Author Topic: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners  (Read 801954 times)

0 Members and 2 Guests are viewing this topic.

Offline charlie101

  • Full Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 148
  • Age: 59
  • Location: Sweden, way up north
  • Indian 101 buff
Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
« Reply #1440 on: October 29, 2013, 12:20:34 AM »
It seems the oil analysis works if a testing program is set up from the beginning with enough samples and history to make a statistically valid baseline.  This is what I got out of reading all that stuff on Bob the Oil Guy's site.  That is what I am going to do with the new motor.  I will save all of my filter papers so I can see if there are any changes that indicate things are not normal.

This is something to worry about.  Parts for these engines are very expensive and they do have a history of spinning main bearings and sometimes rod bearings.  None of the people I know can say why.  The used cylinder head I recently bought came from a motor that spun a main bearing.

The filter I looked at today was used for two runs on the salt and the 2013 dyno work.  It had some flakes and there were much fewer of them than the break in filter paper.  The flakes were looked at under a microscope.  They could be bearing surface flakes or machining chips.  It is hard to tell.  My figuring is, if it was a bearing shell, I would see more chips on the newer paper than on the old one.  I think everything is OK.    

The absolute quickest analys is the one you do, cut and examine the filter with a loupe. The spun bearings are bothersome, maybe some read about foaming and oil behaviour in the crankshaft could be interesting? I have absolute no knowledge about the oil system in a Triumph, but it is a interesting topic.
http://www.bobistheoilguy.com/forums/ubbthreads.php?ubb=showflat&Number=3111483#Post3111483
« Last Edit: October 29, 2013, 01:18:40 AM by charlie101 »

Online wobblywalrus

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 4987
  • Age: 66
  • Location: backwoods Oregon
Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
« Reply #1441 on: October 30, 2013, 01:01:08 AM »
Thanks, Charlie.  Those folks on that site are serious about oil.  There is conjecture that the shell to journal clearances on these Triumphs can be on the tight side for race use.  Most racers use a looser clearance.  Mine are set up as close as possible to halfway between the "as new" clearance and the wear limit.  Also, the oil holes are chamfered.  They are not on a standard crank.

A forum member was talking to me about his old Honda and how he cannot get crank and rod bearings for it any more.  He says using old style oil with zinc and phosphorous helps his precious bearings to last longer.  I was going to switch over to Silkolene and then I found all sorts of Mobil 1 that I bought on sale, hid away, forgot about, and rediscovered.  Mobil lowered their zinc and phosphorous content.  I will bring it back up to the old level using some break in additive.  The phosphorous in the oil might help those bearings.   

Online wobblywalrus

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 4987
  • Age: 66
  • Location: backwoods Oregon
Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
« Reply #1442 on: November 01, 2013, 12:15:13 AM »
The shed is coming together and the roof is on.  The old carpenter is 78 and he does everything except for the heaviest lifting.  His son does that.  Rose lifts lighter things.  There are some Model T and Model A dimensions on the i-net and I measured out a car size rectangle on the floor.  The horseless carriages will barely fit through the door and there will be hardly any room to work on them when they are inside with a small work bench.  There is no room in the shed for a car if I keep the bikes in it.  It seems I will always be a bike racer.  It takes a lot of floor space to build a car.

   

Offline Peter Jack

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 3658
  • Age: 75
  • Location: Calgary, Alberta
Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
« Reply #1443 on: November 01, 2013, 02:24:20 AM »
That's a nice looking shed Bo. Your wife is definitely a keeper!  :-D :-D :-D

Pete

Online wobblywalrus

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 4987
  • Age: 66
  • Location: backwoods Oregon
Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
« Reply #1444 on: November 01, 2013, 09:25:01 PM »
Pete, maybe she is thinking this.  "You spend enough time with that bike.  Now you can spend all of your time with it."  And then she tosses me out of the house and I live in the shed.  A fellow never knows exactly what a lady is up to.

The back of the windshield is lowered an inch and a half.  This will reduce frontal area and lower the Cd.

A lot of time was spent on gasoline choice during the last off season.  There were two schools of thought.  One was a lively oxygenated unleaded would work OK.  The other was to stay with a non-oxygenated leaded.  My choice was to be safe and use the leaded.

The head was taken off so I could get the flow testing done.  There are no signs of overheating and the PipeMax printout says 95.5 to 96.5 (R + M)/2 octane is OK.  It is halfway down the printout.  I can get Sunuco gas near my house and in AUS.  That is what I will use and their gas comparison table is shown.

