Gremlin
|
| posted on 3/6/08 at 02:06 PM |
|
|
R1 Questions
What age R1 engine is best I have a feeling when I looked before it was up to 03 but cant remember why?
What other parts will I need from the donor bike?
EZy GreMLiN
"The only way to get rid of temptation is too give in to it..!"
|
|
|
|
|
nitram38
|
| posted on 3/6/08 at 02:08 PM |
|
|
I would say an injection engine as it is easier to tune for emmissions with a power commander.
|
|
|
Dangle_kt
|
| posted on 3/6/08 at 02:24 PM |
|
|
engine, carbs (injectors), loom, fuel pump, air box, coils, ecu, manifolds if your doing a single seater, you can also use the clocks of you have
them
[Edited on 3/6/08 by Dangle_kt]
|
|
|
Gremlin
|
| posted on 3/6/08 at 02:24 PM |
|
|
So after 03 is not injection?
Does that mean I only need to keep the manifolds if making a single seater not that the engine is only ok for a single seater...
The plans are to put it in a two seater MK Indy?
[Edited on 3/6/08 by Gremlin]
EZy GreMLiN
"The only way to get rid of temptation is too give in to it..!"
|
|
|
Dangle_kt
|
| posted on 3/6/08 at 02:42 PM |
|
|
if its a single seater you can use the manifold, if its in an MK you need to get a manifold made to fit (you can buy them off the shelf for a popular
engine like an r1)
Its due to the engine being mounted side on in a seven, so the original manifold wont work.
|
|
|
fesycresy
|
| posted on 3/6/08 at 02:47 PM |
|
|
'02 onwards are all injected.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
The sooner you fall behind, the more time you'll have to catch up.
|
|
|
TimC
|
| posted on 3/6/08 at 02:50 PM |
|
|
To bang my now regular drum....
Any R1 engine 98-08 will likely deliver somewhere between 155bhp and 170bhp mounted in a front engined car. Much of the extra BHP from the later
'04-on (16v) engines is acheived by clever ram-air intakes, something which is difficult to emulate in an Indy. Hence, I'm not convinced
that they are worth the extra £££ over the earlier 20v motors. 98-01 (4XV and 5JJ) are on carbs and the 02-03 (5PW I think) is fundamentally the same
motor but with injection. The carb'd engines are reputedly more violent in their power delivery but this will largely depend on the fueling
set-up. I always intended to make my own loom, hence it suited me to use a 5JJ carb'd motor as it's simpler to wire. However any of the
pre '04 motors would stil be my choice. If I wanted more power I'd go ZX12.
Years listed here relate to model years so don't assume that an '02 bike has a 5PW motor - some get registered later. Likewise, a limited
supply of '02 model years may have been registered early.
You won't want the exhaust manifold in the Indy.
[Edited on 3/6/08 by TimC]
|
|
|
Gremlin
|
| posted on 3/6/08 at 03:17 PM |
|
|
So a 02-03 5PW with injection will probably be the best option for an Indy for me?
ZX12 would be nice but are MUCH more costly arnt they? What age ZX12?
EZy GreMLiN
"The only way to get rid of temptation is too give in to it..!"
|
|
|
TimC
|
| posted on 3/6/08 at 03:28 PM |
|
|
In my opinion, probably yes.
I'd call Malc at Yorkshire engines and see what he can do.
|
|
|
Gremlin
|
| posted on 3/6/08 at 03:54 PM |
|
|
Great thanks sounds like a plan..
EZy GreMLiN
"The only way to get rid of temptation is too give in to it..!"
|
|
|
eznfrank
|
| posted on 3/6/08 at 04:16 PM |
|
|
You're looking at around £1400 for a ZX12 kit with all the bits but you won't get an exhaust off the shelf for that one.
|
|
|
worX
|
| posted on 3/6/08 at 05:04 PM |
|
|
Seconded!
Try to stay away from the '04 - '05 model...
Stevequote:
Originally posted by Gremlin
So a 02-03 5PW with injection will probably be the best option for an Indy for me?
ZX12 would be nice but are MUCH more costly arnt they? What age ZX12?
|
|
|
smart51
|
| posted on 3/6/08 at 05:40 PM |
|
|
2002 - 2003 R1 = fuel injection, 150 BHP and 12000 RPM.
2004 - 2006 R1 = fuel injection, 180 BHP and 14000 RPM. All of the extra power is at the higher revs. The engine is less torquey at low revs so
perhaps of less use in a BEC. The gears are closer together and if anything further apart would suit a BEC. Lastly, those extra revs = more exhaust
noise both at SVA and on track days.
1998 - 2001 carbed engines are not bad and are a bit cheaper.
|
|
|
ChrisGamlin
|
| posted on 3/6/08 at 06:31 PM |
|
|
quote:
Originally posted by smart51
2002 - 2003 R1 = fuel injection, 150 BHP and 12000 RPM.
2004 - 2006 R1 = fuel injection, 180 BHP and 14000 RPM.
