ESE's works engine tuner

[Sketchy_Racer]

Unlikely to be worth the heartache KISS
I will post an attachment or two
http://www.kiwibiker.co.nz/forums/al...hmentid=301840
http://www.kiwibiker.co.nz/forums/at...1&d=1411461040
http://www.kiwibiker.co.nz/forums/al...hmentid=301842
http://www.kiwibiker.co.nz/forums/al...hmentid=301843

http://www.kiwibiker.co.nz/forums/al...hmentid=301859
http://www.kiwibiker.co.nz/forums/al...hmentid=301860
http://www.kiwibiker.co.nz/forums/al...hmentid=301858
http://www.kiwibiker.co.nz/forums/al...hmentid=301857
http://www.kiwibiker.co.nz/forums/al...hmentid=301856


There are much larger gains to be made in real nz track conditions just making sure its getting large quantities of fresh clean cool air.
You need to be going at least 200km to see the benefit. ie only for a few seconds per lap
Yet there are far more corner and corner exits that will give better opportunities to decrease lap times and passing opportunities. My opinion.

there was an F3 NSR Honda Kit airbox I are assuming you have that already?
http://www.geckomotorcycles.co.uk/ma...c21-mc18.html#
http://www.geckomotorcycles.co.uk/ma...c-airtray.html

Thanks for that Husa,

I believe that the one we have is based off the F3 one. I haven't run it on my bike before but on of the other lads had it in his but decided to get rid of it. Haha if there is no effect until kph then it'll never work on our bikes except the few meters of the straight where we get 210kph at manfeild. It'll be interesting to see our top speed at hampton downs. It might be an advantage there!

[husaberg]

Thanks for that Husa,

I believe that the one we have is based off the F3 one. I haven't run it on my bike before but on of the other lads had it in his but decided to get rid of it. Haha if there is no effect until kph then it'll never work on our bikes except the few meters of the straight where we get 210kph at manfeild. It'll be interesting to see our top speed at hampton downs. It might be an advantage there!

My muddled thoughts would be to work on what I see as the limiting factor of the NSR300 in F3 ie its capacity disadvantage as the rules allow for another 100cc. Plus the cranks are not fully serviceable or rebuildable.
Someone like you (with some impressive machining ability) could knock up a fully serviceable crank or too to kill these two birds while bringing the engine back closer to squarer bore and stroke. (three birds) maybe five birds with better inherent balance more modern smooth non pork chopped internal design.
Then add in a Atac style chamber to further improve drivability, I can't remember what Wob said it was worth but it was dramatic increase in drivability.

I have tested "boost bottles" between the carb and the reed.
They improve throttle response very low down in the revs off the pipe.
A couple of older quads used the idea, and one will hardly run at all off the bottom end if the bottle is removed.
But compared to a ATAC on the header they are virtually useless for improving power at the bottom of the useable band.
Whereas the wave/pressure action in the pipe is so much stronger that a flapper valve controlled chamber on the BSL500 gave 28% more power at around 7000 - was closed by 8000 and had virtually no effect at that rpm and up.

In the testing I did using an ATAC chamber with a flat throttle plate close to the header gave just over 30% more power on top of the extra
we already had from the powervalve , at the bottom of the powerband.
I have operated them with a servo using a rotating throttle plate, or you can even use a Rotax type powervalve diaphram pulling a flat blade with a port in it.
This worked even better with its spring return and a small compressed air bottle to solenoid valve drive it with ECU control.

I think that you are beating a dead horse a bit trying to get a big positive result from intake tuning.
The short pumper carb being able to be run "updraft" was one reason I suggested it.
The rotary valve setup needs the flow to enter the case, moving upward over the crank - not downdraft.
As the wave action in the Exhaust is WAY more powerful, then the result from a PV or a ATAC setup will get much more dramatic results, relatively easy to implement as well..

I was just pointing out that the idea of using water, great as it may be in theory, and on a dyno when looking for bottom end, it "works" just fine.
But in a controlled test to see if its was usefull, it failed, as the systems effect had to be reduced so much that any gain in bottom end was still offset by a loss in the top end.
As Burgess said,when the effect was usefull,it took too long to reheat the pipes.
My thoughts,from the testing I did with a PV and ATAC operated separately ( instead of combined together as many MX engines have now) is that this works real well with no down sides at all,and is easy to implement.

If you or someone can refine the original idea - then great.

