Get your exhaust headers or full system before you mount your engine otherwise your exhaust could well be way off line with respect to the chassis once you bolt it up to the engine
i have just got my new engine a fazer 1000
can any one tell me were i can get a cradle to fit the engine or will i have to make one up
also what ratio of sierra diff is best to use with this engine
thanks for your help
It's not just a cradle you'll need, it will almost certainly need a few modifications to the chassis in the engine bay area for the lower
mounting brackets. To be honest, you'd be better off doing it yourself if you can.
Best diff really depends what ratios are available for your particular application. Somewhere around 3.62 should be OK.
Phil
Would agree with Hellfire, not an hard job too do yourself, make room for it in the chassis, lower it into where you want it and build a cradle around
it, most bike engines are solid mounted into the chassis, I have used suspension bush's too mount before but the last 3 have been solid with no
detrimental effects that Ive noticed.
Diff ? depends on the gearbox final output ratio, dunno on yours........
I think its the same ratios as the R1, so something betwen a 3.3x and 3.6x would be fine assuming you plan on running regular size wheel/tyres and aren't going for the bling 17" option.
word of advice,
Get your exhaust headers or full system before you mount your engine otherwise your exhaust could well be way off line with respect to the chassis
once you bolt it up to the engine
thanks
quote:
Originally posted by locoboy
word of advice,
Get your exhaust headers or full system before you mount your engine otherwise your exhaust could well be way off line with respect to the chassis once you bolt it up to the engine
I'd sooner have the engine in the right place and then get a custom exhaust system made to measure
mines a fazer 1000 and a with a standard 3.62 diff does 100mph at 10.000 rpm, i have 205/40/17 tyres if that helps
[Edited on 23/4/06 by GEORGE80]
quote:
Originally posted by Hellfire
I'd sooner have the engine in the right place and then get a custom exhaust system made to measure
but atleast make sure the exhaust is possible ie the ports arent inline with the chassis rail or anything else you cant easily move.
the engine should be as far back as practicable, canted over to the same angle as the bike had the engine at and with the output flange at the center
of the tunnel when looking from the diff end.
quote:
Originally posted by cossey
...and with the output flange at the center of the tunnel when looking from the diff end.
quote:
Originally posted by JoelP
quote:
Originally posted by cossey
...and with the output flange at the center of the tunnel when looking from the diff end.
no need for that bit, so long as the two flanges are perfectly parallel and the prop knuckles lined up right. I have mine as far over to my feet as possible, to clear the n/s rails. Apparently universal joints last longer running at a small angle.
+ your gonna be using a 2 piece prop so any angle at the front is lost there.
got mine in the chassis over the weekend and straight in line isn't going to happen without rebuilding the front end of the chassis.
what I was planning on doing was turning the engine a bit so it sits parallel to the n/s top rail, giving a fairly straight run from the output shaft
to the centre bearing, where it will have to go round a bit of a corner to carry on down the tunnel.
and yeah, it's going to be custom exhaust headers. The bike ones turn downwards too quickly - through the chassis rail!
Mounting wise, I was just going to make up some mounts that vaguely replicated how it was in the bike. But that depends on your engine - the ZZR has
all the mounts down near the bottom, rather than having one up near the head.
doesnt the output flange face have to be parallel to the diff flange face?
I fail to see why, but if anyone can correct me please do so in the next week or two before I make any engine mounts!
because if they arent parallel then the universal joints will make the motion of the shaft uneven and cause vibrations
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Universal_joint
I thought it might be something like that.
I did contemplate using CV joints for one or other half of the prop (although not for that reason). Might have to have another look at that one.
Hi,
I thought it was that the angles had to even up in the end and not that it needed to be aligned...
It runs through a centre bearing - rubber doughnut which needs to be at an angle really but the straighter the better but not completly straight. Was
unaware they had to align faces.
Simon
quote:
Originally posted by cossey
because if they arent parallel then the universal joints will make the motion of the shaft uneven and cause vibrations
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Universal_joint
The prop can run at an angle if it has a slider in it to take up the in out motion it causes.
I stand to be corrected but I seriously doubt a slider in the prop will slide anywhere quick enough to absorb an oscillating movement at 7000rpm (over 100Hz). Try sliding it in and out once a second by hand and see how much effort it takes, now multiply that by 100
As I understand it, the problem with CV joints is you can't easily find one thats rated to rotate at the kind of RPM you see on a prop.
[Edited on 24/4/06 by ChrisGamlin]
the constant velocity also means just that, the rotary velocity is constant at an angle. When universal joints are run either at an angle or with the
knuckles not matching (ie cancelling), the output end will not spin at a constant velocity, it will pulse.
i cant see how they will pulse or vibrate in or out though?
