Go Back   Motorcycle Forum > Motorcycle.Com General Discussion > Motorcycle General Discussion

Reply
 
Thread Tools
Old 10-19-2007, 09:53 AM   #11
seruzawa
The Toad

 
seruzawa's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2001
Location: 8501 ft.
Posts: 17,461
Default There are just...

Quote:
Originally Posted by longride View Post
Not that I am a turbo expert, but you can't run much boost with a high-compression engine without burning holes in the pistons. The first step for running high-boost turbo applications is a cylinder spacer to lower compression and then usually C-16 gas to control detination. If you are pinging on boost, you will have a motor meltdown sooner, rather than later. Low boost and mild cam timing, and high rpm's is what makes a turbo go. Like I said, I am not an expert, but high-compression and high boost = BAD!
... too many variables to make any accurate generalizations.

My rule of thumb for gas engines is: "If you want more HP get a bigger engine." Turbos just introduce too many problems. That's what happened with the turbo bikes the Japanese introduced all those years ago. Why put a turbo on a 750 to get 1000 performance? Just get a 1000.

Anyone who thinks they need a turbo on a Hayabusa is welcome to the problems.
__________________
"Make no mistake, Communism lost a big argument - one we know today as the 20th century."
seruzawa is offline   Reply With Quote

Sponsored Links Remove Advertisements
Motorcycle Forum
Advertisement
Old 10-19-2007, 10:10 AM   #12
acecycleins
Founding Member
 
acecycleins's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2007
Location: North Georgia
Posts: 4,129
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by longride View Post
Not that I am a turbo expert, but you can't run much boost with a high-compression engine without burning holes in the pistons. The first step for running high-boost turbo applications is a cylinder spacer to lower compression and then usually C-16 gas to control detination. If you are pinging on boost, you will have a motor meltdown sooner, rather than later. Low boost and mild cam timing, and high rpm's is what makes a turbo go. Like I said, I am not an expert, but high-compression and high boost = BAD!
I'm not talking insane compression, here. More like the type you get out of your standard superstock 1000cc-1400cc bike. You can run an easy 8-10ftlbs of boost out of a stock Busa motor and get hp figures in the 240 area pretty easy without burning up to motor. But in a V-Twin application, running 7-9ftlbs of boost will trigger a torque curve that should stay above 100ftlbs from about 2500rpm (or so) to 6000rpm, usually peaking in the 130 range in or around the 4500rpm range.
I've seen v-twins running flat-top weisco pistions with 8.5to1 and get solid 150hp ranges all day and night. I know a Busa owner that does his own mapping with a stock motor hit the 260 range. He's never dropped a piston and as far as I know only runs premium 93 octane pump gas. I'm not expert, either, but If you run FI motors and have a laptop you may be in pretty good shape if you know fuelling. I don't. I'm just giving my take from what I've experienced. Personally, I'd go blower. Much more consistant air pressure in application.
__________________
"Slack" - a state of being in which everything flows smoothly.....a frame of mind so at ease that the universe naturally cooperates.
acecycleins is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 10-19-2007, 10:28 AM   #13
longride
Super Duper Mod Man

 
longride's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2001
Location: Anywhere they let me
Posts: 10,479
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by acecycleins View Post
I'm not talking insane compression, here. More like the type you get out of your standard superstock 1000cc-1400cc bike. You can run an easy 8-10ftlbs of boost out of a stock Busa motor and get hp figures in the 240 area pretty easy without burning up to motor. But in a V-Twin application, running 7-9ftlbs of boost will trigger a torque curve that should stay above 100ftlbs from about 2500rpm (or so) to 6000rpm, usually peaking in the 130 range in or around the 4500rpm range.
I've seen v-twins running flat-top weisco pistions with 8.5to1 and get solid 150hp ranges all day and night. I know a Busa owner that does his own mapping with a stock motor hit the 260 range. He's never dropped a piston and as far as I know only runs premium 93 octane pump gas. I'm not expert, either, but If you run FI motors and have a laptop you may be in pretty good shape if you know fuelling. I don't. I'm just giving my take from what I've experienced. Personally, I'd go blower. Much more consistant air pressure in application.
Busa's have low compression compared to the other Supersports ,which is why they are so popular to turbo. Much easier to turbo a Busa at 8-10 lbs., which is low boost. Go any higher than 10 and you would need a spacer and octane boost, or some type of intercooler. The way your friend is set up is fine for an occasional blast, but any extended high-speed run, and he might end up with a motor for lunch.
__________________
I'm a knucklehead
longride is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 10-19-2007, 10:33 AM   #14
longride
Super Duper Mod Man

 
longride's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2001
Location: Anywhere they let me
Posts: 10,479
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by seruzawa View Post
... too many variables to make any accurate generalizations.

My rule of thumb for gas engines is: "If you want more HP get a bigger engine." Turbos just introduce too many problems. That's what happened with the turbo bikes the Japanese introduced all those years ago. Why put a turbo on a 750 to get 1000 performance? Just get a 1000.

