Motorcycle.com

mscuddy · 05-08-2010, 08:08 PM

Read this. You might have to read it two or three times, because it's very technical, but after you read it, and don't consider how many lives decisions like this touch, and the ultimate consiquence of ignoring what works for what doesn't, is a daming verdict for Honda.

Taken from another website:

"Let's look now at what Honda was doing just before they announced to the world, "No more two-strokes!" The story really begins a long time ago when people discovered that two-stroke engines would sometimes run without spark-ignition. That is, one could pull off the sparkplug lead, while the engine was running, and it would continue to run as if nothing had changed. People said, "It's dieseling."

Actually, what was happening was very different from combustion in a diesel engine. The phenomenon was best explored by Shigeru Onishi in the 1970s. He called it "Active Thermo-Atmosphere Combustion (ATAC)." He said, "With ATAC the fuel consumption and exhaust emissions of two-stroke cycle, spark-ignition engines are remarkably improved, and noise and vibration are reduced." He eventually showed that a carbureted two-stroke engine could be more efficient (lower fuel consumption) than a diesel engine. But only within a narrow range of speed-load conditions.

In the 1990s, Honda R&D Chief Engineer, Yoichi Ishibashi, wanted to clean up two-stroke motorcycle engines. He called ATAC: "Activated Radical (AR) Combustion." Onishi's engines ran generators at nearly a constant speed. Ishibashi needed to greatly extend the range where AR combustion was stable. He found that throttling the exhaust was the secret. He developed a 400-cc single-cylinder engine. For real-world testing, several of these EXP-2 engines were put in endurance-racing chassis. They ran in the Granada-Dakar Rally and the Baja 1000. The results were good enough for Ishibashi to press on and develop the engine further.

Two bikes were entered in the Dakar - both finished. As Ely Kumli reported in 1997: "The race results were very good even though the bike was not designed to win races, but to test new technology. When the dust settled, the EXP-2 had earned 5th overall and first in both the under-500cc and experimental classes..."

As it turned out, the second-string riders had been given the better equipment! "Compared to Honda's NXR780 four-stroke twin rally race bike," said Kumli, "the EXP-2 has very similar performance, with several advantages. While the single-cylinder EXP-2 produces 54hp to the big NXR's 71hp, they both make 58 lbs-ft of torque, but the EXP-2 is 118 pounds lighter giving it a slightly better power-to-weight ratio. What all this boils down to is that the EXP-2 has about the same real-world performance as the 780, but with substantially better fuel economy and lower emissions."

As good as that sounds, Ishibashi was just beginning. The exhaust valve prevented most of the fresh charge (fuel-air mixture) from getting lost out the exhaust port, but he needed to scavenge the cylinder with air only, and admit the fuel late in the cycle. He came up with a 'pneumatic injection system' that used a standard four-stroke-type fuel injector. Ishibashi summarized the results: "...PDI-AR Combustion drastically decreases HC emission close to the level of four-stroke, and CO and NOx level is 1/5 and 1/7 of four-stroke level respectively. Furthermore, fuel consumption is improved 15% compared with the four-stroke." His English isn't perfect.

I will add: A Honda four-stroke engine giving equal performance had carbon monoxide emissions 500% higher and oxides of nitrogen emissions 700% higher than his two-stroke. Without an oxidizing catalyst, the two-stroke hydrocarbon emissions were slightly more than the four-stroke's, but with a cat, the levels of HC were the same. The CO levels dropped, but the two-strokes advantage over the four-stroke was actually greater. (NOx is unaffected by an oxidizing catalyst).

Obviously, Honda had a good engineer doing good work. He had one more song to sing before the bean-counters dropped the axe on him...

He did not begin with the long-stroke CR250, but with half of Honda's NSR500V. This was a case-reed road-racing engine with a square bore-stroke ratio - like the McGrath generation YZ250s. Honda said that it made "135-plus horsepower" at 10,500 rpm; about 68-hp for a 250.

If ten-five makes it sound like all the power was on the top end, one rider called it a "torque monster" and said the power was "similar to an open-class motocrosser". This engine was introduced at the first 500 GP, 1996. I have given these details because there has been, at least, the suggestion that the long-stroke 250 two-stroke had reached some sort of a technological limit (at less than 50-hp) and that the 450 four-stroke was some sort of a 'solution' to this 'problem'. In 2005, MotoVerde magazine (Spain) dyno tested the CRF450 and the RMZ450 and got 56-hp and 55.2-hp, respectively.

