Motorcycle Chassis Design Digest #861-870
MC-Chassis-Dgst Wednesday, December 23 1998 Volume 01 : Number 861
1. Paul Sayegh Subj: MC-Chassis Thanks
2. "Michael Moore" Subj: Re: MC-Chassis Thanks
3. Neil Collins Subj: MC-Chassis Re: http://www.htb.com.au/htb10.html
4. batwings@i-plus.net Subj: Re: MC-Chassis Re: swingarm brace
5. batwings@i-plus.net Subj: Re: MC-Chassis Re: swingarm brace
6. Alan Lapp Subj: Re: MC-Chassis SA alignment
7. "Thomas Alberti" Subj: MC-Chassis Frank Cam. Please Respond (XL500R Wheel)
8. Hnry@aol.com Subj: Re: MC-Chassis-swing arm alignment
9. Alan Lapp Subj: Re: MC-Chassis Re: swingarm brace
10. Paul Sayegh Subj: Re: MC-Chassis-swing arm alignment
11. batwings@i-plus.net Subj: Re: MC-Chassis-swing arm alignment
12. "Michael Moore" Subj: Re: MC-Chassis Re: swingarm brace
13. "dcmserv" Subj: Re: MC-Chassis Frank Cam. Please Respond (XL500R Wheel)
14. "Franklyn Berry" Subj: MC-Chassis V-Max alignment
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Date: Tue, 22 Dec 1998 19:18:00 -0800
From: Paul Sayegh
Subject: MC-Chassis Thanks
My thanks to all of you who responded to my alignment problem. My frame
is at the "Frame Man" here in Sacramento. He is supposed to be pretty
good. He will set it up in his frame jig and give me a recomendation
and I can do the machine work for what ever is required. Although I
don't have the perfect solution you have all given me some new ideas to
help resolve this. Thanks again, especially to Michael who went
through the trouble to draw the picture.
- --
................................................................
Paul Sayegh
V-Max Technical List Administrator
VMOA Northwest Director
V-Max web page http://www.sayegh.org/tips.htm
------------------------------
Date: Tue, 22 Dec 1998 21:52:00 -0800
From: "Michael Moore"
Subject: Re: MC-Chassis Thanks
Hello Paul,
> is at the "Frame Man" here in Sacramento. He is supposed to be pretty
> good. He will set it up in his frame jig and give me a recomendation
> and I can do the machine work for what ever is required. Although I
You should get a good job done by Walt from everything I've heard.
> don't have the perfect solution you have all given me some new ideas to
> help resolve this. Thanks again, especially to Michael who went
> through the trouble to draw the picture.
It only took a minute or two - just pull up the jpg in a
paint/illustration program and modify it.
Cheers,
Michael
Michael Moore
Euro Spares, San Francisco CA
Distributor of Lucas RITA and Powerbase products
Sole North American distributor of "The Racing Motorcycle: a technical guide for constructors"
Host of 7 m/c email lists (details on the web site)
http://www.eurospares.com
AFM/AHRMA #364
------------------------------
Date: Wed, 23 Dec 1998 18:06:47 +1030
From: Neil Collins
Subject: MC-Chassis Re: http://www.htb.com.au/htb10.html
Hi there!
I have just updated my web page and it may be worth your while to have a
look especially; the Genuine Yamaha Literature / Memorabilia.
regards Neil
http://www.htb.com.au/htb10.html
http://www.htb.com.au/htb11.html
Neil Collins
------------------------------
Date: Wed, 23 Dec 1998 07:45:52
From: batwings@i-plus.net
Subject: Re: MC-Chassis Re: swingarm brace
At 02:09 PM 12/22/98 -0800, you wrote:
>> come up with the perfect design. Most of what I have found
>> ( http://www.geocities.com/MotorCity/Speedway/2476/swingarm.htm )
With all respect, this stuff is way off. The arm itself isn't a badly done
item, for an arm. There would be however two big problems with its
attachment implementation. I ran into the same thing once on a VF500 Honda:
first the overhung bngs have a tendancy to not only move the support pins
under load but there can't be a provision for taking up the thrust, since
there is no shaft running through the whole thing, hence they also spring
apart a bit when loaded axially, and get sloppy in their action. The second
problem would be that the drive side bng is in a cup which appears to be
welded to the side of the main tube there, so any load applied to it can
not only flex the mounting for support pin in frame, it can also distort
the tubing the cup is welded to in the arm. This cup should be reinforced
with a conical support that welds to its outer end and to the side of the
arm some distance from the bottom of the cup, and the more it's wrapped
around the main tubing there, the better job it will do. Have even wondered
since all this topic started up, if the power hadn't bent the pin support
member, IOW that misalignment came after-market and was not supplied by
vendor.
Also ... Vmax motor is huge and the frame stretched around it to the
disadvantage of the tubes. A brace from region of SA pivot to the
under-tank area near steering head will no doubt be a big help.
Best regards,
Hoyt
Belfab CNC: http://www.freeyellow.com/members/belfab/belfab.html
Best MC Repair- http://www.freeyellow.com/members/batwings/best.html
Camping/Caving- http://www.freeyellow.com/members/batwings/caving.html
'It's the end of the world as we know it; I feel fine' <=Michael Stipe
------------------------------
Date: Wed, 23 Dec 1998 07:50:10
From: batwings@i-plus.net
Subject: Re: MC-Chassis Re: swingarm brace
At 02:41 PM 12/22/98 -0800, you wrote:
>www.eurospares.com/graphics/vmaxsarm.jpg
Now that's a darn nice job ... only one small crit: The braces shouldn't be
butted up to the middles of the bigger members but should always attach at
the edges of the other tubes where the loads are carried edge-wise to them,
and loads should be spread out with gussets also.
Best regards,
Hoyt
------------------------------
Date: Wed, 23 Dec 1998 09:33:07 -0500
From: Alan Lapp
Subject: Re: MC-Chassis SA alignment
>My problem is that I can't get a rod all the way through the swingarm
>because of the driveshaft
>tube, unless I cut a hole in it. In addition it would be difficult to
>hold the tapered bearings
>in tight to get a true alignment.
I understand the dificulty - perhaps you would have an easier time if you
removed the engine from the frame.
If you were dead set against R/R of the engine, you could fabricate an
external jig which would be 'U' shaped with long pilot tubes at the top of
each vertical leg of the 'U' section. This jig would fit around the frame
on the outside. These pilot tubes would be reamed straight and true during
fabrication. This would allow you to use 2 alignment shafts outboard of
the frame, rather than from the inside of the frame.
Take a look at
>http://www.sayegh.org/images/Paul/swingarm_reinforcing.jpg
Nice work!
Al
level_5_ltd@earthlink.net
------------------------------
Date: Wed, 23 Dec 1998 08:38:03 -0600
From: "Thomas Alberti"
Subject: MC-Chassis Frank Cam. Please Respond (XL500R Wheel)
Please disregard unless you are Frank Camilieri (spelling?)
Frank, due to hard drive issues, I don't have your address to send you a
check, please write me at: reduc@hotmail.com with your address. Sorry for
the delay.
Thomas
------------------------------
Date: Wed, 23 Dec 1998 09:38:53 EST
From: Hnry@aol.com
Subject: Re: MC-Chassis-swing arm alignment
Hello,
What if...
V-Max is reassembled without modification. Front wheel and rear wheel
alignment is measured with string/straightedge, unladen. Alignment is
acceptable. (Is this adjustable on a shaft drive machine?)
Then, front wheel & rear wheel alignment are measured with rear suspension's
total compression travel mocked-up.
If the wheel alignment remains unchanged between these two extremes, is there
a problem that will affect handling (disregard swing arm flex discussion)?
Or, are the concerns raised centered on the problems of the arm's free
movement and the quality of fit at bearings and pivots?
Scott Jameson
Greenville, South Carolina
------------------------------
Date: Wed, 23 Dec 1998 09:43:46 -0500
From: Alan Lapp
Subject: Re: MC-Chassis Re: swingarm brace
>> come up with the perfect design. Most of what I have found
>> ( http://www.geocities.com/MotorCity/Speedway/2476/swingarm.htm )
>> relies on the 180 bend, which I believe "may" adequately address the
>> individual sides but does little to tie the whole arm together to reduce
>> torsional flexing. Can you elaborate a little more about your straight tube
>> design?
>
>Hello Terry,
>
>You can start by reading Tony's article on frame bracing at:
>
>http://www.ctv.es/USERS/softtech/motos/Articles/Frame.mod/KawaMods.htm
>
>None of the designs on the referenced web site seem to do the job to
>me.
I would tend to agree: the brace must be kept from moving laterally with
respect to the OEM SA. To my eye, this implies putting diagonal tubes or a
sheet metal box section on the brace where it runs paralell to the SA pivot.
In fact, if you look at the braces put on WSB bikes, the majority are
entirely fabricated from sheet metal.
Al
level_5_ltd@earthlink.net
------------------------------
Date: Wed, 23 Dec 1998 07:36:44 -0800
From: Paul Sayegh
Subject: Re: MC-Chassis-swing arm alignment
Hnry@aol.com wrote:
> Hello,
> What if...
> V-Max is reassembled without modification. Front wheel and rear wheel
> alignment is measured with string/straightedge, unladen. Alignment is
> acceptable. (Is this adjustable on a shaft drive machine?)
The V-Max , from what I have heard comes from the factory with a 10mm "offset"
front to rear. If the SA pins are not in alignment, the swing arm can't possibly
swing in a 90 deg arc even if I was lucky enough by some twirk of tolerance that
Front to rear were lined up at the "static" position. What happens when you hit
a big bump and the SA rotates at an angle? Won't this change F to R alignment?
Am I being too picky here? I am hoping that this is part of my problem and that
aligning these SA pins will help.
> Then, front wheel & rear wheel alignment are measured with rear suspension's
> total compression travel mocked-up.
> If the wheel alignment remains unchanged between these two extremes, is there
> a problem that will affect handling (disregard swing arm flex discussion)?
> Or, are the concerns raised centered on the problems of the arm's free
> movement and the quality of fit at bearings and pivots?
I can't help but think that if the bearings do not sit straight in their cups
that when the SA supports flex this can cause problems as well loosing contact
area all the way around. One of the things that brought my attention to this in
the first place was the marks in the bearing race on opposite sides with only 8k
mi on bike.
- --
.............................................
Paul Sayegh
V-Max Technical List Administrator
VMOA Northwest Director
V-Max web page http://www.sayegh.org/tips.htm
------------------------------
Date: Wed, 23 Dec 1998 12:42:48
From: batwings@i-plus.net
Subject: Re: MC-Chassis-swing arm alignment
At 09:38 AM 12/23/98 EST, you wrote:
>Or, are the concerns raised centered on the problems of the arm's free
>movement and the quality of fit at bearings and pivots?
Good thinking on the wheel alignment thing, but the real issue is handling,
probably as affected by the above.
Just my imagination, but aren't overhung bngs OK when torque and
performance applied to the system is lower?
Best regards,
Hoyt
------------------------------
Date: Wed, 23 Dec 1998 10:22:52 -0800
From: "Michael Moore"
Subject: Re: MC-Chassis Re: swingarm brace
Hello Hoyt,
> Now that's a darn nice job ... only one small crit: The braces shouldn't be
> butted up to the middles of the bigger members but should always attach at
> the edges of the other tubes where the loads are carried edge-wise to them,
> and loads should be spread out with gussets also.
This brings to mine something I've read where tubular joints should
be designed so that the center axis of each tube intersects with all
the other tube axis in the joint.
I think this may be to limit offset loading of the tubes.
Comments?
Cheers,
Michael
------------------------------
Date: Wed, 23 Dec 1998 01:33:24 -0500
From: "dcmserv"
Subject: Re: MC-Chassis Frank Cam. Please Respond (XL500R Wheel)
His work # is 603-887-4287
DG
- -
>Please disregard unless you are Frank Camilieri (spelling?)
>
>Frank, due to hard drive issues, I don't have your address to send you a
>check, please write me at: reduc@hotmail.com with your address. Sorry for
>the delay.
>
>Thomas
>
>
------------------------------
Date: Wed, 23 Dec 1998 15:46:16 -0600
From: "Franklyn Berry"
Subject: MC-Chassis V-Max alignment
Ian Drysdale writes:
>If your 'dummy' shows that the alignment is OK - I would
>look at some way to tie the outside plates together so that
>they can't spring apart as much under load. A bolt right thru
>the centre is ideal but not able to be used in this application
>I realize.
I've just posted the solid model image of a Tonti-designed Guzzi frame on
my website at .
Tonti used a pair of horizontal tubes to [IMHO] counter this tendency on the
Guzzi frame, which is somewhat like the V-max frame layout. One exception
is that the Guzzi swing arm houses plain bearings, with threaded bushings
on the frame holding a threaded stub shaft. Side loads are countered by
bearing thrust pre-load, which has to be carefully maintained. The locking
'nuts' are quite large, perhaps 40mm [haven't modeled them yet].
I'm considering adding a triangulating strut between the driveshaft side-
lower tube corner and brake side-upper tube [i.e. triangulate the two
horizontal tubes], in the hope of gaining a little more stiffness between
the swing arm mounts. Perhaps the V-Max could use/has something similar?
Franklyn Berry Premier Plastics 1225 Pearl St Waukesha, WI 53186
fax: (414)549-3631 vox: (414)549-9532 x101 pag: (888) 851-0506
------------------------------
End of MC-Chassis-Dgst V1 #861
******************************
MC-Chassis-Dgst Friday, December 25 1998 Volume 01 : Number 862
1. "Terry Hayden" Subj: MC-Chassis Vmax alignment
2. batwings@i-plus.net Subj: Re: MC-Chassis Re: swingarm brace
3. Russell Royal Subj: MC-Chassis Tubular Joints (was swingarm brace)
4. Paul Sayegh Subj: MC-Chassis SA pictures
5. briankk@aimnet.com (Brian Knowles) Subj: MC-Chassis Slightly spooky Magna
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Date: Wed, 23 Dec 1998 16:44:39 -0800
From: "Terry Hayden"
Subject: MC-Chassis Vmax alignment
The Vmax has a cross tube above and below the pivot points to minimize the
effect of side thrust...however, I agree that it can benefit from some
gusset work and triangulation to minimize distorsion...(not to mention that
the overall frame design can use some help...)
http://www.geocities.com/MotorCity/Speedway/2476/Frame.jpg
cheers, Terry
Franklyn Berry Wrote:
>I've just posted the solid model image of a Tonti-designed Guzzi frame on
>my website at .
>Tonti used a pair of horizontal tubes to [IMHO] counter this tendency on
the
>Guzzi frame, which is somewhat like the V-max frame layout. One exception
>is that the Guzzi swing arm houses plain bearings, with threaded bushings
>on the frame holding a threaded stub shaft. Side loads are countered by
>bearing thrust pre-load, which has to be carefully maintained. The locking
>'nuts' are quite large, perhaps 40mm [haven't modeled them yet].
