ESE's works engine tuner

[tdc211]

it would be nice to use but unfortunately not legal in the NZ F4 class.

well, as is , its terrible.

its a older design they have not upgraded.

so all the inner outer transfer walls are mostly epoxy and the porting lays out nice
of coarse added in good roof angles. Really nothing different than what is done here.
plus countless hrs in eng mod.

[Peter1962]

Talk about the devil: a couple of weeks ago I pointed Harry Ryger to the kiwibiker-forum and he seems to be impressed; I just found this mail in my in-box, which I post here in its entirety:
==============================================
Dear (two-stroke) friends,

Thank you for all the attention you have given the Ryger engine.
My name is Harry and I have been working on two-strokes for about 45 years now.
Back in the year 2000 I was convinced that a clean two-stroke would be possible and I started thinking .. five years before the idea was finally there in the middle of the night, April 2005.
Then it all started… It took me 10 years of development and it was not much of an easy ride.
Nobody believed at first and there I was.. alone with some bits and pieces building the perfect engine.
Honestly I didn’t expect it was that good, I knew it was clean but the power was a nice present that came along with it !
The reason we introduce the Ryger step by step is simple: it is not meant for the big guys but for everybody.
Upgrading a conventional two stroke must be available to everyone before it is to late because of inescapable new emission regulations.

A few things to think about :
30.000 rpm ? easy….. it could do a lot more. How ? don’t let the piston touch the rings !
Port timing ? …not important !
Crankcase volume ? not important !

At last a big thank you to my dear friends Frits, Luc, Thijs and the lot from the Ryger team !

P.S. now and then I answer some questions but within my limitations, on my facebook via pm…Mcd Twist Ryger Engine.

Kind regards
Harry Ryger
=================================================

"port timing ? ... not important ! "

I am flabbergasted...

[Grumph]

Talk about the devil: a couple of weeks ago I pointed Harry Ryger to the kiwibiker-forum and he seems to be impressed; I just found this mail in my in-box, which I post here in its entirety:

What, no birthday greetings ?

Happy birthday Frits, and thanks for all the information and assistance.

[richban]

We flew the the 2 stroke flag quite well on Sunday. An NSR300 won every race we entered. I got 1 win. Other Richard got 1 and Glen got 2. The bikes went really well. Small crash for me and a big one for other Richard. Lots of talk in the pits about the performance of the bikes. I am sure we will see more on the grid soon. They just keep getting better the more we learn.

The Ignitech quick shifters work perfectly for all.

[breezy]

Chairs Frits.
Don't let the piston touch the rings............................
I was thinking on the ring seals are in the Sleeve....... but no that would still touch?
Back to attempts at thinking
Unless of course there was plenty of oil in between.

like an expanding and contracting scenario? when required, i checked the squish on my project engine a few days back, i left the rings off the piston, it turned over fairly easily. but i never really noticed till i fitted the rings and wound the crank over... the friction from the rings is very noticable..

[Muciek]

May I ask how in the hell You want to run this when stock cylinder with expansion chamber is killing gearbox all the time?

[kel]

its a older design they have not upgraded.

so all the inner outer transfer walls are mostly epoxy and the porting lays out nice
of coarse added in good roof angles.

if you are happy to share, please post pictures of your cylinder work.
I have bought an aftermarket 50mm bore Derbi cylinder kit, I'm shocked at how much porting work it requires. This cylinder will also require epoxy to both inner and outer transfer ducts.

[Flettner]

Talk about the devil: a couple of weeks ago I pointed Harry Ryger to the kiwibiker-forum and he seems to be impressed; I just found this mail in my in-box, which I post here in its entirety:
==============================================
Dear (two-stroke) friends,

Thank you for all the attention you have given the Ryger engine.
My name is Harry and I have been working on two-strokes for about 45 years now.
Back in the year 2000 I was convinced that a clean two-stroke would be possible and I started thinking .. five years before the idea was finally there in the middle of the night, April 2005.
Then it all started… It took me 10 years of development and it was not much of an easy ride.
Nobody believed at first and there I was.. alone with some bits and pieces building the perfect engine.
Honestly I didn’t expect it was that good, I knew it was clean but the power was a nice present that came along with it !
The reason we introduce the Ryger step by step is simple: it is not meant for the big guys but for everybody.
Upgrading a conventional two stroke must be available to everyone before it is to late because of inescapable new emission regulations.

A few things to think about :
30.000 rpm ? easy….. it could do a lot more. How ? don’t let the piston touch the rings !
Port timing ? …not important !
Crankcase volume ? not important !

At last a big thank you to my dear friends Frits, Luc, Thijs and the lot from the Ryger team !

P.S. now and then I answer some questions but within my limitations, on my facebook via pm…Mcd Twist Ryger Engine.