The leaded Standard is what I use now.  It is a fairly light gas with a fast burn that works well.  S.G. = 0.729  Sunuco recommends Green E-15 as an oxygenated gas choice.  It is a bit denser at S.G. = 0.742  The density vs burn speed relationship for oxygenated fuel is not the same as for non-ethanol gas, according to Sunuco, and the E-15 should burn about as fast as the Standard.  Normally, with alcohol free gas, the denser fuel would burn slower.  Unfortunately, Green E-15 is not readily available in AUS.  It would need to be imported.

The 260 GT Plus was also recommended by Sunuco, although they said the E-15 was their best recommendation.  It has S.G. = 0.762 and they said it burns a little bit slower than Standard.

My big plan is to put the engine back together with the cams I have and the less restrictive pipes.  Two ignition modules will be brought to the dyno session.  One will be the module I am using now with the Stage 3 curve.  The other will be the Stage 3 curve with more advance.  I was figuring 2 or 3 degrees added will be enough.  The dyno session comparison will be the Standard fuel with both advance curves and the 260 GT Plus gas with both advance curves.  That will be four combinations and I will use the best one in AUS.

All of this will be a 1000cc APS-F or APS-G bike running for the DLRA 150 club.  I am not sure if 260 GT Plus is allowed in the gas class.  Some more reading is needed.                 

Offline Jon

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 852
  • Age: 52
  • Location: Brisbane, Australia
Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
« Reply #1445 on: November 02, 2013, 03:09:42 PM »


My big plan is to put the engine back together with the cams I have and the less restrictive pipes.  Two ignition modules will be brought to the dyno session.  One will be the module I am using now with the Stage 3 curve.  The other will be the Stage 3 curve with more advance.  I was figuring 2 or 3 degrees added will be enough.  The dyno session comparison will be the Standard fuel with both advance curves and the 260 GT Plus gas with both advance curves.      

From this I'm guessing that the ignition module is not easily programmable Bo.

Maybe worthwhile getting an ignition unit that is easily mapable and setting it up on the dyno.
Some motor/fuel combinations respond well to more timing, some don't.
A lot of later model curves are ver conservative for emission and noise testing and to let Joe Public with his partner on the back pull up a long hill on a summers day a gear too high without damaging anything.

I've used the Ignitech units on a few different bikes including DavieB's (my son) salt bike with pretty good results. They are a pretty simple unit with easy to learn interface and you can generally get them with an adaptor loom.

http://www.ignitech.cz/en/

Not sure about pipemax but Engine Analyser Pro will give you "best power" ignition timing for an engine combination given a fuel octane input.

You would never run a carburettor that you had to send to the factory to get the fuel curve changed.

jon
Underhouse Engineering
Luck = Opportunity + Preparation^3

Offline Freud

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 5415
  • Age: 88
  • Location: Everett, WA - USA
Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
« Reply #1446 on: November 02, 2013, 04:09:11 PM »
Easier to see........

FREUD
Since '63

Offline Koncretekid

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 1096
  • Age: 72
  • Location: Yarmouth, Nova Scotia & Lafayette, Co.
Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
« Reply #1447 on: November 02, 2013, 04:22:39 PM »
As far as I know, most ignition maps are for acceleration; not necessarily top end which is what we need in land speed racing.  I checked my ignition after my latest record runs and found that I had less advance than was ever recommended for my motor.  On the dyno, watch the last few hundred RPM very carefully.
Tom
We get too soon oldt, and too late schmart!
Life's uncertain - eat dessert first!

Offline SaltPeter

  • Full Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 171
  • Age: 63
  • Location: Eyre Peninsula South Australia
  • Can't you just be Serious for once in your Life!
Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
« Reply #1448 on: November 02, 2013, 09:43:14 PM »
Bo

I don't know if it's applicable to your Engine, apparently the trick to getting "Over Rev" on a 2 Stroke is to retard the timing right after the HP peak for that last 1000 odd RPM.

I am still working on my "Curve" as it drops off sharply after 11500 rpm, that's what 2 Strokes do, but it can be "flattened" a bit with Retard.

Pete
The Mission is to go as fast as possible along on that old Road Less Traveled.

Online wobblywalrus

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 4987
  • Age: 66
  • Location: backwoods Oregon
Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
« Reply #1449 on: November 03, 2013, 12:53:36 AM »
Thanks, Freud, Jon, Tom, and Peter.  The ignition modules on these Triumphs are programmed in England for a Stage 1, Stage 2, or Stage 3 curve, depending on the level of the engine modifications.  Right now I use a Stage 3 curve.  It is the one recommended for the engine set up I have with conventional gasoline.

