ESE's works engine tuner

[speedpro]

If Wiseco is your thing ....

New Zealand supplier in Auckland of Wiseco rings, sleeves and piston kits.

http://www.sportspro.co.nz/products/...eco_rings.aspx

I see they have 95mm sets so Richban will be interested.

[husaberg]

Playing with 2 strokes can be an expensive hobby. Can you guess what is even more expensive?

I guess one may feel like it has cost and arm and a leg.
One could cost your arms or your legs.
While the other is likely to eventually cost you your life.

2 strokes are twice the fun and a lot less expensive, than the middle ones.
Everyone knows anything more than 2 strokes is Masturbation. Source coxford dictionary

I see they have 95mm sets so Richban will be interested.

Re Richban's 95mm+ piston
You guys, it is not cheating!
The fact is its all legit.

It added up just fine on the calculator.
Its just he's a bit errr...dyslexic.
In fact according to his new calculations, he could stroke it as well now, and it will still be under 551cc

[pugs]

There are no secrets at Team ESE, we post everything we do, its the fun of making friends, sharing ideas, riding bikes and building stuff we enjoy.

My respect for you and the rest of ese's team, sir..

The header length at 37% is just plain dumb and very wrong, never seen a pipe on any engine that worked with that %.It should be in the 31 to 33 range.
And running a 19mm stinger on any 125 that makes any power at all - IT WILL BLOW UP.
...its the design intent that is important, not the actual numbers.

Yes, I notice that, especially the stinger diameter that is getting smaller and smaller with higher bmep input, thanks Wob. Well, maybe I would just use this software for less demanding stuff..

To summarize: specific time.area is port area, multiplied by the time during which it is open, per cc.

Thank you for reminding me about that Frits, I knew I was missing something here..

I would like to know more about these percentages, and how they relate to pipe design philosophy in general.

Sorry if this was already posted here, but it help me a lot about pipe design philosophy.. (unfortunately in dutch..)
http://www.ytcn.nl/archief/Archief/e...e_uitlaten.pdf

[richban]

I see they have 95mm sets so Richban will be interested.

Its a bit early for mud slinging Mike.

But I suppose the next GP is not far away. I hope you lot will have finished your spannering buy then.

[TZ350]

Ten characters

i see they have 95mm sets so richban will be interested.

....

[wobbly]

The % I quoted for header means that portion of the length from piston to rear cone end.
Its from the piston to the beginning of the diffuser, what happens in between isnt relevant.
Unless of course you use a small Ex duct and a bigger header, that makes more power.
And of course same for the diffuser end, that is simply 66% of the length from the piston to the end of the rear cone.

[2T Institute]

Just a couple of points re the pipe designs shown above.
The header length at 37% is just plain dumb and very wrong, never seen a pipe on any engine that worked with that %.It should be in the 31 to 33 range.
And running a 19mm stinger on any 125 that makes any power at all - IT WILL BLOW UP.
Also its very short sighted to take Frits pipe layout from a 125 GP rotary valve engine that makes over 50 Hp around 13000, and simply bung it onto an air cooled bucket engine
with a 24mm carb that needs a huge level of input to make 30 RWHp.
Aprilia made arm loads of test pipes to understand what worked on that engine,and for sure it wont work well on the GP125 bucket - its the design intent that is important, not the actual numbers.

Exactly why I say cheap on-line pipe calculators are worth every cent you pay.

[F5 Dave]

LOL. Fair enough Frits, thats some perspective. Expensive is relative of course. In the last couple of months I've bought a TD2 project bike, a TZR250 for one of my projects and more parts and services bike related than my marriage could stand were it openly discussed.
In the spirit of the co-operation already in this thread, and considering that fuel injection was brought up earlier, here is the beginning of a prototype system I've been playing with. I'd appreciate any feedback, hopefully productive. If you'd like to say it won't work that's fine but please explain why?





Now some of you may recognize my name as a member of another forum where FI has been discussed,(I recognize some of your usernames), and may hold against me some things I said there. Please understand that my comments there were made because of my frustration with a poster there and his apparent arrogance and unwillingness to share information. Don't misunderstand me, I don't believe that it was required of him, but rather than refuse to answer questions he acted as though the questions were somehow beneath him. I would appreciate it if these pics didn't appear elsewhere. I'd rather it be running before I face the firestorm. Thanks.

edit. I really don't know why those pics are so small...sorry

Yeah I've kept my nose right out of that. Lets not go there.

[Frits Overmars]

...Sorry if this was already posted here, but it help me a lot about pipe design philosophy.. (unfortunately in dutch..)
http://www.ytcn.nl/archief/Archief/e...e_uitlaten.pdf

What do you do for a living, Pugs? Archeology? I wrote that stuff 33 years ago! Where did you dig it up?