So this was the basis of Ishibashis new 'environmental conscious power unit'. But he really only used the parameters; he built a new design. He got AR Combustion to work from about 3000 rpm to peak power - meaning that the engine could operate normally within that range without an ignition system! At the very bottom, the sparkplug initiated combustion and his Pneumatic Direct Injection limited HC and CO emissions. The engine made 60-hp at 11,000 rpm.

Because the solenoid injector fed an anti-chamber - not the cylinder - its high-frequency limit did not restrict high-end power. In other words, Ishibashis approach did not require the invention of any new technology, only basic engineering. The technology required existed in the 1970s.

There was a rumor that the NSR500V might be turned into a killer street bike. Of course, that never happened. Instead, Ishibashi was sent off to design Civic door latches, or whatever...

About now, someone should be asking: "If Honda knew how to make two-strokes that are cleaner and more economical than their four-strokes, that do not require any new technology, and that could win endurance races, why didn't they produce them?"

Back in 1984, Steve Anderson (then Technical Editor of Cycle World Magazine) went to Japan for a VIP tour of Honda's (then) new racing R&D facility. There, Takeo Fukui, Design Director, "...made it clear that Honda views itself as a four-stroke company that will not be satisfied until it wins all of its championships with four-strokes." Simply put, the four-stroke engine has been company policy; in fact, it has been more of a religion.

Anderson saw, "...shelf after shelf of oval pistons..." and was told that engines were running "...with at least eight valves per cylinder..." and turbo charging. We haven't heard anything about oval pistons in a long time because, after spending umpteen millions of dollars, somebody saw that it was a really stupid idea. It was a way of getting around the racing rules. Four-strokes couldn't win within the rules, so Honda had to find some way to beat the two-strokes and/or the rules. The trouble was, no matter what the shape of the pistons, or how many valves they could stuff in, or how many rpm they could get out of them, the two-strokes kept getting faster and the four-strokes weren't even able to keep pace.

In 1995, Mick Doohan was asked how much power his NSR500 two-stroke made: "I can't tell you that, but I can tell you that if Honda produced a one-liter motor it would make upwards of 400 horsepower."

It was about that time, it seems, when one of the four-stroke monks had an epiphany: "Instead of spending more money on exotic engines," he might have said, "which hasn't been getting us anywhere, why don't we just buy the AMA and FIM and make our own rules? For instance, we could require that all two-stroke riders wear their helmets backward - if they can't find the first turn, we have to win!" And that is - sort of - what happened.

The entire article was from this site...
The Future Of Two Strokes And Dirt Bikes

silentgrayfellow · 05-09-2010, 05:53 PM

I read the whole page that you linked...very interesting and entertaining read.

mscuddy · 05-09-2010, 06:45 PM

Makes you wonder what is going on at Honda now days, doesn't it?

I wonder if they bought new furniture for AMA headquarters, or gave 'em a few cars or generators...

I like the part where Honda says "we are a four stroke company"..guess they forgot about the Elsinore & CR series.

seruzawa · 05-09-2010, 06:59 PM

When companies get big they move away from the leading edge and begin to think more about protecting their turf. That's where Honda is. They are big enough to buy all sorts of people. Unfortunately too many people have no integrity and are easily bought.

Buzglyd · 05-09-2010, 07:17 PM

Why do you think all the Wall St giants will support Zero's "economic reform?"

It will squash competitors.

mscuddy · 05-09-2010, 08:08 PM

As you can see, too many people are hip to Honda's MO now, and are yelling from the rooftops how when "Big Red" can't win, they change the rules. Wonder how long this can go on, before someone in the legal field starts digging. Would be nice to watch, wouldn't it?

Wonder how many bodys are buried?

Kenneth_Moore · 05-10-2010, 05:41 AM

Interesting read Matt. I have questions:

Companies, like people, do things for a reason. Honda is in business to make money. If they built lighter, more powerful, cleaner 2-strokes, they'd win more races and sell more bikes, and make more money. "4-Stroke Religion" would go right in the crapper if the bottom line said 2-Stroke is a winner.