[Edited on 24/4/06 by JoelP]
Good point, its going to cause differences in angular velocity over a 360 degree roatation, shouldnt cause a longitudinal pulsing AFAICS
By design, Hooke joints (UJs) rotate about a point which is the intersection of the 2 axes of the spider. So there's no in and out.
Thankfully!!!
cheers
Bob
PS some of the crap UJs you find in socket sets don't have intersecting axes on the spider - that would cause in/out & all sorts of wobble!
by pulsing i means the angular velocity will not be constant nothing to do with longitudinal motion.
the angle of the uj when the the 2 flanges are parallel wil be only a couple of degrees at most and therefore the pulsing effect (which will only
effect the propshaft between the joints) is fairly low. however if you put the engine in at an angle the front uj could be running at anything up to
15-20 degrees at which point the pulsing becomes far greater. this pulsing is going to cause fatigue on the welded joint at the front end of the prop
which will lead eventually to failure. prop failures arent a good thing and can trash both the car and the driver.
therefore you do not want to be running the joints at any angle larger than is necessary and preferably as low as possible. so keep the output
flange parallel with the diff flange or at most maybe 5 degrees off (engine pointing towards the righthand side)
[Edited on 24/4/06 by cossey]
I'm confused. Could anyone draw a small diagram explaining this for me?
Adam
adam, if you get a lego universal joint and bend it to 90 degrees, you will see! You have to turn each side alternately by 180 degrees This is the
same effect taken to the extreme.
When i was mounting my engine...
i did the plane way wy?
you need to compensate..
Sow in fact you want the diff (or centre bearing flange) on the same plane as the engine output flange..
it would give you the minimal vibrations and trouble. While one UJ needs to popout on the other side it will popin...etc..
I have now a angle on my prop of minimal 20degrees..
it works great and in first and second no vibrations...(could test the rest)
the only problem/mental problem i have is that as anyone knows the UJ wants to straighten itself up...
sow the bearingloads on the engine bearing and the centre bearing will be sky high when using big angels....(and high revs)
thats the reason i'm now bulding a transmission box to be able to put everything in its centre place/plane...
and take away the load from the engine bearing/centre bearing and the UJ's.
Tks
in the attachment pdf you see the gearbox i'm going to build.
in it there will be oil, chain and 2 pinions wich will also make my 3,92 diff to a 3,62 one...
any comments are welcome..
- Aluminio==> Aluminium (Alloy)
- C25 ==> carbon steel 0,25C right guys??
etc..
Attachment
[Edited on 27/4/06 by tks]
quote:
Originally posted by tks
When i was mounting my engine...
i did the plane way wy?
you need to compensate..
Sow in fact you want the diff (or centre bearing flange) on the same plane as the engine output flange..
it would give you the minimal vibrations and trouble. While one UJ needs to popout on the other side it will popin...etc..
I have now a angle on my prop of minimal 20degrees..
it works great and in first and second no vibrations...(could test the rest)
the only problem/mental problem i have is that as anyone knows the UJ wants to straighten itself up...
sow the bearingloads on the engine bearing and the centre bearing will be sky high when using big angels....(and high revs)
thats the reason i'm now bulding a transmission box to be able to put everything in its centre place/plane...
and take away the load from the engine bearing/centre bearing and the UJ's.
Tks
in the attachment pdf you see the gearbox i'm going to build.
in it there will be oil, chain and 2 pinions wich will also make my 3,92 diff to a 3,62 one...
any comments are welcome..
- Aluminio==> Aluminium (Alloy)
- C25 ==> carbon steel 0,25C right guys??
etc..
Cossey
You are absolutely correct in what you are saying, but in reality, there are very few bec 7's out there with parallel faces...
All the ones I have seen have the engine offset slightly and running parallel to the top left chassis rail..
It is not ideal, but a product of the space you have to work with...
Perhaps the Torque resiliant tube soaks up some of the vibes?
here is a pic of mine
another pic
[Edited on 27/4/06 by G.Man]
The needings are simple you need to be in the same plane not centric (Not nececary) best performance would you have if you donīt use any angle in any
direccion..
in fact you take away the need of a UJ.
IN the pic you see the 2 situations.
The first 2 is the minimal needings (the same plane)
Left one islooking from above the other when looking from the engine side.
(for 3d you need minimal 2 2D sketches)
the last one is the ideal one..wich just means straight to..
Regards,
Tks
Rescued attachment PLane.JPG
quote:
Originally posted by chris mason
My prop uses cv joints instead of u/j's, if it's good enough for a mass produced honda then it's good enough for me
Chris
quote:
Originally posted by G.Man
Cossey
You are absolutely correct in what you are saying, but in reality, there are very few bec 7's out there with parallel faces...
All the ones I have seen have the engine offset slightly and running parallel to the top left chassis rail..
It is not ideal, but a product of the space you have to work with...
Perhaps the Torque resiliant tube soaks up some of the vibes?
here is a pic of mine
another pic
[Edited on 27/4/06 by G.Man]
R1 is a different beast to the zx12r due to its stacked gearbox...
