tankplanker
|
| posted on 18/4/17 at 08:16 AM |
|
|
Older Engine + Turbo vs. Latest Superbike Engines
As with all performance cars/bikes you soon get used to the power. Over the next few months I'm planning on dropping the weight of the Indy as
much as possible (15" wheels to 13", sierra back axle + drums to freelander + light weight willwoods, lithium battery, some carbon fibre
panels, and I've also lost ~20kg of fat since last summer with another 10kg to go).
My Indy currently has a 954 Fireblade, with a bit of a tune up it'll be making ~145 BHP and weighs about 460kg, or 575kg (~250BHP/ton) with me
in it last summer. This year I'm aiming for 495kg with me in the Indy (~290BHP/ton). However weight cutting will only take me so far so
I'm planning on increasing the power.
I was debating getting Holeshot to Turbo my existing 954 to make around 250 BHP, so around 500BHP/ton allowing for the weight increase of the turbo
and its supporting gubbings. However the engines in the current range of superbikes caught my eye as these are making an easy 200 BHP with a sports
silencer and a rolling road session, or about 400BHP/ton.
I greatly prefer the power delivery of a NA engine and it would be less stressed than turboing a ~14 year old engine but it would be less power and
I'd have to rewire the entire car to suit.
Those who have gone turbo what was the (re)install like? Reliability and driveability like?
For those who have fitted a recent superbike engine how easy was it to fit the engine and get everything running sweetly?
|
|
|
|
|
nick205
|
| posted on 18/4/17 at 09:04 AM |
|
|
I suppose I'd be looking at comparative costs of both approaches + if turbo-ing the existing motor does it tie you to using the same engine in
future to retain the turbo (how tailored is the turbo setup to the engine).
|
|
|
daniel mason
|
| posted on 18/4/17 at 09:29 AM |
|
|
Stick a modern blade in it. It'll be more than fast enough!
|
|
|
MadMaxx
|
| posted on 18/4/17 at 09:52 AM |
|
|
Any chance of a further step of tuning keeping NA the engine?
Me too interested to the topic having a Fireblade 919 and according to the Italian law not allowed to "legally" swap the engine to a
different one.
My re-building diary:
http://www.llcc.it/YetAnotherForum.NET/default.aspx?g=posts&t=13448
|
|
|
tankplanker
|
| posted on 18/4/17 at 10:18 AM |
|
|
quote:
Originally posted by nick205
I suppose I'd be looking at comparative costs of both approaches + if turbo-ing the existing motor does it tie you to using the same engine in
future to retain the turbo (how tailored is the turbo setup to the engine).
Without speaking to Holeshot but looking at their spec sheets I
can see that they reuse the same Turbo and ECU for a bunch of different engines. I'd need a new manifold and the uprated engine bits for any
future engine, which would still be a big chunk of change.
Turbo would cost about £5.5k fully fitted to the engine from Holeshot with all supporting upgrades (new pistons, fuel pumps, ECU, etc.), but would be
plug and play when the engine came back, a weekend's work.
A recent Fireblade engine would run me about £2.5k, I did fancy the Aprillia RSV4 as it sounds a lot nicer being a V4 but that would be nearly twice
the price!
Obviously plugging in a new engine would mean sorting out the wiring, engine mounting, cooling, etc. then getting the engine mapped on a rolling road
combined with an upgrade to both my quick shifter and power commander to latest versions. So a large number of weekends and another £1k/£1.5k of extra
bits, taking the cost to about £4k.
@MadMaxx - I think the 919 will take the larger 949 pistons with some work? Port the head, get a decent exhaust and intake setup and with a good
session on a rolling road and you can get another 20/30 BHP altogether. Cost would be similar to replacing the engine with an early CBR1000, hence why
I haven't bothered.
|
|
|
bi22le
|
| posted on 18/4/17 at 12:21 PM |
|
|
How about buying a donor that has all of the work done?
You could use the nos to smooth the lag created from the turbo!
Aprilia RSV Turbo Nitrous Drag bike road legal
Sell all of the snazzy bits you don t need and make 1K back.
Track days ARE the best thing since sliced bread, until I get a supercharger that is!