[dinamik2t]

Also its very short sighted to take Frits pipe layout from a 125 GP rotary valve engine that makes over 50 Hp around 13000, and simply bung it onto an air cooled bucket engine
with a 24mm carb that needs a huge level of input to make 30 RWHp.
Aprilia made arm loads of test pipes to understand what worked on that engine,and for sure it wont work well on the GP125 bucket - its the design intent that is important, not the actual numbers.

Wob, could someone use EngMod to conduct design comparisson tests, according to its engine/application?
What I'm trying to say: in EngMod, are there data to compare pipe designs (or generally modifications) beyond plain numbers, that an inexperienced tuner can interpreter and use?

Would you or Frits be interested to tell us about how you reached this level of knowledge? Did you have someone to help you with the basics, like you help us, or was it more like personal testing and reading and testing? I can imagine you mechanics in the GP teams laboratories, discussing, studying, testing. Younger ones listening, suggesting erroring (if that's a word), elders yawping, helping, teaching..
I know it leaves the topic's boundaries. I think it will be very inspiring though! Perhaps it will remind you good old days too.

[cookie1965]

2 strokes and good looking women . . . I'm willing to pay the cost.

Re the FI above, the idea looks good but I have serious reservations about the manifold. I would have thought a nice tuned length velocity stack arrangement for each cylinder into an airbox with the injector mounted overhead would flow better. TZ has shared quite a bit of info about what has improved the flow through his carbs. I'd be tempted to even go for some sort of nozzle/venturi leading to the reed cages to create a high velocity section. It could be a good tuning enhancement, you could change it's location and dimensions depending on results. It could even be made variable easily. I'm sure you have already done it but there is good gains to be had by filling in the reed cages and keeping the cross-sectional area constant or tapering slightly to the reeds. What management system are you using?

Thanks for the reply. My theory, probably misguided, was that with this set up I was providing enough air flow, since the size of my single TB is equivalent to 2 x 32mm carbs, and the fuel being injected directly at the red cage would be an improvement over the fuel being carried through the longer intake tract. I'm Probably looking at things in too simple a manner.

[wobbly]

EngMod can be used at any level of experience.
Only problem that occurs is crap in = crap out, and you can get VERY mislead in trying any variations of say a pipe design if you
don't know how to optimise the other variables to suit a change.
For example you can spend days getting a really good power graph of a pipe for a 125, but if you run all the sims with a 19mm stinger, the design is flawed from
the start, and will never work on a real engine, no matter how good the sim result seems.
You can, simply run the sim and read off the graphs that pipe A is "better "than pipe B.
But then you can start to "read "the pressure traces within any part of the system and begin to learn WHY a change was better or worse.
And you can graph TuMax to see what is happening in the cylinder head with the squish and timing curve you have entered.
This is the beginning of real tuning knowledge.
One thing that used to be a good help was to use TSR to get in the ballpark with initial EngMod entries, and now Neels has started to help out
with a generic pipe design calculator, but the only way to really get an understanding is to watch the problems caused by a 37% header,on the screen, in real time.

[husaberg]

LOL. Fair enough Frits, thats some perspective. Expensive is relative of course. In the last couple of months I've bought a TD2 project bike, a TZR250 for one of my projects and more parts and services bike related than my marriage could stand were it openly discussed.
In the spirit of the co-operation already in this thread, and considering that fuel injection was brought up earlier, here is the beginning of a prototype system I've been playing with. I'd appreciate any feedback, hopefully productive. If you'd like to say it won't work that's fine but please explain why?

Anything well just about anything can be made to work given enough time, money and more importantly determination.

I concept is great but why one throttle body?
What is the outcome you are after drivablity, fuel consumption,Tune-ability, emissions or performance. ?
The main issues i see is that carbs are light and simple and relatively specking. Ie no battery/alternator, fuel pump regulator ECU etc.
I am not knocking you because it is great to actually do it rather than just thing about it or just ruling it out.
What sort of fuel pressure are you envisaging?
I remember the Cagiva system involved huge pressures.
The biggest potential advantages i see with fuel injection are economy and emissions drive-ability but maybe, i am short sighted about this.

The one thing i did pick up from a few pages back was the split system with each set of injectors handling half the revolutions. So two injectors on each cylinder running each fueling alternate revolutions. Which should solve a few of the problems with doing it in the past.

You could also maybe alter the characteristics under overrun even possibly dial in some engine braking.
Maybe include a four stroke switch for slippery conditions and learner racers.

2011 Return of the two stroke. Possibly premature.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=goNP9...ia1uTNqMht_TCF

[Bren_chch]

What do you do for a living, Pugs? Archeology? I wrote that stuff 33 years ago! Where did you dig it up?

hahahaa thats classic!!!

umm i been building this engine which i copied off the peter steadman ke125/rg barrel motor with a few teeeennny tinnny changes.

I ran it yesterday in a few races and it went better than i expected, attached it a photo of the piston... to me it looks perfect but what do you guys think?

added a couple of the cool machining photos too.

many thanks

[Yow Ling]

Seems to go alright