Motorcycle Chassis Design Digest #871-880
MC-Chassis-Dgst Friday, January 1 1999 Volume 01 : Number 871
1. Henry Cutler Subj: MC-Chassis racer on the street?
2. David Weinshenker Subj: Re: MC-Chassis racer on the street?
3. "Michael Moore" Subj: Re: MC-Chassis New duke
4. "dcmserv" Subj: Re: MC-Chassis racer on the street?
5. Paul Sayegh Subj: MC-Chassis FRAME FLEX
6. David Weinshenker Subj: Re: MC-Chassis Steering Dampers - a data point from the field
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Date: Thu, 31 Dec 1998 09:17:55 -0800
From: Henry Cutler
Subject: MC-Chassis racer on the street?
I'm interested in converting an older race bike into a "street" bike. Not a
street bike that's been modified for racing, but a Real race bike,
especially something like a TZ250, maybe of late 70's - early 80's vintage.
I've no intention of trying to make it really practical - just for daytime
fun on local mountain roads, and track time. Inconveniences like race
ergonomics, premix fuel and pathetic lighting are acceptable.
I've no experience with this sort of bike so perhaps some of you can advise
me whether this is a reasonable project, or if I'm crazy. Yes, I'm fully
aware of the possibilities of modifying street-based bikes - I'm just
looking for another option.
Some of the neccessary modifications are obvious to me (kickstand, headlamp,
turnsignals, brake lamp and switches, street tires, bicyle speedometer...)
Some of the other stuff isn't:
Engine- really convenient would be a bike that shares parts with a street
model, so that electrics, kickstarter, or maybe even a whole engine could be
fitted. Are the engines in many racers way too high-strung to ever be
streetable?
For example, TZ's seem to share some parts with RD's. Could a hybrid TZ/RZ
engine with all the appropriate gear be assembled? Are the engine mounts
common with RZ's or RD's?.
Electrics- endurance racers run (lots of) lights and lights are commonly
fitted to dirt bikes, so it must be possible to fit some sort of electrical
system to many racers too.
Am I missing something substantial?
Any particularly good candidates, especially if they are common enough to be
available for a reasonable price?
Thanks,
Henry
------------------------------
Date: Thu, 31 Dec 1998 09:49:17 -0800
From: David Weinshenker
Subject: Re: MC-Chassis racer on the street?
Henry Cutler wrote:
> For example, TZ's seem to share some parts with RD's. Could a hybrid TZ/RZ
> engine with all the appropriate gear be assembled? Are the engine mounts
> common with RZ's or RD's?.
The original parallel twin TZ's were the same basic bottom end layout
as the RD's... the RZ is similar but the engine mount layout is slightly
different. You could easily drop an aircooled RD motor into a
"monoshock"
TZ chassis from the 70's. If you were willing to do a bit of welding
& fab, an RZ motor could probably be installed.
If you stick with a TZ-style racing ignition with no generator coil for
the lights, you could always run a total loss battery and recharge
it after night runs...
> Any particularly good candidates, especially if they are common enough to be
> available for a reasonable price?
There's still lots of RD stuff running around... the early TZ chassis
may be a bit rare these days!
(An RD350 feels like it was really meant to be a racer anyway, but
some slipped out as a streetbikes... same frame layout, heavier
tubing; the TZ frames have a reputation for eventually cracking
which is part of why they're rare today. I've been looking at
what it would take to graft a monoshock on my RD; it's already
scheduled for an RZ350 fork transplant.)
The whole thing sounds like a fun idea!
- -dave w
------------------------------
Date: Thu, 31 Dec 1998 09:50:43 -0800
From: "Michael Moore"
Subject: Re: MC-Chassis New duke
> Suzuki's rear suspension space issues just look like a red herring
> to me. There's always space somewhere with some imaginative linkage
> design.
Twin dampers or a single side-mounted damper a la BMW solves the
space problem.
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: Thu, 31 Dec 1998 13:13:32 -0500
From: "dcmserv"
Subject: Re: MC-Chassis racer on the street?
>Henry Cutler wrote:
> You could easily drop an aircooled RD motor into a
>"monoshock"
>TZ chassis from the 70's. If you were willing to do a bit of welding
>& fab, an RZ motor could probably be installed.
>
You can use a RD bottom end (including charging system) with a TZ top end
and only sacrifice the autolube for a place to mount the water pump.
An alternative is TZ top end on a RD bike which will give you serial numbers
that won't cause registration problems. If you are interrested, Carleton
Andersen has one for sale. A very clean job with half a TZ750 top end. Alloy
tank, rims. Nice job. You can contact him at 508-877-1144.
DG
------------------------------
Date: Thu, 31 Dec 1998 16:38:34 -0800
From: Paul Sayegh
Subject: MC-Chassis FRAME FLEX
On the V-Max with the misaligned pins........ I have noticed that when
I torqued the SA pins with a "T" handled allen wrench and I can spread
the frame quite noticeably. Keep in mind that I can't convert to a
through bolt because of the drive shaft. If I can spread the frame with
such little torque, I can imagine what happens when I hit a bump in a
turn. There is a cross bar about 3 1|2 inches above and below the SA
area. Would it be worthwhile to gusset the SA area to the cross bars?.
It is really the only place I can do anything since the gas tank is
right in front of the rear wheel.
- --
................................................................
Paul Sayegh
V-Max Technical List Administrator
VMOA Northwest Director
V-Max web page http://www.sayegh.org/tips.htm
------------------------------
Date: Fri, 01 Jan 1999 12:42:23 -0800
From: David Weinshenker
Subject: Re: MC-Chassis Steering Dampers - a data point from the field
Griffiths, Duncan wrote:
> Most, if not all, of us regard the steering damper as a band-aid to fix
> something wrong elsewhere in the handling department. Would you also
> agree that it serves a purpose on generally good-handling bikes when they
> experience an unusual or extreme situation/loading that starts an
> oscillation?
I'd say it definitely does... I found one of the old Yamaha
rotary dampers for the RD350, filled it with #10 fork oil,
and hooked it up... the net result is the bike now feels
much more "vertical" over bumps where before it would twitch
around some in certain cases. The bike still jolts around a bit
in the vertical plane - I've got some suspension upgrades
in mind (see earlier post) - but now the damper seems to
absorb enough energy to calm the lateral transients...
Also the steering feels just an eensy bit more "fluid"
and less "darty".
A subtle but very welcome improvement, all and all.
- -dave w
------------------------------
End of MC-Chassis-Dgst V1 #871
******************************
MC-Chassis-Dgst Saturday, January 2 1999 Volume 01 : Number 872
1. Ian Drysdale Subj: MC-Chassis Frame spread
2. Paul Sayegh Subj: Re: MC-Chassis Frame spread
3. Duncan Griffiths Subj: Re: MC-Chassis racer on the street?
4. Henry Cutler Subj: Re: MC-Chassis racer on the street?
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Date: Sat, 02 Jan 1999 09:54:17 +1100
From: Ian Drysdale
Subject: MC-Chassis Frame spread
> On the V-Max with the misaligned pins........ I have noticed that when
> I torqued the SA pins with a "T" handled allen wrench and I can spread
> the frame quite noticeably. Keep in mind that I can't convert to a
> through bolt because of the drive shaft. If I can spread the frame with
> such little torque, I can imagine what happens when I hit a bump in a
> turn.
If you do the maths on the force you are generating ( the adjusters
are generally a very fine thread ) you might be suprised. Unlike
a CX 650 or some other shaft bikes - you don't have a 'short throw'
mono shock to add to the swingarm pivot forces - so the torque
on the adjuster is probbaly way above the cornering forces.
> There is a cross bar about 3 1|2 inches above and below the SA
> area. Would it be worthwhile to gusset the SA area to the cross bars?.
Yes - for sure - it all helps - just remember that you may have
to strengthen the big hollow tube that the universal is housed in -
you could easily crush that after building up everything else.
Cheers IAN
- --
Ian Drysdale
DRYSDALE MOTORCYCLE CO.
Melbourne. Australia
http://werple.net.au/~iwd
Ph. + 613 9562 4260
Fax.+ 613 9546 8938
------------------------------
Date: Sun, 01 Nov 1998 18:10:35 -0800
From: Paul Sayegh
Subject: Re: MC-Chassis Frame spread
Ian Drysdale wrote:
>
>
> Yes - for sure - it all helps - just remember that you may have
> to strengthen the big hollow tube that the universal is housed in -
> you could easily crush that after building up everything else.
>
> Cheers IAN
>
>
If you look at -- http://www.sayegh.org/framepic.htm you can see what I am up
against. Thanks for the info. I never even thought about the tube going
egg-shaped under load, it is really thin. I was wondering why when I torqued
the timken bearings it felt so mushy. I'm sure that's why.
I'll check the diameter torqued vs. not torqued and see how much it
egg-shapes. I think I will look and see if there is enough room to weld or
press a ring inside at the centerline of the swingarm and still clear the
u-joint.
- --
................................................................
Paul Sayegh
------------------------------
Date: Fri, 01 Jan 1999 08:32:28
From: Duncan Griffiths
Subject: Re: MC-Chassis racer on the street?
At 12:43 PM 1/1/99 -0800, you wrote:
>From: Henry Cutler
>
>I'm interested in converting an older race bike into a "street" bike. Not a
>street bike that's been modified for racing, but a Real race bike,
>especially something like a TZ250, maybe of late 70's - early 80's vintage.
>
>Any particularly good candidates, especially if they are common enough to be
>available for a reasonable price?
The only real race bikes that the public has been able to afford are the
two strokes, and Yamaha's TZ continues to follow the tradition of the TZ/RD
interchangeability. Since we no longer get the RD/RZ in the U.S., the
equivalent would be the TZR250 that is commonly available in Japan and
Europe. The '91 TZ is particularly close to the road TZR, so much so that
it hurt performance. The '90 TZ is faster in stock form.
Because of this, the '91 is a good option for this kind of project. Any
necessary street parts will bolt on. Steve Biganski and Nick Ienatsch ran
a TZ in the last 24-hour race at Willow Springs with the addition of a
lighting coil from a Banshee ATV. A crank seizure during the night (~10
hours complete) caused them a hiccup, but they were able to replace it in a
couple of hours and ride the rest of the race.
Steve has turned a '91 TZ into a road bike and it sure looks pretty. The
'91 TZ is the first of the V-twins and includes a counterbalancer, so it
would be a lot smoother than the older parallel twin models. My '89 used
to put my feet to sleep with the buzzing.
Commercial: I've got my '91 for sale for $4700, Marvic wheel, Ohlins
shock, etc. email privately if interested. '91 TZ's can run the range
$4000-$5500. Depends on your definition of reasonable.
Duncan Griffiths
DNA Racing
'93 TZ250
------------------------------
Date: Sat, 02 Jan 1999 20:00:18 -0800
From: Henry Cutler
Subject: Re: MC-Chassis racer on the street?
Thanks to everyone for their suggestions about my proposed racer to street
conversion bike.
I've located a TZ250, F model that appears to be clean and healthy. The RD
engine conversion, or hybrid RD/TZ engine & transmission seems the most
pratical route (as practical as any part of this project, at least).
Julian Bond wrote:
>If you want something a bit more modern, SoS big singles can be made to
>run on the street pretty easily. Especially the Rotax engine which has
>lots of street options. A road going Tigcraft-Rotax/Yamaha would make a
>lovely device.
I actually rode such a bike today; A Yamaha SRX with a hot-rod motor,
buttoned up suspension and other goodies. Given the serious hardware that
seems to be running in SoS these days, I don't imagine this bike is
currently competitive. Nonetheless, it was a fun ride - A super chassis with
the wonderful power band of a hot single would absolutely be a super canyon
tool. I'm not buying this SRX, but if I go for the TZ, maybe it'll get a big
single someday.
- -Henry
Henry Cutler
- ------------
daedalus@mediacity.com 1039 Laurel Street 3
ph & fax: 650.328.9201 Menlo Park, CA 94025
------------------------------
End of MC-Chassis-Dgst V1 #872
******************************
MC-Chassis-Dgst Sunday, January 3 1999 Volume 01 : Number 873
1. "Michael Moore" Subj: MC-Chassis MotoBi scrambler
2. "Michael Moore" Subj: MC-Chassis Re: frame jig
3. "dcmserv" Subj: MC-Chassis Computrack Comments
4. David Weinshenker Subj: Re: MC-Chassis Re: frame jig
5. David Weinshenker Subj: MC-Chassis rd350 to monoshock?
6. RWa11@aol.com Subj: MC-Chassis Ohlins 2wd
7. "dcmserv" Subj: Re: MC-Chassis Re: frame jig
8. Dick Brewster Subj: Re: MC-Chassis Re: frame jig
9. geoff@ihug.co.nz (Geoff Merryweather. ) Subj: Re: MC-Chassis rd350 to monoshock?
10. "Michael Moore" Subj: Re: MC-Chassis Re: frame jig
11. Paul Sayegh Subj: MC-Chassis frame jig
12. "LTSNIDER" Subj: Re: MC-Chassis rd350 to monoshock?
13. "Ed Biafore" Subj: RE: MC-Chassis Re: frame jig
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Date: Sat, 2 Jan 1999 21:41:32 -0800
From: "Michael Moore"
Subject: MC-Chassis MotoBi scrambler
8+ hours of work in the garage today sees the majority of the frame
work done on the scrambler. I need to add some sheet metal near the
steering head, but it is pretty well all welded up.
If my back isn't seized up tomorrow I should be able to finish that
and get the swing arm extended. Of course I'm taking pictures as I go
along, though the garage is a bit dark and I'm having to slow down to
a 1/15th of a second exposure.
With luck I'll be able to put the front end on and a motor in and see
if the tire will clear the rocker cover as it is supposed to do.
I cleared the frame jig off before starting and took some pictures of
that and the plates that locate the swing arm spindle. If they come
out I'll add them to the website with a bit of additional narrative
on the setup procedure.
Oh yes, the MotoBi sheetmetal frame uses .070" thick steel sheet,
with about a 1.6" outside width.