Please read my ring story:
http://www.locostbuilders.co.uk/forum/13/viewthread.php?tid=139152&page=1
Me doing a sub 56sec lap around Brands Indy. I need a geo set up! http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=EHksfvIGB3I
|
|
|
CosKev3
|
| posted on 18/4/17 at 12:31 PM |
|
|
Worth noting you will need to cut off the lower engine mounts off the chassis and make up new ones to match a newer engine.
Your original engine turbocharged will be circa double the torque of a new superbike engine?so I would say it would be faster,and feel much faster in
the way the power is delivered.
Those prices on Holeshot are scary 
I'm currently turbocharging and converting to inj my R1 engine,so glad I can do it all myself 
[Edited on 18/4/17 by CosKev3]
|
|
|
tankplanker
|
| posted on 18/4/17 at 12:33 PM |
|
|
quote:
Originally posted by bi22le
How about buying a donor that has all of the work done?
You could use the nos to smooth the lag created from the turbo!
Aprilia RSV Turbo Nitrous Drag bike road legal
Sell all of the snazzy bits you don t need and make 1K back.
That looks suitably mental! I'm surprised its only making that much with
all those mods, crazy how far BMW moved the super bike market on in the last few years.
Probably the most cost effective way to do it would be to sell my Indy and buy one ready done, but I quite fancy the project of doing it myself.
|
|
|
russbost
|
| posted on 18/4/17 at 12:38 PM |
|
|
For me the problem with any significant tuning such as turbo charging on a bike engine (which is already quite highly stressed) you HAVE to lose
reliability & when the engine goes bang (which it will, the only question is when) it will probably not only wreck itself to the point where
almost none of it is salvageable, but it will probably also knacker the turbocharger from having bits either going thro' it or in the oil.
I'm with Daniel Mason, stick a modern NA bike engine in it & keep it fairly standard. My engine of choice is the ZZR1400 & you can get a
complete package from someone like Malc at Yorkshire engines for around £3k for a good, fairly new low mileage engine, still leaves you another grand
for exhaust/air intake, new cradle, sprocket etc. It will give almost as much power to weight without any temperamental bits to have hissy fits &
go wrong.
It might not last forever, but it will be a LOT more reliable & have far better longevity than a turbo'ed 954 & comes with a ton of
torque as standard too, yes it will mean a few w/e's work, but I think overall you'll finish up with a much more tractable package
I no longer run Furore Products or Furore Cars Ltd, but would still highly recommend them for Acewell dashes, projector headlights, dominator
headlights, indicators, mirrors etc, best prices in the UK! Take a look at http://www.furoreproducts.co.uk/ or find more parts on Ebay, user names
furoreltd & furoreproducts, discounts available for LCB users.
Don't forget Stainless Steel Braided brake hoses, made to your exact requirements in any of around 16 colours.
http://shop.ebay.co.uk/furoreproducts/m.html?_dmd=1&_ipg=50&_sop=12&_rdc=1
|
NOTE:This user is registered as a LocostBuilders trader and may offer commercial services to other users
|
MadMaxx
|
| posted on 18/4/17 at 01:16 PM |
|
|
quote:
Originally posted by tankplanker
quote:
Originally posted by nick205
I suppose I'd be looking at comparative costs of both approaches + if turbo-ing the existing motor does it tie you to using the same engine in
future to retain the turbo (how tailored is the turbo setup to the engine).
Without speaking to Holeshot but looking at their spec sheets I
can see that they reuse the same Turbo and ECU for a bunch of different engines. I'd need a new manifold and the uprated engine bits for any
future engine, which would still be a big chunk of change.
Turbo would cost about £5.5k fully fitted to the engine from Holeshot with all supporting upgrades (new pistons, fuel pumps, ECU, etc.), but would be
plug and play when the engine came back, a weekend's work.
A recent Fireblade engine would run me about £2.5k, I did fancy the Aprillia RSV4 as it sounds a lot nicer being a V4 but that would be nearly twice
the price!
Obviously plugging in a new engine would mean sorting out the wiring, engine mounting, cooling, etc. then getting the engine mapped on a rolling road
combined with an upgrade to both my quick shifter and power commander to latest versions. So a large number of weekends and another £1k/£1.5k of extra
bits, taking the cost to about £4k.