>
>I'm considering adding a triangulating strut between the driveshaft side-
>lower tube corner and brake side-upper tube [i.e. triangulate the two
>horizontal tubes], in the hope of gaining a little more stiffness between
>the swing arm mounts. Perhaps the V-Max could use/has something similar?
>
>
------------------------------
Date: Thu, 24 Dec 1998 08:26:39
From: batwings@i-plus.net
Subject: Re: MC-Chassis Re: swingarm brace
At 10:22 AM 12/23/98 -0800, you wrote:
>This brings to mine something I've read where tubular joints should
>be designed so that the center axis of each tube intersects with all
>the other tube axis in the joint.
Good when the tubes are the same size, hence their ODs coincide and the
walls are already aligned. Putting small tube centered in middle of big
tube would mean bending loads on the wall thickness of bigger tube. Same
applies to putting gussets on tubes: should run tangent to ODs.
------------------------------
Date: Thu, 24 Dec 1998 08:58:40 -0800 (PST)
From: Russell Royal
Subject: MC-Chassis Tubular Joints (was swingarm brace)
A typical simple stable truss analysis assumes pinned joints. Bending
moments at the cluster are not accounted for which requires the
centerlines of the tubes to meet at the joint to balance the forces.
A welded cluster in a stable truss is usually conservative for this
reason.
Joining different diameter tubes is common but as batwings brought up
an extreme difference in diameter puts the wall of the larger tube in
flat plate bending as well as working the weld in tension. The
smaller tube could be offset to maximuze tangency with the larger
(with the drawback of induced torsion on the larger tube and eccentric
bending in the smaller) and/or a gusset added to distribute the small
tube load to the larger in shear tangent to the large diameter wall.
Saves the tube and the weld.
Flat centerline gussets are also used but they are usually fitted into
notches through the tubes and pick up both sides of the tube. Works
the tube locally like an arch.
A good reference is FAA Advisory Circular AC 43.13 - Acceptable
Methods, Techniques, and Practices for Aircraft Inspection and Repair
and Alterations. Lots of information in chapter 2 on welding tubular
structure including detailed illustrations for cluster joints, splice
joints and repairs. The manual is available fairly inexpensively, but
if anyone wants just the welding section I can scan the pages and
place them on my home site.
Russ
===
Russell Royal
r2av@rocketmail.com
2995 Hwy 237
Auburn, WY 83111
Aviat Aircraft Inc.
- ---batwings@i-plus.net wrote:
>
> At 10:22 AM 12/23/98 -0800, you wrote:
> >This brings to mine something I've read where tubular joints should
> >be designed so that the center axis of each tube intersects with all
> >the other tube axis in the joint.
>
> Good when the tubes are the same size, hence their ODs coincide and
the
> walls are already aligned. Putting small tube centered in middle of
big
> tube would mean bending loads on the wall thickness of bigger tube.
Same
> applies to putting gussets on tubes: should run tangent to ODs.
>
_________________________________________________________
DO YOU YAHOO!?
Get your free @yahoo.com address at http://mail.yahoo.com
------------------------------
Date: Thu, 10 Dec 1998 14:58:50 -0800
From: Paul Sayegh
Subject: MC-Chassis SA pictures
I posted some pictures of my swingarm misalignment at
http://www.sayegh.org/framepic.htm These pictures give a better idea of
the problem that started the conversation. If you need more pictures I
can easily post them.
Again, thanks to all that responded....good group! Merry X-Mas!
- --
................................................................
Paul Sayegh
------------------------------
Date: Fri, 25 Dec 1998 09:31:57 -0800
From: briankk@aimnet.com (Brian Knowles)
Subject: MC-Chassis Slightly spooky Magna
Mike;
Thanks for your thoughts copncerning possible oversize bolt-holes on my
engine mounts. The idea would have occurred to me one day, but you've sped
the process up a bit. I'll check it out as soon as it's warm enough go
outside again.
Please excuse my belated reply, I can read the list from work, but can't post.
Merry Christmas,
Brian
------------------------------
End of MC-Chassis-Dgst V1 #862
******************************
MC-Chassis-Dgst Saturday, December 26 1998 Volume 01 : Number 863
1. "Michael Moore" Subj: MC-Chassis Con rods: I beam vs H beam
2. "Michael Moore" Subj: MC-Chassis Bearings
3. "Michael Moore" Subj: MC-Chassis Suspension
4. "Michael Moore" Subj: Re: MC-Chassis Slightly spooky Magna
5. "DCM Services" Subj: Re: MC-Chassis Con rods: I beam vs H beam
6. "DCM Services" Subj: Re: MC-Chassis Bearings
7. "DCM Services" Subj: Re: MC-Chassis SA pictures
8. dave.williams@chaos.lrk.ar.us (Dave Williams) Subj: MC-Chassis Con rods: I beam vs H beam
9. dave.williams@chaos.lrk.ar.us (Dave Williams) Subj: Re: MC-Chassis Con rods: I beam vs H beam
10. "dcmserv" Subj: Re: MC-Chassis Con rods: I beam vs H beam
11. "Michael Moore" Subj: Re: MC-Chassis Con rods: I beam vs H beam
12. David Weinshenker Subj: Re: MC-Chassis Con rods: I beam vs H beam
13. "dcmserv" Subj: Re: MC-Chassis Con rods: I beam vs H beam
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Date: Fri, 25 Dec 1998 10:34:59 -0800
From: "Michael Moore"
Subject: MC-Chassis Con rods: I beam vs H beam
Also in RE they had an article on Top Fuel drag car tech. They show
a massive aluminum con rod, and mention that cylinder pressure can
cause even this item to buckle.
It seems like an I beam rod would be the best for fore-aft strength,
since it moves the greater mass of metal to the edges of the rod.
Yet many top race engine still use a Carrillo-style H beam rod, and
some designers seem to use both rods in their designs.
Which is likely to be the best? And wouldn't a tubular rod have even
greater benefits? I'm sure that aero effects also have some bearing
on an "ideal" rod design.
Comments?
Cheers,
Michael
------------------------------
Date: Fri, 25 Dec 1998 10:35:00 -0800
From: "Michael Moore"
Subject: MC-Chassis Bearings
Another RE article was on "hybrid" bearings, that aren't using just
steel components.
The use of silicon nitride balls is becoming more widespread as the
price of a .25" ball has come down from $20 15 years ago to $.30 in
the near future.
The silicon nitride ball is 60% lighter, has a greater strength and
elastic moduls and a higher temp capablility, increasing bearing
life 5 - 10 times. The SN also has a better final surface finish
with a 1/3 reduction in the C of Friction. Lubricants perform
better, meaning less is needed at high speeds. The SN balls are
also harder and less prone to damage from metal chips.
Total annual production of SN balls is about 30 million vs 100
billion for steel, but volume is rapidly increasing.
They are also making bearing cages out of carbon -carbon materials
which further reduces the rotating mass of the bearing and can be
used with either steel or ceramic balls. It also dissipates heat
more rapidly.
A C-C cage patent holder is quoted as saying the C-C cage is one of
the rare instances where all the major desirable properties have been
significantly improved for high-temp use by the new material. The
C-C cage is half the weight of steel, and bearing life is doubled
again if the SN balls are used with it, as well as a 30% reduction in
torque resistance and bearing temp.
They are also doing some bearings with both SN balls and races, where
all the components are diamond coated. The bearings require no
lubrication and are almost frictionless. These are very expensive
Defense Dept weapon systems items.
Interesting stuff.
Cheers,
Michael
------------------------------
Date: Fri, 25 Dec 1998 10:34:59 -0800
From: "Michael Moore"
Subject: MC-Chassis Suspension
There were several interesting things in the 12/98 issue of "Racecar
Engineering".
In an interview with rally car suspension specialist Pekka Siltanen
it was mentioned "pneumatic springs carry benefits at higher
frequencies; air is more linear than a spring. This means that, in
one area, you can have a very linear and less changing rate but,
because of this you have to add an active damper control at the same
time".
Cheers,
Michael
------------------------------
Date: Fri, 25 Dec 1998 10:44:51 -0800
From: "Michael Moore"
Subject: Re: MC-Chassis Slightly spooky Magna
> Thanks for your thoughts copncerning possible oversize bolt-holes on my
> engine mounts. The idea would have occurred to me one day, but you've sped
> the process up a bit. I'll check it out as soon as it's warm enough go
> outside again.
Hello Brian,
You don't have room for the bike in the kitchen or living room?
Oversize mounting holes are very common - lots of them seem to even
be cast holes instead of drilled. Several companies used to sell
motormount kits for the Kawa Z1 that had big Al plates with oversize
bolts, and these were reported as making noticeable differences. You
might as well make that big lump of a motor contribute a bit to the
chassis.
Cheers,
Michael
------------------------------
Date: Fri, 25 Dec 1998 21:05:28 -0500
From: "DCM Services"
Subject: Re: MC-Chassis Con rods: I beam vs H beam
The H beam allows you to run your stiffeners right out alongside the bolts
(in a 2 piece rod) without losing strength to the bolt holes. Other than
that I can see little advantage to either type. I've seen oval section rods
(presumably tubular) somewhere but I don't recall the application. The
manufacturing difficulties might outweigh the benefits. You would want a
tube closed at the ends since the bearings need to be fully supported. This
would require a difficult casting or a fabricated assembly. The casting is
difficult because core shift would be unacceptable, and the fabricated
assembly is even more costly and would require complex heat treating to
assure consistent strength. The casting might also need to be "hipped" (hot
isostatic pressed) to acceive sufficient mechanical strength. This is not a
simple or inexpensive process. For a racing application, I would also want
to individually magnaflux and x-ray either type of these rods. Even more
money. Perhaps the best compromise is a forging with an aerodynamic fore -
to - aft profile. This could be a variation on the I beam, and would require
no more special or costly fabrication than current rods.
Since rods in a Top Fuel or Funny car are disposable, and since they make
about 5000 hp I don't think there is much need for more aerodynamic rods in
that application, but our high revving, small output engines could possibly
benefit from them.
My $.02
DG
>Also in RE they had an article on Top Fuel drag car tech. They show
>a massive aluminum con rod, and mention that cylinder pressure can
>cause even this item to buckle.
>>Comments?
>
------------------------------
Date: Fri, 25 Dec 1998 20:44:22 -0500
From: "DCM Services"
Subject: Re: MC-Chassis Bearings
Bearings using Sn balls have been used in high speed machine tool spindles
for several years now with very good success. The rebuild costs are still
staggering though, about three times the cost of the best steel bearings.
The carbon/carbon technology has also been around for a while, but it's
application has been limited largely by cost. There is also the issue that
some of the processes to produce the materials fall under the catagory of
"controlled export technologies" and some of them are even classified. Not
too surprising considering the technologies were developed for the ablative
tips on ICBM's!
The diamond coatings may work on carbon races, but the biggest problem with
this process is adhesion to the substrate. It has been tried on many
different materials but many are unsuitable for the process. Another problem
is that the coating is quite weak in shear and bending loads. This could be
a problem in a bearing if the races and cage were to deflect at all in
operation. Bearing deflection is a fact of life in an engine, so this could
be a big problem.
My $.02
DG
>Another RE article was on "hybrid" bearings, that aren't using just
>steel components.
>
>The use of silicon nitride balls is becoming more widespread as the
>price of a .25" ball has come down from $20 15 years ago to $.30 in
>the near future.
------------------------------
Date: Fri, 25 Dec 1998 21:37:49 -0500
From: "DCM Services"
Subject: Re: MC-Chassis SA pictures
I agree with many of the other replies in that you may be best off going to
a GMD computrack facility to correct the misallignment. I say this not to
promote them, but because they have a very good system to determine all
errors in chassis geometry. Without a huge coordinate measuring machine at
your disposal, I can think of no other truly accurate way to determine the
actual relationship between steering axis and swingarm pivot. Simply getting
the pivot to go straight through both sides of the frame does nothing to
assure the pivot is perpendicular to the steering axis, and if it is not,
the bike still won't handle right. Another, perhaps less accurate, option
would be to fabricate a checking fixture that attached to a mock steering
stem and bracketed both sides of the bike to provide a reference plane. This
would require a fair amount of fabricating and machining though. It would
also require very tight tolerances due to cosine errors over the distance
from steering pivot to S/A pivot.
My $.02
DG
------------------------------
Date: Fri, 25 Dec 1998 19:11:00 -0500
From: dave.williams@chaos.lrk.ar.us (Dave Williams)
Subject: MC-Chassis Con rods: I beam vs H beam
- -> Yet many top race engine still use a Carrillo-style H beam rod, and
- -> some designers seem to use both rods in their designs.
Yes.
- -> Which is likely to be the best? And wouldn't a tubular rod have even
- -> greater benefits?
The rod makers who have made rods both ways claim there is no
real-world difference in strength. This is likely true; the major load
on the rods is bending, second major load is tension, but they
generally fail from plain old fatigue.
Tubular rods have been done - early Offenhousers, some aircraft
engines, etc. They performed satisfactorily as far as I know, but
production costs were high.
MechArt makes a cast stainless rod for some automobile applications.
It's very bulky, but of interest because it's hollow, apparently an
investment casting. David Vizard has spoken well of them, they've been
around a long time, but you don't come across them often.
- -> I'm sure that aero effects also have some bearing
- -> on an "ideal" rod design.
BRC and Venolia have made "aerodynamic" rods since the 1960s; I'm sure
they do *something*, but it's apparently well down in the zone where
it's hard to measure hp repeatably. However, I don't know of any tests
with aero rods that take oil aeration into account; there might be some
benefit there, given the meager data made public about testing with
knife edged counterweights. The knifed edged cranks generally made
little if any power, but the time before aerating the oil increased.
Once the oil becomes aerated the bearing temp goes up and you start
seeing cavitation wear in the bearing shells. On the flip side, most
"real race engines" are dry sump, which bypasses that problem if done
right.
==dave.williams@chaos.lrk.ar.us======================================
I've got a secret / I've been hiding / under my skin / | Who are you?
my heart is human / my blood is boiling / my brain IBM | who, who?
=================================== http://home1.gte.net/42/index.htm
------------------------------
Date: Sat, 26 Dec 1998 08:33:00 -0500
From: dave.williams@chaos.lrk.ar.us (Dave Williams)
Subject: Re: MC-Chassis Con rods: I beam vs H beam
- -> tube closed at the ends since the bearings need to be fully
- -> supported. This would require a difficult casting or a fabricated
- -> assembly. The casting is
All the tubular rods I've seen were billet. As in, saw off a chunk of
bar stock and whittle away everything that doen't look like a connecting
rod, as opposed to what I now call "advertising billet", which exists
only in the minds of PR people.
------------------------------
Date: Fri, 25 Dec 1998 22:28:15 -0500
From: "dcmserv"
Subject: Re: MC-Chassis Con rods: I beam vs H beam
All the tubular rods I've seen were billet. As in, saw off a chunk of
bar stock and whittle away everything that doen't look like a connecting
rod, as opposed to what I now call "advertising billet", which exists
only in the minds of PR people.
I've heard of carbon fiber billet as being the next wave of PR materials.
They apparently need a new term to misuse and think this must be it. Sounds
to me like most of the benefits of carbon fiber would be lost as soon as you
start cutting it away, but I'm not a PR person.
