If this is your first visit, be sure to check out the FAQ by clicking the link above. You may have to register before you can post: click the register link above to proceed. To start viewing messages, select the forum that you want to visit from the selection below. |
|
|
Thread Tools | Display Modes |
#21
|
|||
|
|||
Hyabusa flat 8
bildan wrote:
snip Keep in mind how the motorcycle works. The bike has a 6-speed gearbox whereas the airplane engine would have only one. The standard sport bike shift technique, approved by the factory, is to apply a large force to the shift lever and then tap the clutch lever when the rider wants to shift. I don't think it is, you know. ISTBC of course. -- Catman MIB#14 SKoGA#6 TEAR#4 BOTAFOF#38 Apostle#21 COSOC#3 Tyger, Tyger Burning Bright (Remove rust to reply) 116 Giulietta 3.0l Sprint 1.7 145 2.0 Cloverleaf 156 V6 2.5 S2 Triumph Sprint ST 1050: It's blue, see. www.cuore-sportivo.co.uk |
#22
|
|||
|
|||
Hyabusa flat 8
We were somewhere around Barstow, on the edge of the desert, when the
drugs began to take hold. I remember Catman saying something like: bildan wrote: snip Keep in mind how the motorcycle works. The bike has a 6-speed gearbox whereas the airplane engine would have only one. The standard sport bike shift technique, approved by the factory, is to apply a large force to the shift lever and then tap the clutch lever when the rider wants to shift. I don't think it is, you know. ISTBC of course. Some people just like rebuilding gearboxes. |
#23
|
|||
|
|||
Hyabusa flat 8
Grimly Curmudgeon wrote:
We were somewhere around Barstow, on the edge of the desert, when the drugs began to take hold. I remember Catman saying something like: bildan wrote: snip Keep in mind how the motorcycle works. The bike has a 6-speed gearbox whereas the airplane engine would have only one. The standard sport bike shift technique, approved by the factory, is to apply a large force to the shift lever and then tap the clutch lever when the rider wants to shift. I don't think it is, you know. ISTBC of course. Some people just like rebuilding gearboxes. I must confess I'm not massively keen on it. I tend to stick with the 'pull clutch, change gear, release clutch' technique. Unless I'm doing clutchless upshift, of course. -- Catman MIB#14 SKoGA#6 TEAR#4 BOTAFOF#38 Apostle#21 COSOC#3 Tyger, Tyger Burning Bright (Remove rust to reply) 116 Giulietta 3.0l Sprint 1.7 145 2.0 Cloverleaf 156 V6 2.5 S2 Triumph Sprint ST 1050: It's blue, see. www.cuore-sportivo.co.uk |
#24
|
|||
|
|||
Hyabusa flat 8
On Mar 6, 10:19*am, Grimly Curmudgeon
wrote: We were somewhere around Barstow, on the edge of the desert, when the drugs began to take hold. I remember Catman saying something like: bildan wrote: snip Keep in mind how the motorcycle works. *The bike has a 6-speed gearbox whereas the airplane engine would have only one. *The standard sport bike shift technique, approved by the factory, is to apply a large force to the shift lever and then tap the clutch lever when the rider wants to shift. I don't think it is, you know. ISTBC of course. Some people just like rebuilding gearboxes. Nope, "pre-load and clutch" is how Sport Bike constant mesh, progressive transmissions are DESIGNED to be shifted. It just shows how much abuse these engines and transmission are intended to take. |
#25
|
|||
|
|||
Hyabusa flat 8
bildan wrote:
On Mar 6, 10:19 am, Grimly Curmudgeon wrote: We were somewhere around Barstow, on the edge of the desert, when the drugs began to take hold. I remember Catman saying something like: bildan wrote: snip Keep in mind how the motorcycle works. The bike has a 6-speed gearbox whereas the airplane engine would have only one. The standard sport bike shift technique, approved by the factory, is to apply a large force to the shift lever and then tap the clutch lever when the rider wants to shift. I don't think it is, you know. ISTBC of course. Some people just like rebuilding gearboxes. Nope, "pre-load and clutch" is how Sport Bike constant mesh, progressive transmissions are DESIGNED to be shifted. It just shows how much abuse these engines and transmission are intended to take. Popcorn, anyone? -- Catman MIB#14 SKoGA#6 TEAR#4 BOTAFOF#38 Apostle#21 COSOC#3 Tyger, Tyger Burning Bright (Remove rust to reply) 116 Giulietta 3.0l Sprint 1.7 145 2.0 Cloverleaf 156 V6 2.5 S2 Triumph Sprint ST 1050: It's blue, see. www.cuore-sportivo.co.uk |
#26
|
|||
|
|||
Hyabusa flat 8
"platypus" wrote in message ... Wicked Uncle Nigel wrote: Using the patented Mavis Beacon "Hunt&Peck" Technique, "TOG@Toil" typed On 6 Mar, 11:03, bod43 wrote: On 5 Mar, 21:57, "Morgans" wrote: snip interesting stuff Maybe someone on uk.rec.motorcycles might have an idea as to the expected life span of a hyabusa engine when operated in a constant load regime, say at 130bhp. You'd need to boost the low and midrange torque to swing a prop, as props rotate relatively slowly, don't they? I think a 'Busa engine would last forever is detuned to 130bhp. Depends on the prop, but I would think that gearing down would be the way to go. The thing that everyone seems to forget when promoting automotive engines for aircraft is that most piston aero engines have a very hard life. Take-off and climb is full power or very nearly, then they throttle back to cruise at 75% or thereabouts. The only roadgoing vehicles that approach that sort of use are in motorsports, and how long do they last? Not true at all. Ever driven a gas powered motor home, pulling a boat trailer. I drove a 6500 series Chevy dump truck years ago, always pulling a Case 580C back hoe. It was 100% power almost all the time, and always at lease 75% on the highway. I have seen lots of auto engines successfully suffer MORE abuse than aircraft engines in many circumstances, and most often do it without proper maintenance. Some school bus and UHaul truck engines deserve to be in the Motor Sports Hall of Fame. But that doesn't solve all the propeller and PSRU issues. |
#27
|
|||
|
|||
Hyabusa flat 8
"vaughn" wrote in message ... "bod43" wrote in message ... I have the idea that mechanical failure of the original 4 cyl engines (or any high performance japanese bike engine) is pretty much unheard of but I am not at all sure. It matters little, because now you are making a whole new engine for a totally different application, with no track record and the distinct possibility of new and exciting failure modes. Further, the same can be said about the reiliability for most any automotive engine in its intended application, but the track record of automotive aero conversions is spotty at best. Just thinking outside the box... Since the proposed Hyabusa Flat 8 engine will need a PSRU anyhow; how about two Hyabusa engines put together into a twin-pack? The result would likely weigh a tad more than a simple flat 8, but now you have two known engines combined with twin-engine redundancy. Eliminate a lot of question marks with the experimental crank and rods too. |
#28
|
|||
|
|||
Hyabusa flat 8
On Mar 6, 10:26*am, Catman wrote:
Grimly Curmudgeon wrote: We were somewhere around Barstow, on the edge of the desert, when the drugs began to take hold. I remember Catman saying something like: bildan wrote: snip Keep in mind how the motorcycle works. *The bike has a 6-speed gearbox whereas the airplane engine would have only one. *The standard sport bike shift technique, approved by the factory, is to apply a large force to the shift lever and then tap the clutch lever when the rider wants to shift. I don't think it is, you know. ISTBC of course. Some people just like rebuilding gearboxes. I must confess I'm not massively keen on it. I tend