Cheers,
Michael
------------------------------
Date: Sun, 3 Jan 1999 11:01:40 -0800
From: "Michael Moore"
Subject: MC-Chassis Re: frame jig
> I assume you have a frame jig from your post. I talked to
> Computrack today and they seem to think their setup is way better
> than a frame jig. Is this so? I have not seen the setup. From
> some of the s#bscribers input they seem to think Computrack is
> pretty good. I have had a few comments on this as well on my list.
> What is so unique about Computrack?
Hello Paul,
Yes I do have a frame jig - you can find a description of it in the
frame articles on the website, and you can see it in some of the
pictures.
You need to keep in mind that the Computrack is a measurement device,
and not something that holds parts while they are being welded.
If you are going to do modifications or build something you still
need a fixture, though it needn't be terribly elaborate. The
Computrack can tell you if the parts are in alignment, but that is
all. The Computrack people still need to have an alignment fixture
with hydraulic rams etc for straightening or repositioning frames.
If you have a good frame fixture you can put a frame on it and
figure out if it is out of alignment, though it won't be as fast as
the Computrack, will require you to strip the frame, and may not be
quite as accurate as the Computrack. However, you should be able to
measure to within .010" or less, which should be plenty close.
There was an article on the Computrack system in "Race Car
Engineering" which said that many of the F1 car and GP bike teams are
buying their own Computrack systems to use in checking
alignment/settings.
FYI, Walt at The Frame Man in Sacramento has been using a home-brewed
laser alignment system for many years.
The Computrack seems to be quite a clever device, and for a change
the inventor seems to be making some money from his efforts. Still,
I gather it is fairly expensive and a bit unlikely to be showing up
in many private garages.
Cheers,
Michael
------------------------------
Date: Sun, 3 Jan 1999 15:00:50 -0500
From: "dcmserv"
Subject: MC-Chassis Computrack Comments
The Computrack system is very expensive, lots of zeroes in the price tag.
The franchise arrangement includes the frame jig as well as the measuring
equipment and software, but as this is pretty straightforward, it is rarely
mentioned in any articles. The jig holds the bike by its swing arm pivot and
removable jig frames then are placed around the frame and act as a frame for
the hydraulic rams to work against. The swing arm can be straightened at the
same time, as well as sub frame and other mounts. There is an alignment tool
that goes through the steering axis as well. This combined with standard
measuring tools is used to check the frame while it is in the jig during and
after straightening. Any front end repair is done seperately while the front
end is off the bike. The front end is checked for straightness and alignment
even if the measurement did not indicate any problems. The bike is also
final checked after re-assembly on the measuring machine to assure that
everything was done right and all corrections are complete.
It works very well, and they can save most bent frames. It is a bit costly,
but usually a lot less than a replacement frame.
I don't own a franchise or have any direct financial involvement in
Computrack, but I do admit that Peter Kates, owner of the Boston franchise
has been a friend of mine for many years, long before he became a francisee.
DG
------------------------------
Date: Sun, 03 Jan 1999 12:24:24 -0800
From: David Weinshenker
Subject: Re: MC-Chassis Re: frame jig
Michael Moore wrote:
> FYI, Walt at The Frame Man in Sacramento has been using a home-brewed
> laser alignment system for many years.
Are you in a position to describe this system in any detail?
I suspect I'm not the only curious one!
I've been noticing the proliferation of inexpensive
laser pointer devices and wondering if there could
be any use for them in chassis work...
(perhaps an alternative to strings or carpenters' levels
for holding alongside the wheels to check their alignment??)
- -dave w
------------------------------
Date: Sun, 03 Jan 1999 12:50:09 -0800
From: David Weinshenker
Subject: MC-Chassis rd350 to monoshock?
Has any one ever seen or heard of attempts to convert twin
shock Yamaha RD-350 frames to non-linkage "monoshock"
rear suspension like the TZ and YZ bikes of the late 70's?
I'm thinking of something like welding a triangulated upper
section to the swingarm with a shock & spring leading to a
forward mount located just under the rear of the tank. (Cross
tube between the side rails, tied in with a couple of brace tubes?)
(I realize that will poke the shock right through the present
location of the rectifier & battery, but I can think of
a few ways to work around that!)
Am I likely to have any luck finding a decently
adjustable shock with appropriate travel and spring rate
selection for such an application? Is any "standard
sportbike" aftermarket shock likely to be in range?
(My concern is that these tend to be for linkage setups
with higher leverage ratios and spring rates than this
application.)
Thanks,
- -dave w
------------------------------
Date: Sun, 3 Jan 1999 16:04:00 EST
From: RWa11@aol.com
Subject: MC-Chassis Ohlins 2wd
The Jan. 1999 issue of dirt bike has two pics and a v/short description of the
Ohlins 2wd being developed for enduro racing. The front drive is hydraulic,
with the driving pump mounted above the motor and driven with a chian from the
counter shaft. The rear drive is conventional. The description said 10% of
the available power goes to the front wheel.
Does anybody know anything else about it? I'll have to admit I'm fascinated
with the 2wd concept after driving (flogging) my wifes Subaroo this fall and
winter. I could see a bike becoming silly fast in low traction situations.
Rex Wallace
------------------------------
Date: Sun, 3 Jan 1999 16:17:00 -0500
From: "dcmserv"
Subject: Re: MC-Chassis Re: frame jig
I use a $25 laser pointer mounted on a magnetic base as a baseline to
measure from. There is only about .015" of beam spread over 20 feet.
DG
>I've been noticing the proliferation of inexpensive
>laser pointer devices and wondering if there could
>be any use for them in chassis work...
>(perhaps an alternative to strings or carpenters' levels
>for holding alongside the wheels to check their alignment??)
>
>-dave w
>
------------------------------
Date: Sun, 03 Jan 1999 14:36:30 -0800
From: Dick Brewster
Subject: Re: MC-Chassis Re: frame jig
David Weinshenker wrote:
>
> Michael Moore wrote:
> > FYI, Walt at The Frame Man in Sacramento has been using a home-brewed
> > laser alignment system for many years.
>
> Are you in a position to describe this system in any detail?
> I suspect I'm not the only curious one!
>
> I've been noticing the proliferation of inexpensive
> laser pointer devices and wondering if there could
> be any use for them in chassis work...
> (perhaps an alternative to strings or carpenters' levels
> for holding alongside the wheels to check their alignment??)
>
> -dave w
The work very nicely as alignment tools. Buy one that uses cheap
batteries. Two AAA cell lights are fairly common, the little ones
that use special batteries are more expensive to run.
You might need to pot or otherwise anchor the optics to the
housing to keep them from shifting on you. A little potting
compound or epoxy works nicely.
Dick
------------------------------
Date: Sun, 03 Jan 1999 22:40:37 GMT
From: geoff@ihug.co.nz (Geoff Merryweather. )
Subject: Re: MC-Chassis rd350 to monoshock?
On Sun, 03 Jan 1999 12:50:09 -0800, you wrote:
>Has any one ever seen or heard of attempts to convert twin
>shock Yamaha RD-350 frames to non-linkage "monoshock"
>rear suspension like the TZ and YZ bikes of the late 70's?
I have seen pictures in old Performance Bikes of this being done. One
I recall was a GT250X7 Suzuki
>Am I likely to have any luck finding a decently
>adjustable shock with appropriate travel and spring rate
>selection for such an application? Is any "standard
>sportbike" aftermarket shock likely to be in range?
>(My concern is that these tend to be for linkage setups
>with higher leverage ratios and spring rates than this
>application.)
Best to use a shock that is made for this set up. EG RD350LC Yamaha
ones. I like my EMC Quadrant shock from M&P Accessories (in Wales, UK)
on my RD350LC racer. If you want the dimensions, I can measuer it for
you. ALternatively, I have some original Yamaha ones you can have for
the cost of postage from New Zealand. Make good paperweights, even
when new...
Geoff
- --
Radar detector FAQ, Forte Agent automation FAQ, bathroom fan FAQ
and THE WORLDS BEST CHRISTMAS PUDDING RECIPE
are at http://crash.ihug.co.nz/~geoff/
REMOVE "DELETEME" SPAMBLOCKER FROM ADDRESS TO REPLYTO USENET POSTINGS
------------------------------
Date: Sun, 3 Jan 1999 14:41:35 -0800
From: "Michael Moore"
Subject: Re: MC-Chassis Re: frame jig
> Are you in a position to describe this system in any detail?
Sorry, I've never seen it and from what I was told Walt didn't like
to show it to anyone. However, that was some time ago so I imagine
it would be a lot easier to do something now.
Cheers,
Michael
------------------------------
Date: Sun, 03 Jan 1999 14:49:23 -0800
From: Paul Sayegh
Subject: MC-Chassis frame jig
Michael Moore wrote:
> > Are you in a position to describe this system in any detail?
>
> Sorry, I've never seen it and from what I was told Walt didn't like
> to show it to anyone. However, that was some time ago so I imagine
> it would be a lot easier to do something now.
This is true. Walt will not let anyone in that area of his shop and keeps door shut always.
>
- --
................................................................
Paul Sayegh
------------------------------
Date: Sun, 3 Jan 1999 15:26:55 +0000
From: "LTSNIDER"
Subject: Re: MC-Chassis rd350 to monoshock?
Geoff Merryweather wrote:
Best to use a shock that is made for this set up. EG RD350LC Yamaha
ones. I like my EMC Quadrant shock from M&P Accessories (in Wales, UK)
on my RD350LC racer. If you want the dimensions, I can measuer it for
you. ALternatively, I have some original Yamaha ones you can have for
the cost of postage from New Zealand. Make good paperweights, even
when new...
Geoff
- --
When I had an RD350LC there were several manufacturers or importers
that made shocks for them. Fox for sure, and maybe White Brothers.
Ohlins would be the best, but spendy.
LYNN
"Works hard to set low standards and then consistantly
fails to achieve them."
------------------------------
Date: Sun, 3 Jan 1999 17:13:56 -0700
From: "Ed Biafore"
Subject: RE: MC-Chassis Re: frame jig
Dave W sez:
> I've been noticing the proliferation of inexpensive
> laser pointer devices and wondering if there could
> be any use for them in chassis work...
> (perhaps an alternative to strings or carpenters' levels
> for holding alongside the wheels to check their alignment??)
I've seen some laser levels for carpenters, they probably would work pretty
good for that too.
Later,
Ed
'91 883/1200 Sporty
Glendale, AZ
http://home.att.net/~biafore/index.htm
------------------------------
End of MC-Chassis-Dgst V1 #873
******************************
MC-Chassis-Dgst Monday, January 4 1999 Volume 01 : Number 874
1. "Ed Biafore" Subj: RE: MC-Chassis ARTICLE
2. Paul Sayegh Subj: Re: MC-Chassis ARTICLE
3. Neil Collins Subj: Re: MC-Chassis ARTICLE
4. "Glenn Thomson" Subj: Re: MC-Chassis rd350 to monoshock?
5. "Thacker, Heath HW" Subj: MC-Chassis Registering a YZ125 in Australia.
6. "Michael Moore" Subj: MC-Chassis 250 MotoBi Scrambler
7. "Karlis Plinche" Subj: RE: MC-Chassis ARTICLE
8. "Ed Biafore" Subj: RE: MC-Chassis ARTICLE
9. "Tony Foale" Subj: MC-Chassis Re: Monoshock question
10. Ian Drysdale Subj: MC-Chassis 2 WD ??
11. =?iso-8859-1?Q?Anders_H=F8rtvedt?= Subj: RE: MC-Chassis 2 WD ??
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Date: Sun, 3 Jan 1999 17:53:27 -0700
From: "Ed Biafore"
Subject: RE: 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
I'm interested in this article, does anyone know where I could get a copy?
Later,
Ed
'91 883/1200 Sporty
Glendale, AZ
http://home.att.net/~biafore/index.htm
------------------------------
Date: Sun, 03 Jan 1999 17:38:37 -0800
From: Paul Sayegh
Subject: Re: MC-Chassis ARTICLE
Ed Biafore wrote:
> > > I had read an article in Performance bikes a few months ago on frame
> > > geometry for the layman.
>
> I'm interested in this article, does anyone know where I could get a copy?
>
John was kind enough to send\type it for me. I'll send it to you.
- --
................................................................
Paul Sayegh
------------------------------
Date: Mon, 4 Jan 1999 12:43:13 +1030
From: Neil Collins
Subject: Re: MC-Chassis ARTICLE
Hi Paul Sayegh
If its electronic could you email a copy to me.
thanks Neil
http:///www.htb.com.au/htb11.html
email: neil@beaker.htb.com.au
- ------------------------------------------
At 05:38 PM 1/3/99 -0800, you wrote:
>John was kind enough to send\type it for me. I'll send it to you.
>Paul Sayegh
>V-Max Technical List Administrator
>VMOA Northwest Director
>V-Max web page http://www.sayegh.org/tips.htm
- -----------------------------------------
>Ed Biafore wrote:
>
>> > > I had read an article in Performance bikes a few months ago on frame
>> > > geometry for the layman.
>>
>> I'm interested in this article, does anyone know where I could get a copy?
>>
------------------------------
Date: Sun, 3 Jan 1999 22:34:07 +0000
From: "Glenn Thomson"
Subject: Re: MC-Chassis rd350 to monoshock?
On 3 Jan 99, David Weinshenker wrote:
> Has any one ever seen or heard of attempts to convert twin
> shock Yamaha RD-350 frames to non-linkage "monoshock"
> rear suspension like the TZ and YZ bikes of the late 70's?
www.aircooled-rd.com
The Aircooled RD club pres, Ric Naylor, had a 250 converted to
monoshock. It's on the website.
> I'm thinking of something like welding a triangulated upper
> section to the swingarm with a shock & spring leading to a
> forward mount located just under the rear of the tank. (Cross
> tube between the side rails, tied in with a couple of brace tubes?)
>
> (I realize that will poke the shock right through the present
> location of the rectifier & battery, but I can think of
> a few ways to work around that!)
>
> Am I likely to have any luck finding a decently
> adjustable shock with appropriate travel and spring rate
> selection for such an application? Is any "standard
> sportbike" aftermarket shock likely to be in range?