@MadMaxx - I think the 919 will take the larger 949 pistons with some work? Port the head, get a decent exhaust and intake setup and with a good
session on a rolling road and you can get another 20/30 BHP altogether. Cost would be similar to replacing the engine with an early CBR1000, hence why
I haven't bothered.
I will be very happy if I could gain 30 bhp on top of the 128 bhp declared as standard at the flywheel. I already have dyno jetted the carbs with 130
main jets and dedicated exhaust. Now I've manufactured a custom made fresh air intake beside the radiator with a new plenum and conic filter
with dedicated airbox, but I can test the job done only when I will finish to rebuild the car :-)
[Edited on 18/4/17 by MadMaxx]
My re-building diary:
http://www.llcc.it/YetAnotherForum.NET/default.aspx?g=posts&t=13448
|
|
|
tankplanker
|
| posted on 18/4/17 at 03:43 PM |
|
|
quote:
Originally posted by russbost
For me the problem with any significant tuning such as turbo charging on a bike engine (which is already quite highly stressed) you HAVE to lose
reliability & when the engine goes bang (which it will, the only question is when) it will probably not only wreck itself to the point where
almost none of it is salvageable, but it will probably also knacker the turbocharger from having bits either going thro' it or in the oil.
I'm with Daniel Mason, stick a modern NA bike engine in it & keep it fairly standard. My engine of choice is the ZZR1400 & you can get a
complete package from someone like Malc at Yorkshire engines for around £3k for a good, fairly new low mileage engine, still leaves you another grand
for exhaust/air intake, new cradle, sprocket etc. It will give almost as much power to weight without any temperamental bits to have hissy fits &
go wrong.
It might not last forever, but it will be a LOT more reliable & have far better longevity than a turbo'ed 954 & comes with a ton of
torque as standard too, yes it will mean a few w/e's work, but I think overall you'll finish up with a much more tractable package
I'm not sure I want the trade off of torque for the extra weight of the ZZR1400 or similar plus sized engines. I quite like the buzzy
nature of the litre super bikes and I'm not too bothered by the lack of torque once I am moving, and I'm not stationary that often, unless
its in the gravel 
I am leaning towards upgrading for a new engine, mine will need money spending on it this winter just to fix niggles so might as well replace it.
|
|
|
russbost
|
| posted on 18/4/17 at 04:55 PM |
|
|
I'd be interested to know if the ZZR1400 or indeed the 'Busa are significantly heavier than 1 litre bike engines. It's certainly not
a heavy engine, I can easily lift the engine & cradle into place with the help of a friend & I am a total wimp! 
I can't find any specs for engine weight in either case, but by the time you've bolted a turbo & all the bits on you'd be adding
a fair bit of weight to the 954
I don't know if you realise what a massive difference in torque there is, both the ZZR & the Haywagon have around 113lb/ft, compared to the
954 having around 75 or 77, in both cases I believe that's before the multiplier that goes in prior to the gearbox proper. One of the biggest
gains you would make with turbocharging is in torque as much as power & in getting a more usable power band, both of which come as standard with
the bigger bike engines
If you like the busier nature of the 1.0 litre lumps then the 999.8cc CBR gives about 24bhp & 10 lb/ft of torque increase over the old 954
I no longer run Furore Products or Furore Cars Ltd, but would still highly recommend them for Acewell dashes, projector headlights, dominator
headlights, indicators, mirrors etc, best prices in the UK! Take a look at http://www.furoreproducts.co.uk/ or find more parts on Ebay, user names
furoreltd & furoreproducts, discounts available for LCB users.
Don't forget Stainless Steel Braided brake hoses, made to your exact requirements in any of around 16 colours.
http://shop.ebay.co.uk/furoreproducts/m.html?_dmd=1&_ipg=50&_sop=12&_rdc=1
|
NOTE:This user is registered as a LocostBuilders trader and may offer commercial services to other users
|
tankplanker
|
| posted on 18/4/17 at 05:08 PM |
|
|
I was comparing a NA CBR vs. a NA 1400. I think the 1400 is about 90kg and the 954 is about 60kg, so roughly 30kg difference? It wouldn't eat up
the all the extra torque of the 1400 but it wouldn't be as big a jump as it appears on paper. Turboing my existing lump should come way under
30kg even with an intercooler?