Fast Freddies 500 tripple had them on 2 cylinders as well, but I found that the combo of independent atac and PV was the shit.
Adding them to a non PV cylinder is an easy way to gain a heap of free bottom though.
The clear ceramic coating I have NOT being using for years on KT100 pistons and chambers where its illegal, nor in World Champ winning stock class jet skis at Lake Havasu.
Several tech inspecting teams have commented about how lean the middle of our pistons run in comparison to the squish band,I told them that was all in the jetting of course.

I posted about this a while ago.The chamber needs to be about the swept vol of the cylinder.
When its big enough, going bigger does nothing.
The connecting tube should be about 1/2 the header dia, as short as possible, with the controlling throttle plate as close to the pipe as you can get it, and as close to the flange as you can get it.
The resonant effect works up to a specific rpm, then kills power real quick, so you need an rpm "switch" to control a solenoid that quickly snaps the plate open at a set point,unlike a powervalve that can be ramped.
Many current cylinders have an ATAC volume within the casting that is opened/closed at the same time as the powervalve.
This is easy but for sure not the best setup.

Yes I agree the sim calculates the transfer duct as a tapered pipe taken from the dimensions given, from this it calculates the volume.
And yes I also agree that it cannot know if it is ( although it must assume that it is ) a constant taper.
The less the real duct conforms to this ideal, the less accurate the sim is in its calculations in relation to the real diffuser.
Neels visits here sometimes - maybe he could enlighten us if any calculations are done for reverse flow down the duct, when blowdown overcomes case pressure, and the transfer duct actually acts as a diffuser and not a contraction.

TeeZee, Neels has sent us both the latest version to install.
Resend the packed sim when you have this done - and I will report if it crashes.

A boost bottle setup helps throttle response when getting back on the gas, after coasting into a corner at low rpm.
Could be usefull on a sprint track.
The ATAC boosts the whole bottom end, off the pipe, and works much more effectively due to the greater wave intensity in the header.

Honda obviously found out how to make these things work just as I did.
As short a connecting tube as you can get, diameter about 1/2 the header,ATAC vol about the same as the cylinder swept vol.
We had about 1/3 of the throttle plate hanging down in the header when it was open, in line with the flow direction.
By experiment you find the point where the resonating volume starts to kill power, and then go back a couple of hundred rpm, and snap it shut with a rpm driven solenoid.
Easy with the Ignitech programmable output.
There is NO advantage to ramping the closing point ie interconnecting it with the PowerValve is nowhere near as effective as a single point solenoid action.
Spencers Honda 500 Tripple had two of them on the outer pipes, and it was completely unrideable without them.
You could get even better useable band width by having a double volume system, where another plate valve opened and shut the entrance to a second bottle vol.
The two being open initially, then the second vol being shut off, creating a much smaller vol that was then shut of at a higher rpm.
But hey the simple thing works a treat on engines with no option for a PV.
.

The ATAC valve needs to be opened and closed at a set rpm, there is NO advantage to ramping it over an rpm span.
Thus the best, cheapest, quickest solution is a small push or pull, spring return solenoid, operated by an rpm switch.
The servo motor solution is overkill and unnecessarily complex.

Then we took the next step, and used my experience from the BSL500 and added an ATAC volume on top of each header tube, controlled by a flat blade that simple slid back
to connect the header to the ATAC volume via a short tube 1/2 the header diameter.
This was like the flat plate sliding throttles as used in F1 car injection systems.
The ATAC was only required to be opened instantly at a set rpm, so was also activated by the 5psi pressure under another diaphram.
The air driven ATAC added another 32% of extra power at the very bottom of the powerband, needed no extra power, easily lasted all day and was simply controlled by the ECU with an rpm switch in software.
Seems like the perfect system to be used in a 125/175/250/500/700 hydro boat.
A diaphram can easily be made to have sufficient stroke to do both jobs, without having to push a pipe 130mm or so with lots of power needed for a servo controlled system on a multi cylinder.

[nodrog:Me]

Yes, sadly, many New zealand men who are nice people when sober, just can't go a night without drinking, usually by themselves, then doing stupid shit. Of course none of them admit to being alcoholics.
Let me just say to the trouble-makers: This thread has a wide following around NZ and, since we all know who you are, you can be sure that destruction of this thread as a result of your negative posts will have repercussions in your lives.
Frankly, if you don't race or tune 2-strokes, you have no reason to be reading this thread, let alone posting on it.

Fuck what a choc knob.

you sound quite scary, I bet you have all episodes of sons of Anarchy on dvd.