As Tim mentioned though, much of that increase seems to be down to ram-air effect, and also because the earlier engines seem to kick out good (ie
better than stock) power in a BEC. In the real world a good 5JJ / 5PW kicks out 135-140bhp at the rear wheels in a BEC which is nearer 160bhp at the
crank. Later engines probably don't kick out any more than 170bhp at the crank without ram-air so the real differences are far less than the
paper figures suggest.
I think if I was spending 04-06 R1 money and wanted a light 1000cc engine, I'd probably look at using the CBR1000RR or ZX10 before the R1.
|
|
|
ChrisGamlin
|
| posted on 3/6/08 at 06:34 PM |
|
|
quote:
Originally posted by chris mason
why but an older engine with no doubt more miles and less power, when you almost the same money you can have the later model.
I agree with about getting a newer / low mileage engine if possible, because even 5PWs are now 5+ years old so a low mileage one is probably tricky to
find. Are 04-06 engines similar prices now then, as when I last had a fleeting look they seemed to be going for significantly more cash?
[Edited on 3/6/08 by ChrisGamlin]
|
|
|
Gremlin
|
| posted on 3/6/08 at 06:58 PM |
|
|
So an R1 is not the best engine to go for for the money or is it?
For around the 1K mark what would be the best bike engine for an BEC?
Power?
Value For Money?
Good support and off the shelf parts for (Newbie ish)
All getting more complicated as it goes on to decide..
Will a BEC really loose that much performance with a second person?
Can the newer R1 engines be used without the Ram-Air with just a slight preformance lose?
[Edited on 3/6/08 by Gremlin]
EZy GreMLiN
"The only way to get rid of temptation is too give in to it..!"
|
|
|
ChrisGamlin
|
| posted on 3/6/08 at 07:12 PM |
|
|
Nah, at around the £1k mark I would personally say that the 5PW R1 is probably the engine Id chose. When I last looked, 04-06 engines seemed to be
around the £1500 though, which is where there's other potentially equal or better choices, in my opinion.
Im not saying the 04 R1 engine is bad, and Im not saying the 03 engine is better than the 04 because Ive not driven a car with a later engine to say
first hand, but from what Ive been told by people in the know in RGB etc, the newer engine isn't as good as the headline power figures suggest
it might be.
|
|
|
Hellfire
|
| posted on 3/6/08 at 07:13 PM |
|
|
For that sort of money, I'd stick with the R1. No harm in keeping your eyes out for that elusively cheap ZX12R/ZX10R/GSXR though.
Two up in a BEC will take the edge off the performance but nothing more and not hugely noticeable. BTW, same goes for a CEC too but it's much
less noticeable cos they're much slower to start with. 
Phil
PS - Forget about ram air. You simply won't achieve the speeds required for ram air to take effect in a brick shaped seven.
[Edited on 3-6-08 by Hellfire]
|
|
|
Gremlin
|
| posted on 3/6/08 at 07:15 PM |
|
|
So a 02-03 5PW with injection will probably be best for me?
Ok I think its going to be between this or going with a car engine like the C20XE and trying to modify after building to get the extra power.
Thanks all for your help
[Edited on 3/6/08 by Gremlin]
EZy GreMLiN
"The only way to get rid of temptation is too give in to it..!"
|
|
|
Hellfire
|
| posted on 3/6/08 at 07:18 PM |
|
|
 No,no, don't even think car engine. Get that thought out of your mind.....
|
|
|
Gremlin
|
| posted on 3/6/08 at 07:19 PM |
|
|
95% sure it will be the R1!!!
Do they still need the oil sump plate if fitted in an Indy?
EZy GreMLiN
"The only way to get rid of temptation is too give in to it..!"
|
|
|
ChrisGamlin
|
| posted on 3/6/08 at 07:24 PM |
|
|
If only road use its debatable, but for track use virtually everyone does, for the sake of £30 or so its not worth risking.
|
|
|
worX
|
| posted on 3/6/08 at 07:25 PM |
|
|
My comments that go against the 04 - 05 engines are not spoken from personal experience, only regurgitated knowledge.
And on top of that, only really from a race (RGB & Sidecars) point of view so could be perfectly fine in a road car that wasn't going to see
the track.
Steve
quote:
Originally posted by chris mason
I disagree with the comments regarding the 2004-2006 R1 engines.
1, There reliable
2, They produce more bhp
3, They produce no less Torque
4, They rev higher
5, There no louder than any other R1
if it was my money then i'd buy a 2006 engine.
why but an older engine with no doubt more miles and less power, when you almost the same money you can have the later model.
Btw, i've driven a 2001,2003,2006 R1 powered cars, and anyone who says the earlier ones are better clearly hasn't been in all 3 types.
Chris
|
|
|
Gremlin
|
| posted on 3/6/08 at 07:35 PM |
|
|
Car would mainly be a road going car but could see the track in the future...
With the R1 is the EXUP still kept or bypassed?
EZy GreMLiN
"The only way to get rid of temptation is too give in to it..!"
|
|
|
Jubal
|
| posted on 3/6/08 at 08:11 PM |
|
|
quote:
Originally posted by Gremlin
With the R1 is the EXUP still kept or bypassed?
If you use the R1 clocks you'll want to keep it or live with the error code...
|
|
|
.jpg){kind=avatar}
