ESE's works engine tuner

[TZ350]

Thanks for that, thanks everyone, it wasn't intuitively obvious to me by just looking at the separate graphs.

That red superimposed 30hp curve is way better than I thought, pity I buggered the 30hp cylinder trying to improve it.

Now to find some bigger 58T rear sprockets and start on a new cylinder.



Well look here at what Bucket found in the shed.

[rgvbaz]

I did a graph a while ago showing a KR1S v a RGV. Everyone said the KR1S was better because it had more torque and better drive up the curve. If you change the gearing by .875 then the RGV destroys the KR1S everywhere.




Dave

[Frits Overmars]

Here is what Frits implied, TZ: (red being the 30hp curve, moved 1500rpm to the left)
Attachment 280456

Not quite, Dinamik. Rescaling it 15% to the left is not the same as moving it 1500 rpm to the left.
I'll try to clearify that with some numbers.
8 hp @ 8,000 rpm becomes 8 hp @ 6,800 rpm
18 hp @ 10,000 rpm becomes 18 hp @ 8,500 rpm
30 hp @ 13,300 rpm becomes 30 hp @ 11,305 rpm
26 hp @ 14,000 rpm becomes 26 hp @ 11,900 rpm

EDIT: Damn, first Wobbly, now Rgvbaz; you guys type too fast for me.

[rgvbaz]

Not quite, Dinamik. Rescaling it 15% to the left is not the same as moving it 1500 rpm to the left.
I'll try to clearify that with some numbers.
8 hp @ 8,000 rpm becomes 8 hp @ 6,800 rpm
18 hp @ 10,000 rpm becomes 18 hp @ 8,500 rpm
30 hp @ 13,300 rpm becomes 30 hp @ 11,305 rpm
26 hp @ 14,000 rpm becomes 26 hp @ 11,900 rpm

EDIT: Damn, first Wobbly, now Rgvbaz; you guys type too fast for me.

Sorry, Frits

[dinamik2t]

Sorry for my misleading post. I understood the pattern now

[TZ350]

How are those CVT plans coming along?

Good .... but unsure if its best to run the variator off the crank at 13,000rpm or have a reduction from the crank to a jack shaft with the variator on it. Any input about that would be welcome.



I am building a completely new better handling bike based on a MC16 frame.



Similar to FarmerKens that I think will be at least 15kg's lighter than the Beast.

Was 102.6

And for those that like to suggest the rider should lose some to, well I have dropped 10+kg and plan another 5 for a total of 30, bike + rider.

I plan on trying three engines, a CVT system, a version of the Trombone and a conventional layout, I expect in time one will morph into the setup of choice.

Currently I am using the Beast as an engine development platform.

[cotswold]

Tee Zee, with your field being fluid transfer have you considered this , god knows how it works but.........
4: Honda DN-01

ONE of the limits for Yamaha’s hydraulic-drive 2WD bike was the fact the drive system couldn’t carry a huge amount of the engine’s power to the front wheel. Honda’s DN-01 might not have had 2WD, but it showed that hydraulics could be used to carry considerably more power.

The bike’s transmission was a masterpiece, with an angle-drive hydraulic pump that allowed the amount of fluid pumped per revolution to be completely variable – changing the effective gearing as it did so. It was clever stuff.

So it was a shame Honda shackled that transmission to its ancient Deauville V-twin engine and wrapped the whole lot in styling that even its mother couldn’t love. Oh, and then asked crazy-high prices for the finished caboodle. Sales were not high, some dealers joke that DN-01 stands for 'Did Not Order One'. The bike was killed off in short order but may one day be a future classic.



Read more: http://www.visordown.com/motorcycle-...#ixzz2Oh2jn3j4

[pete376403]

Tee Zee, with your field being fluid transfer have you considered this , god knows how it works but........

like this...

http://world.honda.com/motorcycle-te...tic/p3.html#02

Honda first used this transmission concept in the Juno scooter back in the early '60s.

very similar to an automotive air conditioning compressor, except the air con doesn't use variable swash plates

[TZ350]

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=KubG...layer_embedded

Jay Lawrence (was a regular Bucket Racer) riding the Bridgestone ZX10R does the Cliffhanger and smashes the record.

[F5 Dave]

Well unless hes been sneakily coming up to Auckland he hasn't raced buckets for quite some time & his old bucket was in my garage till recently minus a few bits on my 100 now. Used to have some good battles on the 50s here. Good lad too.

[bucketracer]

Attachment 275392

Fitted the 28hp B cylinder and its all sorted for Taumarunui.

Erm this is far better as far as power delivery goes than the previous (30hp) cylinder.

Forget about the few extra ponies, this is the right direction

TeeZee will probably continue working on his 30+hp cylinder.

the 30 hp curve is simply better. If you plot it over the 28 hp curve, you will see that the 30 hp curve completely encloses the 28 hp curve.

Attachment 280456

This is what Frits meant. Red being the 30hp curve, moved to the left.

[speedpro]

A really good example of gearing a motor to work at the desired road/track speed can be found in the Harley versus Jap 600 argument. The Harley makes lots of engine torque at 100KmH but a 600 makes a lot less engine torque at the same road/track speed. The 600 is revving a lot higher though so has a higher reduction ratio. Smack them both open at the same lowish speed and the 600 will leap ahead even though it's making a lot less "engine" torque. The rear wheel torque is greater.

It's the same with car advertising. They advertise big torque values for diesels at low engine rpm. Because the reduction ratio between engine and wheels is low the torque is not multiplied as much as say a lower torque, but higher revving, petrol engine. On the road the big torque vehicle be it car or bike ends up being a sluggish heap. R1s and the like are another thing all together.

[koba]

SS90 Blah Blah

The point has been proven many times over; in ways that mean so much more than forum posts on the internet.

Must you persist?

[koba]

Jay Lawrence (was a regular Bucket Racer) riding the Bridgestone ZX10R does the Cliffhanger and smashes the record.

So cool!

Even better once I stopped trying to wipe the bug of my monitor!

[bucketracer]

Good .... but unsure if its best to run the variator off the crank at 13,000rpm or have a reduction from the crank to a jack shaft with the variator on it.

Any input about that would be welcome.

Taken from the link below, Ok nothing about pully speed but V belts are more efficent power transmitters than chain and toothed belts are even better.

http://www.reliableplant.com/(X(1)S(...les/Print/2418

Standard roller chain drives operate at 91 to 94 percent efficiency

V-belt drives transmit power through friction between the belt and pulley. With efficiencies ranging from 95 to 98 percent at installation, these drives use energy more efficiently than roller chain drives, and somewhat less efficiently than synchronous belt drives.

Synchronous belts work on the tooth-grip principle. Round, square or modified curvilinear belt teeth mesh with grooves on sprockets to provide positive power transmission on high-torque applications with high and low speeds.

If drive size is a problem, many synchronous belt drive systems now have have an equivalent capacity to roller chain drives in the same width.

While roller chain requires frequent retensioning and V-belts require periodic retensioning, a synchronous belt typically requires no retensioning for the life of the belt.

Roller chain: A roller chain will elongate approximately 3 inches (or 3 percent) over its life, requiring about 1.5 inches of center distance take-up.

V-belt: A V-belt requires 1.5 to 2.5 inches of center distance take-up over its life, depending on the cross section and belt manufacturer.

Synchronous belt: A synchronous belt typically requires only .04 inches of center distance take-up over its life, depending on the belt type and manufacturer.

Maybe you can figure out the pully/speed info from here:- http://pdf.directindustry.com/pdf/me...67508-_15.html