What do you think Honda's motivation is for trying to quash 2-stroke technology? Is selling more parts for exploding 4 stroke engines a viable long-term corporate strategy? How long can Honda stay in business if they get a reputation for products that are unreliable? It seems to me that even if they could buy off the AMA or anybody else, they can't "buy off" the consumer. How long could this go on?

seruzawa · 05-10-2010, 06:12 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Kenneth_Moore

Interesting read Matt. I have questions:

Companies, like people, do things for a reason. Honda is in business to make money. If they built lighter, more powerful, cleaner 2-strokes, they'd win more races and sell more bikes, and make more money. "4-Stroke Religion" would go right in the crapper if the bottom line said 2-Stroke is a winner.

What do you think Honda's motivation is for trying to quash 2-stroke technology? Is selling more parts for exploding 4 stroke engines a viable long-term corporate strategy? How long can Honda stay in business if they get a reputation for products that are unreliable? It seems to me that even if they could buy off the AMA or anybody else, they can't "buy off" the consumer. How long could this go on?

They may be in business to make money, but that doesn't mean they have any vision or are smart. Sometimes bad strategic decisions are made for whatever reason. If this decision leads to loss of market share the company can either bite the bullet and play catch up or they can use their wealth to buy influence. History shows which course is chosen all too often. The entire US Auto industry nearly murdered itself by purposefully building and selling junk. That was certainly a boneheaded decision based on a short term view of "making money". Heck, Daimler bought Chrysler specifically to raid and milk it and then throw it away. Someone made money, that's sure.

Kenneth_Moore · 05-10-2010, 06:27 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by seruzawa

The entire US Auto industry nearly murdered itself by purposefully building and selling junk. That was certainly a boneheaded decision based on a short term view of "making money".

Touche......

sarnali2 · 05-10-2010, 07:40 AM

I think anymore Motorcycles are a side line for Honda. Since Soichiro slipped his mortal coil they've gotten further and further away from motorcycles and focused more on cars, lawn mowers and generators. Aside from Todao Baba, designer of the Fireblade and new gen Gold Wang there doesn't appear to be a lot of innovation going on there. The new VFR is a pretty slick piece but it falls short of the K-GT and Conk-14, even the FJR is better at the job of Sport Touring which I assume is the VFR's focus.

They're a car company now.

