ianmccabe3
|
| posted on 25/12/05 at 05:27 PM |
|
|
what bike engine??????????
hi im looking into using a bike engine which one would you use and what do you do about reverese gear
im too lazy to get out and push the car backwards
merry christmas
ian:P
|
|
|
|
|
benji106
|
| posted on 25/12/05 at 05:31 PM |
|
|
most people are using 1 litre bike engines such as the r1, gsxr thou and fireblade, some are using busa engines and i think theres a couple building
with zx12r engines, their are pro's and con's for each but the r1 seems particularly popular.
some people are using a reverse motor, you'll have to wait for someone with more knowledge than me for an in depth answer.
-Everything in excess-
|
|
|
jambojeef
|
| posted on 25/12/05 at 05:49 PM |
|
|
Hi there,
Theres as many engines as there are bikes for you to choose from!
Depends on how much cash you've got and what you're after (like so may things).
If you've got loads of cash I would go for a busa engine and dry sump it. You might be looking at £2-3000 - I havent been watching prices though
so could be cheaper than that.
If you're on a budget, like me, you could go for a CBR1000 which you can pick up for the low hundreds. 135bhp reliably but a bit heavier than
the crop of R1s Blades etc.
In between these two engines are the R1s, Blades, GSXRs and stuff which are around 140 - 150bhp or more if you go for later engines.
If you dont go in line 4 cylinder theres Pan Europeans, TL1000Rs, Ducatis, Aprilias and all sorts - not to mention triumph triples and BMWs - take
your pick!
bikez.com has a fair few bike model to look at - although their info on the CBR1000 seems a little off the mark - but it gives you a flavour!
Sorry thats a bit waffley - im a few beers down the line from xmas dinner!
Geoff
|
|
|
G.Man
|
| posted on 25/12/05 at 06:39 PM |
|
|
Kawasaki ZX12R, dry sumped..
Quaiffe reverse box (midway along the driveshaft)..
180+ BHP, more than a Busa, stronger internals as standard and a lot cheaper...
Opinions are like backsides..
Everyone has one, nobody wants to hear it and only other peoples stink!
|
|
|
fesycresy
|
| posted on 25/12/05 at 08:14 PM |
|
|
R1 with carbs, easy to wire and set up. Fuel injected a bit more difficult and possibly needs a power commander for the SVA, still unsure.
No dry sump only a baffle plate to stop oil surge and 160ish with a good exhaust.
ZX12, GSXR or Busa if your pockets are deep enough for the dry sump.
Seen some good deals on ZX12's lately. Have a chat to Sillybugger on the forum, he knows what he's talking about and will sort you out a
motor.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
The sooner you fall behind, the more time you'll have to catch up.
|
|
|
OX
|
| posted on 25/12/05 at 11:23 PM |
|
|
well g man ,i think your the only man i know who thinks the zx 12 is internaly stronger than a busa and from what iv seen so far the busa and zx12
are roughly the same price and both could do with a dry sump kit ,,,kwak engines are good torqy engines but youv been drinking to much if you think
they have the bullet proof reputation of the suzuki  ..
id stay away from the gsxr 1000 as these seem to be a week link for a kitcar also the 175 bhp r1 engine is an unknown (high revs high horse power only
1000cc and no bottom end)
if you wanna keep it simple have the r1 ,blade or zx9
|
|
|
froggy
|
| posted on 26/12/05 at 09:26 AM |
|
|
i stand to be corrected but it appears that a lot of motorcycle engines seem to gain a good few bhp just by being fitted to a car ive yet to see a
carbed cbr900 make over 115 so 140-150 is excellent ,how is this acheived?
|
|
|
fesycresy
|
| posted on 26/12/05 at 09:51 AM |
|
|
Thats the bullshit factor. But, 04 R1's do make 175 and 02/03 R1's make 160ish.
If you take into account the transmission losses, well who knows ? I'll have to wait for the dyno sheet to see.
Anyone dyno'd an R1 in a car ?
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
The sooner you fall behind, the more time you'll have to catch up.
|
|
|
froggy
|
| posted on 26/12/05 at 10:15 AM |
|
|
it would be really interesting to see some real world figures for the most common setups like 40-70 in top gear etc and where peak torque is in
different engines. im not knocking bec,s as im doing one myself but the downside of using a bike engine doesnt get much attention.
i drove a demonstrator a couple of years ago with a blade engine and it was hysterical for about half an hour but the main thing that struck me was
the single minded nature of the engine. im sure that the more modern engines have much better torque much lower down the rev range, as the car i drove
was really pathetic below 5000rpm. just my opinion by the way
|
|
|
GEORGE80
|
| posted on 26/12/05 at 10:22 AM |
|
|
hi all, i recomend the fazer 1000, it has more torque than the r1 do to the heads being reworked and it is noticbly quiker than an r1 when installed
ina kit car, plus u can jet them up more
|
|
|
Hellfire
|
| posted on 26/12/05 at 10:25 AM |
|
|
Like Ox says if you want to keep it simple, go for a Blade, R1 or ZX9R. None of these engines will disappoint
Unless you really need one, don't bother with reverse, they're nothing but trouble.