> (My concern is that these tend to be for linkage setups
> with higher leverage ratios and spring rates than this
> application.)
Folow the directions on the website and join the mail list. The
conversion isn't too unusual in the UK.
Cheers,
Glenn
gthomson(at)bserv.com
Waterloo, Ontario, CANADA
------------------------------
Date: Mon, 4 Jan 1999 15:24:44 +1100
From: "Thacker, Heath HW"
Subject: MC-Chassis Registering a YZ125 in Australia.
Anyone ever attempted to register a MX bike in Australia ? Or a home built
bike ? I know it "can" be done, but am stuggling to find out what needs to
be done, and how much it will cost me.
I know I need lights & blinkers, and have to quite the pipe & pass emission
tests (can I just idle on the lean side ?)
BTW, I don't plan to ride on the road much, just don't want to get busted in
the State Forests etc.
Ian, Did you register your 2WD bike ? I noticed number plates on it.
Thanks,
Heath.
'88 GSXR750J
'95 YZ125G
------------------------------
Date: Sun, 3 Jan 1999 21:00:45 -0800
From: "Michael Moore"
Subject: MC-Chassis 250 MotoBi Scrambler
I've still got some sheet-metal gussets to put in the area of the
steering head, but I was able to do a mockup of the bike this evening.
With the 2" extension to the swingarm and the relocated steering head
and MX forks the wheelbase is in the 54-55" range, and it looks pretty
good to me!
FYI, the swingarm is made of 30mm x 2.5mm wall tubing. I ended up
having to make the spigotted inserts from some 1.25" solid bar stock,
which took me several hours of work on the lathe.
The chassis has gained a bit of weight, but it is much more
dirtworthy than when it started out.
For vintage dirt track/flat track a standard frame/forks with a 3" or
4" extension to the swing arm might be the way to go.
Of course I now get to build the gas tank, seat, reinforced foot pegs,
skid plate, front fender stays (I want to run a low fender), rear
fender mounts, etc etc etc, not to mention fitting up a bigger carb
and manifold and a real air cleaner.
Still, I'm quite pleased with the last few days work - I may just have
to get down into the garage more often.
Cheers,
Michael
------------------------------
Date: Mon, 4 Jan 1999 09:55:10 +0200
From: "Karlis Plinche"
Subject: RE: MC-Chassis ARTICLE
Hi!
I see I'm not very original. I would like to get it too if it's possible.
email: karlis@junik.lv
___________________
Karlis
___________________
I wanna see you...
in the rearview mirror
> John was kind enough to send\type it for me. I'll send it to you.
> --
> ................................................................
> Paul Sayegh
> V-Max Technical List Administrator
> VMOA Northwest Director
> V-Max web page http://www.sayegh.org/tips.htm
>
>
>
------------------------------
Date: Mon, 4 Jan 1999 02:31:36 -0700
From: "Ed Biafore"
Subject: RE: MC-Chassis ARTICLE
> Ed Biafore wrote:
> > > > I had read an article in Performance bikes a few months
> ago on frame
> > > > geometry for the layman.
> > I'm interested in this article, does anyone know where I could
> get a copy?
> John was kind enough to send\type it for me. I'll send it to you.
Thanks Paul and John!
Later,
Ed
------------------------------
Date: Mon, 4 Jan 1999 10:59:54 +0100
From: "Tony Foale"
Subject: MC-Chassis Re: Monoshock question
David asked:
<<
Has any one ever seen or heard of attempts to convert twin
shock Yamaha RD-350 frames to non-linkage "monoshock"
rear suspension like the TZ and YZ bikes of the late 70's?
>>
Yes, I did hundreds in the 70s. I'll scan some photos and post them on my
site in the next day or two.
Tony Foale.
Espaņa / Spain
http://www.ctv.es/USERS/softtech/motos
------------------------------
Date: Tue, 05 Jan 1999 00:21:50 +1100
From: Ian Drysdale
Subject: MC-Chassis 2 WD ??
> The Jan. 1999 issue of dirt bike has two pics and a v/short description of the
>
> Ohlins 2wd being developed for enduro racing. The front drive is hydraulic,
> with the driving pump mounted above the motor and driven with a chian from the
>
> counter shaft. The rear drive is conventional. The description said 10% of
> the available power goes to the front wheel.
>
> Does anybody know anything else about it? I'll have to admit I'm fascinated
> with the 2wd concept after driving (flogging) my wifes Subaroo this fall and
> winter. I could see a bike becoming silly fast in low traction situations.
Is that American Dirtbike Magazine ? Which month ? We won't have the
Jan 99 issue here for a month or more - could you re-type the description
if it is short ( as you say ).
Couple of questions - what do you mean by 'Ohlins' - is this the guy's name
or the shock manufacturer ? ( Who are [still?] 100% owned by Yamaha )
Don't know about the hydraulic drive to the front - who'd be silly enough
to do something like that.................
Cheers IAN
- --
Ian Drysdale
------------------------------
Date: Mon, 4 Jan 1999 14:35:39 +0100
From: =?iso-8859-1?Q?Anders_H=F8rtvedt?=
Subject: RE: MC-Chassis 2 WD ??
This message is in MIME format. Since your mail reader does not understand
this format, some or all of this message may not be legible.
- ------ =_NextPart_000_01BE37EF.81FC7570
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
This bike has also been described in a Norwegian magazine. It is=20
Ohlins, th swedish suspension manufacturer.
Anders H=F8rtvedt
- ----------
From: Ian Drysdale[SMTP:iwd@werple.net.au]
Sent: 4. januar 1999 14:21
To: mc-chassis-design@list.sirius.com
Subject: MC-Chassis 2 WD ??
> The Jan. 1999 issue of dirt bike has two pics and a v/short=20
description of the
>
> Ohlins 2wd being developed for enduro racing. The front drive is=20
hydraulic,
> with the driving pump mounted above the motor and driven with a chian=20
from the
>
> counter shaft. The rear drive is conventional. The description said=20
10% of
> the available power goes to the front wheel.
>
> Does anybody know anything else about it? I'll have to admit I'm=20
fascinated
> with the 2wd concept after driving (flogging) my wifes Subaroo this=20
fall and
> winter. I could see a bike becoming silly fast in low traction=20
situations.
Is that American Dirtbike Magazine ? Which month ? We won't have the
Jan 99 issue here for a month or more - could you re-type the=20
description
if it is short ( as you say ).
Couple of questions - what do you mean by 'Ohlins' - is this the guy's=20
name
or the shock manufacturer ? ( Who are [still?] 100% owned by Yamaha=20
)
Don't know about the hydraulic drive to the front - who'd be silly=20
enough
to do something like that.................
Cheers IAN
- --
Ian Drysdale
------------------------------
End of MC-Chassis-Dgst V1 #874
******************************
MC-Chassis-Dgst Monday, January 4 1999 Volume 01 : Number 875
1. "dcmserv" Subj: Re: MC-Chassis 2 WD ??
2. Ian Drysdale Subj: MC-Chassis MX rego.
3. Paul Sayegh Subj: MC-Chassis Article
4. Alan Lapp Subj: RE: MC-Chassis Re: frame jig
5. Johnayleng@aol.com Subj: Re: MC-Chassis Article
6. Julian Subj: Re: MC-Chassis Re: note on laser pointers
7. Julian Subj: Re: MC-Chassis rd350 to monoshock?
8. Paul Sayegh Subj: MC-Chassis Works Shocks
9. "Calvin Grandy" Subj: Re: MC-Chassis Works Shocks
10. batwings@i-plus.net Subj: Re: MC-Chassis rd350 to monoshock?
11. "Thacker, Heath HW" Subj: RE: MC-Chassis MX rego.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Date: Mon, 4 Jan 1999 08:48:11 -0500
From: "dcmserv"
Subject: Re: MC-Chassis 2 WD ??
>Don't know about the hydraulic drive to the front - who'd be silly enough
>to do something like that.................
>
Actually, Honda has an annual competition for its engineers to design/build
odd and inovative bikes. There was a 2WD trials bike many years ago with
hydraulic drive to both wheels done for that competition.
DG
------------------------------
Date: Tue, 05 Jan 1999 01:05:38 +1100
From: Ian Drysdale
Subject: MC-Chassis MX rego.
> Anyone ever attempted to register a MX bike in Australia ? Or a home built
> bike ? I know it "can" be done, but am stuggling to find out what needs to
> be done, and how much it will cost me.
>
> I know I need lights & blinkers, and have to quite the pipe & pass emission
> tests (can I just idle on the lean side ?)
It's not easy - unless you live in the Northern Territory - you can get
1 week regos for MX bikes and you don't even need lights - add this
to the fact that there are NO speed limits outside of towns and you
are trail riding heaven.
Elsewhere - you will have to do an ' Individual Constructers
Compliance' - no emmisions req'd - but you need lights and
there is a stationary noise test. That's the good news - the bad
is the it will set you back $2-3000 for a one off - and take 4
months minimum.
There was a company in Sydney doing ADR'd CR & RM 250's
but they were only from new - doubt they are still doing it either.
So - sell the bike and buy something with an ADR plate on it -
it will be the cheapest way - sorry. Please don't ride your unreg.
MX bike in the bush - it is the image the rest of us have to constantly
defend against those who would close all the tracks.
> Ian, Did you register your 2WD bike ? I noticed number plates on it.
Was there ? I wonder how they got there ?
Cheers IAN
- --
Ian Drysdale
------------------------------
Date: Mon, 04 Jan 1999 07:13:13 -0800
From: Paul Sayegh
Subject: MC-Chassis Article
Please note that the article that John sent me is merely a description
of rake, trail and wheelbase in layman's terms. John, perhaps you
should post it for all, or I will if you have no objection....
- --
.............................................
Paul Sayegh
------------------------------
Date: Mon, 4 Jan 1999 10:16:43 -0500
From: Alan Lapp
Subject: RE: MC-Chassis Re: frame jig
>Dave W sez:
>
>> I've been noticing the proliferation of inexpensive
>> laser pointer devices and wondering if there could
>> be any use for them in chassis work...
>> (perhaps an alternative to strings or carpenters' levels
>> for holding alongside the wheels to check their alignment??)
>
> I've seen some laser levels for carpenters, they probably would work pretty
>good for that too.
There are inexpensive (<$20) laser pointers, which have some practical uses
- - and impractical... I have one mounted on my pneumatic spud gun as a
sight. :) The carpenters laser levels are rotary lasers. Placed in the
center of a room, they provide a reference mark all the way around the
room. I'm not exactly sure how they achieve this - it could easily be
either a rotating mirror or a rotating lens.
Al
level_5_ltd@earthlink.net
------------------------------
Date: Mon, 4 Jan 1999 12:37:47 EST
From: Johnayleng@aol.com
Subject: Re: MC-Chassis Article
In a message dated 1/4/99 8:17:27 AM Mountain Standard Time, paul@sayegh.org
writes:
>
> Please note that the article that John sent me is merely a description
> of rake, trail and wheelbase in layman's terms. John, perhaps you
> should post it for all, or I will if you have no objection....
>
Here it is: (BTW: the article is in Superbike
Sept.98)
Rake (or castor) angle is the angle the steering head is pulled back from 90
degrees vertical. With the front wheel spindle as pivot point. On a modern
superbike the typical rake angles are between 24-26 degrees. As opposed to
popular myth, rake is nowhere near as critical to a bike's handling as trail
and doesn't affect the bike's steering that much. Indeed, it is possible to
ride a bike with 90 degree (vertical) rake. However, this would lead to
chronic 'chattering' under braking as the forks flexed. Kicking the forks out
to 'attack' bumps also tends to help stop forks bending, reduce stiction and
enhance feel.
Trail: a horizontal measurement in millimeters from the point where the front
tyre makes contact with the ground to the point where an imaginary line drawn
down the steering axis makes contact with the road. The trail figure is the
singlemost important factor in governing the way a bike steers. Put simply,
less trail makes the steering very light and quick but it is easily deflected
(tankslappers), while more trail restores wheel alignment overt bumps quicker
and makes the steering very stable, but more effort is needed to make the bike
turn. A bike with a long wheelbase and long trail figure will turn like a
barge. A bike with a long trail figure and a short wheelbase, however, will
still turn quickly (viz Aprillia RS250, 102mm trail, 1,365mm wheelbase).
Wheelbase: This is the distance measured between the front and rear wheel
spindles when the steering is straight. Most manufacturers quote their bike's
wheelbase figure at its absolute shortest, but bear in mind that a wheelbase
figures may extend as much as 40mm for a stretching chain. Most bikes average
between 1,350-1,450mm wheelbases. The shorter your wheelbase is the quicker
the bike will steer, though extending the wheelbase will have the following
effects: Stability over bumps will improve. Steering into turns is slower.
Turning circle is increased. Less dive/squat under braking/acceleration.
Increased bending effect on frame. So what you're juggling with is allowing
the bike to turn quickly and give the frame great stiffness, but also
including an element of stability over bumps and under braking/acceleration
forces. This is why dragbikes have wheelbases the length of the QE2
(stability). And mopeds the length of a postage stamp (easy steering, tight
turning circle).
------------------------------
Date: Mon, 04 Jan 1999 12:15:14 +0000
From: Julian
Subject: Re: MC-Chassis Re: note on laser pointers
dcmserv wrote:
>
> I use a $25 laser pointer mounted on a magnetic base as a baseline to
> measure from. There is only about .015" of beam spread over 20 feet.
> DG
>
Most laser pointers use a diode that creates a fan shaped beam combined
with a focusing lens that compresses the "fan" to a straight "beam".
The lens position effects how accurate the beam is. Some are only
calibrated by eye and may vary from unit to unit (from the same
fanufacture). There is also some variances in accuracy of the actual
diodes.
For those who want to daple with lasers a bit more, Edmund Scientific
sells a great assortment of laser (from cheap to scientific grade) and
optical products (lenses, prisms, filters, etc) for industrial and
scientific applications... www.edsci.com
...and lastly, be careful. Even the cheap ones can permanently burn
your eyes!
