trenace
Needs a job
Posts: 3056
|
posted December 24, 2005 12:13 AM
Actually the Virgin approach (keeping the same crank and changing only the cams and engine management) has perfect balance, identical to conventional, but does suffer from the double-strength power pulses and the torque reversals mentioned above.
Though I con't know what math is required to compute it, I wouldn't tend to think that doing the same but then further giving a 10 degree or so difference between the paired cylinders (e.g. with 1 and 4 being a pair, advance 1 by 5 degrees and retard 4 by 5 degrees to get that difference) would give really hideous vibration -- ditto for modifying the more conventional firing order (1-2-4-3) with small advances and retards to give some pauses, if the advances and retards are subtle enough -- but I could be wrong.
  
|
norkawa
Parking Attendant
Posts: 15
|
posted December 24, 2005 12:38 AM
MCN B.S.
|
trenace
Needs a job
Posts: 3056
|
posted December 24, 2005 12:44 AM
I suppose you have evidence that they fabricate interviews with named Kawasaki engineers?
|
tinhead
Expert Class
Posts: 203
|
posted December 24, 2005 05:41 AM
Roadracing World and Motorcycle Technology (the full name of the rag) about 2 years ago ran a series of articles on engine balancing.
The math lost me really quickly. 
It is my reading skills, not my math ones, that lead me to believe that balancing a Big Bang motor to acheive a degree of longevity at high output levels is hard to do. If all those motorcycle companies with all those engineers haven't managed to do it yet, I'm not going to try. No matter what approach is used, I haven't heard of a duty cycle life for the motor cases and/ or crankshaft that goes much past 500KM for a Big Bang Motor, 3 hours or less of track time.
|
Y2KZX12R
Needs a job
CompetitionCNC.com
Posts: 3762
|
posted December 24, 2005 06:02 AM
Fly by wire on a bike? No fucking thank you.
My 03 GMC sierra has it and I hate it. It hesitates, and feals like crap. Surges like hell. Runs like shit cold.
My wife drives toyotas (many different ones) and the ones with "fly by wire throttle" suck with all the same issues as My GMC.
Unless they make a setup that has the exact same throttle feal (and i dont mean hand feal) then i would NEVER buy a bike with it. I would insist on riding any bike with ETC before i ever bought it.
If you are putting traction control on a bike then ETC is the easyier wat to do it. But if it doesnt have traction control then why bother with ETC.
I think its a bad idea unless they figure it out better.
____________
Y2KZX12R
CompetitionCNC.com
|
CanyonCarver
Expert Class
Posts: 121
|
posted December 24, 2005 06:19 AM
 Edited By: CanyonCarver on 24 Dec 2005 06:20
Yeah. Seemed to work pretty good on the Aprilia Cube... 
|
nedragr
Zone Head
Posts: 504
|
posted December 24, 2005 06:20 AM
The old man at the shop thinks the same way. He doesn't have much to say of the way all this technoligy is going.
____________
Real racebikes run premix!!
http://www.bikepics.com/members/nedragr/
|
norkawa
Parking Attendant
Posts: 15
|
posted December 24, 2005 07:07 AM
I am not that good in English, but I will try to translate some part of this intevju with Okabe for you.
It is from an other MC Mag.
"In the future traction-control may be a possibility, at first as a Racingkit and if the respond is positive, it may become standard" "If Ohlins would reduce their cost or build a factory in Japan, we could buy more from them. It is a possibility that we can use more Ohlin's in the future, maybe on a Sp-version, Engineers like to spend money on expensive parts"
"I would like to build a ZX with dry-clutch and air-damping as well, but our sale-department would probably not agreed to do that"
|
redelk
Moderator
Please... speak to the hand.
Posts: 3212
|
posted December 24, 2005 07:50 AM
My '03 Dodge 2500 also has ETC and is... let's say, unique. Though it to some getting used to, kinda like having flat slides without an accelerator pump. I haven't really had any problems with it and found it to respond with a precision I would easily compare to any "hard wire" configuration. Be it towing a 24' trailer or "slinking" around on sleet and snow covered streets... the ETC on my truck has performed admirably.
