the pic shows, a trunk piston using a very short rod with mixture compressed to a high degree under the piston. As drawn, poor transfers - but plenty of well cooled exhaust area.
The crosshead at the top of the rod looks easier to seal and lube than the Ryger homologated arrangement too.
The project design is dated Autumn 1957.
I put it here as I'm going to say the Ryger speculation is pretty well over on ESE's thread - bar the shouting....

Interesting design!
Difference between this and the Ryger is that this was just design exercise (a dream) whereas the Ryger was somebody's dream which unfortunately was thrown in at the deep end and didn't become a reality.
Looking at them, both suffer from a conrod which I believe is much too short, but could be improved, and excessive height which could also be improved on.
Perhaps Bradshaw was a genius, but he is a glaring example of someone who forgot about or ignored the KISS principle. (eg his toroidal engine).
I didn't read the book but i think he had at least as many failures as successes!
Sez I!

[Grumph]

It was more than a design exercise. Prototypes ran and the design was hawked around the UK motor trade as was Bradshaw's usual policy.
The prototypes appear to have been possibly twins - he was aiming at the small car market.
It's a bit simpler than the Ryger in some ways - the bottom end is petroil lubed via the "timed" ventilation holes and full roller bearing.
He apparently ran into uneven running at points in the rpm band - poor scavenging due to a form of crossflow scavenging but without a deflector to aim the flow upwards.
It was certainly viable with some more development, nothing in it mechanically is beyond the manufacturing or matallurgy of the period.

I was amused to read that he never made a fortune from his engine work - but in the late 1920's he was pretty well a millionaire from design, manufacture and licencing of gambling machines....Then that company got caught up in what we'd now recognise as a Ponzi scheme run by a financier and Bradshaw lost the lot.

[WilDun]

I should have read the book before I said anything!

Guess this thread is good for finding out about this sort of stuff in a leisurely fashion instead of the speculation and controversy of the big Ryger debate and the pressure to get it performing in a certain time!

So it looks like Bradshaw wasn't afraid to make a mistake or two! (and that is a good thing in my opinion ) but I'm still not convinced about the use of short conrods though, or even the need for one!
I wonder if there might be a couple of examples lying around somewhere in the UK or Europe, not recognised as being important which could be restored or copied just to find out.