I can read whatever the fuck I want, and I'm trying to get my weedeater running properly.

[d2t]

Does anybody know of a good link that shows engine forces (like rotating/recipricating forces) relating to different configurations? There used to be a great site that had animations about the different engines used towards the end of the 500gp era (V2, V4, square 4, etc.) but of course that was more than a decade ago and I can't find it now. In particular, I'd like something that shows different firing orders (remember when "big-bang" was the hot new thing?). I know most of you guys have singles but maybe somebody can point me in the right direction. Thanks.

[TZ350]

... here is nice photo of the chambers that I'll hopefully be running for the Suzuki Series this year. We've had no end of problems with the stainless steel ones cracking so with a bit of luck the mild steel ones will be the good.

Attachment 317266

Great looking work.

[speedpro]

I too have been doing 2-stroke stuff this weekend. Remachined my watercooled head combustion chamber to fit a different cylinder. The squish is now curved rather than straight so it matches the piston. A small thing but it feels like how it should be. I had to sink it back into the head with the result that the bowl became smaller. Compression was over 16:1 which seemed a bit high. I've remachined the bowl and dropped it back to about 15:1. Have to finish assembly and check it properly. Was hoping to have the time to pin the head to the cylinder for alignment but hasn't happened. Being a cheap commuter bike and with loose tolerances on the original there was no need for precision and the head was free to move about 1mm back and forth. Just lovely. I'm not changing to the Ignitech programmable ignition so left a little radius from squish band into the bowl. It seems to work OK doing that with the ignition we are running.

Sketchy - where are those billet heads and how are you locating them on the cylinders? I have been measuring crankcase stud locations and cylinder dimensions and have decided that a couple of new 8mm holes with dowels in them, one in front and one in back of the cylinder would work and be easily done.

[TZ350]

Man Cave.



My work bench and my Cave with the old F5 50 (two GP 3rd places) and the new Suzuki GP/NSR110 F4 bike I am building up, (the old Suzuki managed one GP 3rd place). The cave is the size of a single car garage. The big technology ambition is to replace the comfy chair with a lazy boy for after noon naps in my happy place.

No fancy gear here but I am lucky to have access at work to a lathe, mill drill, a press, tig and of course the dyno.

We race Buckets in NZ, and Team ESE run 2T's, its just what we have, others around the world have Free Tec 50's or Simpsons or Scooters and other small capacity race classes where people turn out racing machines from spaces even smaller than mine.

I take my hat off to them. Whether they are an accomplished builder or someone starting out. I don't care where in the world they are, if they have a project they are working on I would love to see posts about their progress and I am very grateful to the experienced tuners who share their knowledge with us here as we try to improve what we do.

Lately the Ryger thing has attracted more talk than action and has taken up a lot of space but I have learn't a few things from it and the associated links, like 4T BMEP is pretty much at its potential but 2Ts have a big way to go yet.

And if you only look at the actual fuel burnt, 2T's are way more efficient and less polluting than 4T's. Its the raw un burnt stuff spilled from 2T's that is the problem. Technology like EFI and stratified charge and the way its applied to 2T's is rapidly developing. The humble 2T may yet become the clean engine of choice. Things I would not have thought about if it was not for all the speculation about the Ryger engine.

I look forward to the Ryger reveal.

There are so many people around the world, some with really good workshops and others with more modest means working on their own projects. I would love to see more posts from them about what they are up to, it makes the world a more interesting, friendlier place.

[seymour14]

I sort of feel bad having got into two stokes now, all it has taught me is that the rules for buckets are way out of whack.

When 50cc two strokes in F5 still demolish 100cc four strokes, and there is a 125cc two stroke vs 150cc four stroke going on in F4, I can see that the odds are far and away in the two strokes favour, developed or not developed. And it is hard to talk up the virtues of something when the rules are majorly in its favour. My first half arsed attempt at a two stroke, having no motorcycle interest or skill at all, has produced a bike that beats four strokes hands down. And no, I don't follow the ESE thread at all, because it makes very little sense at all to me.

That to me is sad, because I know how much energy and skill Scott puts into our four strokes, he has taken them to a level never seen in buckets, I consider him like John Britten, an immense untapped talent. No one on this thread has built seventeen motorcycles with their own two hands. He just gets bitter because he knows that some people talk a lot, but never mention their faults, and we know their faults. A good human being accepts their strengths and their weaknesses. When you know that they don't, you have to doubt their word, just like you would doubt the word of a gambler who is always claiming nothing but wins...