I reckon ZX12R's are still a fair bit cheaper than Busa's but because they are newer, haven't quite got the reputation of a Busa
just yet.
|
|
|
froggy
|
| posted on 26/12/05 at 10:25 AM |
|
|
do you have any figures to compare?
the fazer1000 is around the 115bhp mark isnt it?
|
|
|
G.Man
|
| posted on 26/12/05 at 11:24 AM |
|
|
quote:
Originally posted by OX
well g man ,i think your the only man i know who thinks the zx 12 is internaly stronger than a busa and from what iv seen so far the busa and zx12
are roughly the same price and both could do with a dry sump kit ,,,kwak engines are good torqy engines but youv been drinking to much if you think
they have the bullet proof reputation of the suzuki ..
id stay away from the gsxr 1000 as these seem to be a week link for a kitcar also the 175 bhp r1 engine is an unknown (high revs high horse power only
1000cc and no bottom end)
if you wanna keep it simple have the r1 ,blade or zx9
Well I guess that comes from my years as a BSB technician...
Dont forget the starter idler case on the busa is an issue, so its hardly bulletproof...
The Busa was mainly picked as it is a 1300, but the kwack has more torque, and more bhp and can cope with more rpm on stock components... the gearbox
on the Suzuki is stronger tho....
Fazer Thou is around 145bhp, but can be brought to R1 performance with a few mods (cams, carbs)...
As for price, I paid £1800 for a 4,000 mile zx12r complete, a similar Busa would have cost closer £3,000 both before fitting the dry sump...
However, now the zx12r engines are getting more popular in BEC racing, I can see them moving up in price...
My fave for all round would be the R1, the fazer has different engine mount lugs so may not be supported by all chassis manufacturers (NP if you are
building your own cradle)...
[Edited on 26/12/05 by G.Man]
Opinions are like backsides..
Everyone has one, nobody wants to hear it and only other peoples stink!
|
|
|
G.Man
|
| posted on 26/12/05 at 02:50 PM |
|
|
quote:
Originally posted by scotlad
Who on earth drives their bec below 5000rpm? kinda misses the point a bit!!! Surely thats what a gearbox is for??? My old carb blade is flat as a
pancake up to 5k but after that it pulls like a train- no prizes for guessing how i drive it........
Only when parking/manouvering it... lol (under 5k)
Opinions are like backsides..
Everyone has one, nobody wants to hear it and only other peoples stink!
|
|
|
scotlad
|
| posted on 26/12/05 at 02:50 PM |
|
|
quote:
Originally posted by froggy
it would be really interesting to see some real world figures for the most common setups like 40-70 in top gear etc and where peak torque is in
different engines. im not knocking bec,s as im doing one myself but the downside of using a bike engine doesnt get much attention.
i drove a demonstrator a couple of years ago with a blade engine and it was hysterical for about half an hour but the main thing that struck me was
the single minded nature of the engine. im sure that the more modern engines have much better torque much lower down the rev range, as the car i drove
was really pathetic below 5000rpm. just my opinion by the way
Who on earth drives their bec below 5000rpm? kinda misses the point a bit!!! Surely thats what a gearbox is for??? My old carb blade is flat as a
pancake up to 5k but after that it pulls like a train- no prizes for guessing how i drive it........
|
|
|
OX
|
| posted on 26/12/05 at 02:52 PM |
|
|
yes the starter idler shaft and gear were week on the earlier busa and the cases were only a problem on a limited amount but this wasnt helped by the
amount of noobs who were trying to start there bike with a low battery and on full throttle ,early triumphs up untill they went fuel injected had the
same problem .
i belive early zx12's had clutch problems,but dont all bikes have teething when there new
|
|
|
froggy
|
| posted on 26/12/05 at 05:54 PM |
|
|
" who drives their bec below 5000rpm?"
or should that be "can anyone drive their bec below 5000rpm"
come on somebody must admit that that the big trade off for mega revs and excellent power to weight is poor torque and general driveability for road
use?
|
|
|
G.Man
|
| posted on 26/12/05 at 06:03 PM |
|
|
indeed, some A1 zx12r's had problems with the clutches...
Opinions are like backsides..
Everyone has one, nobody wants to hear it and only other peoples stink!
|
|
|
OX
|
| posted on 26/12/05 at 07:27 PM |
|
|
froggy ,your only up the road from me,come on down and let me take you out ,theres no lack of bottom end power .
from a stand still i can pull away in second with only tickover revs and 3rd from a stand still reving it to 3000 rpm.
40-70 in top gear isnt a problem ,it still pulls like a train but unless your drving like miss daisy why would you want to,just knock it down a gear
and listen to the music
|
|
|
zxrlocost
|
| posted on 26/12/05 at 11:56 PM |
|
|
yes and he has a very long private test track outside his house which he likes to use to accelerate up and do about 350 donuts at the end then thunder
back down.