Slightly off subject...Mercedes Benz experimented with carbon fiber con rods
at one point. Can you say expensive? Sure you can.
------------------------------
Date: Sat, 26 Dec 1998 08:35:00 -0800
From: "Michael Moore"
Subject: Re: MC-Chassis Con rods: I beam vs H beam
The Steve Pick twin cylinder engine originally had some tubular rods
with 4 bolts that looked to have been welded together.
Cheers,
Michael
------------------------------
Date: Sat, 26 Dec 1998 08:50:47 -0800
From: David Weinshenker
Subject: Re: MC-Chassis Con rods: I beam vs H beam
dcmserv wrote:
> Sounds
> to me like most of the benefits of carbon
> fiber would be lost as soon as you
> start cutting it away
Yeah, I'd expect the best results from any fibrous composite
material to be obtained with "additive" fabrication techniques
that place the fibers according to the load paths...
So would our C.F. con-rod thus look like one of the filament wound
"dog bone" pieces of the Britten V-twin chassis?
- -dave w
------------------------------
Date: Sat, 26 Dec 1998 00:20:47 -0500
From: "dcmserv"
Subject: Re: MC-Chassis Con rods: I beam vs H beam
>
>Yeah, I'd expect the best results from any fibrous composite
>material to be obtained with "additive" fabrication techniques
>that place the fibers according to the load paths...
>
>So would our C.F. con-rod thus look like one of the filament wound
>"dog bone" pieces of the Britten V-twin chassis?
>
The pictures I saw looked like filament wound structure around metal inserts
at the bolt holes and bearing bores. Probably titanium, it is very
compatible with carbon fiber. Aluminum is not very compatible, add even a
tiny bit of moisture and it will react electrolytically and corode itself.
DG
------------------------------
End of MC-Chassis-Dgst V1 #863
******************************
MC-Chassis-Dgst Saturday, December 26 1998 Volume 01 : Number 864
1. batwings@i-plus.net Subj: Re: MC-Chassis SA pictures
2. "Ed Biafore" Subj: RE: MC-Chassis Con rods: I beam vs H beam
3. "Michael Moore" Subj: Re: MC-Chassis Con rods: I beam vs H beam
4. Julian Bond Subj: Re: MC-Chassis Con rods: I beam vs H beam
5. dave.williams@chaos.lrk.ar.us (Dave Williams) Subj: Re: MC-Chassis Con rods: I beam vs H beam
6. "DCM Services" Subj: Re: MC-Chassis Con rods: I beam vs H beam
7. Ian Drysdale Subj: MC-Chassis Conrods
8. David Weinshenker Subj: Re: MC-Chassis Conrods
9. flat-track@juno.com (Tony Manx) Subj: MC-Chassis GMD Computrack
10. "Michael Moore" Subj: Re: MC-Chassis Conrods
11. David Weinshenker Subj: Re: MC-Chassis Conrods
12. GD Subj: Re: MC-Chassis Conrods
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Date: Sat, 26 Dec 1998 08:04:21
From: batwings@i-plus.net
Subject: Re: MC-Chassis SA pictures
At 09:37 PM 12/25/98 -0500, you wrote:
>Simply getting
>the pivot to go straight through both sides of the frame does nothing to
>assure the pivot is perpendicular to the steering axis, and if it is not,
>the bike still won't handle right.
In fact the real problem is making sure it's centered. Unless the frame is
really bad about the vertical position of the pivot ends, the pivot and
stem will always have a plane perp to one and including the other, but the
pivot may not be symmetrically disposed within it.
It's not too far out of reality to suggest the problem in MC isn't absolute
relative accuracy of the positions of the bits, it's that they may be
moving around due to flex, in use. It's not necessary for rear the wheel to
go up and down parallel to the stem or even be aligned to the frame if
these relarionships are constant; for smaller errors there will be no
noticable effect. And the best alignment on earth is useless unless it can
be preserved dynamically, which as I understand it is the difficulty in
this case.
Best regards,
Hoyt
------------------------------
Date: Sat, 26 Dec 1998 10:53:35 -0700
From: "Ed Biafore"
Subject: RE: MC-Chassis Con rods: I beam vs H beam
> >So would our C.F. con-rod thus look like one of the filament wound
> >"dog bone" pieces of the Britten V-twin chassis?
> The pictures I saw looked like filament wound structure around
> metal inserts
> at the bolt holes and bearing bores. Probably titanium, it is very
> compatible with carbon fiber. Aluminum is not very compatible, add even a
> tiny bit of moisture and it will react electrolytically and corode itself.
> DG
Hey Guys,
This composite stuff is really cool. I'd like to know if any of you could
help me out and point me towards some good books on carbon fiber? A good
general textbook and maybe another good book on fabbing out some small runs
of fenders and misc. small parts in the garage would really help me out.
Thanks,
Ed
'91 883/1200 Sporty
------------------------------
Date: Sat, 26 Dec 1998 10:31:40 -0800
From: "Michael Moore"
Subject: Re: MC-Chassis Con rods: I beam vs H beam
> So would our C.F. con-rod thus look like one of the filament wound
> "dog bone" pieces of the Britten V-twin chassis?
I've seen a picture of a CF connecting rod that was made that way.
It had a very organic look to it - much like muscle fibers.
Cheers,
Michael
------------------------------
Date: Sat, 26 Dec 1998 18:21:19 +0000
From: Julian Bond
Subject: Re: MC-Chassis Con rods: I beam vs H beam
In article <01be307f$c5f37840$5d2f29d8@front-office>, dcmserv
writes
>
>I've heard of carbon fiber billet as being the next wave of PR materials.
CF Billet. Excellent. We should do a multimedia fax campaign to promote
it :*)
- -- --------============>>>>>>>>>> )+( <<<<<<<<<<============-------- --
Julian Bond
------------------------------
Date: Sat, 26 Dec 1998 10:09:00 -0500
From: dave.williams@chaos.lrk.ar.us (Dave Williams)
Subject: Re: MC-Chassis Con rods: I beam vs H beam
- -> Slightly off subject...Mercedes Benz experimented with carbon fiber
- -> con rods at one point. Can you say expensive? Sure you can.
VW did extensive work about 15 years ago with various fiber composite
rods. Strength/weight were good, but as they cost more than an ordinary
steel rod, there was no place for them in ordinary production engines.
Honda used metal-matrix composite rods in some of their production
motors. Some models of CRX were advertised to have them, anyway. The
MMC rods used a steel fiber core with an aluminum die cast rod formed
over it; the intent was to get a lighter rod without the reputed fatigue
problems of aluminum rods.
The early PR blurbs for the NSX that appeared in the SAE journal
claimed MMC rods; later PR claimed titanium.
------------------------------
Date: Sat, 26 Dec 1998 18:42:15 -0500
From: "DCM Services"
Subject: Re: MC-Chassis Con rods: I beam vs H beam
Honda used metal-matrix composite rods in some of their production
motors. Some models of CRX were advertised to have them, anyway. The
MMC rods used a steel fiber core with an aluminum die cast rod formed
over it; the intent was to get a lighter rod without the reputed fatigue
problems of aluminum rods.
Ferrari uses MMC rods in the F1 cars and other F1 teams are rumored to do so
also. These use a porous ceramic core and high silicon aluminum. The
aluminum may be silicon whisker reinforced as well. The rods are cast (if
that is the right word for the hibrid process used to produce the blanks) in
Waltham, MA. I've talked to them about bike rods, but is not economically
realistic to produce small lots without the type of money a F1 team has.
My $.02
DG
------------------------------
Date: Sun, 27 Dec 1998 13:49:27 +1100
From: Ian Drysdale
Subject: MC-Chassis Conrods
> Also in RE they had an article on Top Fuel drag car tech. They show
> a massive aluminum con rod, and mention that cylinder pressure can
> cause even this item to buckle.
Michael opens up the floodgates on Pandora's box of worms again !
As I am about to make a set of rods for my 1000cc motor it
is subject I have been giving a lot of thought to recently.
Mechanically supercharged motors running oxygenated fuels
(i.e.- chemically supercharged too) are going to be hard on
rods - but these motors aside - the highest stress on a rod is
at the end of the exhaust stroke - i.e. - in tension.
Hence the mean piston speed and related peak acceleration
( or deceleration ) being critical. BTW - one of the Italian
mags prints the mean piston speed of every bike they test in
the specification box - even scooters.
In this situation the 'tapered' Carillo 'H' style rods will tend
to concentrate the stress at the small end ( the point of smallest
cross section ) whereas the standard Japanese OEM 'I' beam
rod with it's constant section will distribute the stress all the
way along.
The Carillo style rods are obviously better in both bending
and compression but Japanese bikes are now running up to
22 m/s mean piston speed on the road with ( what appears
to be ) fragile looking parallel 'I' beam rods. The 600 RR
production class must run stock rods in Oz ( not sure about
Europe/US ) and rod failures are unheard of. Go figure.....
As to tubular et al - it comes back to the X sect. under
tension. I have seen rods in old motors with an exaggerated
'I' beam with holes all the way along - great in bending but
less so in tension. Same I think with materials - the very
best aluminum's come up to what ? - about 1/3 the tensile
strength of commonly available HT steels ? Titanium
seems to be the best compromise ( if cost is no object ) -
F1 cars and Superbikes are all 'still' running Ti rods as
far as I know. The CF stuff is interesting - and the ceramic
matrix / alumium technolgy is very promising but it would
appear that the conrod design/material is another thing that
the old blokes got ( almost ) right first time.
Cheers IAN
- --
Ian Drysdale
DRYSDALE MOTORCYCLE CO.
Melbourne. Australia
http://werple.net.au/~iwd
Ph. + 613 9562 4260
Fax.+ 613 9546 8938
------------------------------
Date: Sat, 26 Dec 1998 19:20:48 -0800
From: David Weinshenker
Subject: Re: MC-Chassis Conrods
Ian Drysdale wrote:
> Mechanically supercharged motors running oxygenated fuels
> (i.e.- chemically supercharged too) are going to be hard on
> rods -
But a blown nitro dragracing mill is really just a rocket blast
tenuously captured in a piston motor - such motors are
hard on _everything_! Fortunately each race is only
six seconds long...
> but these motors aside - the highest stress on a rod is
> at the end of the exhaust stroke - i.e. - in tension.
Presumably you mean for four-stroke as distinct from 2-stroke
engines...
Wouldn't the compression stress at the end of the power stroke
be at least as high? The piston deceleration is the same for
both ends of the stroke, excepting the BDC/TDC asymmetry due
to rod angularity (which increases at short rod/stroke ratios)
but cylinder pressure will act on the rod in the same direction
as the deceleration force, i.e., compressing it.
Approaching compression TDC, the cylinder pressure will help
decelerate the piston, so the rod won't see the full deceleration
force as tension stress. (This case applies at the end of each
upstroke in a 2-stroke.)
Approaching intake BDC and exhaust TDC, cylinder pressure is
fairly close to atmospheric, so the rod would see only the piston
deceleration force, nearly unaffected in either direction
by cylinder pressure.
With typical rod lengths, will the effect of TDC/BDC asymmetry
actually override these effects of cylinder pressure??
For a given BMEP, the inertial effects will tend to predominate
at sufficiently high RPM, so the engine's operating speed will
qualify any of these comparisons!
- -dave w
------------------------------
Date: Sat, 26 Dec 1998 22:45:04 -0500
From: flat-track@juno.com (Tony Manx)
Subject: MC-Chassis GMD Computrack
Hello All,
I've heard mention on the list and elsewhere about GMD Computrack.
Has anyone any experience with this service? What can you tell all of us
about your experience with them?
The cost? Sincerely, Tony Manx
------------------------------
Date: Sat, 26 Dec 1998 20:14:55 -0800
From: "Michael Moore"
Subject: Re: MC-Chassis Conrods
> But a blown nitro dragracing mill is really just a rocket blast
> tenuously captured in a piston motor - such motors are
> hard on _everything_! Fortunately each race is only
> six seconds long...
Hello Dave,
So long? 0-100 mph in less than 1 sec, 0-260 mph in 660 ft, 0-320
mph in 4.6 sec. 4.8G positive accel from the start and 5G negative
accel when popping the braking parachutes.
At press time of the RE article Joe Amato held the Top Fuel records
at 4.539 seconds and 323.5 mph, and the absolute speed record is a
Funny Car at 323.89 mph.
Each run sees the engine turning about 600 revs.
Pretty scary.
Cheers,
Michael
------------------------------
Date: Sat, 26 Dec 1998 20:36:47 -0800
From: David Weinshenker
Subject: Re: MC-Chassis Conrods
Michael Moore wrote:
> At press time of the RE article Joe Amato held the Top Fuel records
> at 4.539 seconds and 323.5 mph, and the absolute speed record is a
> Funny Car at 323.89 mph.
>
> Each run sees the engine turning about 600 revs.
>
> Pretty scary.
Yeah really...
600 revs in 4.5 seconds is 8000 rpm _average_ ... on a "big block"
V8 no less! I don't usually rev my 350 Yamahas that high
on the street! (though my RZ motor will pull to 10500)
- -dave w
------------------------------
Date: Sat, 26 Dec 1998 20:44:24 -0800
From: GD
Subject: Re: MC-Chassis Conrods
Yeh 600 revs and they need a total rebuild. What a concept.
GD
Michael Moore wrote:
> > But a blown nitro dragracing mill is really just a rocket blast
> > tenuously captured in a piston motor - such motors are
> > hard on _everything_! Fortunately each race is only
> > six seconds long...
>
> Hello Dave,
>
> So long? 0-100 mph in less than 1 sec, 0-260 mph in 660 ft, 0-320
> mph in 4.6 sec. 4.8G positive accel from the start and 5G negative
> accel when popping the braking parachutes.
>
> At press time of the RE article Joe Amato held the Top Fuel records
> at 4.539 seconds and 323.5 mph, and the absolute speed record is a
> Funny Car at 323.89 mph.
>
> Each run sees the engine turning about 600 revs.
>
> Pretty scary.
>
> Cheers,
> Michael
------------------------------
End of MC-Chassis-Dgst V1 #864
******************************
MC-Chassis-Dgst Sunday, December 27 1998 Volume 01 : Number 865
1. David Weinshenker Subj: MC-Chassis RD's and RZ's and wheels oh my!
2. batwings@i-plus.net Subj: Re: MC-Chassis Conrods
3. Ian Drysdale Subj: MC-Chassis Piston decceleration
4. Ian Drysdale Subj: MC-Chassis Drag motors.
5. "dcmserv" Subj: Re: MC-Chassis GMD Computrack
6. Zachary Eyler-Walker Subj: MC-Chassis Electric shifting.
7. camillieri@earthlink.net Subj: Re: MC-Chassis Electric shifting.
8. "Ed Biafore" Subj: RE: MC-Chassis Electric shifting.
9. yhakim@sprynet.com Subj: Re: MC-Chassis Electric shifting.
10. yhakim@m5.sprynet.com Subj: MC-Chassis Toyota + Motorcycle?
11. "Jim Schneider" Subj: Re: MC-Chassis Electric shifting.
