ESE's works engine tuner

[speedpro]

A built MB100 with genuine honda bits is good for 14,000rpm and the crank will last 6 years of lots of racing monthly. If you use standard MB pistons every now and again you will lose the tip off a ring. Our sidecar had over 14rwhp between 9,000rpm and 13,500rpm and made a solid 19.9rwhp for approx 1000rpm.

Old #6 made 22.5hp at less than 11,000rpm and pulled cleanly from 4,000rpm or so.

The new, yet-to-be-built-Wobbly-spec engine is designed for 14,000rpm and hopefully will make serious power.

[SS90]

A built MB100 with genuine honda bits is good for 14,000rpm and the crank will last 6 years of lots of racing monthly.
Old #6 made 22.5hp at less than 11,000rpm and pulled cleanly from 4,000rpm or so.

The new, yet-to-be-built-Wobbly-spec engine is designed for 14,000rpm and hopefully will make serious power.

That sounds awesome Speedpro! While I hate to deviate from the subject of this thread (further than it already has......), do you have some dyno graphs for that engine? I would love too see them!

Pulling cleanly from 4000 RPM (and making full power at just over 10,000 RPM...and revving to 14,000 RPM..... that could suggest a 4000 RPM wide spread of peak power......) for a 100cc air cooled two stroke is very respectable (to say the least!)

My experience suggests that you would be making over 23 NM of torque (at a little over 10,000 RPM) to be doing that......

I'm not knocking you, I just really like to see what others are doing, because that really is a good engine!

[speedpro]

I'm not knocking you, I just really like to see what others are doing, because that really is a good engine!

It was a good engine until I downshifted without the clutch at max revs - see avatar! Put me in hospital for days.

I do have the dyno charts but they have faded pretty bad. I've tried scanning them but the results aren't good. The high revving sidecar engine only made 19.9rwhp but the other one made 22.5rwhp and didn't rev over 11,000rpm. Both were a joy to use with their broad spreads of power. My old TS100 made 19.9rwhp as well and had a huge power spread which was all wrong for a motor with 200deg of intake and exhaust timing.

[craisin]

hey speedpro I often wondered what your avatar was ,
I blew the image up .
Looks like the conrod would make a good work of art

[speedpro]

Finally got a scan showing the TS100 and the MB100 sidecar. Ignore the red graph, that was a failed experiment. The TS went to 12,000, the MB went to 13,500. I actually don't have a chart of old #6 MB100.

[speedpro]

Thread hijack . . . .

I scanned this as well just for giggles, this motor had 4 bent exhaust valves - daylight visible through one when the runs were done. It was WAYYYYY peppier with new o'size valves.

[TZ350]

Its very interesting to see these dyno graphs. Speedpro the last graph, is that your turbo charged Kawasaki Post Classic racer?

.

[TZ350]

Finally got a scan showing the TS100 and the MB100 sidecar. Ignore the red graph, that was a failed experiment. The TS went to 12,000, the MB went to 13,500. I actually don't have a chart of old #6 MB100.

The TS looks like 14hp @ 6K, peaks at 20 and falls back to 14hp at 12k. Very impressive.

.

[SS90]

I hope no one feels that I am turning this into a pissing contest, but for the sakes of comparisons,

This is an old engine from last year...133cc's cast iron (polini), quite alot of work.... (same specs as the one I showed some pics of last week or so) with the prototype of one of our new ignitions (the red line), compared to a standard electronic ignition (original electronic ignitions have 2deg Advance opposed to 11 Deg retard)

The Carb is also 28mm (so it's not quite as comparable as I would like, but all in good time)

It is possible to get more peak power (and certainly much more RPM), but doing so sacrifices too much torque (particularly at low RPM), and,like Teezee's GP125, these engines all have 4 gears.....as such, in my opinion (and experience) this would be quite close to what sort of curve you would like to see on your engine Teezee (although your exhaust timing is quite alot higher than this one, so possibly you won't quite achieve this spread of power!, but will certainly rev higher!)

[TZ350]

Is this the new generation porting and pipe?

[F5 Dave]

That is quite a lot of power from such low revs. But with 4 gears I suppose it is geared fairly high. There is only a 2000rpm spread, doesn't it fall out of power in taller gears? Or are they close enough in an all gears run?