to stick with the 'pull clutch, change gear, release clutch' technique. Unless I'm doing clutchless upshift, of course. -- Catman MIB#14 SKoGA#6 TEAR#4 BOTAFOF#38 Apostle#21 COSOC#3 Tyger, Tyger Burning Bright (Remove rust to reply) 116 Giulietta 3.0l Sprint 1.7 145 2.0 Cloverleaf 156 V6 2.5 S2 Triumph Sprint ST 1050: It's blue, see.www.cuore-sportivo.co.uk Of course! You're thinking of ENGLISH bikes - that's different. We all know how reliable those are. If the tranny can be shifted without a clutch, it's not a Japanese sport bike. My Kawasaki can't be shifted without the clutch but it shifts great with the pre-load & clutch method and has done so reliably since '86. |
#29
|
|||
|
|||
Hyabusa flat 8
bildan wrote:
On Mar 6, 10:26 am, Catman wrote: Grimly Curmudgeon wrote: We were somewhere around Barstow, on the edge of the desert, when the drugs began to take hold. I remember Catman saying something like: bildan wrote: snip Keep in mind how the motorcycle works. The bike has a 6-speed gearbox whereas the airplane engine would have only one. The standard sport bike shift technique, approved by the factory, is to apply a large force to the shift lever and then tap the clutch lever when the rider wants to shift. I don't think it is, you know. ISTBC of course. Some people just like rebuilding gearboxes. I must confess I'm not massively keen on it. I tend to stick with the 'pull clutch, change gear, release clutch' technique. Unless I'm doing clutchless upshift, of course. -- Catman MIB#14 SKoGA#6 TEAR#4 BOTAFOF#38 Apostle#21 COSOC#3 Tyger, Tyger Burning Bright (Remove rust to reply) 116 Giulietta 3.0l Sprint 1.7 145 2.0 Cloverleaf 156 V6 2.5 S2 Triumph Sprint ST 1050: It's blue, see.www.cuore-sportivo.co.uk Of course! You're thinking of ENGLISH bikes - that's different. We all know how reliable those are. If the tranny can be shifted without a clutch, it's not a Japanese sport bike. Oh dear. My Kawasaki can't be shifted without the clutch but it shifts great with the pre-load & clutch method and has done so reliably since '86. Can't afford a newer one? -- Catman MIB#14 SKoGA#6 TEAR#4 BOTAFOF#38 Apostle#21 COSOC#3 Tyger, Tyger Burning Bright (Remove rust to reply) 116 Giulietta 3.0l Sprint 1.7 145 2.0 Cloverleaf 156 V6 2.5 S2 Triumph Sprint ST 1050: It's blue, see. www.cuore-sportivo.co.uk |
#30
|
|||
|
|||
Hyabusa flat 8
"TOG@Toil" wrote in message
... On 6 Mar, 14:15, Mark Olson wrote: Wicked Uncle Nigel wrote: You'd need to boost the low and midrange torque to swing a prop, as props rotate relatively slowly, don't they? I think a 'Busa engine would last forever is detuned to 130bhp. Depends on the prop, but I would think that gearing down would be the way to go. If you're forced to use a higher-revving engine, yes- but gearboxes or belts and cogs introduce problems of their own, which is why a relatively large displacement slow-revving engine (which doesn't need four valves/cylinder, multiple chain drive cams with cam chain tensioners, etc.) makes a lot of sense for aircraft. Which was what I was thinking. I mean, what was max revs for a Merlin? Googles Hm. About 3000rpm. Just off tickover for a 'Busa. Hmm, some more... By that line of reasoning, turbines should be really problematic. No wonder FAA requires additional certification for pilots to fly turbine aircraft. Peter :-)))) |
Thread Tools | |
Display Modes | |
|
|
Similar Threads | ||||
Thread | Thread Starter | Forum | Replies | Last Post |
There I was, flat on my back... | Kyle Boatright | Home Built | 5 | August 16th 07 05:34 AM |
Flat tire | Viperdoc[_4_] | Piloting | 11 | June 4th 07 02:57 PM |
Flat Tires? | Jay Honeck | Owning | 40 | August 31st 05 01:59 AM |
Wrinkly flat panels | [email protected] | Home Built | 27 | March 6th 04 02:12 PM |
Flat Spin | JJ Sinclair | Soaring | 34 | February 10th 04 05:57 PM |