12. dave.williams@chaos.lrk.ar.us (Dave Williams) Subj: MC-Chassis Electric shifting.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Date: Sat, 26 Dec 1998 22:06:42 -0800
From: David Weinshenker
Subject: MC-Chassis RD's and RZ's and wheels oh my!
I've got an RD350 with the stock 1.85-18 and 2.15-18 rims.
Tire sizes are 90/90-18 front and 110/80-18 rear. I also have
an RZ350 front assembly (fork legs, yokes, steering stem,
& 2.15-18 cast wheel) which I am thinking of installing
on the RD... many catalog listings for replacement roller
bearings show the same part # for the two bikes, and the
steering head tubes appear to be similar in height, so that
should be a direct swap.
The RZ forks are a little longer from the axle centerline
to the steering head, so it should be possible to get the
RD back to the same front ride height by lowering the yokes
on the fork tubes appropriately. (I'm not trying to
make a "chopper"... I like the steering characteristics of
the little RD but wish to upgrade the suspension...)
So far so good, I think, but now I'm wondering about the rear...
Will 90/90 and 110/80 tires on 2.15 rim widths at both
ends be a reasonable setup, or would it be better to lace
on a 2.5 inch rim at the rear?
I've got a 2.5 x 18 rear RZ wheel available, but fitting
it into the RD swingarm would take a bit of doing due to
different brake and sprocket carrier styles... has anyone
made this rear swap work?
Advice or comments anyone?
- -dave w
------------------------------
Date: Sun, 27 Dec 1998 08:02:15
From: batwings@i-plus.net
Subject: Re: MC-Chassis Conrods
At 07:20 PM 12/26/98 -0800, you wrote:
>Wouldn't the compression stress at the end of the power stroke
>be at least as high? The piston deceleration is the same for
>both ends of the stroke, excepting the BDC/TDC asymmetry due
>to rod angularity (which increases at short rod/stroke ratios)
That's a surprisingly big difference, as you say depending on rod-stroke,
but for reasonable proportions it's probably 20-35% diff.
>but cylinder pressure will act on the rod in the same direction
>as the deceleration force, i.e., compressing it.
There's nothing left to speak of by then; ex valve has been open for 60
degrees or so.
>With typical rod lengths, will the effect of TDC/BDC asymmetry
>actually override these effects of cylinder pressure??
Listen to your daddy: Ian is right.
Best regards,
Hoyt
------------------------------
Date: Mon, 28 Dec 1998 02:10:49 +1100
From: Ian Drysdale
Subject: MC-Chassis Piston decceleration
> Presumably you mean for four-stroke as distinct from 2-stroke
> engines...
Yes - sorry - should have made that destinction - 2 stroke is a
different case as it is always 'cushioned' by the compression
of the gases. Some very large supercharged 2 stroke diesels
don't even have bearing caps on the rods - as the rod is always
in compression.
> Wouldn't the compression stress at the end of the power stroke
> be at least as high? The piston deceleration is the same for
> both ends of the stroke,
For SHM ( simple harmonic motion ) - yes the deceleration will
be the same but in crank / conrod setup you get 'snap' at the top
and 'dwell' at the bottom of the stroke - made worse by short rods.
A solid section will bend in compression before it breaks in
tension but an 'I' or 'H' section will break first as the X sect. area
becomes smaller in comparsion to the second moment of area.
( The term that defines resistance to bending )
> Approaching compression TDC, the cylinder pressure will help
> decelerate the piston, so the rod won't see the full deceleration
> force as tension stress. (This case applies at the end of each
> upstroke in a 2-stroke.)
That's why I specified exhaust stroke ( but neglected to specify
4 stroke ).
Cheers IAN.
- --
Ian Drysdale
------------------------------
Date: Mon, 28 Dec 1998 02:23:51 +1100
From: Ian Drysdale
Subject: MC-Chassis Drag motors.
> So long? 0-100 mph in less than 1 sec, 0-260 mph in 660 ft
SNIP
> Yeh 600 revs and they need a total rebuild. What a concept.
> GD
I must admit I think the 20 day Paris Dakar desert race or the
LeMans 24 hour RR is a better test of an engine builders skills
than a 5 second drag.
Still - you can't argue will the spectacle of a funny car in angry
mode.
The F1 cars are pretty amazing though - pulling 16 /17,000 rpm
out of a 3 litre motor for nearly 2 hours per race. Sort of
explains why their mechanical failure rates are so high. The
relative simplicity of a 2 stroke also explains why GP 500
bikes rarely have engine failures ( except maybe this year
as factories got used to the new fuel rules ).
Cheers IAN
- --
Ian Drysdale
------------------------------
Date: Sun, 27 Dec 1998 00:00:15 -0500
From: "dcmserv"
Subject: Re: MC-Chassis GMD Computrack
>Hello All,
> I've heard mention on the list and elsewhere about GMD Computrack.
>Has anyone any experience with this service? What can you tell all of us
>about your experience with them?
>The cost? Sincerely, Tony Manx
I've had very good luck with them, but must admit to some prejudice. Peter
Kates, owner of the Bostn franchise, has been a friend for about 15 years.
Nonetheless, for about $80 they will measure your bike and give you a
printout showing all alignments and errors. Correction is done on a time and
materials basis and can get fairly costly. But with the price of new bike
frames starting at near $1000, costly is relative. It is still cheaper than
replacement, and guaranteed straight, which some new bikes are not.
Optimization of racebikes is another thing altogether, and can be fairly
pricey, but all evidence I've seen and racers I've talked to say it works,
at least on the modern bikes. It certainly made a difference on my street
bikes. There is some question as to it's effectiveness on vintage bikes, but
I suspect most of the issues there can be traced to chassis rigidity. If you
optimize the geometry to take advantage of available traction you will be
putting greater loads into the chassis, and some of the older ones may not
be able to handle these extra loads.
The phone number for the Boston franchise is 508-270-2655
My $.02
DG
------------------------------
Date: Sun, 27 Dec 1998 14:31:50 -0500 (EST)
From: Zachary Eyler-Walker
Subject: MC-Chassis Electric shifting.
In the current issue of Motorcyclist there is an article about a
customized Bandit. Among the other modifications done is the
fitting of an electric upshifter.
A quick description of the technique used is in the text, and it looks
pretty simple: A button is pushed which interrupts the ignition circuit
(thereby unloading the transmission) and sends juice to a solenoid which
is attached to the shifting arm and pulls it up.
Now, this isn't something that I'd probably really benefit from, but it
would be cool. It sounds like there's practically nothing to it, but on
the other hand the manufacturer wants to sell kits for something like
$400. Either they're making a lot of money off each unit or there's a
bunch of factors that I'm overlooking that take money to fix.
So, has anyone tried anything like this, or even just have a good opinion
about its feasibility?
Zach
------------------------------
Date: Sun, 27 Dec 1998 17:17:07 -0500
From: camillieri@earthlink.net
Subject: Re: MC-Chassis Electric shifting.
Years ago ( early 70's ) a guy in MA made what he called the Shifter Switch.
It replaced the detent plunger and was was a bit of a pain to get
adjusted but it worked nice. It worked by shorting out the ET
ignition when you pressed on the lever. The biggest problem was
false neutrals killed the engine. I had one on my woods machine
and liked it.
Frank Camillieri
Chester, NH
------------------------------
Date: Sun, 27 Dec 1998 18:49:16 -0700
From: "Ed Biafore"
Subject: RE: MC-Chassis Electric shifting.
Zach sez;
> In the current issue of Motorcyclist there is an article about a
> customized Bandit. Among the other modifications done is the
> fitting of an electric upshifter.
Cool Bandit, Those kind of articles always get me thinking of new projects.
Stock stuff doesn't do anything for me and as a matter of fact, a Cycle
World article started up my current Sporty project.
> A quick description of the technique used is in the text, and it looks
> pretty simple: A button is pushed which interrupts the ignition circuit
> (thereby unloading the transmission) and sends juice to a solenoid which
> is attached to the shifting arm and pulls it up.
Sounds like the airshifters that are standard fare on drag bikes without
all the air tank stuff. I think it would be the hot ticket for a pro street
or street and strip drag bike. Bet it would be fun playing drag racer
wannabe with one of those on a nice straight deserted road too!!!
Dale Walker also makes an Electric Powershifter that cuts the ignition for
an adjustable period of time when you start to move the shift lever so you
don't have to clutch. http://www.holeshot.com/ is his web page address. I
understand that Dale is a real nice guy, he helped one of my buddies with a
bunch of drag racing advise and such over the phone a while back and all he
bought from Dale was a kill switch!
> Now, this isn't something that I'd probably really benefit from, but it
> would be cool. It sounds like there's practically nothing to it, but on
> the other hand the manufacturer wants to sell kits for something like
> $400. Either they're making a lot of money off each unit or there's a
> bunch of factors that I'm overlooking that take money to fix.
I would think you'd need some kind of adjustable delay, so the drive train
could unload. That would probably be no problem for someone electronically
inclined, The switch gear and solenoid would be pretty simple to fab up too.
I would think that the real issue is time. If I can get something off the
shelf that fits my needs, I figure out the money vs. time issue. If I can
make more cash doing other things in the time it takes me to make something
I want, I just buy it. If not I make it.
Later,
Ed
------------------------------
Date: Sun, 27 Dec 1998 18:29:45 -0800
From: yhakim@sprynet.com
Subject: Re: MC-Chassis Electric shifting.
Pretty much all the top RR bikes use KLS electric shifters, which pretty much
does
what you say your old shifter did. Cuts the spark for a small period of time.
Yousuf H.
------------------------------
Date: Sun, 27 Dec 1998 18:31:42 -0800
From: yhakim@m5.sprynet.com
Subject: MC-Chassis Toyota + Motorcycle?
In a recent (US) Toyota television advertisement for a Camry (I think), the car
has
a license plate that reads BSA441. Perhaps with the current retro fad Toyota is
planning a new Victor?
Yousuf H.
------------------------------
Date: Sun, 27 Dec 1998 20:16:59 -0700
From: "Jim Schneider"
Subject: Re: MC-Chassis Electric shifting.
In the late '60s we took a CB450 Honda and rigged the ignition to the horn
button. When my buddy wanted to shift his bike, he would tap the horn
button to kill the ignition, then shift under full load without the clutch.
Newer technology is doing this electronically with the duration of the
ignition interrupt adjusted according to the RPM. There are usually there
are also some additional adjustments to allow for different types of
engines/flywheel loads etc.. This allows you the "right" amount of time for
the next gear to engage.
Honda brought out a line of electrically shifted 4-wheelers for '99, saw
them back in August. They have two buttons on the left handlebar, the top
one is for shifting up and the bottom for downshifting. They also had
overrides for manual shifting in case anything went wrong with the electric
shifter. Should spell for an interesting future.
Swiss
Subject: Re: MC-Chassis Electric shifting.
>Pretty much all the top RR bikes use KLS electric shifters, which pretty
much
>does
>what you say your old shifter did. Cuts the spark for a small period of
time.
>
>Yousuf H.
>
>
------------------------------
Date: Sun, 27 Dec 1998 22:22:00 -0500
From: dave.williams@chaos.lrk.ar.us (Dave Williams)
Subject: MC-Chassis Electric shifting.
- -> So, has anyone tried anything like this, or even just have a good
- -> opinion about its feasibility?
Some people are gaga about electric or pneumatic shifters, but I don't
see any real benefit from it. I'm perfectly capable of rounding off the
engagement dogs all by myself.
Other than ultrasquids who thing it's going to get them that last .0001
second off their ET, the only practical purpose of such a thing would be
for the gimp crowd. When I had a DWI run me down for kicks one evening
on the way home from work, it was touch and go whether I'd come out of
the hospital with two functioning legs. I was already putting feelers
out for an old CB750A or Guzzi Automatic, just in case.
Of the two, the 750A would probably have been the better deal. Big
bore kits to 1200cc exist, along with a pretty decent selection of speed
parts, considering the old SOHC is about two hundred years old (in
motorcycle years...) I never found one; either they're all gone by now,
or nobody wanted to sell theirs. Supposedly there were a lot of Guzzi
Automatics made for police use, but I didn't find any of those either.
Some people would probably rather go to linked brakes and keep the foot
shifter, moving it to the other side if needed. Me, I'd sooner drive a
car than ride a bike without proper brakes; differential braking has
saved my butt too many times.
------------------------------
End of MC-Chassis-Dgst V1 #865
******************************
MC-Chassis-Dgst Monday, December 28 1998 Volume 01 : Number 866
1. Dick Brewster Subj: Re: MC-Chassis Electric shifting.
2. Dick Brewster Subj: Re: MC-Chassis Electric shifting.
3. Duncan Griffiths Subj: RE: MC-Chassis Electric shifting
4. Julian Bond Subj: MC-Chassis Cassette Gearboxes
5. Julian Bond Subj: Re: MC-Chassis Electric shifting.
6. "dcmserv" Subj: Re: MC-Chassis Toyota + Motorcycle?
7. "dcmserv" Subj: Re: MC-Chassis Cassette Gearboxes
8. "dcmserv" Subj: MC-Chassis Electric shifting.
9. Ian Drysdale Subj: MC-Chassis Autos
10. dave.williams@chaos.lrk.ar.us (Dave Williams) Subj: Re: MC-Chassis Electric shifting.
11. dave.williams@chaos.lrk.ar.us (Dave Williams) Subj: Re: MC-Chassis Electric shifting.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Date: Sun, 27 Dec 1998 22:10:45 -0800
From: Dick Brewster
Subject: Re: MC-Chassis Electric shifting.
Ed Biafore wrote:
>
> Zach sez;
....
> > A quick description of the technique used is in the text, and it looks
> > pretty simple: A button is pushed which interrupts the ignition circuit
> > (thereby unloading the transmission) and sends juice to a solenoid which
> > is attached to the shifting arm and pulls it up.
>
> Sounds like the airshifters that are standard fare on drag bikes without
> all the air tank stuff. I think it would be the hot ticket for a pro street
> or street and strip drag bike. Bet it would be fun playing drag racer
> wannabe with one of those on a nice straight deserted road too!!!
>
> Dale Walker also makes an Electric Powershifter that cuts the ignition for
> an adjustable period of time when you start to move the shift lever so you
> don't have to clutch. http://www.holeshot.com/ is his web page address. I
> understand that Dale is a real nice guy, he helped one of my buddies with a
> bunch of drag racing advise and such over the phone a while back and all he
> bought from Dale was a kill switch!
>
....
> I would think that the real issue is time. If I can get something off the
> shelf that fits my needs, I figure out the money vs. time issue. If I can
> make more cash doing other things in the time it takes me to make something
> I want, I just buy it. If not I make it.
>
> Later,
> Ed
I have no connections at all with Dale Walker's company, but am a
very satisfied customer. And I am normally a bit difficult to
satisfy. i.e., I have bought many new cars and all but one dealer
have sucked, I have bought several new motorcycles and all the
dealers have sucked.
I've bought a few things from Dale for my 1200 Bandit, but not an
electric shifter.