That is, it didn't take long to forget the fact that indeed it has ETC. As a matter of fact, I hadn't even thought about it in over a year until just now. Being a "company" truck, several of my employees also drive it. The surprising thing is that many have commented on what they believe to be a "quick" throttle response of the truck when compared to their truck (much older GM and Fords).
On the other hand, it might have more to do with my truck just being "newer" than their's. I don't think that its because it has a Hemi, since all their trucks also have V8s. None of us at the shop would qualify as "expert" drivers that own sports cars. Just a bunch of rednecks with pickups.
____________
There are only three sports: bullfighting, motor racing, and mountaineering; all the rest are merely games.
-Ernest Hemingway
|
eazy-zxrr
Novice Class
Posts: 34
|
posted December 24, 2005 08:49 AM
are you sure that they are talking bout the zx 10rr superbikes they're going to race in ama and wsbk having 200hp cause i know that the bike at the daytona tire test didnt have the full race motors yet?.......
|
trenace
Needs a job
Posts: 3056
|
posted December 24, 2005 12:35 PM
Again they're talking crankshaft horsepower.
When a manufacturer doesn't specifically say rear wheel,they mean crankshaft. It's how they do it most of it the time.
|
ikezixxer
Expert Class
Posts: 268
|
posted December 24, 2005 03:03 PM
still pushing 170 or more rwhp if it is estimated to be 200 bhp...that would be insane, especially if it is without the RAM air. throw some exhaust, intake, tuning, a few other parts and your running 180+ to the rear wheel, which is insane. I am running 165 on my 10r and it is already so much I don't see the point of having it even on the track, the front shoots up everytime I come out of corners running half throttle...183 or 184 rwhp and a lighter bike, holy poops man, that would be freaky motoGP style...only need a longer swingarm and shoter chassis, higher swingarm positioning in respect to the frame and maybe an extra 3/4 inch on the wheelbase and position the bike with a slightly more aggressive 1/2 inch lower center of gravity and that bike will take all of it's monstrous rhwp.
|
2OLD2BFAST
Novice Class
Posts: 36
|
posted December 24, 2005 06:26 PM
Anybody else surprised the '06 10R has a shorter swingarm than the '04 & '05's? from what I've read it's still the better track tool, but I was still surprised to hear that they designed it to carry a shorter swingarm nonetheless...
|
trenace
Needs a job
Posts: 3056
|
posted December 24, 2005 09:59 PM
Well, as a not-knowing guess -- it's easy to think of a given direction as always being better, e.g. the magazines each year always seemed to speak of yet-narrower valve angles being better, bigger valves as being better, or car mags used to speak of bigger carbs as always being better, etc... yet if such were so, then one would just go "all the way" with such things immediately. But it's not so, instead there's an optimum, or at least with the rest of the design being a given way there's an optimum for that. Perhaps with the rest of the design also changing, then the optima for these other things also change.
What I was saying but it got too long is that it may not be true that longer is always better for swingarms, even for the same wheelbase. Instead there might be an optimum, it's just that tha optimum is longer than what swingarms used to be. But perhaps the previous 10R overshot it a little.
One reason that could be is that actually the anti-squat effect induced by the chain / swingarm relationship is a good thing in the correct amount. Maybe the engineers decided they wanted a touch more of that effect?
|
simonkobejapan
Novice Class
Posts: 36
|
posted December 25, 2005 12:31 AM
Edited By: simonkobejapan on 25 Dec 2005 00:32
if ohlins would build a factory in japan?ALL their R and T forks are made in japan by SOQI
(owned by yamaha,owner of ohlins,SOQI make the shock for the R1 and the forks and shock for the new R6)
|
norkawa
Parking Attendant
Posts: 15
|
posted December 25, 2005 04:53 AM
Thank you simonsan, i dident know that
|
Hells Dark Lord
Needs a life
living life, and loving it.