The modules are easy to change and dyno time is expensive.  I like to have the a few of them handy with different curves programmed into them so so they can be quickly changed without any computer work.  The dyno session goes quicker that way.

This morning was the monthly Triumph club breakfast and I asked a lot of questions.  A programmable ignition module is available and it seems to work good based on what folks tell me.  One is on order for me now and I should have it in a week or two.

The fellow in England that programs these things has a lot of knowledge.  The plan is to tell him what I am planning to do and get his ideas about what to change.   

 


Offline tauruck

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 4883
  • Location: Johannesburg, South Africa
Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
« Reply #1450 on: November 03, 2013, 05:17:08 AM »
That sounds like a good move Bo. Plug and play. 8-)

Online wobblywalrus

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 4987
  • Age: 66
  • Location: backwoods Oregon
Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
« Reply #1451 on: November 03, 2013, 05:25:37 PM »
Hi Mike.  An engine builder who has helped me through the years told me the compression is low and the valves are a bit small for maximum power.  I know this.  There is not much I can do about it.  Late one night I was reading all sorts of fuel stuff on the internet.  One manufacturer makes an unleaded with 10% oxygen content for crate motors and other engines with "cylinder head limitations."  This gave me the idea.

This bike has crate motor compression and less cyl head flow than I need so the oxygenated fuel might be a big help.  Plus, I am learning some concepts about combustion that will be vital when it is turbo time.  I just need to be careful and not blow up the motor.  Timing and jetting need to be correct.     

Online wobblywalrus

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 4987
  • Age: 66
  • Location: backwoods Oregon
Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
« Reply #1452 on: November 09, 2013, 02:56:59 PM »
There sure are a lot of oxygenated fuels, both leaded and unleaded.  My figuring is, between the less restrictive glass paks and the fuel change, a 10 % power increase is a reasonable assumption.  The unoxygenated leaded I use now has a 110 (R + M) / 2 octane and a 0.729 specific gravity.  It is a moderately fast burning fuel and it works well in the thin air at B-ville.

The first job is to look at octane requirements.  The static compression ratio is used a lot and it's relation to detonation is what we call a "very vague abstraction" in engineering.  My guess this is a number 4 in accuracy.  Right now I am looking at BMEPs.  They are a much better abstraction than the static CR and maybe ranked 3.  Virtual modeling in Engine Analyser Pro would be better at a #2 ranking.  The actual pressure readings from sensors would be the #1 most accurate and best way.

Method #1 is out.  This would be like trying to teach a monkey how to do watch repair, #2 will be after AUS when I have some money, Method 3 is what I am doing now, and Method 4 is too mickey mouse.

The first printout shows the assumption that using the fuel and pipes will move the peak power 500 rpm higher than where it is now.  Note the VE is a moderate 107 percent and the BMEP is 189 psi.  This is not too radical of a VE or BMEP change.  The second printout models an "across the board" torque increase with the 10% power increase happening at 7,300 rpm, where it does now.  The VE changes to 112% and the BMEP goes up to 200 psi.  Big changes.

This little modeling exercise tell me this.  First, use the knock light during dyno work.  There is a good chance I will be in unexplored territory as per VE and BMEP.  Second, pay attention to torque curve shape.  Curves with peaks at a lower rpms are a big concern.  Third, start out with an oxygenated gas with some substantial octane.  My best guess is (R = M)/2 over 100.  This eliminates a lot of the oxygen enriched unleaded gasolines on the market.       

Online wobblywalrus

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 4987
  • Age: 66
  • Location: backwoods Oregon
Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
« Reply #1453 on: November 10, 2013, 12:11:04 AM »
The gasoline will be MULC-E-(AUS).  A fast burning unleaded with 8.2 % oxygen content.  This puts me in the fuel class, for sure.

Any description with pictures showing a "fuel shut-off operable without moving the hands from the handlebar grips" will be a big help.  Some quality made thing I can buy and not make is ideal for this guy.

Also, any handy devices to measure fuel flow during a dyno session.

Tipping the can is new territory for this backwoods boy.     

Offline salt27

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 1387
  • Age: 62
  • Location: S.W. Orygun
Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
« Reply #1454 on: November 10, 2013, 12:57:25 AM »
Bo, The Pingel Guzzler with remote shut off is what we use.

Not cheap but they work.

I believe they are a Bubs sponsor.

 Don