Anyone who thinks they need a turbo on a Hayabusa is welcome to the problems.
At the boost levels the OEM's ran the turbo was more of a marketing scheme than a performance booster. The reason most guys run turbos compared to buying new or building the motor is expense and ridability. Build a non-boosted 200+ hp Busa, and you lose rideablity AND it costs an arm and a leg. With boost you retain stock rideability until the turbo spools and then hang on! I have heard of 500 HP streetable Busa's out there. Crazy!
__________________
I'm a knucklehead
longride is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 10-19-2007, 11:01 AM   #15
seruzawa
The Toad

 
seruzawa's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2001
Location: 8501 ft.
Posts: 17,461
Default Not quite.

Quote:
Originally Posted by longride View Post
At the boost levels the OEM's ran the turbo was more of a marketing scheme than a performance booster. The reason most guys run turbos compared to buying new or building the motor is expense and ridability. Build a non-boosted 200+ hp Busa, and you lose rideablity AND it costs an arm and a leg. With boost you retain stock rideability until the turbo spools and then hang on! I have heard of 500 HP streetable Busa's out there. Crazy!
If you lower the compression on a boosted engine you lose performance until you are on boost. My brothers old Merkur was a very irritating car to drive because it was gutless until it was on boost. So you were either poking along or pressed back in your seat. It was a rush that got very fatiguing after a while. That and the fact that the POS quit running at random moments and had to be towed. I got very tired of driving 25 miles to pick him up on the side of I-5. LOL!
__________________
"Make no mistake, Communism lost a big argument - one we know today as the 20th century."
seruzawa is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 10-19-2007, 12:20 PM   #16
longride
Super Duper Mod Man

 
longride's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2001
Location: Anywhere they let me
Posts: 10,479
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by seruzawa View Post
If you lower the compression on a boosted engine you lose performance until you are on boost. My brothers old Merkur was a very irritating car to drive because it was gutless until it was on boost. So you were either poking along or pressed back in your seat. It was a rush that got very fatiguing after a while. That and the fact that the POS quit running at random moments and had to be towed. I got very tired of driving 25 miles to pick him up on the side of I-5. LOL!
Which is why there are so many turbo Busas running around with stock compression and 10 lbs of boost. 250 hp with stock drivability for not a lot of cash. I was considering doing it myself until my license took a couple of hits from the friendly state troopers.
__________________
I'm a knucklehead
longride is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 10-19-2007, 01:04 PM   #17
Gluge
Registered Member
 
Join Date: Jun 2007
Location: Santa Monica, CA
Posts: 352
Default

I don't know why so many people have this screwy idea that torque and hpr are somehow seperate things. They're not.

Hpr = torque * rpm

So oviously since a turbo increases your power but doesn't make your engine rev higher it increases torque, it might not increase it at the peak though, it might increase it after the peak in the higher rpm range.

That's the equation. When taking about acceleration what actually accelerates you is rear wheel torque. But rear wheel torque isn't = to engine torque it's related to engine hpr since there's a gear box in between. What I mean is rear wheel torque is higher the lower the gear (hence harder acceleration)

Hpr is ALWAYS a better measure of acceleration potential since it factors out the gearing.

Basically in the end torque is a stupid marketing gimmick. because take this scenario - One engine makes 50 lbs of torque at 10,000 rpm another makes 80 lbs of torque at 5,000 rpm the one that spins to 10,000 is going to have 20% more power. If you gear it down to 1/2 what the 5,000 engine is geared for it will accelerate harder and make more rear wheel torque, even at the 'mid-range'
__________________
#867 Barrett Meeker Racing
Gaerne - Regina - Shoei - Bridgestone
-----------
Supervisor - Blur Studio

Endorsed by Longride - "Of course your points are unarguable. You are the smartest guy in the whole world ... What you really taught me is how little I really know about motorcycles and how much you know. Yes, you are the best and the smartest."

Last edited by Gluge : 10-19-2007 at 01:12 PM.
Gluge is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 10-19-2007, 09:15 PM   #18
pplassm
Founding Member
 
pplassm's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2001
Posts: 3,875
Default

A lot of people have this mistaken idea that good low RPM power meas "Torque" and good high RPM power means "Horsepower". It's all horsepower. Torque is just the force reading we take to compute the power out of the engine over time.
pplassm is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 10-22-2007, 10:35 AM   #19
bbtowns
Founding Member
 
Join Date: Jun 2007
Posts: 540
Default

I think the formula is torque x rpm /5252 = HP. Or HP / rpm x 5252, which is why the formulas always cross at 5252. Others here have said it, if you make more HP, you will make more torque at that particular RPM, it may or may not change the HP you are making at the peak torque RPM, which would affect your peak torque number. In plainer language, trading low RPM HP for high RPM horsepower will typically lower peak torque, but you'd need to chart it to be sure. This is why you'll often find a Harley making 65 hp at 4K has higher torque than a 600cc sportbike making 100 hp at 11K (about 85 vs. 48 ft. lbs).
bbtowns is offline   Reply With Quote
Reply


Thread Tools

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

vB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are Off
Pingbacks are Off
Refbacks are Off