magicman

Couldn't have said it better myself... But I can say it bigger... That is one sexy fork!

I'm kind of interested to hear your long term opinion on the lightened flywheel. Normally when you go lighter it makes the motor twitchier, as in it's easier to make quick rpm changes. On our bike, where it's already quite "throttle sensitive", I'll be eager to hear how it runs in "cruise" mode on the highway, or you know, getting to your fun places... Otherwise, I'm very excited by your entire project, and can't wait to see your results. And then when you decide to toro-charge it too. :laughing6-hehe:

If only there were another 9hp to be found... Then you would have doubled the stock output! I wonder if those e3 diamond fire plugs work... :fing02:

Yowzah!

As an open and inquisitive mind, I applaud you for your efforts and eagerly await results! I think part of the reason this is not a popular technology is the whole power draw issue. How many of the people who would honestly consider building a rig to test it in the original pioneering days would have had a motorcycle to do it with. And more importantly, a Stator based charging system. Best of luck, and be sure to continue to make regular updates with even minor results.

This way also sounds cooler, and therefore he can probably charge WAY more too. :goofy:

I still think an "electronic" Rally style, slap shifter will be the easiest and most reliable option. It's just Up/Down momentary switches, wired to any number of linear actuators/gear reduced motor options, that would work in parallel to shift both motors at the same time. The boolean logic diagram is ridiculously simple, the only oddity being Neutral, but you can simply ad a separate button to do the half shift from 1st or 2nd. It would be much simpler to build, and WAY easier to route.

What the Whyte PRST 4? yeah I want one! You can't pedal standing up (honk) very well but they 'float' over anything rough x-country. have a look at the new whyte bike's rear quad-link/tara swingarm works. Whyte was a ex-F1 benetton suspension designer. Done rear's for Marin bikes too. :laugh: That totally just reminded me of that Turbo Encabulator video...

Now that's just fantastic.

Great read! Didn't Codewriter use a vacuum solenoid to turn off the autotune on decel?

I've been following this for quite a while, and I'm glad to see you getting it together. Take your time and get it right. The suspense is worth it.

Do keep up, mate! You're right, but GreenVFR was exiled from the UK-based HondaVFRClub over a year ago; I was actually permanently banned from there last week...Ciao, Sounds like a pair of awesome (or lame) stories... I took my buddies 636 out the other week. I need a kit. And to retune my suspesion (upgrade it). But I need more power!

So are we going to get to see this thing by the spring or what?

Oh, just incase you didn't already know... Since you're going to use a VTEC motor, make sure you get the same revision. 2002-2005 are the same, but the ECU (and maybe more) changed from 06+

Keep in mind 4100 RPM is just the start of the usable power this motor makes. With the turbos that might be fine, but with just the dual motors, I'd suggest some shorter gearing and bring that up... You also don't need to be geared to hit 200+ (or do you?). I just noticed something that might look a bit confusing. My labeled "Primary Ratio" in the spec range refers to the first external sprocket set. The factory internal "primary ratio" is just that. Internal. I didn't notice that until reading your post. The 1.939 factory internal primary is already taken into the calculation. The value in the box is adjustable as it would be the first stage of external gearing. I'm also not sure what having a .5 stage would do to your torque output. I'm not certain that a 3.7 immediately following would recoup that halving of power. I imagine that halving the ratio would make it much harder to turn that shaft. There by placing undue stress on the sprockets and chain. I'd keep all the gears about as close to one another as possible. Get the tallest rear you can get your hands on, and try to keep the mid gears closer to 1:1. Anything on the positive side of 1 should be beneficial. Try these figures: 23.7 3.7 .85 .9 6 156.4 156.4mph would be your theoretical limit, if your rebuilt motors had the same 11,750RPM redline. That would also put your 65mph cruising rpm at just under 4900. I'm not sure if the numbers are perfect, but here is a dyno run for a stock bike: The HP difference between 4100 and 4900 is almost 10hp. That shorter gearing would make same gear passing much easier. VTEC (if you didn't mess with it) would kick in at ~90 mph in 6th. ~68mph in 4th, and ~60mph in 3rd. Then you would get the full pull through 3rd, up to ~100mph. Maybe an actual engineer will stumble through here and voice their opinions...

Well, things have gotten quite a bit more complex, but I believe I have gotten the spreadsheet to take the internal primary, and each (selectable) individual gear ratio into consideration. I've even tried a different layout to make it a little more user friendly. I also left the listings of the factory (internal) gear ratios at the bottom for quick reference (and don't delete them :rolleyes:). Although, all you need to do is use the drop down to select the gear you wish to see the mph:rpm ratings for. Obviously, you can change the other specs on the left as well... Let me know if you have any questions! :blink: Ratios.xls