So basically if you like to shite yourself take him up on his offer
|
PLEASE NOTE: This user is a trader who has not signed up for the LocostBuilders registration scheme. If this post is advertising a commercial product or service, please report it by clicking here.
|
arseface
|
| posted on 27/12/05 at 08:50 AM |
|
|
quote:
Originally posted by G.Man
quote:
Originally posted by OX
well g man ,i think your the only man i know who thinks the zx 12 is internaly stronger than a busa and from what iv seen so far the busa and zx12
are roughly the same price and both could do with a dry sump kit ,,,kwak engines are good torqy engines but youv been drinking to much if you think
they have the bullet proof reputation of the suzuki ..
id stay away from the gsxr 1000 as these seem to be a week link for a kitcar also the 175 bhp r1 engine is an unknown (high revs high horse power only
1000cc and no bottom end)
if you wanna keep it simple have the r1 ,blade or zx9
Well I guess that comes from my years as a BSB technician...
Dont forget the starter idler case on the busa is an issue, so its hardly bulletproof...
The Busa was mainly picked as it is a 1300, but the kwack has more torque, and more bhp and can cope with more rpm on stock components... the gearbox
on the Suzuki is stronger tho....
Fazer Thou is around 145bhp, but can be brought to R1 performance with a few mods (cams, carbs)...
As for price, I paid £1800 for a 4,000 mile zx12r complete, a similar Busa would have cost closer £3,000 both before fitting the dry sump...
However, now the zx12r engines are getting more popular in BEC racing, I can see them moving up in price...
My fave for all round would be the R1, the fazer has different engine mount lugs so may not be supported by all chassis manufacturers (NP if you are
building your own cradle)...
[Edited on 26/12/05 by G.Man]
Just come back to this site after a few years. The Busa is the Daddy of bike engines, if you look at the crank you can clearly see it is much
stronger than the ZX12. The ZX12 is a great engne but it has more in common with the ZX9, the Busa is a different animal.
The busa gearbox is a work of art, it is capable of taking over 300 lb ft and surviving try that with a ZX12.
Drag race busa engines are making a reliable 600hp on the standard crank, cases and head only the pistons and conrods need to be changed with the
output shaft plus some fasteners. These are common not the exception.
Have a look at these Turbo Busa Vids
G Man, out of interest which BSB team uses Busa engines ? What power are they getting from them ?
John
[Edited on 27/12/05 by arseface]
|
|
|
G.Man
|
| posted on 27/12/05 at 09:52 AM |
|
|
The team I was in ran Suzuki GSXR 1000's
But our team tuned all bikes for powerbike teams and other MRO champs as well as drag bikes...
Funny how so many of these very tough hayabusa engines seem to break so easily in the racing...
Lots of drag motors are rebuilt after 2-3 runs... and lots more of them blow up...
Its the pistons and rods I regard as the weak link compared to the kwack, I already stated the gearbox in the Busa is stronger than the kwack, you
even quoted that...
:p
The busa has been running longer than the zx12 and now the zx12 is catching up... but it will never be as popular as the Busa in drag racing I fear,
as there is rarely a substitute for Cubes in drag classes..
PS how many of those 600bhp Busa engines go pop? Coz last time I saw some run, quite a few went bang...
Opinions are like backsides..
Everyone has one, nobody wants to hear it and only other peoples stink!
|
|
|
froggy
|
| posted on 27/12/05 at 11:22 AM |
|
|
ok il narrow it down a bit. most big bike engines make between 70-90 ftlb at near enough full rpm ,for example what does an r1 produce at 6000rpm?
just trying to get an idea of how the bec compares when not being driven in loon mode
|
|
|
G.Man
|
| posted on 27/12/05 at 12:23 PM |
|
|
A BEC will pull away on idle and is more than happy being driven in non-loon mode...
The primary reduction and close ratio gearbox makes them fairly easy to drive normally but they require a bit more work on the box to get the best
from them as the torque is not there like a car engine...
No use looking at the numbers as they dont reflect the way the car drives...
Opinions are like backsides..
Everyone has one, nobody wants to hear it and only other peoples stink!
|
|
|
ChrisGamlin
|
| posted on 27/12/05 at 01:24 PM |
|
|
quote:
Originally posted by froggy
ok il narrow it down a bit. most big bike engines make between 70-90 ftlb at near enough full rpm ,for example what does an r1 produce at 6000rpm?
just trying to get an idea of how the bec compares when not being driven in loon mode
Here we go again
When asking that you need to understand that just because you know the torque at the crank at a certain rpm, it gives you little idea of how the
engine actually pulls at those revs. At 4-6k a bike engine may only produce 50-60lbft, but because its so low geared you get just as much torque at
the wheels as a 100lbft car engine say at 3k rpm, so both will pull equally as well because its at the wheels where it matters, not at the crank.
|
|
|
.jpg){kind=avatar}