05-08-2010, 08:08 PM	#1
mscuddy MODERATOR X Join Date: Jun 2007 Location: Next to my still checkin the temp. Posts: 5,444	More Honda Bashing Read this. You might have to read it two or three times, because it's very technical, but after you read it, and don't consider how many lives decisions like this touch, and the ultimate consiquence of ignoring what works for what doesn't, is a daming verdict for Honda. Taken from another website: "Let's look now at what Honda was doing just before they announced to the world, "No more two-strokes!" The story really begins a long time ago when people discovered that two-stroke engines would sometimes run without spark-ignition. That is, one could pull off the sparkplug lead, while the engine was running, and it would continue to run as if nothing had changed. People said, "It's dieseling." Actually, what was happening was very different from combustion in a diesel engine. The phenomenon was best explored by Shigeru Onishi in the 1970s. He called it "Active Thermo-Atmosphere Combustion (ATAC)." He said, "With ATAC the fuel consumption and exhaust emissions of two-stroke cycle, spark-ignition engines are remarkably improved, and noise and vibration are reduced." He eventually showed that a carbureted two-stroke engine could be more efficient (lower fuel consumption) than a diesel engine. But only within a narrow range of speed-load conditions. In the 1990s, Honda R&D Chief Engineer, Yoichi Ishibashi, wanted to clean up two-stroke motorcycle engines. He called ATAC: "Activated Radical (AR) Combustion." Onishi's engines ran generators at nearly a constant speed. Ishibashi needed to greatly extend the range where AR combustion was stable. He found that throttling the exhaust was the secret. He developed a 400-cc single-cylinder engine. For real-world testing, several of these EXP-2 engines were put in endurance-racing chassis. They ran in the Granada-Dakar Rally and the Baja 1000. The results were good enough for Ishibashi to press on and develop the engine further. Two bikes were entered in the Dakar - both finished. As Ely Kumli reported in 1997: "The race results were very good even though the bike was not designed to win races, but to test new technology. When the dust settled, the EXP-2 had earned 5th overall and first in both the under-500cc and experimental classes..." As it turned out, the second-string riders had been given the better equipment! "Compared to Honda's NXR780 four-stroke twin rally race bike," said Kumli, "the EXP-2 has very similar performance, with several advantages. While the single-cylinder EXP-2 produces 54hp to the big NXR's 71hp, they both make 58 lbs-ft of torque, but the EXP-2 is 118 pounds lighter giving it a slightly better power-to-weight ratio. What all this boils down to is that the EXP-2 has about the same real-world performance as the 780, but with substantially better fuel economy and lower emissions." As good as that sounds, Ishibashi was just beginning. The exhaust valve prevented most of the fresh charge (fuel-air mixture) from getting lost out the exhaust port, but he needed to scavenge the cylinder with air only, and admit the fuel late in the cycle. He came up with a 'pneumatic injection system' that used a standard four-stroke-type fuel injector. Ishibashi summarized the results: "...PDI-AR Combustion drastically decreases HC emission close to the level of four-stroke, and CO and NOx level is 1/5 and 1/7 of four-stroke level respectively. Furthermore, fuel consumption is improved 15% compared with the four-stroke." His English isn't perfect. I will add: A Honda four-stroke engine giving equal performance had carbon monoxide emissions 500% higher and oxides of nitrogen emissions 700% higher than his two-stroke. Without an oxidizing catalyst, the two-stroke hydrocarbon emissions were slightly more than the four-stroke's, but with a cat, the levels of HC were the same. The CO levels dropped, but the two-strokes advantage over the four-stroke was actually greater. (NOx is unaffected by an oxidizing catalyst). Obviously, Honda had a good engineer doing good work. He had one more song to sing before the bean-counters dropped the axe on him... He did not begin with the long-stroke CR250, but with half of Honda's NSR500V. This was a case-reed road-racing engine with a square bore-stroke ratio - like the McGrath generation YZ250s. Honda said that it made "135-plus horsepower" at 10,500 rpm; about 68-hp for a 250. If ten-five makes it sound like all the power was on the top end, one rider called it a "torque monster" and said the power was "similar to an open-class motocrosser". This engine was introduced at the first 500 GP, 1996. I have given these details because there has been, at least, the suggestion that the long-stroke 250 two-stroke had reached some sort of a technological limit (at less than 50-hp) and that the 450 four-stroke was some sort of a 'solution' to this 'problem'. In 2005, MotoVerde magazine (Spain) dyno tested the CRF450 and the RMZ450 and got 56-hp and 55.2-hp, respectively. So this was the basis of Ishibashis new 'environmental conscious power unit'. But he really only used the parameters; he built a new design. He got AR Combustion to work from about 3000 rpm to peak power - meaning that the engine could operate normally within that range without an ignition system! At the very bottom, the sparkplug initiated combustion and his Pneumatic Direct Injection limited HC and CO emissions. The engine made 60-hp at 11,000 rpm. Because the solenoid injector fed an anti-chamber - not the cylinder - its high-frequency limit did not restrict high-end power. In other words, Ishibashis approach did not require the invention of any new technology, only basic engineering. The technology required existed in the 1970s. There was a rumor that the NSR500V might be turned into a killer street bike. Of course, that never happened. Instead, Ishibashi was sent off to design Civic door latches, or whatever... About now, someone should be asking: "If Honda knew how to make two-strokes that are cleaner and more economical than their four-strokes, that do not require any new technology, and that could win endurance races, why didn't they produce them?" Back in 1984, Steve Anderson (then Technical Editor of Cycle World Magazine) went to Japan for a VIP tour of Honda's (then) new racing R&D facility. There, Takeo Fukui, Design Director, "...made it clear that Honda views itself as a four-stroke company that will not be satisfied until it wins all of its championships with four-strokes." Simply put, the four-stroke engine has been company policy; in fact, it has been more of a religion. Anderson saw, "...shelf after shelf of oval pistons..." and was told that engines were running "...with at least eight valves per cylinder..." and turbo charging. We haven't heard anything about oval pistons in a long time because, after spending umpteen millions of dollars, somebody saw that it was a really stupid idea. It was a way of getting around the racing rules. Four-strokes couldn't win within the rules, so Honda had to find some way to beat the two-strokes and/or the rules. The trouble was, no matter what the shape of the pistons, or how many valves they could stuff in, or how many rpm they could get out of them, the two-strokes kept getting faster and the four-strokes weren't even able to keep pace. In 1995, Mick Doohan was asked how much power his NSR500 two-stroke made: "I can't tell you that, but I can tell you that if Honda produced a one-liter motor it would make upwards of 400 horsepower." It was about that time, it seems, when one of the four-stroke monks had an epiphany: "Instead of spending more money on exotic engines," he might have said, "which hasn't been getting us anywhere, why don't we just buy the AMA and FIM and make our own rules? For instance, we could require that all two-stroke riders wear their helmets backward - if they can't find the first turn, we have to win!" And that is - sort of - what happened. The entire article was from this site... The Future Of Two Strokes And Dirt Bikes __________________ A gun is a tool, Marian; no better or no worse than any other tool: an axe, a shovel or anything. A gun is as good or as bad as the man using it. Remember that.