So, I did up a little spread sheet. You can play with your tire height, and all three ratio points. It calculates your tire circumference and resultant Rear Wheel RPM at various speeds (in MPH for your convenience :offtopic:). It then takes your input ratios (in reverse order) to give you the engine RPM at those speeds. Green figures you can change, red are formulas (leave them unless you see an error). Now, I don't know all the formulas needed to calculate the actual torque being applied, but it will help you in figuring out what needs to be done where. From the quick groupings I did, it looked like you wanted the tallest rear (smallest value), and some very tall mid and primary gears, or your engine RPMs get ridiculous. Good news is that having close to 1:1 ratios up front means small sprockets. Gives you more space to work. Let me know what you think, and if I forgot anything. Have fun! EDIT: Oh, bollocks. I goofed. That would not give you engine RPM, but output shaft RPM. 6th Gear would be the closest to true considering it's ratio of 0.965:1. I'll fix that in a minute or two. Ratios.xls

That sounds like a good job for MS excel. On the bike, in 6th, 100kph=~4500rpm. You'd probably want to go a bit higher, but probably not over 5800 for 100kph. Otherwise you're going to start to get a bit buzzy at speed. Stock gearing for that is 16:43 for the sprockets. If I get a chance this afternoon, I'll see if I can break that down into a simple formula for you. It would of course take your tire size into account as well. I'm guessing you'll go with the dual stage, as it would be more flexible, and also add some adjustment to gearing.

The sprockets are going to be your limiting factor for clearance. You've got considerably more mass to move, so getting your ratios right is either going to require some fairly large diameter sprockets, or a really low geared rear diff.

That's basically what I was trying to suggest. You could either have the motor off to the side and hopefully you'd even have enough room so you only need the one stage of chain to have them hook directly into your drive shaft. If not you could have the motors only slightly offset and two stage it. They would run chains heading into the left side of the engine bay onto a dual sprocket shaft, and then from that shaft another stage would run back to your central drive shaft. That would allow you to center the motors a bit more, which would probably help in the header department too.

I very much love these ideas. I know that you'll figure something out. There are lots of RC vehicles that run with dual motors. I mention that not to say it can (obviously) be done, but to point out that the motors all have a similar drive out put. A shaft to which you would mount a sprocket (or gear). There are many, many solutions out there, so take a scan through and you might find something inspirational. Heck, one of the local bike builders (now deceased) built a couple multi-motor bikes. http://www.toadscycle.com/customBikes.htm. So, the layout you've described sounds more like you're going to build a W8 rather than a V8. I would actually suggest putting the motors side by side, both facing to the right (so drive output shaft would be pointing to the nose of the car). I would do as SEBSPEED suggested and just run both motors with normal sprocket outputs through short distance chains to a drive shaft with dual sprockets. That way they will both be turning the same direction, the same distance apart (which you would have to make adjustable to compensate for chain stretch). This would also allow you to install the motor(s) longitudinally in the right half of the engine bay with the outputs in line with the central drive shaft. This leaves space on the left half for your turbos/inter-cooler, battery (if not in the trunk), brake master and clutch master cylinders (remember, all these motors have hydraulically driven clutches). Alternatively, you could mount them in the V8 configuration transversely (East-West) with the same gear/chain drives and a small diff in between. You would only have one motors width between the sprockets to fit it though. The output of the diff would lead to your RWD drive shaft. If you REALLY don't like the sprocket idea, I'd suggest grabbing some shaft driven V4s. Such as from a Magna. You could set them up in the V8 formation, and have two output shafts coming out of the back of each block. Run them through their own hubs if you want, or into some diffs to convert them to turning your main drive shaft and that way you can basically lock them in place. I think that may be the easiest option. Especially with the Cam gear problem mentioned before. They also came in 1100s. :excl: The problem you're going to encounter though is linking the cranks. If you don't, it would still run just fine. They wouldn't even need to be in the same gear (assuming you don't over rev one). You'd obviously lose that sound you were looking for though. So, keeping the motors running at the same RPM no matter what is going to be key. You'll also need to make sure that the clutches engage/disengage together to prevent undue stresses. Getting used motors, that'll most likely mean rebuilt clutch packs/springs/etc. Make sure everything is new, and theoretically it should all have the same specs and functionality. As far as synchronizing the shifting, I would probably suggest either an electric or pneumatic type shifter. That way you don't need to worry about getting your linkages adjusted, or having them bend or any other similar problem. It would also eliminate the problem of trying to route the rods as well. You could just end up with a rally style, up/down quick shifter. That'd be pimp! And more importantly very easy to make electrically. The only hard part would be for putting it into neutral. But a separate button beside the shifter could be installed to command an only 1/2-2/3 push on the lever. Electric linear actuators aren't terribly expensive, and the Boolean logic would be super simple to convert into a small form factor relay based control module. Building that would also leave a ready to rock system to incorporate the electric reverse. If Neutral=True, then reverse can be engaged. Simple (the logic anyway). Best of luck! Make sure you keep us up to date!

Yowsa! Well, I guess I'm not going to find out how much it weighs... :goofy:

Man, I love the 35. But I think I'd rather have a 30 with all your goodies on it. That'd be the hotness! I know they were only rated at like 63hp or something like that, but is there anything you can do about that? Someone must have made some cams or something for them... Any idea of what it weighs now?

Actually, that depends on where you are. Summer didn't arrive in Nova Scotia until August. It just hovered around the 20C mark and rained for the J months. That is partially atypical. This was supposedly the coldest summer on record, and I can attest that last year was not nearly this "chilly". Some fog and rain is normal of course. Keeps it nice and mild here. There are no 40C or -40C days either.