Posts: 7981
|
posted December 25, 2005 06:22 AM
quote:
still pushing 170 or more rwhp if it is estimated to be 200 bhp...that would be insane, especially if it is without the RAM air. throw some exhaust, intake, tuning, a few other parts and your running 180+ to the rear wheel, which is insane. I am running 165 on my 10r and it is already so much I don't see the point of having it even on the track, the front shoots up everytime I come out of corners running half throttle...183 or 184 rwhp and a lighter bike, holy poops man, that would be freaky motoGP style...only need a longer swingarm and shoter chassis, higher swingarm positioning in respect to the frame and maybe an extra 3/4 inch on the wheelbase and position the bike with a slightly more aggressive 1/2 inch lower center of gravity and that bike will take all of it's monstrous rhwp.
185 hp at the wheel isnt unheard of for the ZX10R, there have been reports on here of some guys getting that with 04 adn 05 bikes and are keeping them Super Stock leagal.....so to see an 06 with it I think will almost be the norm rather than the exception....my 04 turns 160 HP at the wheel stock....on 93 pump gas.....with race fuel and the slip on I have from Area P I woudlnt doubt it woudl touch 165HP.....with a full system a custonm map in a PC, or a KHI race ECU, thiner head gasket and some tweaking, I dont think 175 HP is unrealistic.....hell my 02 ZX12R was only 185HP at the wheel after tweaking and the regular mods.....and the 10 is almost 100 lbs lighter.....aught to be interesting....now if Kerry woudl ever makea full exhaust for me....:P
____________
When in doubt, lean farther and go faster....
|
zxhoya
Zone Head
Posts: 631
|
posted December 27, 2005 07:59 PM
quote:
Unless they make a setup that has the exact same throttle feal (and i dont mean hand feal) then i would NEVER buy a bike with it. I would insist on riding any bike with ETC before i ever bought it.
If you are putting traction control on a bike then ETC is the easyier wat to do it. But if it doesnt have traction control then why bother with ETC.
I think its a bad idea unless they figure it out better.
Apparently the Yamaha fly-by-wire is cable actuated, so it probably feels like good old fashioned cable throttle.
____________
''The angle of my dangle is inversely proportional to the heat of my meat'' Will Ferrell
|
trenace
Needs a job
Posts: 3056
|
posted December 27, 2005 08:58 PM
Edited By: trenace on 27 Dec 2005 20:59
Reportedly on Rossi's bike his hand still directly controls one pair of cylinders, and the computer has total control over the other pair. I don't know if the R6 works that way.
The R6 does have direct cable connection to the butterflies, so if the electrics fail that connection is still there. I read that the Honda MotoGP version approximately speaking has a motor inbetween the twistgrip and the butterflies, all connected by cable, and the computer can add or subtract pull, but if the computer is doing nothing, then the friction is sufficient that the twistgrip completely controls the throttle, the "motor" or perhaps-better-described-otherwise mechanism just sitting inbetween passively in such cases.
BTW, the latest issue of Superbike (a British mag) not only reads "17,500 revs" on the cover, with the first two sentences of the review reading "This bike revs to 17,500 rpm. That's more than the M1 MotoGP bike Rossi rides" but the article manages to blare out that claimed "17,500" figure FOUR MORE TIMES.
Of course it's untrue, but six instances of "15,900 rpm" wouldn't have sold nearly the number of bikes I suppose. Still, when have you seen six mentions, including front cover splash, on the redline of a bike? Yamaha is milking that fraud for all it can.
Also on the subject of traction control, some traction control can be achieved without messing with the throttle at all, but only retard. That's a very fast responding method, though not as fuel-efficient (that latter is actually becoming very important in MotoGP.)
|
Zammy
Expert Class
Posts: 411
|
posted December 29, 2005 02:38 PM
Let me be the first to say...I TOLD YOU SO !!! Ha ! Kawasaki IS dead serious.
|
Zammy
Expert Class
Posts: 411
|
posted December 29, 2005 02:47 PM
http://www.bikeland.org/board/viewthread.php?FID=19&TID=17329&set_time=
|
zxhoya
Zone Head
Posts: 631
|
posted December 30, 2005 10:03 AM
http://www.bikeland.org/board/viewthread.php?FID=19&TID=17329&set_time=
____________
''The angle of my dangle is inversely proportional to the heat of my meat'' Will Ferrell
|
|
|
HOME
NEW TOPIC