Rallye_Mark
|
| posted on 31/5/08 at 08:39 PM |
|
|
Tiger Z100 - How do the engines join?
I am curious to how the engines join in the Tiger Z100 that has the twin motorbike engines.
Would it be possible to join the output shaft of the gearbox to the crankshaft of the other engine and making sure both engines change gear at the
same time?
Thanks for any input, cheers Mark
|
|
|
|
|
mackei23b
|
| posted on 31/5/08 at 08:43 PM |
|
|
The Tiger uses a Z Cars transfer box, 2 input shafts and 1 out put.
Cheers
Ian
|
|
|
oliwb
|
| posted on 1/6/08 at 08:00 AM |
|
|
Why not just copy the Z100WR and have the two engines driving each axle. ie one engine driving the front two wheels and one driving the rear? Oli.
If your not living life on the edge you're taking up too much room!
|
|
|
ChrisGamlin
|
| posted on 1/6/08 at 10:24 AM |
|
|
quote:
Originally posted by oliwb
Why not just copy the Z100WR and have the two engines driving each axle. ie one engine driving the front two wheels and one driving the rear? Oli.
...because you need £10k's worth of Motec ECU to manage the engines sufficiently to even make it think about going round corners! 
Have a look at this website, its a mate of mine's Twin ZX9 Westfield that used the
Z Cars transfer box etc. There's some pics of the transfer box in the modifications page.
Basically though, you couldnt reliably link the gearboxes because gearboxes don't act 100% reliably. Occasionally you'll get a false
neutral where it won't properly engage, or it may even baulk and not change at all. If you have no means of recovering from that, you'll
quickly demolish a gearbox if its clattering away in a false neutral whilst being driven along by the other engine.
You certainly couldnt link the output shaft of one engine to the crankshaft of the other engine because the crankshaft speed is not the same as the
output shaft speed! The only possible way of doing it is to link both crankshafts and output it through a single gearbox, but that's not really
feasible, certainly not achievable without casting new bottom ends for the engines etc.
[Edited on 1/6/08 by ChrisGamlin]
|
|
|
MikeRJ
|
| posted on 1/6/08 at 12:44 PM |
|
|
quote:
Originally posted by ChrisGamlin
quote:
Originally posted by oliwb
Why not just copy the Z100WR and have the two engines driving each axle. ie one engine driving the front two wheels and one driving the rear? Oli.
...because you need £10k's worth of Motec ECU to manage the engines sufficiently to even make it think about going round corners!
How have all the other twin engined cars in the past managed? The twini mini had two stone age carburettored engines and was pretty quick (when it
was trying to kill John Cooper due to a snapped steering arm). There is a twin Mi16 engined Pug 205 project on the net if you serach that is managing
very well on stock ECU's etc.
I think the whole synchronisation thing is massively overstated.
|
|
|
ChrisGamlin
|
| posted on 1/6/08 at 01:08 PM |
|
|
The WR twin was 4wd with one engine driving each end, so without the electronics to temper the front engine when you turn in, it would plough on like
mad according to those who drive it. I guess other twin cars with one engine driving each axle have been significantly heavier and probably less
powerful, so may not have so much of a problem?
Most of the BEC twins have been RWD with both engines hooked up to the same exle, so that problem doesnt arise obviously.
[Edited on 1/6/08 by ChrisGamlin]
|
|
|
.jpg){kind=avatar}