Julian Farnam
(once, the designer of laser-pens)
------------------------------
Date: Mon, 04 Jan 1999 12:50:02 +0000
From: Julian
Subject: Re: MC-Chassis rd350 to monoshock?
Dave (or anyone else), S&W(shocks) put out a book on suspension design.
It is mostly geared toward off-road applications, but has some good
basic information, including a section on setting up the geometry for
non-linkage mono-shocks. It is also the only publication that I have
found that gives actual base numbers for spring rates (for both off-road
and street applications).
If you decide to use a two-point linkage(RZ 350) or three-point(FZR), I
have a simple software program that can be used to create the geometry.
It calcultes the "axle rate" and plots a bar graph of the rate curve
through the travel.
Send me an e-mail if any of this is of interest...
Julian Farnam
andbike@pacbell.net
David Weinshenker wrote:
>
> Has any one ever seen or heard of attempts to convert twin
> shock Yamaha RD-350 frames to non-linkage "monoshock"
> rear suspension like the TZ and YZ bikes of the late 70's?
>
> I'm thinking of something like welding a triangulated upper
> section to the swingarm with a shock & spring leading to a
> forward mount located just under the rear of the tank. (Cross
> tube between the side rails, tied in with a couple of brace tubes?)
>
> (I realize that will poke the shock right through the present
> location of the rectifier & battery, but I can think of
> a few ways to work around that!)
>
> Am I likely to have any luck finding a decently
> adjustable shock with appropriate travel and spring rate
> selection for such an application? Is any "standard
> sportbike" aftermarket shock likely to be in range?
> (My concern is that these tend to be for linkage setups
> with higher leverage ratios and spring rates than this
> application.)
>
> Thanks,
> -dave w
------------------------------
Date: Mon, 04 Jan 1999 13:15:46 -0800
From: Paul Sayegh
Subject: MC-Chassis Works Shocks
During my conversation with Computrack the other day, Works Shocks came
up. They felt that Works was no better than stock, and basically a
waste of money. This is contrary to what I have heard. Opinions?
- --
.............................................
Paul Sayegh
------------------------------
Date: Mon, 4 Jan 1999 16:34:48 -0500
From: "Calvin Grandy"
Subject: Re: MC-Chassis Works Shocks
There are different "Grades" of shocks with any mfg. I stay away from anything not rebuildable.
"If it is not worth making right, why rebuild it?"
- ----------
> From: Paul Sayegh
> To: Chassis List
> Subject: MC-Chassis Works Shocks
> Date: Monday, January 04, 1999 4:15 PM
>
> During my conversation with Computrack the other day, Works Shocks came
> up. They felt that Works was no better than stock, and basically a
> waste of money. This is contrary to what I have heard. Opinions?
>
> --
> .............................................
> Paul Sayegh
------------------------------
Date: Sun, 03 Jan 1999 18:40:45
From: batwings@i-plus.net
Subject: Re: MC-Chassis rd350 to monoshock?
At 12:50 PM 1/3/99 -0800, you wrote:
>I'm thinking of something like welding a triangulated upper
>section to the swingarm with a shock & spring leading to a
>forward mount located just under the rear of the tank. (Cross
>tube between the side rails, tied in with a couple of brace tubes?)
Have done this with various dirt bikes, same in principle, and I thought
when I had Yam RD350 frame here for a while that it could be done easily to
it.
>Am I likely to have any luck finding a decently
>adjustable shock with appropriate travel and spring rate
>selection for such an application? Is any "standard
>sportbike" aftermarket shock likely to be in range?
You can probably adapt a damper off of a variety of dirt bikes as well as
streeters, and you can probably get wider assortment of travel, springs and
adjustments than in street bike stuff, that being one important
characteristic of off-road dampers.
Why wouldn't you put on a linkage too? I've done a few of those, very easy
as a rule and you have a bit more set-up options with it. Just grafted a
Kaw SA and linkage to shortened Yam monoshock damper, mounted
linkage, SA and motor together with alloy plates that matched to the rear
motor mounts and had extra drillings and lateral spacers to hang linkage.
This is for my 12" travel 4S powered Penton. All you really need is a bit
more outline on the plates to accomodate the linkage anchors. You might
even find a linkage together with SA, that will swap in more or less
complete too. Worked for me.
>(My concern is that these tend to be for linkage setups
>with higher leverage ratios and spring rates than this
>application.)
It's not a big thing even w/o the linkage. Most of them are within
1.5-1.8:1, and you can get pretty close to the lower end of that with
laydown config. You would just pick one with closer overall performance to
your ratio to begin with anyway.
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: Tue, 5 Jan 1999 09:53:49 +1100
From: "Thacker, Heath HW"
Subject: RE: MC-Chassis MX rego.
> From: Ian Drysdale[SMTP:iwd@werple.net.au]
>
> Elsewhere - you will have to do an ' Individual Constructers
> Compliance' - no emmisions req'd - but you need lights and
> there is a stationary noise test. That's the good news - the bad
> is the it will set you back $2-3000 for a one off - and take 4
> months minimum.
>
Do you know what are the major competent(s) of this cost ? I can't
understand why it is so expensive, but then I think of all the red tape I
think understand. Guess that's why I don't see many registered MX bikes on
the road. (Only even seen one.)
> So - sell the bike and buy something with an ADR plate on it -
> it will be the cheapest way - sorry.
>
I thought that maybe the case. I just hate selling bikes, I prefer to ride
them until they are unfixable (or uneconomical to fix). I was thinking of
getting a rego'ed bike for trail riding, but thought it would be good if I
could rego the MX bike. But no luck. My girlfriend can't understand why I
would need another bike.
> Please don't ride your unreg.
> MX bike in the bush - it is the image the rest of us have to constantly
> defend against those who would close all the tracks.
>
Don't worry, this little 125 will be kept as a track bike. I'm very lucky
here in the Hunter to have quite a few close MX tracks to ride on. Also,
the sand dunes at Stockon Beach (10 mintues away), have a section of
unregistered vechicles, only drawback is you have to pay $200 a year for
not-quite-rego/insurance, and this is the only spot you can ride.
Heath.
'88 GSXR750J
'95 YZ125G
------------------------------
End of MC-Chassis-Dgst V1 #875
******************************
MC-Chassis-Dgst Tuesday, January 5 1999 Volume 01 : Number 876
1. Ian Drysdale Subj: MC-Chassis Honda 2WD
2. "Kelvin Blair" Subj: Re: MC-Chassis-Dgst MX sidecar dimensions
3. "john.mead" Subj: Re: MC-Chassis rd350 to monoshock?
4. RWa11@aol.com Subj: Re: MC-Chassis 2 WD ??
5. David Weinshenker Subj: Re: MC-Chassis Re: Monoshock question
6. David Weinshenker Subj: Re: MC-Chassis rd350 to monoshock?
7. batwings@i-plus.net Subj: Re: MC-Chassis rd350 to monoshock?
8. Alan Lapp Subj: Re: MC-Chassis MX rego.
9. Alan Lapp Subj: MC-Chassis Home-built pump
10. batwings@i-plus.net Subj: MC-Chassis oiling them
11. batwings@i-plus.net Subj: Re: MC-Chassis Home-built pump
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Date: Tue, 05 Jan 1999 10:38:03 +1100
From: Ian Drysdale
Subject: MC-Chassis Honda 2WD
> Actually, Honda has an annual competition for its engineers to design/build
> odd and inovative bikes. There was a 2WD trials bike many years ago with
> hydraulic drive to both wheels done for that competition.
> DG
I'm not familiar with that one - there was another 2WD bike at a
Honda ideas day ( it is annual I think ) that was a XR250 with
hydraulic drive to the front ( only?). It was a fairly 'low tech'
job - a small gear motor strapped to one fork leg with a chain
drive to the wheel.
There are few secrets in hydraulics - the hose diameter and
the outer appearance of the motor tells you the power it is
rated at - a gear motor is a low pressure unit and the size tells
you the flow rate. I think I figured about 2 - 3 hp from the photo
I saw.
The hoses just looped thru the triple clamps - also a problem -
a hydraulic hose with high pressure in it is like a piece of steel
( aluminium maybe ) - my 2WD used concentric rotary swivel
joints for the steering and suspension. The point where the
steering and front suspension pivots join has so many intricate
parts in it that I had trouble remembering how to put it all back
together when I renewed the seals before I shipped it off to
the Donington Collection.
I am not a fan of the 'front wheel assist' school of thought -
you need the front capable of handling 50 - 75 % of the engine
power if called on - not 5 % as the case of the XR 250 ideas
day bike ( and several others I have seen / heard about ).
Hope I don't sound like a trumped up expert but I spent 3500
hours building my 2WD so you will hear my opinion whether
you like it or not - goddam it .......
Cheers IAN
- --
Ian Drysdale
------------------------------
Date: Tue, 5 Jan 1999 08:16:28 +0800
From: "Kelvin Blair"
Subject: Re: MC-Chassis-Dgst MX sidecar dimensions
Does anyone on the list have or know of anyone willing to provide some
basic dimensions for a MX sidecar outfit.
My wife and I race a speedway sidecar and we are currently constructing a
new frame, however we would like to build a MX style for practice ie to
keep fit and improve coordination etc.
I have a spare TT600 engine that I plan to use, I know it is probably a
little heavy for all out competition but as I said this is to be a
practice/training bike.
Some starting numbers would be appreciated eg
Wheelbase
Track width
Rake & Trail
Sidewheel Lead
Any other relevant tricks/info
Thanks
Kelvin
------------------------------
Date: Sun, 03 Jan 1999 11:36:09 -0800 (PST)
From: "john.mead"
Subject: Re: MC-Chassis rd350 to monoshock?
> On Sun, 03 Jan 1999 12:50:09 -0800, you wrote:
>
> >Has any one ever seen or heard of attempts to convert twin
> >shock Yamaha RD-350 frames to non-linkage "monoshock"
> >rear suspension like the TZ and YZ bikes of the late 70's?
> I have seen pictures in old Performance Bikes of this being done. One
> I recall was a GT250X7 Suzuki
>
> >Am I likely to have any luck finding a decently
> >adjustable shock with appropriate travel and spring rate
> >selection for such an application? Is any "standard
> >sportbike" aftermarket shock likely to be in range?
> >(My concern is that these tend to be for linkage setups
> >with higher leverage ratios and spring rates than this
> >application.)
>
> Best to use a shock that is made for this set up. EG RD350LC Yamaha
> ones. I like my EMC Quadrant shock from M&P Accessories (in Wales, UK)
> on my RD350LC racer. If you want the dimensions, I can measuer it for
> you. ALternatively, I have some original Yamaha ones you can have for
> the cost of postage from New Zealand. Make good paperweights, even
> when new...
> Geoff
> --
> Radar detector FAQ, Forte Agent automation FAQ, bathroom fan FAQ
> and THE WORLDS BEST CHRISTMAS PUDDING RECIPE
> are at http://crash.ihug.co.nz/~geoff/
> REMOVE "DELETEME" SPAMBLOCKER FROM ADDRESS TO REPLYTO USENET POSTINGS
You might want to check out a Showa shock from a newer 900ss Ducati. It
has compression, rebound, and preload adjustments and mount without any
linkage.
John Mead
------------------------------
Date: Mon, 4 Jan 1999 22:01:14 EST
From: RWa11@aol.com
Subject: Re: MC-Chassis 2 WD ??
In a message dated 99-01-04 08:22:59 EST, you write:
<< Is that American Dirtbike Magazine ? Which month ? We won't have the
Jan 99 issue here for a month or more - could you re-type the description
if it is short ( as you say ).>>
Couple of questions - what do you mean by 'Ohlins' - is this the guy's name
or the shock manufacturer ? ( Who are [still?] 100% owned by Yamaha )>>
Hello Ian
It's nice to have some info you want for a change. The two photos were
v/small B&W with a caption. The Swedish shock people are the developers. The
mag. is 'merican ("Dirt Bike" Jan. 99) and is as typical, the editors don't
believe we are intelligent enough to absorb much information. I did not buy
the mag, but from memory I will do the best that I can:
~" The Swedish shock manufacurer Ohlins is developing and 2wd system for
enduro racing. The pump is gear driven to syncrhonize the front wheel with
the back. The pump is driven from a chain to the counter shaft. The bike is
said to rule on mud, snow and ice. 10% of the power is channeled to the front
wheel."
The is a very rough quote. The mag show two pictures one with the front wheel
spinning so that the stupid Americans could figure out that something was
unusual. The second photo showed the left side of the motor with and un-
gaurded chain drive to a hyd. motor directly above the top of the cylinder.
The drive came from the counter shaft, outside the drive sproket. The bike
was 2-stroke (of course, what other bike would have room above the
cylinder?). Unfortunately I do not remember the make of the bike. The front
drive motor appeared to be attached to disc brake mounts, with a braided steel
supply and return line.
I imagine if you are only tranfersing 5 hp things can be very small and light.
The photos were really quite small. However, if you want I will buy the mag
and send it to you. Consider it repayment for your thoughtful contributiuons
to this list, or a down payment for a V-8 ;-).
<< Don't know about the hydraulic drive to the front - who'd be silly enough
to do something like that................. >>
I don't know, they must live in a wonder land called Oz.
Rex Wallace
------------------------------
Date: Mon, 04 Jan 1999 20:57:56 -0800
From: David Weinshenker
Subject: Re: MC-Chassis Re: Monoshock question
Tony Foale wrote:
> Yes, I did hundreds in the 70s.
Care to reminisce? Any general comments/advice?
> I'll scan some photos and post them on my
> site in the next day or two.
Wow, thanks!
- -dave w
------------------------------
Date: Mon, 04 Jan 1999 21:24:13 -0800
From: David Weinshenker
Subject: Re: MC-Chassis rd350 to monoshock?
batwings@i-plus.net wrote:
> Why wouldn't you put on a linkage too?
Mainly I'm attracted to the mechanical simplicity of the "plain"
monoshock.
I just went down & took a quick measure on the RD350, and it
looks like I've got about 16 in. SA length (rear axle to pivot), and
could put the rear shock mount about 9 in. above the SA pivot.