The new litre engines are so much closer, so I can get a big enough jump in power and torque without compromising too much on weight.
|
|
|
russbost
|
| posted on 18/4/17 at 05:14 PM |
|
|
Either I'm a lot stronger than I think I am (no chance) or that 90kg sounds very pessimistic! I'm totally guessing, but would have thought
75kg was nearer the mark.
With respect to the additional power & torque, I barely notice the difference in performance when adding a 80kg or so passenger to mine - biggest
difference it makes is it's much harder to generate wheelspin from a standing start on hot sticky tarmac!
I no longer run Furore Products or Furore Cars Ltd, but would still highly recommend them for Acewell dashes, projector headlights, dominator
headlights, indicators, mirrors etc, best prices in the UK! Take a look at http://www.furoreproducts.co.uk/ or find more parts on Ebay, user names
furoreltd & furoreproducts, discounts available for LCB users.
Don't forget Stainless Steel Braided brake hoses, made to your exact requirements in any of around 16 colours.
http://shop.ebay.co.uk/furoreproducts/m.html?_dmd=1&_ipg=50&_sop=12&_rdc=1
|
NOTE:This user is registered as a LocostBuilders trader and may offer commercial services to other users
|
mark chandler
|
| posted on 18/4/17 at 05:17 PM |
|
|
Turbo on my 918 blade engine was an amazing upgrade.
Engine lasted well, gearbox was chewed due to driver smashing the gears, acceleration at least as good as a BUSA without the fear of spinning no.3 and
landing a hefty repair bill, at most £400 for another lump.
|
|
|
tankplanker
|
| posted on 18/4/17 at 05:20 PM |
|
|
Is that without fluids? As 10l of oil and water could be a good portion of that weight difference?
|
|
|
russbost
|
| posted on 18/4/17 at 05:22 PM |
|
|
with oil without water
I no longer run Furore Products or Furore Cars Ltd, but would still highly recommend them for Acewell dashes, projector headlights, dominator
headlights, indicators, mirrors etc, best prices in the UK! Take a look at http://www.furoreproducts.co.uk/ or find more parts on Ebay, user names
furoreltd & furoreproducts, discounts available for LCB users.
Don't forget Stainless Steel Braided brake hoses, made to your exact requirements in any of around 16 colours.
http://shop.ebay.co.uk/furoreproducts/m.html?_dmd=1&_ipg=50&_sop=12&_rdc=1
|
NOTE:This user is registered as a LocostBuilders trader and may offer commercial services to other users
|
CosKev3
|
| posted on 18/4/17 at 07:46 PM |
|
|
If the zzr is similar weight to a zx12r engine they weigh a lot!
R1 engine bolted to cradle is a one man job,lift it onto the top chassis rail,take a breath,lower into the engine bay
And you won't lose reliability if the turbo conversion is done correctly, including boost control and getting the fueling spot on!
|
|
|
sam919
|
| posted on 18/4/17 at 09:02 PM |
|
|
http://www.locostbuilders.co.uk/viewthread.php?tid=187997
|
|
|
mark chandler
|
| posted on 18/4/17 at 09:21 PM |
|
|
It will go whoosh and be bonkers, what's not to like.
|
|
|
MikeRJ
|
| posted on 19/4/17 at 06:51 AM |
|
|
quote:
Originally posted by mark chandler
It will go whoosh and be bonkers, what's not to like.
The part when it goes bang is less enjoyable.
|
|
|
Sam_68
|
| posted on 19/4/17 at 07:13 AM |
|
|
quote:
Originally posted by tankplanker
As with all performance cars/bikes you soon get used to the power. Over the next few months I'm planning on dropping the weight of the Indy as
much as possible (15" wheels to 13", sierra back axle + drums to freelander + light weight willwoods, lithium battery, some carbon fibre
panels, and I've also lost ~20kg of fat since last summer with another 10kg to go).
I'd observe that if you're going to substantial effort to reduce the weight, it might be counterproductive to go turbo: you'll just
be bolting a fair chunk of it all back in again, in the form of turbo, plumbing and intercooler?