Dale's products are usually reasonably priced and very high
quality. I suspect he is trying to get back some of his
development costs for the shifter. Personally, I like to see
people like Dale stay in business so I don't begrudge him a bit
higher than el-cheapo prices.
And I have experience with the free advice that you mentioned. He
spent a good 15 minutes on the phone advising someone on mods to
his bike while I was in his place to pick up my Bandit carb kit.
After he got off the phone he asked me what I wanted out of the
carb mods, gave me some advice that worked out very well, then I
got an email from him a few days later asking how my carb kit
worked out.
Regards,
Dick
------------------------------
Date: Sun, 27 Dec 1998 22:30:49 -0800
From: Dick Brewster
Subject: Re: MC-Chassis Electric shifting.
Dave Williams wrote:
>
> -> So, has anyone tried anything like this, or even just have a good
> -> opinion about its feasibility?
>
> Some people are gaga about electric or pneumatic shifters, but I don't
> see any real benefit from it. I'm perfectly capable of rounding off the
> engagement dogs all by myself.
>
> Other than ultrasquids who thing it's going to get them that last .0001
> second off their ET, the only practical purpose of such a thing would be
> for the gimp crowd. ....
While I personally feel that drag racing is to racing as
masterbation is to sex; if you're going to drag race, a win by
.0001 second is as good as a win by a minute.
And since when did "practical" have anything to do with
motorcycles?
Dick
------------------------------
Date: Sun, 27 Dec 1998 08:08:51
From: Duncan Griffiths
Subject: RE: MC-Chassis Electric shifting
There are very real benefits on the race track. Not having to slip the
clutch or back off the throttle allows the motor to stay on full song. A
gear shift with an electronic quickshifter takes 20-80 mmilliseconds, quite
a bit less than you could do by yourself. Additional benefit of this is
you can shift while at full lean without upsetting the bike because it
happens so quick. Don't think there's much benefit for the street though.
At less than full throttle and high engine speed, you need a much longer
cutout time.
>>>From: dave.williams@chaos.lrk.ar.us (Dave Williams)
Some people are gaga about electric or pneumatic shifters, but I don't
see any real benefit from it. I'm perfectly capable of rounding off the
engagement dogs all by myself. Other than ultrasquids who thing it's going
to get them that last .0001
>>>second off their ET,
There is nothing magic in any of the different types of speedshifters.
I've pulled mine apart and it's common components such as a relay,
potentiometer, resistors, etc. No circuit boards. If you have time to
mess with it, and a little bit of electronics knowledge, you could
reproduce it at home. But as Ed says, it's all time. I'd have a new frame
for the TZ by now, but I just haven't gotten around to it, what with the
races to attend and all.
Duncan
>> would be cool. It sounds like there's practically nothing to it, but on
>> the other hand the manufacturer wants to sell kits for something like
>> $400. Either they're making a lot of money off each unit or there's a
>> bunch of factors that I'm overlooking that take money to fix.
>>>>>I would think you'd need some kind of adjustable delay, so the drive
train
could unload. That would probably be no problem for someone electronically
inclined, The switch gear and solenoid would be pretty simple to fab up too.
I would think that the real issue is time. If I can get something off the
shelf that fits my needs, I figure out the money vs. time issue. If I can
make more cash doing other things in the time it takes me to make something
I want, I just buy it. If not I make it.
Later,
Ed>>>>>
------------------------------
Date: Mon, 28 Dec 1998 08:38:52 +0000
From: Julian Bond
Subject: MC-Chassis Cassette Gearboxes
Here's a question that's been puzzling me. Are Cassette Gearboxes much
more expensive to design and build than conventional M/C gearboxes? Do
they inherently weigh more?
Since almost all sport bikes end up being raced I'm curious as to why so
few of them are designed from scratch to use this type. This is
particularly strange in designs that end up in WSB/SBK where gear
changes are allowed.
- -- --------============>>>>>>>>>> )+( <<<<<<<<<<============-------- --
Julian Bond
------------------------------
Date: Mon, 28 Dec 1998 08:34:58 +0000
From: Julian Bond
Subject: Re: MC-Chassis Electric shifting.
In article <561676.7.uupcb@chaos.lrk.ar.us>, Dave Williams writes
> Some people would probably rather go to linked brakes and keep the foot
>shifter, moving it to the other side if needed. Me, I'd sooner drive a
>car than ride a bike without proper brakes; differential braking has
>saved my butt too many times.
There's a few people now making rear brake calipers with two separate
circuits and 4 pistons. Lockheed make one so you can have a thumb brake
as well as the foot brake, it's beautiful but expensive! Honda make one
designed for their complicated linked system.
I wonder if a setup where the front lever activated both front disks (as
normal) plus one pair of pistons on the back, while the foot lever
activated just the other pair at the back, would work well. This would
still allow a bit of back brake on it's own on loose surfaces, but also
make use of the back wheel at less than 100% braking on good surfaces.
It shouldn't be too hard to arrange disk sizes and piston sizes so that
you wouldn't need any proportioning valve. The only down side I can see
is the possibility of locking the back wheel under "See God" braking.
The controlled use of the rear brake like this might make it worth while
looking again at some sort of pro squat linkage at the back.
I'd really like to see this combined with ABS, but all the current
systems seem to be a) heavy and b) too complex for garage mechanics.
- -- --------============>>>>>>>>>> )+( <<<<<<<<<<============-------- --
Julian Bond
------------------------------
Date: Sun, 27 Dec 1998 20:59:52 -0500
From: "dcmserv"
Subject: Re: MC-Chassis Toyota + Motorcycle?
>In a recent (US) Toyota television advertisement for a Camry (I think), the
car
>has
>a license plate that reads BSA441. Perhaps with the current retro fad
Toyota is
>planning a new Victor?
>
>Yousuf H.
>
>That would make purchasers "Victims" as did the originals. "You asked for
it, you got it.....Toyota"
DG
------------------------------
Date: Sun, 27 Dec 1998 21:12:00 -0500
From: "dcmserv"
Subject: Re: MC-Chassis Cassette Gearboxes
Define "much more expensive". Unless the manufacturers decide to use it as a
marketing ploy we'll never see it. No, it shouldn't be much more expensive
to do, but unless the market is willing to pay for it it won't be done.
Sorry to sound cynical, but this is marketing/manufacturing reality. as to
your statement about almost all sportbikes being raced... this is
unfortunately not the case. Most are street ridden only. You'll see more of
any current model in the junkyard than you'll see on the starting grid.
DG
>Here's a question that's been puzzling me. Are Cassette Gearboxes much
>more expensive to design and build than conventional M/C gearboxes? Do
>they inherently weigh more?
>
>Since almost all sport bikes end up being raced I'm curious as to why so
>few of them are designed from scratch to use this type. This is
>particularly strange in designs that end up in WSB/SBK where gear
>changes are allowed.
------------------------------
Date: Sun, 27 Dec 1998 21:23:20 -0500
From: "dcmserv"
Subject: MC-Chassis Electric shifting.
Other than ultrasquids who thing it's going to get them that last .0001
second off their ET, the only practical purpose of such a thing would be
for the gimp crowd. When I had a DWI run me down for kicks one evening
on the way home from work, it was touch and go whether I'd come out of
the hospital with two functioning legs. I was already putting feelers
out for an old CB750A or Guzzi Automatic, just in case.
Electric shift has not been an option I've used for any of the "gimp crowd"
work that I've done to date. I prefer to stick to mechanical systems if I'm
going to custom build something like this so the owner has a chance to be
able to repair it if it fails somewhere in East Nowhere. It's kind of tough
to figure out which transistor or relay isn't working by the side of the
road in the dark. Typically I've done either hand shifting with a rotating
left grip/clutch lever ala earlier Vespas or right side shift and thumb
actuated rear brake. In fact the thumb brake works so well, I think I will
be adding it on my street bikes. Works great for wheelie control too.
DG
------------------------------
Date: Tue, 29 Dec 1998 01:46:29 +1100
From: Ian Drysdale
Subject: MC-Chassis Autos
> I was already putting feelers
> out for an old CB750A or Guzzi Automatic, just in case.
>
> Of the two, the 750A would probably have been the better deal. Big
> bore kits to 1200cc exist, along with a pretty decent selection of speed
> parts, considering the old SOHC is about two hundred years old
An aussie ( with a german name ) makes a living out of building
some VERY quick CB 750 based machines for post classic racing
- - rumored to displace well on the worse side of 1100cc. One of
the world level aussie superbike riders sampled one and pronounced
it quicker out of corners than his factory superbike. Corner speed
was down due to tyres and straight line down due to no faring - but
neither by much.
A friend of mine Steve Battison ( who wrote my webpage ) has
promised me a ride on his dad's Guzzi Auto - but I am yet to take
him up on the offer. Another friend also had a CB 750 but I never
took up his offer of a ride either. An auto I have ridden was my
Husky 500 Auto - a wild piece of machinery ! I loved that thing to
death - unfortunately literally - every time I rode it. European
dirtbike riders get used to that sort of unreliability I'm told - but it
really wore me down. ( My 2X2X2 was sort of an auto too - a
manually operated CVT actually.)
That said - there is no doubt I was quicker on my Husky than
anything else I have every ridden - anyone who says you change
gears by instinct hasn't ridden an auto. People either love them
or hate them - and I loved mine - actually tried to buy one again
recently - rose colored glasses and all that.
Cheers IAN
PS - BTW - Doohan doesn't use a 'speed' shifter.
PSS - anyone who wants to sent any hate mail to Steve - his
dad also has a Bimota DB1, a CBX 1000 ( Candy Apple
Red naturally ) and a host of other stuff I can't even
bring myself to mention.
- --
Ian Drysdale
------------------------------
Date: Mon, 28 Dec 1998 09:05:00 -0500
From: dave.williams@chaos.lrk.ar.us (Dave Williams)
Subject: Re: MC-Chassis Electric shifting.
- -> And since when did "practical" have anything to do with
- -> motorcycles?
I dunno, I used one as my only transportation for about ten years.
Felt plenty practical to me.
------------------------------
Date: Mon, 28 Dec 1998 09:24:00 -0500
From: dave.williams@chaos.lrk.ar.us (Dave Williams)
Subject: Re: MC-Chassis Electric shifting.
- -> There's a few people now making rear brake calipers with two separate
- -> circuits and 4 pistons. Lockheed make one so you can have a thumb
- -> brake as well as the foot brake, it's beautiful but expensive!
I'm by no means convinced I can generate enough pressure with my thumb
to do anything useful with a rear brake.
- -> I wonder if a setup where the front lever activated both front disks
- -> (as normal) plus one pair of pistons on the back, while the foot
- -> lever activated just the other pair at the back, would work well.
That's been done before; I can't remember if it was Yamaha or Moto
Guzzi now. The problem is, there are also times when you *don't* want
braking at one end. I've wound up stopping with one wheel on a slick
manhole cover more than once while in traffic.
- -> I'd really like to see this combined with ABS, but all the current
- -> systems seem to be a) heavy and b) too complex for garage mechanics.
I'm a 100% ABS fan. Well, let me qualify that - *real* ABS, such as
the Bosch system as used on the Corvette, not the marketing-checklist-
item suicide boxes in cheap cars. I purchased an ex-Corvette system to
retrofit to my V8 RX-7, and on the track I can show my taillights to the
people who believe an expensive driving school can overcome the one
foot/4 wheels by tapdancing on the pedal, etc.
On a bike, I'm dubious. I've never ridden a bike with ABS, but the
only time it can do much is when the bike is vertical. If the bike is
leaned over, you can easily grab enough brake to go down without ever
locking a wheel. If the bike is vertical I'm capable of keeping the
front wheel from locking all on my lonesome, at least under most
conditions. My friend Jay, also an ABS fan, thinks that ABS on bikes
would be great. He's never ridden an ABS bike either. This has
provided much bench-racing material for discussion. Both of us agree
the goofy outrigger bike tests BMW publicized have little application to
real-world riding.
==dave.williams@chaos.lrk.ar.us======================================
------------------------------
End of MC-Chassis-Dgst V1 #866
******************************
MC-Chassis-Dgst Monday, December 28 1998 Volume 01 : Number 867
1. Mac Westbury Subj: re: MC-Chassis Electric shifting
2. "Calvin Grandy" Subj: Re: MC-Chassis Electric shifting.
3. fshixon@muskie.lerc.nasa.gov (D Hixon) Subj: MC-Chassis Computrack experiences
4. Alan Lapp Subj: Re: MC-Chassis Electric shifting.
5. Alan Lapp Subj: MC-Chassis Thumb brakes
6. Julian Bond Subj: Re: MC-Chassis Electric shifting.
7. Julian Bond Subj: Re: MC-Chassis Cassette Gearboxes
8. "Kelvin Blair" Subj: Re: MC-Chassis-Dgst Thumb Brake
9. "dcmserv" Subj: Re: MC-Chassis Electric shifting.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Date: Sun, 27 Dec 98 22:55:45 -0500
From: Mac Westbury
Subject: re: MC-Chassis Electric shifting
- -- [ From: Mac Westbury * EMC.Ver #2.5.02 ] --
Hello.
Back in the eighties, a friend of mine worked up an electronic time delay to
cut out the ignition. You would pull up on the shift lever with the power
on and the shift occured when you hit the horn button. These buttons were
used on several serious Z900 street-drag bikes for many years with no
problems. The advantage is that your clutch stays locked up, so that slip
and wear are eliminated. It doesn't take much power to prevent the trans
from shifting and it works for both up and down shifts. In fact you end up
using the clutch only to get underway, even around town. My friend still
rides his Z, it is a very powerful bike, and the trans is in good condition
.
Mac Westbury
------------------------------
Date: Mon, 28 Dec 1998 11:18:11 -0500
From: "Calvin Grandy"
Subject: Re: MC-Chassis Electric shifting.
Just as a comment on this subject of ABS.
When I was first considering the purchase of a mid weight touring bike that would comfortably carry wife or child, I test rode several ABS equipped BMW K75's
I have nothing to say about the systems technically, but there are lots of parts I vowed to remove if I owned them.
Riding and using the ABS was enlightening.
The feel at the brake lever/pedal was very similar to "normal" non ABS, under all conditions if straight line stopping. Even when the controls were "mashed" mercilessly. 'just the patter and skip of a tire at the edge of adhesion. Complete with smoke and howl. I had to resist the learned response to "let off" just to try this out. One comment (BY THE DEALER) was that slippery conditions were handled with effectively by the wheel speed sensing system. I did not try "panic stops" on wet leaves though I would have liked to.
In all, I would have left the system on had I made that purchase. In fact a bought a non ABS equipped K75s and need to practice skidding the thing as it is very "high"
With a uncomfortable "get off" last spring under conditions of no cornering force reserves, and extreme lean angle, I wonder what would have happened with ABS. I know I would not be able to duplicate the attitude on the K75!
Regards
Calvin Grandy
- ----------
> From: Dave Williams
> To: mc-chassis-design@list.sirius.com
> Subject: Re: MC-Chassis Electric shifting.