Kind regards
Harry Ryger
=================================================

One way to have the rings not touch the piston is, leave them in the box they came in, as in no rings.
What witch craft is in this ryger
Harry we would like questions answered with no limitations, we won't tell any one, truely.
So were does this leave us, more questions than anwers as per ususal.
Talk about the Devil indeed.

[TZ350]

Talk about the devil: a couple of weeks ago I pointed Harry Ryger to the kiwibiker-forum and he seems to be impressed; I just found this mail in my in-box, which I post here in its entirety:
==============================================
Dear (two-stroke) friends,Upgrading a conventional two stroke must be available to everyone before it is to late because of inescapable new emission regulations. Harry Ryger
=================================================

Upgrading a conventional two stroke, well as soon as I know enough about the Ryger engine to be able to do so I intend making one.

I have already collected a few Suzuki TS/TF125 engines for the purpose, incidentally for all those Bucket guys who bemoan the shortage of good 2T engines, they are still making the TF and TS new.

I figure the TS/TF engine will be more suitable for the conversion than the rotary valve engine I now use.

[kel]

Hello 2 stroke tuners,
I have purchased an aftermarket Derbi cylinder kit. One of many things I'm not happy about with this cylinder is the three rear boost port setup. This design gives away far too much time angle area. As I require more transfer time angle area I'm thinking of -
1. Reducing the upwards angle of the two outer ports and changing the direction of flow so the transfer streams from these ports collide into each other. If this does not work it would be easy to correct ports back to original by filling with epoxy.
OR
2. Grinding out the divider between these ports and the B port thus creating very large B ports which have more traditional directional control of streams i.e. directed across the cylinder to collide into each other and with the hook in the back edge of the port to clear out residual combustion gas. I would appropriately match the duct entry and exit areas. Unlike option 1 I could not use epoxy to return ports to original once done.

So does anyone have experience with this? Is option 1. the one to try first? Would the option 2 B ports being much larger than A ports be a mistake?
Your experience and thoughts would be much appreciated.

[Flettner]

Upgrading a conventional two stroke, well as soon as I know enough about the Ryger engine to be able to do so I intend making one.

I have already collected a few Suzuki TS/TF125 engines for the purpose, incidentally for all those Bucket guys who bemoan the shortage of good 2T engines, they are still making the TF and TS new.

I figure the TS/TF engine will be more suitable for the conversion than the rotary valve engine I now use.

You are not the only one, I've got a few 700 twins I would like to run oil less (make running on gas a real option) and it would be good to derail the fourstroke only mentality in microlights we see these days.
But in the mean time I'll still hammer away at my own little oil less prototype.

[gravmax88]

http://www.google.com.au/url?sa=t&rc...99804247,d.dGY

[tdc211]

Hello 2 stroke tuners,
I have purchased an aftermarket Derbi cylinder kit. One of many things I'm not happy about with this cylinder is the three rear boost port setup. This design gives away far too much time angle area. As I require more transfer time angle area I'm thinking of -
1. Reducing the upwards angle of the two outer ports and changing the direction of flow so the transfer streams from these ports collide into each other. If this does not work it would be easy to correct ports back to original by filling with epoxy.
OR
2. Grinding out the divider between these ports and the B port thus creating very large B ports which have more traditional directional control of streams i.e. directed across the cylinder to collide into each other and with the hook in the back edge of the port to clear out residual combustion gas. I would appropriately match the duct entry and exit areas. Unlike option 1 I could not use epoxy to return ports to original once done.

So does anyone have experience with this? Is option 1. the one to try first? Would the option 2 B ports being much larger than A ports be a mistake?
Your experience and thoughts would be much appreciated.

My B port is about the size and description of your option 2. and my port entrance into the bottom of the cylinder, is smaller than the exit into the cylinder. But not with a flat divider wall like the rsa.
and with the inner/outer radius, roof angle and entrance smaller than exit, that's what worked on the dyno. So that's about all I can say.

I will find some pics and post them

[husaberg]

http://www.google.com.au/url?sa=t&rc...99804247,d.dGY

http://modelenginenews.org/ed.2013.01.html

[peewee]

kels i had a similar idea not long ago. if youve seen my cylinder in the last few pages you notice quit a bit of dead space between C and D. plenty enough dead space for two more ports. instead of making them 50-60 * , i was going to have them enter the cylinder at 15* like the C ports. the main reason i never gave it much more thought is because these new ports wouldnt actually have their own duct per say but rather just a short 10mm tunell from the reed cavity into the cylinder. it was for this reason that i didnt think they would act like a normal side trasfer port and there for i figured it might be better to bring C around as far as i can and then widen D. you situation is alittle different but somewhat the same i think, as it sounds like you want to make the outer rear ports enter at a fairly flat angle. sorry i cant say how it would do as i decided not to even try it