[SS90]

Is this the new generation porting and pipe?

Yes, while the porting is not "cutting edge", it certainly is in the latest direction.

The pipe is the exact same one as I have on my ss90 now (but of course the cylinder I use is one of my own)

The pipe design is quite old (about 3 years) and what we use for my cylinders now is quite "cutting edge" (well, in my opinion anyway), and the engines rev to 10,000 RPM, and make peak power for about 3,000 RPM

There is nothing revolutionary about the exhausts I use, it's just "up to date" and learned from what other people have done (as well as myself)

[SS90]

That is quite a lot of power from such low revs. But with 4 gears I suppose it is geared fairly high. There is only a 2000rpm spread, doesn't it fall out of power in taller gears? Or are they close enough in an all gears run?

Yea, as I am sure you aware F5dave, that is what is particularly hard about tuning a twostroke....making power in low revs.

I experimented (and still do) alot with port timings, exhaust temps, transfer timings ignitions etc etc etc when I first started this job, as it was fairly easy to make more power than most other people, but getting these engines to "pull fourth gear" was really difficult (when you had exhaust timings closer to what Teezee is using.

With the early "peaky" engines I used to make, I had to run a primary ration of 2.86, which even then was ONLY JUST low enough!

There are still performance manufacturers making cylinders over here (and selling then well) that can only make 17 PS, and require a primary ratio of 3.00 !

That's why I paid so much attention to making good torque (something a two stroke is good at) at low RPM.

This particular one is (in my opinion) a good example (my best of this type). There are other people here in europe making this (and more) sort of power from the same 133cc cast iron cylinder, it just involves ALOT of work (both on the cylinder, and the cases), and not many customers are willing to pay what it actually costs!

This attachment is from the same type of engine (but with a different pipe and different exhaust timing.....and from memory a 30MM carb....hence now revving to 10,000, and was also very "peaky"....something I am always keen to get away from particularly when dealing with 4 speed transmissions..... ( 2nd,3rd,4th gear "all gear runs" always have just that little bit more power (as you may well know) you can see the big "jump" between 3rd and 4th gear ratios!

I don't have an all gear run for that other cylinder on this computer, I hopefully have one at work (although the dyno had a new computer at the end of last year, so it may be a little hard)

Obviously the stuff I "specialise" in is reed valved piston windowed cylinders, but some of the things I learned from these engines has carried over well to the disc valved stuff as well..........

[lance_nz]

K14 and Sully60 have both encouraged me to pay more attention to improving my riding, and they are right. There are big big gains to be made there.

Following Sullys suggestions of more pre-load on the rear shocks I found I could start getting the power on earlier. The few times I got this right the bike fair flew around the corner, but it did show up a few more handling issues and my inexperiance with the extra speed. I was arriving at the next corner before I was ready.

Whenever I got the power on early, F...ck the bike flew and caught people up quick. I want more of this and when I have got used to the extra speed, there are going to be some very sorry 4-strokes at Mt Welly.

Team ESE are planning to get down to Saturday practice's, we are all starting to get excited about our individual improvements.

I "borrowed" these pics from Tides post http://www.kiwibiker.co.nz/forums/sh...ad.php?t=97882 Pictures from Mt Wellington 19/4.

Unfortunatly I am not in the pic. I had got a good start and am out of the frame. I led the field for almost a lap before the fast boys started passing and I slowly drifted back through the field.

I was that annoying person we have all met while driving on the open road. You know the one, they go slow in the corners and speed up down the straights and its hard to get past. Well I am getting faster in the corners, much faster.

I can now see the way forward riding wise, and we are building a more drivable bike.

The next meeting should be good fun, especialy if it's wet.
.

I told you that your problem was with the rear shocks springs, takes some person on a web site for you to listen . Ride height adjustments are a poor substitude for getting the correct spring rate. Experiment with heavier springs and try decreasing the steering angle by increasing the rear shock length. Dropping the folks through the yokes is acceptable but if you have problems with ground clearance then this might not be advixable.

[TZ350]

Yes you did, sorry mate, I guess that proves the old saying "a pupil can't be taught untill he's ready to learn". Or in this case "an old dog can learn new tricks" I have got some heavier springs and will fit them.

.