Hopefully next year the rules will reflect this gulf. But then it leads me to think that this just becomes a never ending war of tit for tat.

As to some of the nastiness, not good, easier to find a past time that is not so bitter.

Think I will be moving on, never liked animosity, and there is little I can learn from people who talk word for word out of textbooks.

Always enjoyed your builds TZ, keep the faith.

[TZ350]

I sort of feel bad having got into two stokes now, all it has taught me is that the rules for buckets are way out of whack.

I am not sure what they should be, but there has been some recent talk about a complete re visit of the rules.

When 50cc two strokes in F5 still demolish 100cc four strokes, and there is a 125cc two stroke vs 150cc four stroke going on in F4, I can see that the odds are far and away in the two strokes favour, developed or not developed.

That to me is sad, because I know how much energy and skill Scott puts into our four strokes, he has taken them to a level never seen in buckets, I consider him like John Britten, an immense untapped talent.

I think so too. And the FXR150 pretty much saved buckets, for a long while the 150's were un beatable. Its only now that one or two well developed 2T's are starting to win races again.

It interests me that the humble 2T may yet find a new lease of life on the wider world stage as a cleaner and greener engine than it was, I hope so anyway.

Always enjoyed your builds TZ, keep the faith.

Thanks.

[Yow Ling]

Great looking work.

I think Thomas's cousin may have made them. The wrapper is printed in Thai

[Sketchy_Racer]

I think Thomas's cousin may have made them. The wrapper is printed in Thai

Shhhssssh I was going to try pass that welding off as my own

[husaberg]

Shhhssssh I was going to try pass that welding off as my own

Shit I thought it was just the Auckland Herald

Man Cave.


My work bench and my Cave with the old F5 50 (two GP 3rd places) and the new Suzuki GP/NSR110 F4 bike I am building up, (the old Suzuki managed one GP 3rd place). The cave is the size of a single car garage. The big technology .

Whats up with that hammer in the pic half of it looks invisible. Is this the first clear evidence that ESE is experimenting with stealth technology.
Seeing as the GSSB is reading this thread We aren't going to discuss the pot either

[mr bucketracer]

Shit I thought it was just the Auckland Herald


Whats up with that hammer in the pic half of it looks invisible. Is this the first clear evidence that ESE is experimenting with stealth technology.
Seeing as the GSSB is reading this thread We aren't going to discuss the pot either

ha ha i like the hammer spot

[Lightbulb]

Neil, if I'm not mistaken you're playing with the Profi F2A engine that happened to cross my desk when Profi started producing our MB40 F3D engine.
I dug up some old files: 190° exhaust timing, 140° transfer timing and 0,14 cc combustion volume, does that sound about right?
I found a huge mismatch between blowdown angle.area (good for 26500 rpm) and transfer angle.area (good for 44000 rpm) but as Profi was happy with its performance, he decided not to change it, so all I did was calculate some pipes. If I remember correctly pipe #1 would be delivered with the engine while pipe #2 was experimental.
All pipe lengths are from the piston edge; all diameters are internal. Notice the narrow header and the 4,2 mm stinger diameter on #2?
Attachment 317243Attachment 317244

Hey Frits, what is the fix to the mismatch ?
I am all ears,/eyes
Can it be fixed by making the Exhaust with a higher timing or slightly wider exhaust port ?
Thanks Neil
I like the pan idea to get the engine over the torque dip to get it onto the pipe.
Neil

[chrisc]

The shorter old model straight rubber is best.
Here is a very old dyno test I did on a TM125MX motor we used to race in 125 National class karts...

The short straight manifold worked a lot better, as Wobbly wrote.
So why substitute it with the long straight manifold? My guess is: to better isolate the carburettor from engine vibrations.

Thanks for the reply lads but I'm unsure if I really grasped the main point of it.
Are you saying that the short straight manifold works best in that configuration (TM125MX) and compared to the NF4 angled rubber, or are you saying that as a rule of thumb that a shorter rubber is best. Even for a practically stock RS125 engine.

I figured the angled rubber would be a bad design given what Wobbly has written here before about the importance of a straight inlet and charge distribution to the reeds.

Not having the bits at hand to measure - I wander if the over lengths are the same? (Reed tip to bell mouth).
Older model
Attachment 317262
Later model
Attachment 317263

Interesting point. I can measure a older style carb, newer style carb and long rubber easy enough but that obsolete short rubber I don't have access too. Wobbly, might you have this info? I could always estimate it given I have an angled and long rubber here.