> Date: Monday, December 28, 1998 9:24 AM
>
>
> -> There's a few people now making rear brake calipers with two separate
> -> circuits and 4 pistons. Lockheed make one so you can have a thumb
> -> brake as well as the foot brake, it's beautiful but expensive!
>
> I'm by no means convinced I can generate enough pressure with my thumb
> to do anything useful with a rear brake.
>
>
> -> I wonder if a setup where the front lever activated both front disks
> -> (as normal) plus one pair of pistons on the back, while the foot
> -> lever activated just the other pair at the back, would work well.
>
> That's been done before; I can't remember if it was Yamaha or Moto
> Guzzi now. The problem is, there are also times when you *don't* want
> braking at one end. I've wound up stopping with one wheel on a slick
> manhole cover more than once while in traffic.
>
>
> -> I'd really like to see this combined with ABS, but all the current
> -> systems seem to be a) heavy and b) too complex for garage mechanics.
>
> I'm a 100% ABS fan. Well, let me qualify that - *real* ABS, such as
> the Bosch system as used on the Corvette, not the marketing-checklist-
> item suicide boxes in cheap cars. I purchased an ex-Corvette system to
> retrofit to my V8 RX-7, and on the track I can show my taillights to the
> people who believe an expensive driving school can overcome the one
> foot/4 wheels by tapdancing on the pedal, etc.
>
> On a bike, I'm dubious. I've never ridden a bike with ABS, but the
> only time it can do much is when the bike is vertical. If the bike is
> leaned over, you can easily grab enough brake to go down without ever
> locking a wheel. If the bike is vertical I'm capable of keeping the
> front wheel from locking all on my lonesome, at least under most
> conditions. My friend Jay, also an ABS fan, thinks that ABS on bikes
> would be great. He's never ridden an ABS bike either. This has
> provided much bench-racing material for discussion. Both of us agree
> the goofy outrigger bike tests BMW publicized have little application to
> real-world riding.
>
> ==dave.williams@chaos.lrk.ar.us======================================
------------------------------
Date: Mon, 28 Dec 1998 11:45:22 -0500 (EST)
From: fshixon@muskie.lerc.nasa.gov (D Hixon)
Subject: MC-Chassis Computrack experiences
Hi folks,
My experiences with GMD/Computrack Atlanta (they're the only Computrack
shop that I've worked with):
My first experience was in 1994. I was running a 591 Ascot single housed
in an FZR400 chassis with GSX-R750 front end and rear wheel. If it sounds
like a Frankenbike, that's because it was. My problem was that it was a
twitchy steerer, and became very twitchy under hard braking. Kent had just
gotten the franchise, so I took it by. He measured it and found that the
frame was badly bent (due to endoing the bike at Savannah early in the
season) and the geometry was way off. To fix it, he straightened the bike,
moved the steering stem in the triple clamps to add trail, and set up the
swingarm geometry using the ride height. This was before he did suspension
work, so he didn't do any spring/damper work other than setting the preload
up.
The result was spectacular. It transformed the bike into a *wonderful*
handler, and I immediately went out and won the AHRMA SoS Pro Singles at
Talladega with it.
My second experience was in 1996. I bought a Triumph Speed Triple for
the NASB series, and found that it was a handful even on the street -- both
ends would dive and mush around, and it wasn't very confidence-inspiring.
I took it to Kent to see what could be done, suspension and geometry-wise.
He measured it, and found that the frame was straight. At that point, he
redid the damping (installing Race Tech gold valves in the forks and redoing
the shim stacks in the weird and useless Triumph race shock by hand), and
putting stiffer springs in. He also did everything short of cutting to
get the geometry of the bike better.
The result was again spectacular. The bike was suddenly a *very* good
handler, with two problems. First, the rear spring was still a little
too light. Kent swapped it out for a stiffer one at no charge. Second,
the shock lost all damping after about three laps. Nothing could be done
about that -- all the crappy Triumph race shocks lost damping when you
raced it.
My third experience was in 1997. After Triumph nicely ditched the series
(anyone want to buy a Speed Triple? No, really), I went back to the
Frankenbike, but with a GS500 engine stuffed in. The result was a
bike that was undersprung and underdamped (GS500 engines are *really*
heavy compared to Ascots). The basic problem was that it chattered both
the front and rear wheels in fast, bumpy corners. This really livened
things up at Putnam.
I handed it off to Kent, and he revalved the
forks by hand (no Gold Valve kits for '89 750 forks) and put stiffer
springs in front and rear. I took it back out at Putnam, and the
front chatter was gone. There was still some rear chatter, and Kent
told me that this was due to the rear shock being underdamped. I
agreed, but thought I'd save some cash by waiting until the winter
to have it done.
I took the bike to the GNF, and was battling for 4th place in the
Formula Clubman Expert race when the rear wheel chattered out from
under me in Turn 1 and I bent the frame. Call it an expensive lesson.
So, to reiterate, I'm a fully satisfied customer. In fact, I've spent
the last season trying to scrape together cash to put a GS500 Superbike
together, and 2/6-7/99 is when it's going through the Computrack
shop (and I'm doing the long weekend of towing it from Cleveland, OH
to Atlanta, GA and back to do it).
Cost-wise, it'll be about $1k for the work. Then again, it's one of
the best ways to check Frankenbikes (did I mention that it's a GS with
the GSX-R front end/rear wheel :)) and get the kinks sorted out.
Have fun,
Ray
- -------------------------------------------------------------------------
R Hixon | phone: (440) 962-3146
ICOMP, Ohio Aerospace Institute | WERA #623
22800 Cedar Point RD | 1995 Triumph Speed Triple for sale...
Brook Park, Ohio 44142 | email: fshixon@muskie.lerc.nasa.gov
- -------------------------------------------------------------------------
------------------------------
Date: Mon, 28 Dec 1998 11:55:59 -0500
From: Alan Lapp
Subject: Re: MC-Chassis Electric shifting.
>While I personally feel that drag racing is to racing as
>masterbation is to sex; if you're going to drag race, a win by
>.0001 second is as good as a win by a minute.
>
>And since when did "practical" have anything to do with
>motorcycles?
>
>
>Dick
LOL! I have to agree with you completely!
Although I don't personally have any interest in drag racing, I do
understand that at the higher levels, it's really a competition which is
carried out in the engine builders shop. Given equal machinery, the race
simply boils down to who gets a better launch.
And, since we have a thread on generally useless stuff, I saw a really
cool, clever device on a drag bike: esentially, it was an adjustable door
closer (as found on screen doors). The rider simply holds the throttle at
a steady RPM, then lets go of the clutch lever, and the pneumatic cylinder
feeds out the clutch at an appropriate rate to achieve consistent starts.
Al
level_5_ltd@earthlink.net
------------------------------
Date: Mon, 28 Dec 1998 12:25:10 -0500
From: Alan Lapp
Subject: MC-Chassis Thumb brakes
>-> There's a few people now making rear brake calipers with two separate
>-> circuits and 4 pistons. Lockheed make one so you can have a thumb
>-> brake as well as the foot brake, it's beautiful but expensive!
>
> I'm by no means convinced I can generate enough pressure with my thumb
>to do anything useful with a rear brake.
As a racer speaking in terms of racetrack use only, I see 3 uses for a rear
brake: in the pits, which often have loose items and gravel, (I must
qualify this next statement as something I understand, but don't have the
skill to practice on track) to 'back into a corner' - a la flat tracking -
by sliding the rear wheel to redirect the bike, and most usefully, to
control throttle slides - it's much more predictable and controllable than
trying to reduce the throttle.
In the first and last examples, a thumb brake would be entirely effective.
Not to mention that one could play with bore/stroke ratios to make the
thumb brake as sensative as needed.
>conditions. My friend Jay, also an ABS fan, thinks that ABS on bikes
>would be great. He's never ridden an ABS bike either. This has
As a completely circumstantial example, a friend who has more Dollars than
Sense races a BMW R1100 with the ABS brakes as his rain bike. No kidding.
This thing lives in his trailer with rain tires all the time. He regularly
takes first on this bike in the rain.
My thinking about ABS is mixed - I think my friend has a good thing in his
rain bike, but for dry racing, ABS systems absolutely must use a wheel
speed sensor to accomodate varying tire and traction conditions - and even
then, my preference would be to have ABS only on the front wheel so I could
use the rear brake as described above, if I ever developed the confidence
to do so.
Al
level_5_ltd@earthlink.net
------------------------------
Date: Mon, 28 Dec 1998 17:10:55 +0000
From: Julian Bond
Subject: Re: MC-Chassis Electric shifting.
In article <561757.7.uupcb@chaos.lrk.ar.us>, Dave Williams writes
> That's been done before; I can't remember if it was Yamaha or Moto
>Guzzi now. The problem is, there are also times when you *don't* want
>braking at one end. I've wound up stopping with one wheel on a slick
>manhole cover more than once while in traffic.
The Guzzi system was one front and one rear from the foot and one front
from the hand. This seems to me to be the wrong way round. It means that
you have to use both levers for maximum deceleration and you can't use
just the back brake on dodgy surfaces. I'm proposing a system where you
can use just the rear brake if you need to, but normal hand braking uses
all three disks.
I can't imagine a situation where I would want to use the front only,
except where the back wheel was in the air. I'm talking about a road
system here not racing.
> On a bike, I'm dubious. I've never ridden a bike with ABS, but the
>only time it can do much is when the bike is vertical. If the bike is
>leaned over, you can easily grab enough brake to go down without ever
>locking a wheel. If the bike is vertical I'm capable of keeping the
>front wheel from locking all on my lonesome, at least under most
>conditions.
The last three words are critical. A large number of M/C accidents
happen either through insufficient braking due to a lack of skill and
fear of locking up, or through locking up the front and not being able
to cope with it. You can probably argue for ABS as a training aid as
well.
- -- --------============>>>>>>>>>> )+( <<<<<<<<<<============-------- --
Julian Bond
------------------------------
Date: Mon, 28 Dec 1998 17:21:20 +0000
From: Julian Bond
Subject: Re: MC-Chassis Cassette Gearboxes
In article <01be3207$73cb0f40$233029d8@front-office>, dcmserv
writes
>Define "much more expensive". Unless the manufacturers decide to use it as a
>marketing ploy we'll never see it. No, it shouldn't be much more expensive
>to do, but unless the market is willing to pay for it it won't be done.
>Sorry to sound cynical, but this is marketing/manufacturing reality. as to
>your statement about almost all sportbikes being raced... this is
>unfortunately not the case. Most are street ridden only. You'll see more of
>any current model in the junkyard than you'll see on the starting grid.
I think you misunderstood my words. I meant examples of each bike
design, not total numbers. Consider the 996SPS, RC45, R7. These are all
racing bikes first and homologation road bikes second. Even if they are
fundamentally road bikes, racing success in SBK and Endurance is
critical to their sales success.
This came to mind after reading an article about the racing WSB Ducatis.
Somebody (had to be Fogarty!) was complaining that they can't easily
change the gear ratios on the Ducati. This meant that on some circuits,
several corners fell between gears.
If there was no great cost or weight difference, why not design the
engine from the ground up to include the cassette design anyway, given
the advantages in some race situations?
- -- --------============>>>>>>>>>> )+( <<<<<<<<<<============-------- --
Julian Bond
------------------------------
Date: Tue, 29 Dec 1998 01:59:10 +0800
From: "Kelvin Blair"
Subject: Re: MC-Chassis-Dgst Thumb Brake
Dave said:
> I'm by no means convinced I can generate enough pressure with my thumb
> to do anything useful with a rear brake.
>
Hello Dave
I have a thumb operated rear brake and I can assure you it is very easy and
effective to operate. I am totally convinced it is the best option for
rear brake control, I find it especially good for dirt riding.
Regards
Kelvin
------------------------------
Date: Mon, 28 Dec 1998 01:17:13 -0500
From: "dcmserv"
Subject: Re: MC-Chassis Electric shifting.
>I'm by no means convinced I can generate enough pressure with my thumb
>to do anything useful with a rear brake.
I've done it, it's just a matter of leverage. Works great. Easy to control.
This was using the stock rear master, and running a cable to it from the
lever.
DG
------------------------------
End of MC-Chassis-Dgst V1 #867
******************************
MC-Chassis-Dgst Tuesday, December 29 1998 Volume 01 : Number 868
1. "dcmserv" Subj: Re: MC-Chassis Cassette Gearboxes
2. duncan.griffiths@horiba.com Subj: Re: MC-Chassis Cassette Gearboxes
3. dave.williams@chaos.lrk.ar.us (Dave Williams) Subj: MC-Chassis Thumb brakes
4. dave.williams@chaos.lrk.ar.us (Dave Williams) Subj: Re: MC-Chassis-Dgst Thumb Brake
5. David Weinshenker Subj: Re: MC-Chassis-Dgst Thumb Brake
6. Ian Drysdale Subj: MC-Chassis Cassette boxes
7. dave.williams@chaos.lrk.ar.us (Dave Williams) Subj: Re: MC-Chassis-Dgst Thumb Brake
8. "Thomas Alberti" Subj: MC-Chassis NON-list content, Video Card Help
9. "Michael Moore" Subj: Re: MC-Chassis-Dgst Thumb Brake
10. Julian Bond Subj: Re: MC-Chassis Cassette boxes
11. Julian Bond Subj: Re: MC-Chassis-Dgst Thumb Brake
12. Paul Sayegh Subj: MC-Chassis Triple clamp angle
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Date: Mon, 28 Dec 1998 01:24:38 -0500
From: "dcmserv"
Subject: Re: MC-Chassis Cassette Gearboxes
>
>If there was no great cost or weight difference, why not design the
>engine from the ground up to include the cassette design anyway, given
>the advantages in some race situations?
The cost to design and tool for such a thing is substantial, but probably
justifiable for such aplications. Perhaps we'll see it in the next
generation of Ducatis. As to the others...?
DG
------------------------------
Date: Mon, 28 Dec 1998 10:50:59 -0800
From: duncan.griffiths@horiba.com
Subject: Re: MC-Chassis Cassette Gearboxes
At the present time, it means designing a new motor for Ducati, Honda, etc.
They are at about the time frame for a new design, so they may consider it.
The two-stroke GP motors are all built that way, and are very easy to
change. The dry clutch is removed, side cover off, then eight bolts hold
the side plate with the gear shafts on it. I can see that the weak point
is that these bolts and a few dowels support the end of the shafts. If
this is designed properly, I see no reason it couldn't handle the torque of
the big four strokes. Does any manufacturer have a cassette gearbox on a
four stroke presently?
The superbikes do change gear ratios, it just takes a bit longer. I think
the new GSXR Suzuki would be easier with three splits to the crankcases.
You just pop the back section of, leaving the crank and clutch unmolested.
The drawbacks to the cassette style are this possibly weaker mounting
system. They've got them working on the 500's, so it would probably work
on the 750/1000's as well.
The end plate is fairly complex as it holds the oil pump (pressure fed
gearbox shafts), bearings, shift drum, index, etc., but this makes the
crankcase much simpler. Aft of the primary drive and balance shaft is just
a big metal box to hold this stuff and the side cover.