Looks like there's about 13 in. from there to the main tube
junction under the tank. 16/9 = 1.777 leverage ratio, so 4 in. of
wheel travel would require just over 2.25 in. damper shaft travel.
If I had a better idea of what wheel rate to shoot for, I could
possibly match up a dirtbike application by spring rate...?
- -dave w
------------------------------
Date: Tue, 05 Jan 1999 08:22:09
From: batwings@i-plus.net
Subject: Re: MC-Chassis rd350 to monoshock?
At 09:24 PM 1/4/99 -0800, you wrote:
>batwings@i-plus.net wrote:
>> Why wouldn't you put on a linkage too?
>
>Mainly I'm attracted to the mechanical simplicity of the "plain"
>monoshock.
Works for me; the last mono swap I did was onto XL 350 and I used a
straight mounting system; this vehicle is to best of my understanding still
scaring the rednecks who bought it but for reasons not related to the
suspension ... told them to put new rear tire on it but they didn't listen.
But often you can find complete SA with linkage and damper, and there is a
slight advantage to the latter.
>could put the rear shock mount about 9 in. above the SA pivot.
>Looks like there's about 13 in. from there to the main tube
>junction under the tank. 16/9 = 1.777 leverage ratio, so 4 in. of
>wheel travel would require just over 2.25 in. damper shaft travel.
Something funky about the conclusion above. Your lower damper end is 9"
ABOVE the SA? IF the damper long axis is at 90 deg to a plane containing
the SA pivot and the lower damper mounting, your answer is correct. If it
isn't, the right value to use instead of 9" is the perpendicular distance
from SA pivot to the damper axis. In the latter case, this distance will
vary during suspension action, which is the basis for non-linkage
progressive suspensions. Actually, there is some variation in both cases,
but the variation in former is very slight.
Proj sounds quite interesting all in all ... appeals to the soul ... only
thing I'd sugest that you haven't evidently considerd would be to use
longer SA. <=Putting a bit more weight on front end is usually very good
idea for street vehicles which have had their performance improved ... the
result is less tendancy toward the higher slip angles on rear tire ... as
Kevin Cameron calls it, this is the problem of 'excessive front wheel
traction', or as we put it out this way 'arsy-firsty'. Enjoy!!
Best regards,
Hoyt
------------------------------
Date: Tue, 5 Jan 1999 09:02:20 -0500
From: Alan Lapp
Subject: Re: MC-Chassis MX rego.
>So - sell the bike and buy something with an ADR plate on it -
>it will be the cheapest way - sorry. Please don't ride your unreg.
>MX bike in the bush - it is the image the rest of us have to constantly
>defend against those who would close all the tracks.
Agreed - at least in my home state of Maryland, USA, if you start with a
steering stem which has the VIN number stamped into it from the
manufacturer and has a legal title, you are pretty much free to do anything
else you want to it. It must simply pass inspection.
Al
level_5_ltd@earthlink.net
------------------------------
Date: Tue, 5 Jan 1999 09:22:59 -0500
From: Alan Lapp
Subject: MC-Chassis Home-built pump
Ladies and gentlemen:
I've a question for the list regarding MM's fine article on his website
about hydroforming exhaust parts. I imagine that other parts could be
fabricated using this method as well.
I've attempted to locate a hand-operated pump locally without much luck.
In MM's article, he indicated his cost $180, which I've found to be highly
optimistic in this area.
I was brain-storming last night and came upon the idea of using a rear
brake master cylinder complete with hoses and banjo bolts to perform the
pumping duties. It would require a simple floor stand/bracket to house the
pump handle.
My question is: how much pressure does a hydraulic brake system generate?
I.E. is this concept suitable for the hydroforming application? I realize
that these master cylinders aren't very high volume, and would require a
tremendous amount of pumping, but if they work and are free, I can live
with that, not to mention that it fulfills two of my favorite design
criteria. :)
Should this concept prove viable, one could even produce a higher-volume
*power assist* pump using an automotive master cylinder with the addition
of a simple vacuum pump.
Your input is valued!
Al
level_5_ltd@earthlink.net
------------------------------
Date: Tue, 05 Jan 1999 09:52:00
From: batwings@i-plus.net
Subject: MC-Chassis oiling them
Fans of Rick Sieman will be interested in reading his comments on whether
to oil the components of 2S top ends before/during asm. I presume the same
resoning would apply to 4S also. The notes are found in his online column at:
http://rubicon.off-road.com/rick/dntask1297.html/
It's my humble opinion that the column (Don't Ask) is well-named, because
he believes evidently on basis of one example, that you should not pre-lube
these pieces. I wrote him with another opinion, that based on 33 years of
oiling them. Readers are invited to also write Rick, with their opinions;
his email address is given on the site. (I am not going to give it because
I think you should all look for yourselves.)
Please confine your comments to those you give Rick; I do not wish this to
become a big topic on the lists to which I am writing. Also, I don't need
copies of notes myself that you may write. I have asked Rick to investigate
farther and to summarize any findings he comes up with; I will then provide
them to those people interested in hearing what he tells me.
Best regards,
Hoyt
------------------------------
Date: Tue, 05 Jan 1999 10:06:19
From: batwings@i-plus.net
Subject: Re: MC-Chassis Home-built pump
At 09:22 AM 1/5/99 -0500, you wrote:
>My question is: how much pressure does a hydraulic brake system generate?
Enough, couple hundred PSI probably.
>I.E. is this concept suitable for the hydroforming application?
Sure, but can you say 'grease gun'? They'll run water or oil, are no doubt
a lot cheaper than master cyls, and not only that come properly plumbed up
(use flex hose) and don't need any framework.
Best regards,
Hoyt
------------------------------
End of MC-Chassis-Dgst V1 #876
******************************
MC-Chassis-Dgst Tuesday, January 5 1999 Volume 01 : Number 877
1. "Ed Biafore" Subj: RE: MC-Chassis 2 WD ??
2. GD Subj: Re: MC-Chassis Home-built pump
3. Dick Brewster Subj: Re: MC-Chassis Home-built pump
4. Johnayleng@aol.com Subj: Re: MC-Chassis 2 WD ??
5. Bob Subj: MC-Chassis Radial Engines
6. geoff@ihug.co.nz (Geoff Merryweather. ) Subj: Re: MC-Chassis Home-built pump
7. the ass of death Subj: Re: MC-Chassis Home-built pump
8. "joel" Subj: RE: MC-Chassis Radial Engines
9. "Tony Foale" Subj: MC-Chassis Re: Yam mono
10. Julian Subj: Re: MC-Chassis -spring rate program
11. AR Groom Subj: MC-Chassis Re: Yam mono
12. Ian Drysdale Subj: Re: MC-Chassis-Dgst V1 #876
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Date: Tue, 5 Jan 1999 07:39:37 -0700
From: "Ed Biafore"
Subject: RE: MC-Chassis 2 WD ??
Rex sez:
> The is a very rough quote. The mag show two pictures one with
> the front wheel
> spinning so that the stupid Americans could figure out that something was
> unusual.
Hey, I resemble that remark!!!!
Later,
Ed
------------------------------
Date: Tue, 05 Jan 1999 07:27:45 -0800
From: GD
Subject: Re: MC-Chassis Home-built pump
I thought about this and couldn't get anyone to go along with the idea. I
figured that you could make it a two stage pump so that you could get the part
expanded part way with the higher volume pump and then use the lower volume/
higher pressure pump to full inflate the part. The one thing I would think that
you would have to do is clean out the pump after using it so it didn't
oxidize. The other idea I had was to make a pump out of brass pipe fittings,
that way it wouldn't oxidize. Please let me know if you do anything with this
project, I would like to know how it works out.
Thanks
GD
Alan Lapp wrote:
> Ladies and gentlemen:
>
> I've a question for the list regarding MM's fine article on his website
> about hydroforming exhaust parts. I imagine that other parts could be
> fabricated using this method as well.
>
> I've attempted to locate a hand-operated pump locally without much luck.
> In MM's article, he indicated his cost $180, which I've found to be highly
> optimistic in this area.
>
> I was brain-storming last night and came upon the idea of using a rear
> brake master cylinder complete with hoses and banjo bolts to perform the
> pumping duties. It would require a simple floor stand/bracket to house the
> pump handle.
>
> My question is: how much pressure does a hydraulic brake system generate?
> I.E. is this concept suitable for the hydroforming application? I realize
> that these master cylinders aren't very high volume, and would require a
> tremendous amount of pumping, but if they work and are free, I can live
> with that, not to mention that it fulfills two of my favorite design
> criteria. :)
>
> Should this concept prove viable, one could even produce a higher-volume
> *power assist* pump using an automotive master cylinder with the addition
> of a simple vacuum pump.
>
> Your input is valued!
>
> Al
> level_5_ltd@earthlink.net
------------------------------
Date: Tue, 05 Jan 1999 08:01:16 -0800
From: Dick Brewster
Subject: Re: MC-Chassis Home-built pump
GD wrote:
>
> I thought about this and couldn't get anyone to go along with the idea. I
> figured that you could make it a two stage pump so that you could get the part
> expanded part way with the higher volume pump and then use the lower volume/
> higher pressure pump to full inflate the part. The one thing I would think that
> you would have to do is clean out the pump after using it so it didn't
> oxidize. The other idea I had was to make a pump out of brass pipe fittings,
> that way it wouldn't oxidize. Please let me know if you do anything with this
> project, I would like to know how it works out.
> Thanks
> GD
>
You could use two pumps in parallel (a high pressure and a low
pressure) with check valves on both pumps. that way you wouldn't
need a special pump. Or is that what you just said?
To get an idea how much pressure you need.
Pressure = 2*t*Sy/d
Where:
t = wall thickness
Sy = yield strength
d = inside diameter
For example, 0.045 inch wall thickness, 40,000 lb/in^2 Sy, 2 inch
d
Pressure = 2*0.045*40,000/2 = 1800 lb/in^2
Dick
------------------------------
Date: Tue, 5 Jan 1999 13:33:04 EST
From: Johnayleng@aol.com
Subject: Re: MC-Chassis 2 WD ??
In a message dated 1/5/99 7:38:46 AM Mountain Standard Time,
biafore@worldnet.att.net writes:
>
> Rex sez:
>
> > The is a very rough quote. The mag show two pictures one with
> > the front wheel
> > spinning so that the stupid Americans could figure out that something was
> > unusual.
>
I guess that's why they add "smoke" to rear tire compounds so us stupid
Americans can tell when we're doing burn-outs!
John Aylor NM
------------------------------
Date: Tue, 05 Jan 1999 10:41:27 -0800
From: Bob
Subject: MC-Chassis Radial Engines
My wife outdid herself this Christmas, last spring there was a
motorcycle "show" at the Guggenheim Museum in NYC and I wanted to go in
the worst/best way. It was entitled "the Art of the Motorcycle" and it
emcompassed motorcycles from 1894 to the present. I had mentioned I
would like a catolog from from this show and much to my surprise one was
under the tree this week past. A wopping big 432 pages of slick paper of
catolog with wonderful photos of every bike displayed. And this from a
woman who doesn't like motorcycles! The cover shows a 1922 Magola Sport,
made in Germany, feacturing a 5 cylinder radial engine inside the front
wheel. Crankcase and cylinders fixed solid to the wheel with the crank
rotating, at a 6 to 1 reduction, in the oposite direction. Ancient
history you say, got to thinking about that radial that Ian mentioned,
the one using Honda 50 heads and barrels. Hmmmmm, wonder how it would
work, in a drag bike, incorporated into the rear wheel? An even crazier
thought, a tricycle with one in each rear wheel, maybe in the form of a
billycart, rider lying in front, headfirst. Yeah, I know, you are all
wondering what the hell was in my eggnog? New years resolution, be
rational all year. Cheers Bob
------------------------------
Date: Tue, 05 Jan 1999 19:19:48 GMT
From: geoff@ihug.co.nz (Geoff Merryweather. )
Subject: Re: MC-Chassis Home-built pump
On Tue, 5 Jan 1999 09:22:59 -0500, you wrote:
>Ladies and gentlemen:
>
>I've a question for the list regarding MM's fine article on his website
>about hydroforming exhaust parts. I imagine that other parts could be
>fabricated using this method as well.
>
>I've attempted to locate a hand-operated pump locally without much luck.
>In MM's article, he indicated his cost $180, which I've found to be highly
>optimistic in this area.
None at any price around my area as well.
>I was brain-storming last night and came upon the idea of using a rear
>brake master cylinder complete with hoses and banjo bolts to perform the
>pumping duties. It would require a simple floor stand/bracket to house the
>pump handle.
Yes, I know people who have done this successfully. Another one I came
across is using a waterblaster (!). A panelbeaters jack also would
work
also have a look at:
http://www-staff.lboro.ac.uk/~elvpc/mark1.html
http://www-staff.lboro.ac.uk/~elvpc/mark.html
http://www.aoe.vt.edu/mad/MDO_Courses/projects/hydro/hydroform.html
Mikeal may want to put these links onto his hydroforming page as well.
Geoff
- --
------------------------------
Date: Tue, 5 Jan 1999 14:29:47 -0500
From: the ass of death
Subject: Re: MC-Chassis Home-built pump
> I've a question for the list regarding MM's fine article on his
> website about hydroforming exhaust parts. I imagine that other parts
> could be fabricated using this method as well.
>
> I've attempted to locate a hand-operated pump locally without much
> luck. In MM's article, he indicated his cost $180, which I've found
> to be highly optimistic in this area.
>
> I was brain-storming last night and came upon the idea of using a rear
> brake master cylinder complete with hoses and banjo bolts to perform
> the pumping duties. It would require a simple floor stand/bracket to
> house the pump handle.
Master cylinders release the pressure when you let off the brake.
Also the volume is really infinitesimal. How about a cheap bottle
jack? Pull the piston out and make some sort of adapter. You could
get away with something as crude as brazing a fitting onto the
opening. It'd already have a handle and a pressure release valve. If
you measure the diameter of the piston and do some of that math stuff
with pi and the weight limit of the jack you'll probably find that
they'll do over 1000 psi.