Mine is as far over to the drivers side as possible without losing footwell space, a no no with my size 11 feet...
Fury doesnt compare to a 7 as the engine bay is wider as well as the passenger compartment ... If you look at where the pivots on the wish bones are,
then bear in mind on a 7 they are in the same position, but outboard of the frame rails you will get the drift....
It may be striker geometry, but the dimensions are very different...
It just wasnt possible to go parellel on the sprocket-reverse box shaft, but as i say, some of the vibe will be absorbed by the TRT I fitted...
something far more critical on a bec IMHO
quote:
Originally posted by G.Man
You are absolutely correct in what you are saying, but in reality, there are very few bec 7's out there with parallel faces...
All the ones I have seen have the engine offset slightly and running parallel to the top left chassis rail..
quote:
Originally posted by G.Man
R1 is a different beast to the zx12r due to its stacked gearbox...
Mine is as far over to the drivers side as possible without losing footwell space, a no no with my size 11 feet...
Fury doesnt compare to a 7 as the engine bay is wider as well as the passenger compartment ... If you look at where the pivots on the wish bones are, then bear in mind on a 7 they are in the same position, but outboard of the frame rails you will get the drift....
It may be striker geometry, but the dimensions are very different...
It just wasnt possible to go parellel on the sprocket-reverse box shaft, but as i say, some of the vibe will be absorbed by the TRT I fitted... something far more critical on a bec IMHO
Parallel faces doesn't require that
the angle is 0 degrees beaware of that!!
Parallel faces is nothing more then that
that both flanges are 90degrees to the same plane...
like in the sketch!!
ok will try this way.
In fact an prop axle makes a Z patron..
the top of the z ( - ) is the flange plane..
the / of the z is the prop
the bottom - is the diff flange plane..
what the UJ requires is that the angles are the same (like in the Z)...
then its a bonus if you can get the angle (in every direction of the / as low as possible..)
what couldn't work will be that one UJ
is straight... and the other does have angle...that would be bad and give vibrations..
one UJ has to compensate the other..
i aligned my engine with the radiator member..
Reg.
Tks
TKS
we understand, but to have a parallel face to the axle, the engine must be square in the chassis...
Chris
It depends on the motor install, with a blade or r1, its easier, with a zx12r and the Busa, its far more difficult due to the length of the motor..
Cossey
Again, the R1 is a better install due to its stacked gearbox... its a short motor...
But hey, there are enough running of both types to have shown any issues by now
quote:
Originally posted by G.Man
TKS
we understand, but to have a parallel face to the axle, the engine must be square in the chassis...
Chris
It depends on the motor install, with a blade or r1, its easier, with a zx12r and the Busa, its far more difficult due to the length of the motor..
Cossey
Again, the R1 is a better install due to its stacked gearbox... its a short motor...
But hey, there are enough running of both types to have shown any issues by now
Yup, oil filter changes...
It has just enuff room to unscrew the oil filter....
If you say squera mounted wy didnīt you do it then??
Its the first rule IMHO to follow a succesfull
vibr. level.
Siw IMO you should have less room between the chasis rail and the cil most away from you (when in the car)
The gap between the rail and cil 1 should be bigger in fact creating the angle that member is mounted on...
anyway the oil filter change is a bloddy good reason for doing it this way.
Tks
TKS
Because it wasnt possible to get the engine where we wanted with the ZX12R..
no, actually it was, but would have meant a big compromise to the driver footwell area which meant a poor driving experience for my 6'5"
frame...
Oil filter change took me about an hour last time, it was that hard to get off... Had to pierce with a screwdriver as there was no room to get a
filter wrench or a strap in there properly...
Believe me, Marc and I worked for ages to figure out the best engine positon.. In the end something had to be sacrificed, and I took the risk of
vibration, as that is what he has on hi R1 powered car I went in, and the vibes were not an issue...
I agree its not an engineering perfect way to do it, what I am saying is that in reality it makes little difference...
A transfer box would have been best I guess, then I could move the engine more forward and have had more room for the dry sump plumbing
i believe you offcourse,
tellus how is live at cyprus and wich language do they speak over there?
How is the MOT going on??
Tks
Life is good, they speak english and greek, or a version of both anyway... lol
MOT will be done as soon as my drive is useable, hopefully week or so..
Certainly given me some food for thought this thread.
I might take a more serious look at chopping 6" or so out of the passenger footwell to put the engine in a wider bit of the chassis. I'm
sure there's far more length in there than you need.
I like the idea of CV joints if I could get hold of some that were suitable for the purpose.
I did toy with the idea of a halfshaft off some suitably high powered car to bring drive back to the middle of the car and square it up, then a fairly
conventional prop from there to the back, but I'm quite wary of spinning the things at 3.5 times their designed speed.