Duncan
=============
From: Julian Bond
If there was no great cost or weight difference, why not design the
engine from the ground up to include the cassette design anyway, given
the advantages in some race situations?
------------------------------
Date: Mon, 28 Dec 1998 15:54:00 -0500
From: dave.williams@chaos.lrk.ar.us (Dave Williams)
Subject: MC-Chassis Thumb brakes
- -> by sliding the rear wheel to redirect the bike, and most usefully, to
- -> control throttle slides - it's much more predictable and controllable
- -> than trying to reduce the throttle.
I use the rear brake on my Yamaha quite a bit when playing in the
twisties. Since I'm running the turbo quite far off its sweet spot
strange transient effects happen - roll off the throttle *slightly*, for
example, and the machine will accelerate modestly for a second or two.
Roll off sharply, then roll back on, and you get a big kick from stored
boost. Thus I tend to keep the engine on the boil and out of the
handling loop by using the clutch and rear brake as needed. It's not
*that* difficult to handle, but it requires always looking ahead to the
corner after the next.
------------------------------
Date: Mon, 28 Dec 1998 16:02:00 -0500
From: dave.williams@chaos.lrk.ar.us (Dave Williams)
Subject: Re: MC-Chassis-Dgst Thumb Brake
- -> Hello Dave
- -> I have a thumb operated rear brake and I can assure you it is very
- -> easy and effective to operate. I am totally convinced it is the best
- -> option for rear brake control, I find it especially good for dirt
- -> riding.
I will keep an eye out; perhaps I can find someone willing to let me
take a ride on a machine that has one.
------------------------------
Date: Mon, 28 Dec 1998 15:17:34 -0800
From: David Weinshenker
Subject: Re: MC-Chassis-Dgst Thumb Brake
Dave Williams wrote:
>
> -> Hello Dave
> -> I have a thumb operated rear brake and I can assure you it is very
> -> easy and effective to operate. I am totally convinced it is the best
> -> option for rear brake control, I find it especially good for dirt
> -> riding.
>
> I will keep an eye out; perhaps I can find someone willing to let me
> take a ride on a machine that has one.
>
Hmm. How about combining the systems... left thumb lever operates
rear only for differential braking control, right pedal gives
linked front/rear...
- -dave w
------------------------------
Date: Tue, 29 Dec 1998 10:18:17 +1100
From: Ian Drysdale
Subject: MC-Chassis Cassette boxes
> I think you misunderstood my words. I meant examples of each bike
> design, not total numbers. Consider the 996SPS, RC45, R7. These are all
> racing bikes first and homologation road bikes second. Even if they are
> fundamentally road bikes, racing success in SBK and Endurance is
> critical to their sales success.
I think it is a lot easier to have a cassette box in an engine
with vertically split cases - RGV 250's are a roadbike and
they have one. Ducati 996's are vertical split too I imagine
( older Dukes were ) so I can't see any excuse there.
The ease of machining in the classic 4 cyl. engine with the
gearbox shafts on the case split line does mean that
machining is much simpler with the design as is - but the
new trend of stacking the gearbox shafts ( as on my V8
and the new R1 ) makes no sense in not having a cassette
box.
The cassette box on my V8 can be out ( 2 mechanics ) in
less than 5 minutes - another 8 - 10 minutes to have it back
in. I know Britten could drop the bottom off his twin to
change ratios but a Yamaha 750 has a row of small bolts
under the barrels that need to come out - i.e. - a complete
motor strip to change 1 ratio ?? ( Or leave these 4 or 5
little bolts out ?? ) If I was a WSC mechanic I think I'd
tell the rider to just slip the clutch a bit more - a complete
motor strip and rebuild at the track just to do what should
be a 15 minute job would not amuse me too much.
Cheers IAN
- --
Ian Drysdale
------------------------------
Date: Mon, 28 Dec 1998 20:48:00 -0500
From: dave.williams@chaos.lrk.ar.us (Dave Williams)
Subject: Re: MC-Chassis-Dgst Thumb Brake
- -> Hmm. How about combining the systems... left thumb lever operates
- -> rear only for differential braking control, right pedal gives
- -> linked front/rear...
Under what circumstances would linked front/rear be advantageous?
------------------------------
Date: Mon, 28 Dec 1998 21:52:56 -0600
From: "Thomas Alberti"
Subject: MC-Chassis NON-list content, Video Card Help
Sorry about this, but I'm desperate and you guys are smart...
Does anyone successfully run a Diamond Stealth II card in 1124 x 768 mode,
true color, under Windows 98? I am having a very bizarre, and very
intermittent "reset"-like problem. This started after I moved to Windows
98, but I also added a new hard drive, new memory, new monitor and new
operating system (from '95 to '98), so it's hard to say what the conflict
is. I've tried many things, but dropping the resolution and colors to 800 x
600 and 256 colors seems to stabilize the system. I have the latest drivers
and even got the latest flash-rom upgrade for the card.
Thanks, and you could respond to: talberti@execpc.com with help or hatemail.
Thomas
------------------------------
Date: Mon, 28 Dec 1998 20:19:41 -0800
From: "Michael Moore"
Subject: Re: MC-Chassis-Dgst Thumb Brake
The 16 Dec 98 Motor Cycle News has a new product announcement for the
Team Jays thumb-operated rear brake master cylinder. The unit has a
broad thumb lever and looks pretty compact, though the price is UK
Pounds 355. Details in the UK at 01543-277998.
Does anyone know what size piston is being used? You might be able
to buy existing Brembo parts and fab your own - I think that you can
get down to a 12mm m/cyl piston in the Brembo, and many of their
m/cyls use an expanding plug instead of a circlip to retain the
piston in the housing, which should make it easier to just drill and
ream the piston bore without having to cut circlip grooves.
Cheers,
Michael
------------------------------
Date: Tue, 29 Dec 1998 08:06:57 +0000
From: Julian Bond
Subject: Re: MC-Chassis Cassette boxes
In article <368811B8.E127CC79@werple.net.au>, Ian Drysdale
writes
>I think it is a lot easier to have a cassette box in an engine
>with vertically split cases - RGV 250's are a roadbike and
>they have one. Ducati 996's are vertical split too I imagine
>( older Dukes were ) so I can't see any excuse there.
I've an idea the Aprilia Mille has a cassette box but I can't confirm it
at the moment. I think we'll see the next Ducati engine have one as
well[1].
[1] Their engine design guys are facing a tough job. Their current
engine is seriously old now with some parts having a nearly 20 year
history but any replacement *must* be successful straight out of the
box. The race team, marketing and the money men are all standing right
behind them looking over their shoulders... It must be as bad as trying
to do V3.0!
- -- --------============>>>>>>>>>> )+( <<<<<<<<<<============-------- --
Julian Bond
------------------------------
Date: Tue, 29 Dec 1998 07:59:03 +0000
From: Julian Bond
Subject: Re: MC-Chassis-Dgst Thumb Brake
In article <561959.7.uupcb@chaos.lrk.ar.us>, Dave Williams writes
> Under what circumstances would linked front/rear be advantageous?
At anything under max balls out braking and on the road, it ought to
provide better braking and remove one element of skill required. The
only two times it might cause a problem are when the back wheel is so
lightly loaded there is a danger of lock up, and on loose surfaces where
you don't want to lock the front and need rear brake only.
I've seen a small report lately about a comparison test of two Honda
Blackbirds. One had the linked braking converted to unlinked. One rider
was a relatively inexperienced car journalist, the other a professional
bike journalist. The car journo on the linked system consistently braked
in shorter distances than the bike journo on the unlinked system,
because the bike guy didn't use the rear brake.
A lot of people loved the old Guzzi system, but I think the design is
wrong, because it still requires both circuits for maximum braking and
sensitivity with the foot control. I would prefer to have everything
operated from the handlebar as you have more sensitivity in your fingers
and keep the foot pedal for the exceptions.
- -- --------============>>>>>>>>>> )+( <<<<<<<<<<============-------- --
Julian Bond
------------------------------
Date: Tue, 29 Dec 1998 10:21:53 -0800
From: Paul Sayegh
Subject: MC-Chassis Triple clamp angle
Question for you experts......If I was to machine a set of triple clamps
with a reduced stearing shaft angle, would it help the steering out on a
V-Max? What could I expect?
What I had in mind was clamping some aluminum together, boring the fork
tube diameter straight and then boring the head shaft in the new pieces
at an angle.
If yes, how many degrees reduction should I try? Does machining an
angle screw up the rest of the steering geometry?
- --
.............................................
Paul Sayegh
------------------------------
End of MC-Chassis-Dgst V1 #868
******************************
MC-Chassis-Dgst Wednesday, December 30 1998 Volume 01 : Number 869
1. "Michael Moore" Subj: Re: MC-Chassis Triple clamp angle
2. David Weinshenker Subj: Re: MC-Chassis Triple clamp angle
3. "Antonio C. B. Sanjuan" Subj: MC-Chassis Invention - Tilting Trikes
4. "Calvin Grandy" Subj: Re: MC-Chassis Triple clamp angle
5. "dcmserv" Subj: Re: MC-Chassis Triple clamp angle
6. "dcmserv" Subj: Re: MC-Chassis Triple clamp angle
7. "Jim Schneider" Subj: Re: MC-Chassis Triple clamp angle
8. "Peter Snell" Subj: [none]
9. "Frank Camillieri" Subj: MC-Chassis Re: Removing head bearings
10. batwings@i-plus.net Subj: Re: MC-Chassis Triple clamp angle
11. Ian Drysdale Subj: MC-Chassis New duke.
12. Alan Lapp Subj: Re: MC-Chassis Re: Removing head bearings
13. "Ed Biafore" Subj: RE: MC-Chassis Cassette Gearboxes
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Date: Tue, 29 Dec 1998 10:31:08 -0800
From: "Michael Moore"
Subject: Re: MC-Chassis Triple clamp angle
Hello Paul,
That won't change your steering rake, only the trail and the way the
trail changes as the forks compress. Bimota used different angles -
I think with a greater angle (less steep) on the fork tubes so that
the trail didn't go away as quickly (since the wheel moves closer to
the steering axis).
Greater offset between the steering stem and axle will reduce trail,
making the steering a bit more responsive.
Cheers,
Michael
------------------------------
Date: Tue, 29 Dec 1998 10:42:22 -0800
From: David Weinshenker
Subject: Re: MC-Chassis Triple clamp angle
Michael Moore wrote:
> That won't change your steering rake, only the trail and the way the
> trail changes as the forks compress. Bimota used different angles -
> I think with a greater angle (less steep) on the fork tubes so that
> the trail didn't go away as quickly (since the wheel moves closer to
> the steering axis).
>
> Greater offset between the steering stem and axle will reduce trail,
> making the steering a bit more responsive.
I think Harley once built a bike with the steering stem at 26 degrees
for responsive steering and the fork legs at 29 degrees for a raked out
look. I forget which model it was but it might have been late 70's/
early 80's sometime.
- -dave w
------------------------------
Date: Tue, 29 Dec 1998 16:58:29 -0200
From: "Antonio C. B. Sanjuan"
Subject: MC-Chassis Invention - Tilting Trikes
Greetings.
Please excuse my English.
I am autonomous inventor, and I developed a project of experimental
vehicle denominated: "Quad with Axial Articulations", whose chassis
possesses the capacity of controlled deformation, allowing the
pendulum movement (exactly as in the motorcycle), but only up to 30=20
degrees, offering great gain of stability to the vehicle, and some=20
other innovative characteristics.
If you want see the webpage (860 KB), that it contains detailed=20
drawings, photos and report, please go to :
http://www.e-net.com.br/acbsan
Happy new year to everyone.
Thank you very much.
Antonio C. B. Sanjuan.
Brazil.
------------------------------
Date: Tue, 29 Dec 1998 14:18:31 -0500
From: "Calvin Grandy"
Subject: Re: MC-Chassis Triple clamp angle
Harley used different variations on this theme to tune the XR Dirt track racers with the Ceriani front ends.
Regards
Calvin Grandy
- ----------
> From: David Weinshenker
> To: mc-chassis-design@list.sirius.com
> Subject: Re: MC-Chassis Triple clamp angle
> Date: Tuesday, December 29, 1998 1:42 PM
> I think Harley once built a bike with the steering stem at 26 degrees
> for responsive steering and the fork legs at 29 degrees for a raked out
> look. I forget which model it was but it might have been late 70's/
> early 80's sometime.
>
> -dave w
------------------------------
Date: Tue, 29 Dec 1998 15:34:19 -0500
From: "dcmserv"
Subject: Re: MC-Chassis Triple clamp angle
This will not change the steering head angle, but it will effect trail.
simpler way of changing trail is to change offset of the stem hole in
relationship to tube holes, but still have them parallel. Only a change to
the frame will change the angle.
This can be done by cutting & welding, Inserts in the bearing holes that are
machined to hold new (smaller) bearings at a different relative angle (also
requires a special stem), and/or changing front and/or rear ride height.
None of this should be undertaken without a full understanding of the work
involved and posession of the equipment and skill to do the work.
My $.02
DG
>Question for you experts......If I was to machine a set of triple clamps
>with a reduced stearing shaft angle, would it help the steering out on a
>V-Max? What could I expect?
>
>What I had in mind was clamping some aluminum together, boring the fork
>tube diameter straight and then boring the head shaft in the new pieces
>at an angle.
>
>If yes, how many degrees reduction should I try? Does machining an
>angle screw up the rest of the steering geometry?
>
------------------------------
Date: Tue, 29 Dec 1998 15:35:39 -0500
From: "dcmserv"
Subject: Re: MC-Chassis Triple clamp angle
Even some of the current Hogasaurusses do this.
DG
- -
>I think Harley once built a bike with the steering stem at 26 degrees
>for responsive steering and the fork legs at 29 degrees for a raked out
>look. I forget which model it was but it might have been late 70's/
>early 80's sometime.
>
>-dave w
>
------------------------------
Date: Tue, 29 Dec 1998 14:18:26 -0700
From: "Jim Schneider"
Subject: Re: MC-Chassis Triple clamp angle
My old Norton P-11 had an offset clamp. That was a few years ago.
Swiss
Subject: Re: MC-Chassis Triple clamp angle
>Harley used different variations on this theme to tune the XR Dirt track
racers with the Ceriani front ends.
>
>Regards
>
>Calvin Grandy
>> From: David Weinshenker
>
>> I think Harley once built a bike with the steering stem at 26 degrees
>> for responsive steering and the fork legs at 29 degrees for a raked out
>> look. I forget which model it was but it might have been late 70's/
>> early 80's sometime.
>> -dave w
>
------------------------------
Date: Tue, 29 Dec 1998 17:00:14 -0500
From: "Peter Snell"
Subject: [none]
------------------------------
Date: Tue, 29 Dec 1998 17:36:03 -0500
From: "Frank Camillieri"
Subject: MC-Chassis Re: Removing head bearings
When I have used the weld method for bearing removal it didn't require much
weld to loosen the races. The frame didn't get very warm and I would think
it to be a better method than a hammer as it is almost impossible to beat a
race out straight. We have all seen what the bores look like after a few
bearing replacements.