------------------------------
Date: Tue, 5 Jan 1999 15:03:02 -0500
From: "joel"
Subject: RE: MC-Chassis Radial Engines
> The cover shows a 1922 Magola Sport,
> made in Germany, feacturing a 5 cylinder radial engine inside the front
> wheel. Crankcase and cylinders fixed solid to the wheel with the crank
> rotating, at a 6 to 1 reduction, in the oposite direction. Ancient
> history you say, got to thinking about that radial that Ian mentioned,
> the one using Honda 50 heads and barrels. Hmmmmm, wonder how it would
> work, in a drag bike, incorporated into the rear wheel?
Sounds like an awful lot of rotating mass...?
just a thought, Joel
------------------------------
Date: Tue, 5 Jan 1999 22:19:25 +0100
From: "Tony Foale"
Subject: MC-Chassis Re: Yam mono
Dave W was interested in monoshock conversions:
As promised I found a few photos (not the ones that I was looking for) and
posted them at: http://www.ctv.es/USERS/softtech/motos/Yam_mono the
markings on the photos indicate that this was part of some work that I did
for Kork Ballington, obviously before Kawasaki got hold of him.
>>Care to reminisce? Any general comments/advice?
I prefer to look forward rather than reminisce, but I think the photos are
fairly self explanatory. A very simple structure was added to the standard
swingarm, which was stiffened as a consequence and a suspension unit
mounting was simply welded to the frame just at the end of the top frame
tube. The suspension unit was one of the first good units for doing
monoshocks, the French De-Carbon, It was 10" between centres with 2" and a
bit movement which translated to 4" and a bit wheel movement with a 2:1
ratio used. There's more choice now.
The pics. show the conversion on an early TZ, but I seem to remember that
the RDs. were very similar, except that you had to junk the original
air-filter and fit the battery to the side.
Tony Foale.
Espaņa / Spain
http://www.ctv.es/USERS/softtech/motos
------------------------------
Date: Tue, 05 Jan 1999 13:47:36 +0000
From: Julian
Subject: Re: MC-Chassis -spring rate program
Well, many people have sent replies asking about my "axle rate program",
so I'll tell everyone what is going on...
First off, it is not a commercial program. It is a file written for
Excel(spreadsheet) that I put together myself during the development of
my forkless RZ. I use the file to calculate the axle rates for any
swingarm using a 2 or 3 point linkage similar to an RZ, FZ, FZR, etc. I
was able to design the length and locations of my suspension components
for both the front and rear swingarms of my bike using this file. There
are however, commercially available programs that will do the same and
much, much more. (physics simulators with very intuitive graphics)
Second, the file is a huge string of mathimatical comands and has not
been checked for mistakes by anyone other than myself. I have found
several errors that have since been corrected and all seems to work
well, but I may have just been lucky too...
Third, It is by no streach of the imagination, intuitive to use.
Here is the bottom line. I would be more than happy to run a few
numbers through for people working on specific projects, if I have the
time. This is what I originally had in mind (to help Dave with his RD
project). My interest is in meeting new people and sharing in the
excitment of their projects.
I am however, hesitant to just relaese it blindly in such a rough form
and if I did no one could use it without a lengthy explanation anyway.
If someone in the S.F. Bay area would like to get involved and check my
work and help create a usable formate, then maybe I might be warmed up
to other options.
Note on the S&W book I mentioned: Author- Bruce Burness (for S&W
Engineered Products), 1978.
The book has some very basic and easy to understand information on
motorcycle shock/spring design and positioning. (especialy for older
twin shock designs or non-linkage monoshocks) Similar information is
also covered in a few very good publications avalable from at least two
people on this list (Michael and Tony).
Julian Farnam
------------------------------
Date: Tue, 5 Jan 1999 22:20:21 +0000 (GMT)
From: AR Groom
Subject: MC-Chassis Re: Yam mono
Hi there,
I discovered the pictures of Ollie McKagen's four-stroke rotary
valve head on the web-site and was wanting to find out a bit more about
it and/or any other kind of rotary valve gear, rotary sleeve valves etc.
It's for no other reason than curiosity - I'm an aerospace
engineering student in Bristol - it seems as though rotating valve gear
would remove a great deal of reciprocating weight and hence boost
power. Rotating valve gear doesn't seem very popular though so I'm
assuming there's some problem with it and I want to know what.
Thanks,
Alec Groom
------------------------------
Date: Wed, 06 Jan 1999 09:31:21 +1100
From: Ian Drysdale
Subject: Re: MC-Chassis-Dgst V1 #876
> I imagine if you are only tranfersing 5 hp things can be very small and light.
>
> The photos were really quite small. However, if you want I will buy the mag
> and send it to you. Consider it repayment for your thoughtful contributiuons
> to this list, or a down payment for a V-8 ;-).
Just hang on a day or so and I will see what issue we have -
US Dirtbike is easy enough to find herte - just a bit slow
getting here. With modern printing methods though - more
and more short run stuff is being printed here now.
I may take you up on your generous offer.
Cheers IAN
- --
Ian Drysdale
------------------------------
End of MC-Chassis-Dgst V1 #877
******************************
MC-Chassis-Dgst Wednesday, January 6 1999 Volume 01 : Number 878
1. Ian Drysdale Subj: Re: MC-Chassis-Dgst V1 #876
2. "dcmserv" Subj: Re: MC-Chassis-Dgst V1 #876
3. "Michael Moore" Subj: MC-Chassis (Fwd) Home-built pump
4. "Michael Moore" Subj: Re: MC-Chassis Yam mono
5. "Michael Moore" Subj: Re: MC-Chassis Home-built pump
6. Les Sharp Subj: Re: MC-Chassis Radial Engines
7. David Weinshenker Subj: Re: MC-Chassis rd350 to monoshock?
8. David Weinshenker Subj: Re: MC-Chassis Re: Yam mono
9. bsags@isat.com (David Kath) Subj: MC-Chassis rational? seems ok to me...
10. "LTSNIDER" Subj: Re: MC-Chassis rational? seems ok to me...
11. batwings@i-plus.net Subj: Re: MC-Chassis Re: Yam mono
12. batwings@i-plus.net Subj: Re: MC-Chassis-Dgst V1 #876
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Date: Wed, 06 Jan 1999 09:46:14 +1100
From: Ian Drysdale
Subject: Re: MC-Chassis-Dgst V1 #876
> I was brain-storming last night and came upon the idea of using a rear
> brake master cylinder complete with hoses and banjo bolts to perform the
> pumping duties.
> SNIP
>
> My question is: how much pressure does a hydraulic brake system generate?
> I.E. is this concept suitable for the hydroforming application?
BIG SNIP
> Enough, couple hundred PSI probably.
SNIP
> Sure, but can you say 'grease gun'? They'll run water or oil, are no doubt
> a lot cheaper than master cyls--
A master cylinder would be good for well over 1000 psi - do the
maths on a car system foot force ( 100kg easily ) - 5:1 mech. adv.
and a piston dia of 25 mm ? So got to be designed for 1500 + psi
and therefore you would have to get twice that out of it at least.
( Given the application isn't dangerous - with basic precautions
like not putting your hand over fitting to check for leaks )
Assuming you are using junkyard stuff - I would run straight water
or water with a little cutting compound in it - should be fine.
BTW - a grease gun delievers VERY small volumes - you would
need a week to blow up an expansion chamber.
Cheers IAN
Ian Drysdale
------------------------------
Date: Tue, 5 Jan 1999 18:18:02 -0500
From: "dcmserv"
Subject: Re: MC-Chassis-Dgst V1 #876
Snip
> I was brain-storming last night and came upon the idea of using a rear
> brake master cylinder complete with hoses and banjo bolts to perform the
> pumping duties.
How about a power steering pump from your friendly (?) local junk yard? I've
used them for low power hydraulic things, but only because I needed a pump
and I didn't need necessarily need high pressure. Another high pressure,
junk yard available item (at least in the north) is a snow plow pump =
approx 2500 psi.
DG
------------------------------
Date: Tue, 5 Jan 1999 16:38:20 -0800
From: "Michael Moore"
Subject: MC-Chassis (Fwd) Home-built pump
Harry, are you posting from a different address?
Michael
- ------- Forwarded Message Follows -------
Subject: BOUNCE mc-chassis-design@list.sirius.com: Non-member submission from ["Harry Kroonen" ]
From: "Harry Kroonen"
Alan Lapp wrote:
> I've attempted to locate a hand-operated pump locally without much luck.
> In MM's article, he indicated his cost $180, which I've found to be highly
> optimistic in this area.
>
> I was brain-storming last night and came upon the idea of using a rear
> brake master cylinder complete with hoses and banjo bolts to perform the
> pumping duties. It would require a simple floor stand/bracket to house the
> pump handle.
Should be okay. Max. pressure should be no problem. It's all in the
lever ratio and piston area. Do the calculations and see where you
end up.
But some deviations from this idea:
Don't you know someone with a hydraulic press? Every garage has them
for removing pulleys etc. That's your amplifier, and put a 'master
cilinder' under that for the volume.
If you know them very well, they might allow you to put a T in the
manometer connection and you could do it the direct way. Could
require changing the oil afterwards because of contamination, though.
What about using a standard hydraulic pump and turning that into a
manual pump. You have to do some calculations to see whether you end
up with decent dimensions and power requirements:
Your basic (brand new) hydraulic gear pump should be around US$100,
and fit some kind of big lever on it to amplify your 'human power' to
the pressure level you need. Add a check/relief valve and you should
be finished.
Other types of pumps are also okay, but be careful of internal
leakage. Vane pumps are out because they need speed to operate.
Piston pumps are a good choice, and a few cars use them for power
steering. Most of these pumps can go up to at least 80 bar, but are
pretty big on the displacement (around 10 cc/rev). So the input power
could be a problem. Of course, you could always use the car engine
for that ;-). Check your local dump.
Anyway, that's just my 2p. Good luck.
Harry Kroonen
------------------------------
Date: Tue, 5 Jan 1999 16:50:20 -0800
From: "Michael Moore"
Subject: Re: MC-Chassis Yam mono
One of my friend Craig's customers has a (I think) Yamaha
YZ/IT400-465, basically a large Japanese mid-80s linkage rear end
dirt bike.
He was asking Craig about how to improve the suspension and Craig
suggested he plot the wheel to damper movement to see what he had.
It turns out (and Craig has seen this on other OEM linkages) that
towards the end of the wheel compression it has a falling rate. The
guy did some figuring and rework and got it to at least stay linear,
and was gratified to see the high-speed rear end bottoming go away.
Linkages can be nice things, but they do take some work to get them
to perform properly due to the complexity of the motion. What
happens when you change the sack, lengthen the damper, etc etc? It
is quite possible to move the rear suspension into a less desireable
area of link motion.
Your typical direct mounted twin rear dampers can easily give about a
12% or so rise - far more than you need for the pavement, and not bad
for lots of dirt riding. You might be able to increase that some
with a heavily leveraged damper, inasmuch as you'll have some more
mounting options available. The linkage can let you tailor the
suspension to a specific curve, but you've got to be careful not only
in your calculations but also the manufacturing process.
Cheers,
Michael
------------------------------
Date: Tue, 5 Jan 1999 16:50:20 -0800
From: "Michael Moore"
Subject: Re: MC-Chassis Home-built pump
> >My question is: how much pressure does a hydraulic brake system generate?
>
> Enough, couple hundred PSI probably.
You'll want something in the 800-1000 psi range.
Cheers,
Michael
------------------------------
Date: Wed, 06 Jan 1999 08:38:54 +0800
From: Les Sharp
Subject: Re: MC-Chassis Radial Engines
Bob,
Don't do it, it's no fun at all!
Les
Bob wrote:
> wondering what the hell was in my eggnog? New years resolution, be
> rational all year. Cheers Bob
------------------------------
Date: Tue, 05 Jan 1999 21:04:49 -0800
From: David Weinshenker
Subject: Re: MC-Chassis rd350 to monoshock?
batwings@i-plus.net wrote:
> >could put the rear shock mount about 9 in. above the SA pivot.
> >Looks like there's about 13 in. from there to the main tube
> >junction under the tank. 16/9 = 1.777 leverage ratio, so 4 in. of
> >wheel travel would require just over 2.25 in. damper shaft travel.
>
> Something funky about the conclusion above. Your lower damper end is 9"
> ABOVE the SA? IF the damper long axis is at 90 deg to a plane containing
> the SA pivot and the lower damper mounting, your answer is correct.
Sorry, I was a little imprecise. I should have described my
potential rear point for the shock as "above and slightly
behind" the SA pivot, which will give a fairly perpendicular
push to a damper with its front end sloping up to a mount under the
tank. These are really approximate dimensions (tape measure held
up beside bike, eyeballing potential layout) just to get some idea
of travel & leverage...
- -dave w
------------------------------
Date: Tue, 05 Jan 1999 21:54:33 -0800
From: David Weinshenker
Subject: Re: MC-Chassis Re: Yam mono
Tony Foale wrote:
> I found a few photos (not the ones that I was looking for) and
> posted them at: http://www.ctv.es/USERS/softtech/motos/Yam_mono
Wow, thanks! looks a a lot like what I was thinking of...
> The pics. show the conversion on an early TZ, but I seem to remember that
> the RDs. were very similar, except that you had to junk the original
> air-filter and fit the battery to the side.
Yep, my RD frame looks much like the ones shown. The original
airbox was long gone when I got the bike (I'm using individual
filters) and I have thoughts of flywheel magneto CD ignition which
won't need the battery and rectifier.
- -dave w
------------------------------
Date: Tue, 05 Jan 1999 21:46:13 -0800
From: bsags@isat.com (David Kath)
Subject: MC-Chassis rational? seems ok to me...
Bob B..... How about 5 Gold Star top ends on a common crank...... each
fed with a GP of course.... Individual megas... ahh, what a sound that
would be eh?
But you must be more careful on this list in the future. There are
listees out there with minds already running over/amuck with ideas, and
then guys like you throw out more seeds for thought... how cruel! Bear
in mind, they have families and cats to feed, and all that sorta
responsibilities. I didn't get The Guggie Book this year, but the New
Drill Press cuts those long spirals of alloy. Hey, I'm happy!
dave - NV
------------------------------
Date: Tue, 5 Jan 1999 23:47:28 +0000
From: "LTSNIDER"
Subject: Re: MC-Chassis rational? seems ok to me...