05-09-2010, 06:45 PM	#3
mscuddy MODERATOR X Join Date: Jun 2007 Location: Next to my still checkin the temp. Posts: 5,444	Makes you wonder what is going on at Honda now days, doesn't it? I wonder if they bought new furniture for AMA headquarters, or gave 'em a few cars or generators... I like the part where Honda says "we are a four stroke company"..guess they forgot about the Elsinore & CR series. __________________ A gun is a tool, Marian; no better or no worse than any other tool: an axe, a shovel or anything. A gun is as good or as bad as the man using it. Remember that.

05-09-2010, 06:59 PM	#4
seruzawa Robby Join Date: Nov 2001 Location: 8501 ft. Posts: 16,803	When companies get big they move away from the leading edge and begin to think more about protecting their turf. That's where Honda is. They are big enough to buy all sorts of people. Unfortunately too many people have no integrity and are easily bought. __________________ I've seen things you people wouldn't believe. Attack ships on fire off the shoulder of Orion. I watched c-beams glitter in the dark near the Tanhauser Gate. All those moments will be lost in time, like tears in the rain.

05-09-2010, 07:17 PM	#5
Buzglyd Founding Member Join Date: Nov 2001 Posts: 10,137	Why do you think all the Wall St giants will support Zero's "economic reform?" It will squash competitors. __________________ Jay Leno: "President Obama released his tax returns. It turns out he made $900,000 less in 2011 than he did in 2010. You know what that means? Even Obama is doing worse under President Obama."

05-09-2010, 08:08 PM	#6
mscuddy MODERATOR X Join Date: Jun 2007 Location: Next to my still checkin the temp. Posts: 5,444	As you can see, too many people are hip to Honda's MO now, and are yelling from the rooftops how when "Big Red" can't win, they change the rules. Wonder how long this can go on, before someone in the legal field starts digging. Would be nice to watch, wouldn't it? Wonder how many bodys are buried? __________________ A gun is a tool, Marian; no better or no worse than any other tool: an axe, a shovel or anything. A gun is as good or as bad as the man using it. Remember that.

Sponsored Links	Remove Advertisements
Motorcycle Forum Advertisement

05-09-2010, 05:53 PM	#2
silentgrayfellow Founding Member Join Date: Jun 2007 Posts: 307	I read the whole page that you linked...very interesting and entertaining read.

05-10-2010, 05:41 AM	#7
Kenneth_Moore Registered Member Join Date: Jun 2007 Location: VIsiting the GIft Shop in the Pit of DIspair Posts: 7,118	Interesting read Matt. I have questions: Companies, like people, do things for a reason. Honda is in business to make money. If they built lighter, more powerful, cleaner 2-strokes, they'd win more races and sell more bikes, and make more money. "4-Stroke Religion" would go right in the crapper if the bottom line said 2-Stroke is a winner. What do you think Honda's motivation is for trying to quash 2-stroke technology? Is selling more parts for exploding 4 stroke engines a viable long-term corporate strategy? How long can Honda stay in business if they get a reputation for products that are unreliable? It seems to me that even if they could buy off the AMA or anybody else, they can't "buy off" the consumer. How long could this go on? __________________ www.kennethmoore.org Last edited by Kenneth_Moore : 05-10-2010 at 06:02 AM.

05-10-2010, 07:40 AM	#10
sarnali2 Aging Cafe` Racer Join Date: Jun 2007 Location: Sittin' down by my window, lookin' at the rain. Posts: 8,132	I think anymore Motorcycles are a side line for Honda. Since Soichiro slipped his mortal coil they've gotten further and further away from motorcycles and focused more on cars, lawn mowers and generators. Aside from Todao Baba, designer of the Fireblade and new gen Gold Wang there doesn't appear to be a lot of innovation going on there. The new VFR is a pretty slick piece but it falls short of the K-GT and Conk-14, even the FJR is better at the job of Sport Touring which I assume is the VFR's focus. They're a car company now. __________________ "Carpe` Throttelum -Loud Suits Save Lives" "All the BMW riders in the room, I want you to leave. Now. Out. "