I made taper bearing carriers out of stainless for the frame I am racing. It
originally was made for early Ducati races and wasn't as round as it could
have been. I used Loctite speed bonder 326 structural adhesive to glue them
in. There is no play at all and the forks are very free turning. An added
bonus is that the stem is now over an inch longer. The bearings had been
around for a while and I think they were from a boat trailer axle because
they had seals as part of the inner race.
Frank Camillieri
------------------------------
Date: Tue, 29 Dec 1998 17:41:35
From: batwings@i-plus.net
Subject: Re: MC-Chassis Triple clamp angle
At 10:21 AM 12/29/98 -0800, you wrote:
>What I had in mind was clamping some aluminum together, boring the fork
>tube diameter straight and then boring the head shaft in the new pieces
>at an angle.
It's not that simple. You have to have the angle set with the clamp blanks
spaced the right distance apart, or the stem holes will be parallel but not
concentric when you do separate them.
Best regards,
Hoyt
------------------------------
Date: Wed, 30 Dec 1998 10:25:35 +1100
From: Ian Drysdale
Subject: MC-Chassis New duke.
> [1] Their engine design guys are facing a tough job. Their current
> engine is seriously old now with some parts having a nearly 20 year
> history but any replacement *must* be successful straight out of the
> box. The race team, marketing and the money men are all standing right
> behind them looking over their shoulders... It must be as bad as trying
> to do V3.0!
> Julian Bond
Rumors are that it will be narrower than 90 deg and non
desmo. The front cylinder head needs to come up to get the
swingarm longer - but as Honda and Suzuki have already
done this I would bet on a 75 deg motor or there abouts.
After 75 deg you get too far away from perfect primary
balance although I wouldn't knock back a test ride on a Britten
to comfirm this.
Italian Voxan anyone ?
Cheers IAN
- --
Ian Drysdale
------------------------------
Date: Wed, 30 Dec 1998 10:08:48 -0500
From: Alan Lapp
Subject: Re: MC-Chassis Re: Removing head bearings
>When I have used the weld method for bearing removal it didn't require much
>weld to loosen the races. The frame didn't get very warm and I would think
>it to be a better method than a hammer as it is almost impossible to beat a
>race out straight. We have all seen what the bores look like after a few
>bearing replacements.
This weld method makes me very curious... I've never heard of it.
Could someone please describe it?
Al
level_5_ltd@earthlink.net
------------------------------
Date: Wed, 30 Dec 1998 08:11:53 -0700
From: "Ed Biafore"
Subject: RE: MC-Chassis Cassette Gearboxes
Duncan asks:
>Does any manufacturer have a cassette gearbox on a
> four stroke presently?
HD Sportsters have had that set up since the 50's.
Later,
Ed
------------------------------
End of MC-Chassis-Dgst V1 #869
******************************
MC-Chassis-Dgst Thursday, December 31 1998 Volume 01 : Number 870
1. "Peter Snell" Subj: MC-Chassis Free (almost)to a good home.
2. Paul Sayegh Subj: Re: MC-Chassis Re: Removing head bearings
3. "dcmserv" Subj: Re: MC-Chassis Cassette Gearboxes
4. "Tony Foale" Subj: MC-Chassis Re: Yokes
5. Johnayleng@aol.com Subj: Re: MC-Chassis Re: Yokes
6. David Weinshenker Subj: Re: MC-Chassis Re: Yokes
7. Paul Sayegh Subj: MC-Chassis ARTICLE
8. duncan.griffiths@horiba.com Subj: Re: MC-Chassis New duke
9. Ian Drysdale Subj: MC-Chassis Weld removal
10. flat-track@juno.com (Tony Manx) Subj: Re: MC-Chassis Triple clamp angle
11. Julian Bond Subj: Re: MC-Chassis New duke
12. "LTSNIDER" Subj: Re: MC-Chassis Triple clamp angle
13. "Tony Foale" Subj: MC-Chassis Re: Web page
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Date: Wed, 30 Dec 1998 11:26:07 -0500
From: "Peter Snell"
Subject: MC-Chassis Free (almost)to a good home.
Lemme try this again, for some reason, the last time I sent this
message, the contents were stripped out.
I have a stack of large graph paper that I'm about to recycle, but I
would rather see it go to a good home. It's about 58 cm by 45 cm (23" by
18"), the grid is 40 cm by 50 cm. Small divisions are 1 mm, with major
divisions at 0.5, 1, and 10 cm. It's large enough to make good rough
scale drawings (better than an envelope anyway ;->). It's also large
enough to lay a small engine, like a single, on it, and using transfer
punches, make a simple co-ordinate grid with engine mounting points on
it.
I'm sure that the people on this list can think of lots of other uses
for it.
It has been used as a co-ordinate grid for a student lab optics
experiment, and has a large circle drawn on it, as well as some
reference marks. The marks are mostly in pencil, and would be easily
erased or ignored.
I'll send some to anyone who wants it, for the cost of shipping.
Quantity depends on the number of requests I get. Keep in mind that I'm
in Canada, and you might not want to pay for shipping to, say,
Australia. Although I'm game if you are.
Please reply to me directly.
- -Pete Snell
snell-p@rmc.ca
- --
__
Pete Snell
Royal Military College
Kingston, Ontario, | We dance round in a ring and suppose,
Canada. | But the Secret sits in the middle and knows.
Snell-p@rmc.ca | Robert Frost (1874-1963)
------------------------------
Date: Wed, 30 Dec 1998 08:21:04 -0800
From: Paul Sayegh
Subject: Re: MC-Chassis Re: Removing head bearings
Alan Lapp wrote:
> >When I have used the weld method for bearing removal it didn't require much
> >weld to loosen the races. The frame didn't get very warm and I would think
> >it to be a better method than a hammer as it is almost impossible to beat a
> >race out straight. We have all seen what the bores look like after a few
> >bearing replacements.
>
> This weld method makes me very curious... I've never heard of it.
>
> Could someone please describe it?
>
> Al
> level_5_ltd@earthlink.net
You can take a mig or arc welder on low amps and weld a small bead around the
center of the race or even just a few spots. The weld cools and shrinks the
race....it will almost fall out. I do it for wheel bearings on cars and anytime
I get a race hard to reach.
- --
.............................................
Paul Sayegh
------------------------------
Date: Wed, 30 Dec 1998 11:38:55 -0500
From: "dcmserv"
Subject: Re: MC-Chassis Cassette Gearboxes
>
>>Does any manufacturer have a cassette gearbox on a
>> four stroke presently?
>
> HD Sportsters have had that set up since the 50's.
>
K-Models since 1952. Aprillia now.
DG
------------------------------
Date: Wed, 30 Dec 1998 18:43:07 +0100
From: "Tony Foale"
Subject: MC-Chassis Re: Yokes
Paul asked:
<<
What I had in mind was clamping some aluminum together, boring the fork
tube diameter straight and then boring the head shaft in the new pieces
at an angle.
>>
That's not the way to machine the angled holes, when you unclamp the blanks
and space them correctly then the holes won't line up.
I assume your reason for making such yokes is to alter the trail for a given
castor angle, so just make some yokes with the appropriate offset, but with
parallel holes, it's so much easier.
Tony Foale.
Espaņa / Spain
http://www.ctv.es/USERS/softtech/motos
------------------------------
Date: Wed, 30 Dec 1998 13:49:48 EST
From: Johnayleng@aol.com
Subject: Re: MC-Chassis Re: Yokes
In a message dated 12/30/98 11:04:10 AM Mountain Standard Time,
softtech@ctv.es writes:
> I assume your reason for making such yokes is to alter the trail for a given
> castor angle, so just make some yokes with the appropriate offset, but with
> parallel holes, it's so much easier.
>
I had read an article in Performance bikes a few months ago on frame
geometry for the layman. It stated that trail and wheelbase were the main
factors in a bikes "flickibility." So is the trend to reduce rake one of
reducing wheelbase and weight bias, or is there another reason?
John Aylor NM
------------------------------
Date: Wed, 30 Dec 1998 11:00:39 -0800
From: David Weinshenker
Subject: Re: MC-Chassis Re: Yokes
Johnayleng@aol.com wrote:
> I had read an article in Performance bikes a few months ago on frame
> geometry for the layman. It stated that trail and wheelbase were the main
> factors in a bikes "flickibility." So is the trend to reduce rake one of
> reducing wheelbase and weight bias, or is there another reason?
Perhaps to reduce trail a bit without having to inconveniently
increase offset? (I thought the only good reasons for using
any rake at all were mechanical, such as getting usable trail with
reasonable offsets, convenient location of the steering head on the
motorcycle, and better resistance to braking loads!)
- -dave w
------------------------------
Date: Wed, 30 Dec 1998 13:43:31 -0800
From: Paul Sayegh
Subject: MC-Chassis ARTICLE
> >
> I had read an article in Performance bikes a few months ago on frame
> geometry for the layman. It stated that trail and wheelbase were the main
> factors in a bikes "flickibility." So is the trend to reduce rake one of
> reducing wheelbase and weight bias, or is there another reason?
>
> John Aylor NM
If anyone has this article and could e-mail it to me or fax, I would appreciate
it. Thanks
FAX# 916-264-7955....attn. Paul
- --
.............................................
Paul Sayegh
------------------------------
Date: Wed, 30 Dec 1998 14:17:34 -0800
From: duncan.griffiths@horiba.com
Subject: Re: MC-Chassis New duke
Unless they can get some height out of the heads, then a large capacity
V-twin will not allow a current-standard rear suspension design. The
Bimota/Vee Two/Suzuki method of sticking the shock up the side of the motor
seems to be a good solution. This allows you to rotate and place the motor
anywhere you need to, without interfering with the suspension. Other than
suspension location issues, why would they need to go to a narrower angle?
Duncan
===========
From: Ian Drysdale
Rumors are that it will be narrower than 90 deg and non
desmo. The front cylinder head needs to come up to get the
swingarm longer - but as Honda and Suzuki have already
done this I would bet on a 75 deg motor or there abouts.
Ian Drysdale
------------------------------
Date: Thu, 31 Dec 1998 09:36:09 +1100
From: Ian Drysdale
Subject: MC-Chassis Weld removal
> This weld method makes me very curious... I've never heard of it.
>
> Could someone please describe it?
Run a weld straight onto the surface of the old race ( internal only).
Weld heats up the race - which cracks the 'seal' to the bore - then the
extra weld metal contracts - probably a couple of thou per inch and
the race drops out like magic.
I've seen framers use arc welders on tractor diesel cylinder liners
but a TIG on MC stuff is like a surgeons scapel. Throw your slide
hammer away.
BTW - early Kawaski Z900 ( Z1000 maybe ? ) had those god awful
double angle triple clamps.
Cheers IAN
- --
Ian Drysdale
------------------------------
Date: Thu, 31 Dec 1998 00:26:08 -0500
From: flat-track@juno.com (Tony Manx)
Subject: Re: MC-Chassis Triple clamp angle
Hello all,
Dave W mentioned odd stem angles used on Harleys. As I recall
the 5 speed rubber mounted FXR series that came out in 1982 had a 29
degree neck. The 5 speed rubber mount FLT series had triple clamps
(trees) with no offset, the stem was in line with both fork tubes. If
memory serves correctly , the FXST (Softail) had a 3 degree rake built
into the
triple clamps for that "chopper' look. Back in the 70's there was a
company making trees with 5 and 10 degree rake built in, rumer was these
were trecherous. There is a shop here in Waterbury, Connecticut USA
called Eastern Cycle Performance that will make
raked triple trees on a CNC machine if anyone is interested.
Back to Harleys- in the good old days, when you bought a H-D
with a sidecar ,
it came with 2 position adjustable trees. One position was for use with
the sidecar, the other was for solo use. HRD/Vincent may have done
something similar.
Tony Manx
------------------------------
Date: Thu, 31 Dec 1998 08:32:20 +0000
From: Julian Bond
Subject: Re: MC-Chassis New duke
In article <882566EA.007AA5FE.00@hiis01.horiba.com>,
duncan.griffiths@horiba.com writes
>
>Unless they can get some height out of the heads, then a large capacity
>V-twin will not allow a current-standard rear suspension design. The
>Bimota/Vee Two/Suzuki method of sticking the shock up the side of the motor
>seems to be a good solution. This allows you to rotate and place the motor
>anywhere you need to, without interfering with the suspension. Other than
>suspension location issues, why would they need to go to a narrower angle?
The problem seems to be one of weight distribution and swing arm length.
Suzuki, Aprilia and Voxan have gone to great lengths to try and keep the
motor short. In an L twin, the L cylinder wants to hit the front wheel,
while the length of the gearbox and L cylinder is trying to push the
countershaft and pivot backwards. If you rotate the cylinders back, and
use steep downdraught intakes, you end up with a tall engine and hence
high CoG as well. If you stick the clutch and alternator straight out
the side, the engine can end up nearly as wide as a current 750-4.
Suddenly, you've ended up with an engine module that is bigger and more
awkward than a 4. Slightly different situation, but the RC45 motor is
the same width as the Suzuki 750-4!
Suzuki's rear suspension space issues just look like a red herring to
me. There's always space somewhere with some imaginative linkage design.
If it was more protected from the elements, I like Voxan's approach of a
conventional compression shock under the engine. With some ducting, it
could actually be kept cool in this position instead of the usual
approach of sticking it right behind the engine, enclosed and next to an
exhaust.
This stuff clearly isn't easy which makes Ducatis achievements of the
last 10 years all the more impressive. IMHO, to see how it ought to be
done, take a look at the Britten. This is why the WSB rules are so
interesting from a technical pov. Every engine design results in severe
compromises somewhere else and there's no clear and obvious best
solution.
BTW. The new Suzuki TL650 has an engine mounting point at the bottom
front of the engine that is currently unused. I wonder what they planned
it for? A big trailie? A cruiser?
- --
- -----------============>>>>>>>>>> )+( <<<<<<<<<<============-----------
Julian Bond
------------------------------
Date: Thu, 31 Dec 1998 07:45:57 +0000
From: "LTSNIDER"
Subject: Re: MC-Chassis Triple clamp angle
Actually, I think they just changed the length of the links on the
girder forks; a longer top link would bring the contact patch
rearward.
Back to Harleys- in the good old days, when you bought a H-D
with a sidecar ,
it came with 2 position adjustable trees. One position was for use with
the sidecar, the other was for solo use. HRD/Vincent may have done
something similar.
Tony Manx
LYNN
"Works hard to set low standards and then consistantly
fails to achieve them."
------------------------------
Date: Thu, 31 Dec 1998 16:36:47 +0100
From: "Tony Foale"
Subject: MC-Chassis Re: Web page
My ISP has just realized that I've been using 3 times my allotted space for
my web page for a year or so and has unceremoniously disabled it.
It should be back on line as soon as I've spread some files around a bit.
Tony Foale.
Espaņa / Spain
http://www.ctv.es/USERS/softtech/motos
------------------------------
End of MC-Chassis-Dgst V1 #870
******************************
Back to the home page
© 1997 Michael Moore, all rights reserved
Most recent update: 30 January 1998
For more information contact webmeister@eurospares.com