Bob B..... How about 5 Gold Star top ends on a common crank...... each
fed with a GP of course.... Individual megas... ahh, what a sound that
would be eh?
Ever see a 48 cylinder corncob aircraft engine?
LYNN
"Works hard to set low standards and then consistantly
fails to achieve them."
------------------------------
Date: Tue, 05 Jan 1999 20:01:08
From: batwings@i-plus.net
Subject: Re: MC-Chassis Re: Yam mono
At 10:20 PM 1/5/99 +0000, you wrote:
>Hi there,
> I discovered the pictures of Ollie McKagen's four-stroke rotary
>valve head on the web-site and was wanting to find out a bit more about
>it and/or any other kind of rotary valve gear, rotary sleeve valves etc.
> It's for no other reason than curiosity - I'm an aerospace
>engineering student in Bristol - it seems as though rotating valve gear
>would remove a great deal of reciprocating weight and hence boost
>power. Rotating valve gear doesn't seem very popular though so I'm
>assuming there's some problem with it and I want to know what.
In that case it was that the device is hard to seal off; poppets after all
are seated harder by working gas pressure but the rotary was lifted
instead. I preloaded the bngs that held the cramshaft and I used a port
bushing that was supposed to float like a piston ring, but it it had an
irregular shape that may not have done that well. The device made good and
in fact probably competitive power but it took a lot of slide lift to idle
well and it also ran a bit hot.
Since then I heard of a fellow who used a spherical profile on the valve,
backed up by circular seals floating in round ports; these piloted on the
valve on their edges as did mine but the arrangement obviously was easier
to make and must have been better in effect too.
As always, the real problem is lubrication, requiring ceramic or other
tough materials, probably those best if self-lubing also. Otherwise you
have to run pre-mix, very un-ecological.
Best regards,
Hoyt
------------------------------
Date: Tue, 05 Jan 1999 20:37:26
From: batwings@i-plus.net
Subject: Re: MC-Chassis-Dgst V1 #876
At 09:46 AM 1/6/99 +1100, you wrote:
>A master cylinder would be good for well over 1000 psi - do the
>maths on a car system foot force ( 100kg easily ) - 5:1 mech. adv.
>and a piston dia of 25 mm ?
Hi Ian, nice of you to write. I doubt many people put 220 lbs on their
brake pedals. Would be tiring in the long run, yes? No doubt the bits are
good for the pressures mentioned anyway though.
>BTW - a grease gun delievers VERY small volumes - you would
>need a week to blow up an expansion chamber.
Most GGs have pistons about the same size or in same order magnitude as
bike master cyls. They get the pressure with long handle. Most of us do
have them on hand and they are already rigged. Just a thought. The low/high
pressure/volume thing is still a hangup with either.
Best regards,
Hoyt
------------------------------
End of MC-Chassis-Dgst V1 #878
******************************
MC-Chassis-Dgst Wednesday, January 6 1999 Volume 01 : Number 879
1. batwings@i-plus.net Subj: Re: MC-Chassis Yam mono
2. batwings@i-plus.net Subj: Re: MC-Chassis rational? seems ok to me...
3. dave.williams@chaos.lrk.ar.us (Dave Williams) Subj: Re: MC-Chassis Re: Yam mono
4. Dick Brewster Subj: Re: MC-Chassis rational? seems ok to me...
5. "LTSNIDER" Subj: MC-Chassis rotary valves
6. Alan Lapp Subj: Re: MC-Chassis-Dgst V1 #876
7. Marty Maclean Subj: Re: MC-Chassis rotary valves
8. Paul Kellner Subj: Re: MC-Chassis Home-built pump
9. batwings@i-plus.net Subj: Re: MC-Chassis Re: Yam mono
10. batwings@i-plus.net Subj: Re: MC-Chassis rational? seems ok to me...
11. "Michael Moore" Subj: Re: MC-Chassis Home-built pump
12. "Michael Moore" Subj: MC-Chassis Get them shirts a'rollin . . . .
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Date: Wed, 06 Jan 1999 08:48:06
From: batwings@i-plus.net
Subject: Re: MC-Chassis Yam mono
At 04:50 PM 1/5/99 -0800, you wrote:
>Your typical direct mounted twin rear dampers can easily give about a
>12% or so rise - far more than you need for the pavement, and not bad
>for lots of dirt riding. You might be able to increase that some
>with a heavily leveraged damper, inasmuch as you'll have some more
>mounting options available.
Yamamonos were about 20-25% progressive, due to the position and angle of
the damper mounting. Suzi RM twin-dampers had about the same, no? Either of
those figures should be enough for anybody.
Earlier Kaw rocker-type rears were said by CW to be slightly degressive
around bounce limit; Kaw evidently got around this by tailoring a long
tapered elastomer bounce bumper which made up for the falling spring rate.
Best regards,
Hoyt
------------------------------
Date: Wed, 06 Jan 1999 09:17:08
From: batwings@i-plus.net
Subject: Re: MC-Chassis rational? seems ok to me...
At 11:47 PM 1/5/99 +0000, you wrote:
>
>
>Bob B..... How about 5 Gold Star top ends on a common crank...... each
>fed with a GP of course.... Individual megas... ahh, what a sound that
>would be eh?
>
>Ever see a 48 cylinder corncob aircraft engine?
No such thing .... every radial has to have an odd number of jugs in each
row, as the cam-rings cannot be properly timed to all the cylinders
otherwise. Hence you must be thinking of four-row 28, 36, or 44 cylinder
arrangments. Of course the principle is the same: big mills make lots of
smoke and noise, fly-em heavy stuff with ease.
Best regards,
Hoyt
------------------------------
Date: Wed, 06 Jan 1999 08:36:00 -0500
From: dave.williams@chaos.lrk.ar.us (Dave Williams)
Subject: Re: MC-Chassis Re: Yam mono
- -> instead. I preloaded the bngs that held the cramshaft and I used a
- -> port bushing that was supposed to float like a piston ring, but it it
You preloaded the whats to the which?
------------------------------
Date: Wed, 06 Jan 1999 08:28:28 -0800
From: Dick Brewster
Subject: Re: MC-Chassis rational? seems ok to me...
batwings@i-plus.net wrote:
>
> At 11:47 PM 1/5/99 +0000, you wrote:
> >
> >
> >Bob B..... How about 5 Gold Star top ends on a common crank...... each
> >fed with a GP of course.... Individual megas... ahh, what a sound that
> >would be eh?
> >
> >Ever see a 48 cylinder corncob aircraft engine?
>
> No such thing .... every radial has to have an odd number of jugs in each
> row, as the cam-rings cannot be properly timed to all the cylinders
> otherwise. Hence you must be thinking of four-row 28, 36, or 44 cylinder
> arrangments. Of course the principle is the same: big mills make lots of
> smoke and noise, fly-em heavy stuff with ease.
>
> Best regards,
>
> Hoyt
>
A bit of useless trivia.
It seems like there were some two smoke radials in the early days
of aviation that had an even number of cylinders in one row.
Dick
------------------------------
Date: Wed, 6 Jan 1999 10:07:03 +0000
From: "LTSNIDER"
Subject: MC-Chassis rotary valves
For articles on rotary valves, see Classic racer, Spring 1982, and
Classic Bike, May 1986.
By the way, Hoyt, it's been ummm 37 years since I saw the corncob
engine, so I'm sure you're right about the number of cylinders. What I
do remember clearly is that I was very impressed by the amount of
horsepower in a compact unit. The sound must have been
unbelievable.
LYNN
"Works hard to set low standards and then consistantly
fails to achieve them."
------------------------------
Date: Wed, 6 Jan 1999 12:52:56 -0500
From: Alan Lapp
Subject: Re: MC-Chassis-Dgst V1 #876
>How about a power steering pump from your friendly (?) local junk yard? I've
>used them for low power hydraulic things, but only because I needed a pump
>and I didn't need necessarily need high pressure. Another high pressure,
>junk yard available item (at least in the north) is a snow plow pump =
>approx 2500 psi.
One of the criteria for the project is that it cannot use oil - if the part
being fabricated springs a leak, it must be welded. Oil would contaminate
the weld site, not to mention that it's flamable.
I agree about the power steering pump - my neighbor, Tim the Gearhead from
Hell (tm) built a hydraulic tilt bed on his pickup truck using the ps pump.
However, they're a pain in the butt to dissasemble for post-pumping
corrosion treatment, and also require a rotating power source, adding to
the complexity.
Another thought about power pumps is that they may not have the required
sensativity for controlling the final stages of expansion - i.e. "ok, just
a little more and it'll be right.". Another lister posted some URLs which
have the answer to this issue - use the release valve to control the
pressure.
>From another post:
> I thought about this and couldn't get anyone to go along with the idea. I
>figured that you could make it a two stage pump so that you could get the part
>expanded part way with the higher volume pump and then use the lower volume/
>higher pressure pump to full inflate the part.
I have thought of this, and for simplicity's sake, I figured that the lower
volume, higher pressure pump would be the better choice. And to further
the case for permanent institutionalization, I thought that the use of a
pneumatic chipping hammer with an appropriate adaptor would certainly speed
the process along.
The one thing I would think that
>you would have to do is clean out the pump after using it so it didn't
>oxidize.
True. I figure that since this isn't intended for any form of mass
production, I could simply pop out the circlip from the MC and hose it down
with some WD40.
The other idea I had was to make a pump out of brass pipe fittings,
>that way it wouldn't oxidize.
I also had similar thoughts, but I really don't know enough about pump
design to acheive this.
I also realized that after I sent the first post that I forgot to include a
very important detail: I was going to fabricate a ball check valve which
has the same male thread on the input end as a brake banjo, and on the
output end, a female banjo bolt thread.
Al
level_5_ltd@earthlink.net
------------------------------
Date: Wed, 06 Jan 1999 10:52:54 -0700
From: Marty Maclean
Subject: Re: MC-Chassis rotary valves
LTSNIDER wrote:
> By the way, Hoyt, it's been ummm 37 years since I saw the corncob
> engine, so I'm sure you're right about the number of cylinders. What I
> do remember clearly is that I was very impressed by the amount of
> horsepower in a compact unit. The sound must have been
> unbelievable.
> LYNN
There's one at the Champlin Fighter Museum in Mesa, AZ. Four banks of 9
cylinders, I seem to recall. I'd guess that the only thing more awesome
than the sound of the thing running would be the resolve it would take
to work on the darn thing. Neat stuff.
Marty
------------------------------
Date: Wed, 6 Jan 1999 15:11:12 -0500
From: Paul Kellner
Subject: Re: MC-Chassis Home-built pump
> I've a question for the list regarding MM's fine article on his website
> about hydroforming exhaust parts. I imagine that other parts could be
> fabricated using this method as well.
> I've attempted to locate a hand-operated pump locally without much luck.
> In MM's article, he indicated his cost $180, which I've found to be
highly
> optimistic in this area.
FWIW:
try using a simple portable high-pressure cleaner, these are very cheap
nowadays
and deliver about 80 bar! Also this is much more comfy then manual pumping,
which takes a looooooong time.
Paul Kellner
------------------------------
Date: Wed, 06 Jan 1999 15:50:07
From: batwings@i-plus.net
Subject: Re: MC-Chassis Re: Yam mono
At 08:36 AM 1/6/99 -0500, you wrote:
>
>-> instead. I preloaded the bngs that held the cramshaft and I used a
>-> port bushing that was supposed to float like a piston ring, but it it
>
> You preloaded the whats to the which?
You really had to BE there, Dave...
Best regards,
Hoyt
------------------------------
Date: Wed, 06 Jan 1999 15:53:18
From: batwings@i-plus.net
Subject: Re: MC-Chassis rational? seems ok to me...
At 08:28 AM 1/6/99 -0800, you wrote:
>A bit of useless trivia.
True!!
>It seems like there were some two smoke radials in the early days
>of aviation that had an even number of cylinders in one row.
That is probably so; because they didn't have the same cammings (I think
some of them had ex valve only, for ex) they could be done up differently.
There still have never been any 48 cyl corncobbers.
Best regards,
Hoyt
------------------------------
Date: Wed, 6 Jan 1999 16:51:20 -0800
From: "Michael Moore"
Subject: Re: MC-Chassis Home-built pump
> try using a simple portable high-pressure cleaner, these are very
> cheap nowadays and deliver about 80 bar! Also this is much more
> comfy then manual pumping, which takes a looooooong time.
Hello Paul et al,
The pump I use is hooked up to a garden hose, so you've always got
the full volume of the house line pressure trying to push water in.
The pipe will start to bulge a little once the water is turned on,
and if you have to drain and weld the pipe it fills up right away. I
guess the hose is providing the volume, while the pump provides the
pressure. It doesn't take much pumping to get the pipe expanded.
You do need a bleed on the pipe side of the pump to get air out -
try putting a radiator drain valve on that side. Also get a good
check valve between the pump and bleed orifice so the pressure goes
in and stays in.
If I remember I'll try to spot the pump in the garage and get some
measurements on the handle, throw, etc. The pump body is an
aluminum casting, but I'm sure you could make it out of whatever
lumps of aluminum or brass/bronze that fell readily to hand. It
doesn't look particularly high tech.
Maybe someone on the list who has a CNC mill/lathe could turn out the
basic pump parts at a much more reasonable price than what I paid for
it at the plumbing shop.
Cheers,
Michael
------------------------------
Date: Wed, 6 Jan 1999 20:06:43 -0800
From: "Michael Moore"
Subject: MC-Chassis Get them shirts a'rollin . . . .
OK, Jared on the Vintage-Dirt list sees some time opening up (he's
been busy building Montesas at his shop Southwest Montesa) where he
could do the list shirts (black shirt with pocket, Paul Kellner's
design on the back, no pocket logo) so we need to get things sorted
out on the design. The shirt designs are at the bottom of the first
graphics page on my web site.