Whether that bothers you depends on whether you're chasing weight for weight's sake (a perfectly reasonable ambition!), or as a means of
increasing performance. I'm sure that a turbo has the potential to go quicker, regardless!
|
|
|
russbost
|
| posted on 19/4/17 at 08:02 AM |
|
|
"And you won't lose reliability if the turbo conversion is done correctly, including boost control and getting the fueling spot
on!"
I have to disagree that it won't affect reliability, first there are an awful lot of "ifs" in that sentence as "done
correctly" covers a multitude of things. It doesn't take much to go wrong with a high power turbo installation to make the whole thing go
tits up & there's a lot more to go wrong with it than a standard mass produced engine that's been around for years
If you are going to use that extra power on a regular basis then you cannot help but put extra stress thro' block, pistons, rods, ends, mains,
bolts etc (some of which will no longer be standard obviously) to say nothing of clutch & gearbox - on the opposite side of the coin with a larger
capacity STANDARD engine just take a look at ads for older bikes, they regularly do 70/80,000 miles or more without problems, if you can get a high
power turbo installation to do more than about 20,000 without self destructing then I would be surprised
At the end of the day it's horses for courses, you spends your money & you takes your choice, some will prefer the high revving screaming of
the smaller engine & its more specific power delivery, others will prefer the more rock solid reliability & be happy with the wider power band
& more torque, I doubt there is a massive amount to choose between them in terms of actual cost of installation, long term the bigger capacity
standard engine has to come out cheaper surely?
I no longer run Furore Products or Furore Cars Ltd, but would still highly recommend them for Acewell dashes, projector headlights, dominator
headlights, indicators, mirrors etc, best prices in the UK! Take a look at http://www.furoreproducts.co.uk/ or find more parts on Ebay, user names
furoreltd & furoreproducts, discounts available for LCB users.
Don't forget Stainless Steel Braided brake hoses, made to your exact requirements in any of around 16 colours.
http://shop.ebay.co.uk/furoreproducts/m.html?_dmd=1&_ipg=50&_sop=12&_rdc=1
|
NOTE:This user is registered as a LocostBuilders trader and may offer commercial services to other users
|
tankplanker
|
| posted on 19/4/17 at 08:29 AM |
|
|
The current engine has covered about 22000 but due to its age could do with a bunch of things replacing as various seals and similar have just gotten
old. I think with a proper stripped down overhaul from somebody like Holeshot it would be very close to as new condition, obviously that would be a
big chunk of change though.
I would love to hit 80,000 miles in a recent time window in my Indy, but I only manage about 3000 miles a year, admitted most of that are hard miles.
By the time I got to even 15k in a new engine there would likely be a much better engine out that would be almost as cheap to swap to as to spend
money refreshing my existing engine.
Adding weight when it makes the car faster I'm fine with, adding weight when it doesn't make the car faster I want to avoid. Most of what
I am replacing on the Indy with lighter parts has been on the car a long time and could do with a refresh/detailed inspection anyway.
The only bit of weight gain I don't like from going Turbo is the intercooler, and mostly because it presents a challenge to fit one without
impeding the radiator, but also because that is a big percentage of the extra weight that is also best mounted as far forward as possible.
I'm very tempted by the turbo option but I know that if I upgrade to a newer 'blade engine I will have more of everything now and still
have the option later by adding a turbo to the new engine and have even more power than 954 + Turbo anyway. I need to get saving for that new engine!
Just hope somebody else does it first and can post an idiots guide to the wiring loom.
|
|
|
skippad
|
| posted on 19/4/17 at 12:08 PM |
|
|
My Indy which i had (recently sold ) for 8 yrs... when bought it had 893cc fireblade in it, which i changed for a Kawasaki zzr1400, one the first
ones to be installed in a kit car.
Even though the blade was nippy when wound up, compered to the zzr it was like night and day.
at 190bhp and a lot more torque, the weight difference becomes insignificant.
The engine was utterly reliable, strong gearbox and clutch and took everything i threw at it.
I wish i had'nt sold it...
if i was going for an upgrade i know what i would do
|
|
|
