ESE's works engine tuner

**Haufen** · 24th December 2012, 11:37

Originally Posted by TZ350

Hi Haufen, I can't see in the picture where you mean, but will have a very good look at the cylinder when I get back to the workshop.

No problem, I marked the area for you. The picture might be deceiving, but the area above the inlet port could be kind of a weak spot on side rotary engines.

**husaberg** · 24th December 2012, 11:43

Devcon lip

**TZ350** · 24th December 2012, 13:42

Originally Posted by husaberg

Devcon lip

Very close.

Originally Posted by Haufen

The picture might be deceiving, but the area above the inlet port could be kind of a weak spot on side rotary engines.

Well spotted, it is a crack, well sort of, some devcon that I used to fill an earlier stuff up is starting to pull away.

Thanks for spotting it.

**Grumph** · 24th December 2012, 14:51

Hus - it's all very well to pull out these old articles about equating 2 vs 4 strokes, but....you really should pull up the period responses as well.
At the time their findings were not accepted either by the FIM or by the factories. Some very clued up engineers went into print decrying their findings. Since then both types of motor have moved on and if anyone looked at it now it would have to be using a totally different set of criteria.

At present I see no need to change anything but if you wish it to be discussed, go through a club and by all means try a remit....

I've watched a lot of formula changes in various branches of motorsport and it's rare here that capacity is reduced in any class...but if I had to suggest a change just possibly the 85cc watercooled MXer's run with a spec carb and pipe could be worth a look.
Whatever is done it should not obsolete existing machinery..

BTW - met Hans VD Marwitz when he came out to oversee the Britten record attempts - nice guy. Dead now....

**husaberg** · 24th December 2012, 14:58

Originally Posted by Grumph

Hus - it's all very well to pull out these old articles about equating 2 vs 4 strokes, but....you really should pull up the period responses as well.
At the time their findings were not accepted either by the FIM or by the factories. Some very clued up engineers went into print decrying their findings. Since then both types of motor have moved on and if anyone looked at it now it would have to be using a totally different set of criteria.

At present I see no need to change anything but if you wish it to be discussed, go through a club and by all means try a remit....

I've watched a lot of formula changes in various branches of motorsport and it's rare here that capacity is reduced in any class...but if I had to suggest a change just possibly the 85cc watercooled MXer's run with a spec carb and pipe could be worth a look.
Whatever is done it should not obsolete existing machinery..

BTW - met Hans VD Marwitz when he came out to oversee the Britten record attempts - nice guy. Dead now....

Did you read it...... it was accepted by the FIM then because of Suzuki and Kawasakis threatening to pull out it was then and only then taken out.......... the maths is hard to argue with..... esp if one of the guys is dead now............
Simple fact the FIM comissioned them to do it they did it they a few cry babies threw there toys out of the cot the formula is pretty much spot on unless you have a better one.
buckets started as F4 104cc 2 strokes 130.5cc fours strokes
then it was 140cc four strokes
then 145cc fours strokes
then 150cc four strokes
now 158cc four strokes
Now you says the rules shouldn't be altered for a few cc to suit an oversize piston please Greg it less cc then the first change made to suit the four strokes.
i are quite happy to post the period rhetoric but i don't have any...........do you............????????????????? email i will post em.........
not interested in MX motors so please stop clouding the argument with them. its a totally separate issue all together

**Buddha#81:Me** · 24th December 2012, 15:40

I'm finding the 80cc debate interesting.......it would have been good to see Sketchy's project get off the ground as a benchmark. I probally wasnt the only one to have a look at Tardme.......$500-750 for a shitter MX bike, $300-400 for a motor freshen, sell the roller for parts. That makes a competitive motor for $1kish so bang for bucks it got to be a way to allow the class to grow and you dont have to be a 2t guru to make it happen. I'd look at doing it for my boy to start racing on as a step up from the RS50. Hell some 17's in the MX frame and it could be a weapon for Kart Tracks.

**TZ350** · 24th December 2012, 15:42

Originally Posted by husaberg

... not interested in MX motors ...

Me neither

I feel that in F4 & F5 if anyone wants hp, they should make it the old school way otherwise there are plenty of std FXR's.

**Kickaha** · 24th December 2012, 15:53

Originally Posted by husaberg

buckets started as F4 104cc 2 strokes 130.5cc fours strokes
then it was 140cc four strokes
then 145cc fours strokes
then 150cc four strokes
now 158cc four strokes

I didn't think they were ever offically 145cc although people were running the GL145

**Sketchy_Racer** · 24th December 2012, 16:20

Originally Posted by TZ350

Me neither

I feel that in F4 & F5 if anyone wants hp, they should make it the old school way otherwise there are plenty of std FXR's.

As opposed to 80cc derbi motors?

I still feel that 80cc mx motors would make a big appearance and if ruling governed them to a "stock" 20hp level that is what I would be running while the 40HP supercharger bike is finsihed

**crazy man** · 24th December 2012, 16:29

Originally Posted by Sketchy_Racer

As opposed to 80cc derbi motors?

I still feel that 80cc mx motors would make a big appearance and if ruling governed them to a "stock" 20hp level that is what I would be running while the 40HP supercharger bike is finsihed

you will need 40 hp to help learn you how to get of the mark(-; lol

**speedpro** · 24th December 2012, 17:41

Personally I don't see a problem with the basic idea of running an mx80. Standard they only make 20ish hp. Once freshened up they should be reasonably economical to run. Possibly even the 85s as well. The way they make power would be the interesting thing rather than how much power they make. Could be a reliable fastish option for the people who aren't fond of the dark side. Possibly keep them stock apart from the pipe. They'd probably fit nicely into a RS chassis as well. Cost to purchase and rebuild in comparison to stuff we run now would be interesting.

**Sketchy_Racer** · 24th December 2012, 17:59

Originally Posted by crazy man

you will need 40 hp to help learn you how to get of the mark(-; lol

Don't have to get off the mark with 40hp, I'll still drag race everyone to the line haha.

Originally Posted by speedpro

Personally I don't see a problem with the basic idea of running an mx80. Standard they only make 20ish hp. Once freshened up they should be reasonably economical to run. Possibly even the 85s as well. The way they make power would be the interesting thing rather than how much power they make. Could be a reliable fastish option for the people who aren't fond of the dark side. Possibly keep them stock apart from the pipe. They'd probably fit nicely into a RS chassis as well. Cost to purchase and rebuild in comparison to stuff we run now would be interesting.

Yeah my idea is that they reliable,and parts are easily obtainable. If power levels are governed to 20hp its not going to make anyones hot rod motor that they have worked hard to build redundant, I feel it will just add more riders to the battle at the front, because with the people out there now, unless you have 20hp you may as well go home if you want to try win.

For what it is worth, a piston kit is $99 and will be at your door the next day (www.motocrossparts.co.nz)