To keep the design at 3 colors (white, and the bike riders seem to
be mostly yellow and red) we need to have the flags eliminated, and
the green in the frame jig (and any other colors) changed to yellow,
white or red. Also, the Benelli-MotoBi list name needs to be added
to the design.
I don't know if this is something that Paul can handle, or if we need
to get someone on one of the lists who is a graphics boffin to do it.
If the latter case, maybe it would be best if Paul can pull up his
original artwork prior to adding the list names and send it to me
(and I've asked Jared what format will work the best for doing the
screens so let me find that out first Paul), possibly at a higher
resolution if that is helpful, and then people can have a go at
deleting the flags, changing the colors and adding all the list
names. Or just take the copy of his file that is now on the website
and do the deed if you can.
So let's get to work on this, and maybe we'll even be able to have
some shirts available that people could wear to Daytona.
Cheers,
Michael
------------------------------
End of MC-Chassis-Dgst V1 #879
******************************
MC-Chassis-Dgst Thursday, January 7 1999 Volume 01 : Number 880
1. "john.mead" Subj: Re: MC-Chassis rational? seems ok to me...
2. Tomas Tallkvist Subj: MC-Chassis Hydroforming
3. David Weinshenker Subj: MC-Chassis wheel size difference needed for good steering?
4. Bob Subj: Re: MC-Chassis Radial Engines
5. Bob Subj: Re: MC-Chassis rational? seems ok to me...
6. "Thacker, Heath HW" Subj: MC-Chassis YZ125 Rebuilt
7. David Weinshenker Subj: Re: MC-Chassis YZ125 Rebuilt
8. "john.mead" Subj: Re: MC-Chassis Radial Engines
9. "Ray or Emily Brooks" Subj: Re: MC-Chassis Radial Engines
10. "Thacker, Heath HW" Subj: RE: MC-Chassis YZ125 Rebuilt
11. "joel" Subj: RE: MC-Chassis Radial Engines
12. David Weinshenker Subj: Re: MC-Chassis YZ125 Rebuilt
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Date: Wed, 06 Jan 1999 12:24:28 -0800 (PST)
From: "john.mead"
Subject: Re: MC-Chassis rational? seems ok to me...
Many years ago I picked up a USAF Auxillary Power Unit. It was a 4
cylinder, two stroke, radial. To keep crankcase pressure it used a
supercharger. The electrical part of the generator was missing but it still
had its electrical starter. I got it running once for a short time. It smoked
the garage up but had a neat sound.
John Mead
- ----------
> At 08:28 AM 1/6/99 -0800, you wrote:
> >A bit of useless trivia.
>
> True!!
>
> >It seems like there were some two smoke radials in the early days
> >of aviation that had an even number of cylinders in one row.
>
> That is probably so; because they didn't have the same cammings (I think
> some of them had ex valve only, for ex) they could be done up differently.
> There still have never been any 48 cyl corncobbers.
>
> Best regards,
>
> Hoyt
------------------------------
Date: Thu, 07 Jan 1999 07:33:06 +0200
From: Tomas Tallkvist
Subject: MC-Chassis Hydroforming
Hello !
The system I am using is based on an old Highpressure cleaner, connected to
the outlet,
it feautures a pressure reducing valve so you can adjust the pressure from
5-150 bar.
It works in the same manner as an hydraulic hand pump, but you are allowed
some "minor"
leaks without trouble !
When waterforming megaphones and 2 smoke exhaust systems, no more than 30
bar is used.
The only time I used over 40 Bar was when I made an nice 90 degree bent
chimney connection
tube of 110mm dia of 1,5mm sheet to the Sauna Oven !
The only thing with this technique is that it is hard to come up with
calculations how to
cut the sheet so the final form is the one that you looked for, a better way
is to just make
10-15 megphones and get some experience...
Simple, but it works !
Tomas
www.multi.fi/norrshine
------------------------------
Date: Wed, 06 Jan 1999 22:18:11 -0800
From: David Weinshenker
Subject: MC-Chassis wheel size difference needed for good steering?
A local publication recently tested the new Yamaha 1600 "Road
Star" and commented favorably on its steering, attributing its
good manners to a 20mm difference in tire sizes, and making
a comparison to other cruisers whose equal front & rear sizes
made them "theoretically" unable to steer "on lean angle alone."
Is there anything to this, or is this a case of a motojournalist
knowing what he likes in a bike's handling but not why it handles
like that...
I thought that 5.00-16 front and rear was something of a defacto
standard for old police & touring Harleys... I've never ridden one,
but I've heard they're basically good-handling bikes, limited
by ground clearance, braking, and engine performance/reliability
issues, perhaps, but not inherently ill-steering...
- -dave w
------------------------------
Date: Thu, 07 Jan 1999 10:16:45 -0800
From: Bob
Subject: Re: MC-Chassis Radial Engines
joel wrote:
> Sounds like an awful lot of rotating mass...?
> just a thought, Joel
Hmmm, maybe the crank should be fixed to the wheel and allow the
cyclinders to rotate for flywheel effect, get them babies reved up and
drop the clutch. Starting to sound like eggnog flashbacks. Bob
------------------------------
Date: Thu, 07 Jan 1999 10:16:37 -0800
From: Bob
Subject: Re: MC-Chassis rational? seems ok to me...
David Kath wrote:
>
> Bob B..... How about 5 Gold Star top ends on a common crank...... each
> fed with a GP of course.... Individual megas... ahh, what a sound that
> would be eh?
>
Dave, the thought crossed my mind[?], aside from the diameter of the
resulting wheel it was the thought of setting the fuel level on five
remote float bowls and then have then all whirling around on thier
pivots that brought my to my senses, er, maybe it was the lithium. Bob"I
think I'll fire up my Goldie"B
PS Lets see if we can get 5 Goldies running togather at San Jose this
year, I know it's temping all the Fates to rain scorn on us.
------------------------------
Date: Fri, 8 Jan 1999 11:29:59 +1100
From: "Thacker, Heath HW"
Subject: MC-Chassis YZ125 Rebuilt
I've currently got my '95 YZ125 in bits giving it new piston & rings. Based
on what I've heard, I will be oiling the parts prior to reassembly, but if
anyone has any suggestions, please let me know.
Also, I've got the swingarm & linkages apart, two of the bearings look like
they havn't seen grease for some time. (I've owned the bike about 4 months,
guess I should have checked these first) But when I tried to clean the good
looking ones, the needles (out of needle roller bearing) just fell out in my
hands. Nothing seemed to be holding them in, is this normal ?
Anyway, looks like I'll have to replace most (if not all) of these bearings.
I've heard you guys on this list talk about replacing some (all ?) of these
bearings with Bronze bushes. Is this considered a longer term replacement ?
Are there any drawbacks ? Is there something else I should use ?
Sorry for all the stupid questions,
Thanks,
Heath.
'88 GSXR750J
'95 YZ125G
------------------------------
Date: Thu, 07 Jan 1999 18:00:47 -0800
From: David Weinshenker
Subject: Re: MC-Chassis YZ125 Rebuilt
Thacker, Heath HW wrote:
> I've currently got my '95 YZ125 in bits giving it new piston & rings. Based
> on what I've heard, I will be oiling the parts prior to reassembly, but if
> anyone has any suggestions, please let me know.
The following practices work for me for lubrication and startup
of a newly rebuilt 2-stroke...
1. Scrub newly honed cyl. with liquid detergent and ScotchBrite
kitchen scrub pad, and really hot water.
2. Before the water evaporates off the freshly washed bore
surface (which should be warm from the washing, so this
happens fast) spray with WD-40 rapidly to prevent rust.
Wipe dry and hit with more WD-40.
3. Use petroleum base 2-stroke oil on crank, rod, and
piston pin bearings, and pour a few cc. of oil into the
bottom end, but don't use any on the bore, piston, and rings.
Saturate the top end with WD-40 - it will get plenty of 2-stroke
oil in a few seconds when the engine starts, but the extra
friction running only lubricated with WD-40 helps the rings
catch a quick initial seal.
4. On first startup, run about 30 sec., or until it's warm
enough to hold its idle, then shut down and allow to cool
off completely. Next run, purr around at low power for a minute
or two, shut down and cool. Continue to "heat cycle" the engine
in runs of progressively greater power level, separated
by complete cooling to ambient temperature.
This reduces the risk of piston distortion when the engine is
first allowed to sustain 100% power.
5. After about 1 quart of oil has been used, switch from
petroleum oil to your favorite synthetic.
- -dave w
------------------------------
Date: Thu, 07 Jan 1999 10:23:32 -0800 (PST)
From: "john.mead"
Subject: Re: MC-Chassis Radial Engines
The radial engines in some WWI airplanes had the rear of the crankshaft
mounted to the plane and the prop mounted to the front of the crankcase.
The 5 cylinders would rotate as the engine ran.
John Mead
- ----------
> joel wrote:
>
> > Sounds like an awful lot of rotating mass...?
> > just a thought, Joel
> Hmmm, maybe the crank should be fixed to the wheel and allow the
> cyclinders to rotate for flywheel effect, get them babies reved up and
> drop the clutch. Starting to sound like eggnog flashbacks. Bob
------------------------------
Date: Thu, 7 Jan 1999 21:33:50 -0500
From: "Ray or Emily Brooks"
Subject: Re: MC-Chassis Radial Engines
These are the real rotary engines as in LeRhone Rotary. Mazda makes
wankels.
Ray
- ----------
> From: john.mead
> To: mc-chassis-design@list.sirius.com; mc-chassis-design@list.sirius.com
> Subject: Re: MC-Chassis Radial Engines
> Date: Thursday, January 07, 1999 1:23 PM
>
> The radial engines in some WWI airplanes had the rear of the crankshaft
> mounted to the plane and the prop mounted to the front of the crankcase.
> The 5 cylinders would rotate as the engine ran.
>
> John Mead
>
>
------------------------------
Date: Fri, 8 Jan 1999 14:32:59 +1100
From: "Thacker, Heath HW"
Subject: RE: MC-Chassis YZ125 Rebuilt
Thanks David. My manual suggests using premix at 15:1 during break-in
instead of 30:1, is this normal practice ?
Also, the mechanic at the local dealership said not to hone the cylinder, as
they arn't meant to wear ? He said I'd do more harm than good. Any ideas ?
Thanks again.
Heath.
'95 YZ125G
'88 GSXR750J
> ----------
> From: David Weinshenker[SMTP:daze39@grin.net]
> Reply To: mc-chassis-design@list.sirius.com
> Sent: Friday, 8 January 1999 13:00
> To: mc-chassis-design@list.sirius.com
> Subject: Re: MC-Chassis YZ125 Rebuilt
>
> Thacker, Heath HW wrote:
> > I've currently got my '95 YZ125 in bits giving it new piston & rings.
> Based
> > on what I've heard, I will be oiling the parts prior to reassembly, but
> if
> > anyone has any suggestions, please let me know.
>
> The following practices work for me for lubrication and startup
> of a newly rebuilt 2-stroke...
>
> 1. Scrub newly honed cyl. with liquid detergent and ScotchBrite
> kitchen scrub pad, and really hot water.
>
> 2. Before the water evaporates off the freshly washed bore
> surface (which should be warm from the washing, so this
> happens fast) spray with WD-40 rapidly to prevent rust.
> Wipe dry and hit with more WD-40.
>
> 3. Use petroleum base 2-stroke oil on crank, rod, and
> piston pin bearings, and pour a few cc. of oil into the
> bottom end, but don't use any on the bore, piston, and rings.
> Saturate the top end with WD-40 - it will get plenty of 2-stroke
> oil in a few seconds when the engine starts, but the extra
> friction running only lubricated with WD-40 helps the rings
> catch a quick initial seal.
>
> 4. On first startup, run about 30 sec., or until it's warm
> enough to hold its idle, then shut down and allow to cool
> off completely. Next run, purr around at low power for a minute
> or two, shut down and cool. Continue to "heat cycle" the engine
> in runs of progressively greater power level, separated
> by complete cooling to ambient temperature.
>
> This reduces the risk of piston distortion when the engine is
> first allowed to sustain 100% power.
>
> 5. After about 1 quart of oil has been used, switch from
> petroleum oil to your favorite synthetic.
>
> -dave w
>
------------------------------
Date: Thu, 7 Jan 1999 22:55:15 -0500
From: "joel"
Subject: RE: MC-Chassis Radial Engines
> The radial engines in some WWI airplanes had the rear of the crankshaft
> mounted to the plane and the prop mounted to the front of the crankcase.
> The 5 cylinders would rotate as the engine ran.
>
> John Mead
Those planes are really neat to watch/hear fly. The engines have to
remain at constant revs (1300 rpm +/- i think).. so come landing the
pilots turn the ignition off and on intermittently to control the speed.
Quite an interesting experience. Must be real safe to fly in too.
Joel
------------------------------
Date: Thu, 07 Jan 1999 19:55:59 -0800
From: David Weinshenker
Subject: Re: MC-Chassis YZ125 Rebuilt
Thacker, Heath HW wrote:
>
> Thanks David. My manual suggests using premix at 15:1 during break-in
> instead of 30:1, is this normal practice ?
Sounds about right. Go to 30:1 when you switch
to synthetic.
> Also, the mechanic at the local dealership said not to hone the cylinder, as
> they arn't meant to wear ? He said I'd do more harm than good. Any ideas ?
Is it an iron sleeve or hard plated one? If it's plated (chrome or
nickel
silicon) it doesn't need to be honed when renewing the piston and rings.
The only time a plated cylinder needs to be honed is after the
plating is applied, to establish the exact size.
Since it won't be necessary for the new crosshatch finish of a honed
iron cylinder to be rubbed smooth by the rings, you may be able to
switch to synthetic oil sooner in a plated cylinder.
(Red Line synthetic "racing" oil recommends on the label
to use petroleum oil for 15 min. running time to seat
new rings).
Careful initial heat-cycling is likely to pay dividends in
piston health with either type of bore.
- -dave w
------------------------------
End of MC-Chassis-Dgst V1 #880
******************************
Back to the home page
© 1997 Michael Moore, all rights reserved
Most recent update: 30 January 1998
For more information contact webmeister@eurospares.com