(Note: LANDRACING.COM donations are not tax deductible)


This is a public forum. The opinions expressed here don't
necessarily reflect the feelings of The Folks That Run The Site (that's us)
unless we explicitly say so, ok?


Author Topic: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners  (Read 1014421 times)

0 Members and 2 Guests are viewing this topic.

Offline wobblywalrus

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 5307
  • Age: 67
  • Location: backwoods Oregon
Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
« Reply #3615 on: June 27, 2020, 12:19:55 AM »
Engine control modules will be on hand for the dyno session with 9,000, 9,500, and 10,000 rpm rev limits.  The one that lets the engine rev a few hundred rpm past peak power will be used.  It makes no sense to use more rpm than that.  I shift when I feel the misfire caused by the rev limiter.

It also helps to keep the engine above peak torque rpm through the timed mile.  The idiot light on the tach is set for peak torque.  An idiot light on with a misfire indicates rear sprocket with a tooth or two less is needed.  The idiot light off with no misfire tells me the opposite.  A bigger back chainwheel is needed.  The idiot light on with no misfire tells me the gearing is OK.

It is sorta a caveman way of doing things.  The old tach went up to 9,000 rpm and pegged.  This new one goes to 15,000 rpm.  There is no way any Triumph Bonneville can peg this new one.

     

Offline Harold Bettes

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 407
  • Age: 77
  • Location: High Country (6672'MSL)
  • Firebase High Country
Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
« Reply #3616 on: June 27, 2020, 04:58:56 PM »
Mr. WW, :-D
I am sure you probably know but will make the comment for those that don't: Most electronic tachometers are typically +/- 5% FS devices. Best to verify that number on your own stuff. If you don't have an MSD ignition tester to use for a baseline of real rpm, it is easy to build a signal generator to verify the tachometer AND the shift light. :cheers:
Best to you and yours. How's that Lab doing?
Regards,
HB2  :-)
If it was easy, everybody would be doing it.

As iron sharpens iron, one man sharpens another.

Offline wobblywalrus

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 5307
  • Age: 67
  • Location: backwoods Oregon
Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
« Reply #3617 on: June 28, 2020, 12:22:15 AM »
Hopefully the tach on the dyno is accurate.  That is what I usually use for a comparison.

We do not have the young lab anymore.  Just the older one now.  She is one year six months old.  She was raised in a kennel to be trained to be a field trial champion and to be breeding stock.  We got her at ten months old and she never was acclimatized to being a family dog.  She is slowly learning how to interact with people.  It takes two years, from what I hear, to do this.  We are about a third of the way there based on math. 

Offline wobblywalrus

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 5307
  • Age: 67
  • Location: backwoods Oregon
Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
« Reply #3618 on: June 28, 2020, 09:27:26 AM »
Any recommendations on a tachometer calibration service?  It is a good idea to have an expert check it before it is used.

Offline Seldom Seen Slim

  • Nancy and me and the pit bike
  • Administrator
  • Hero Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 12611
  • Age: 72
  • Location: Skandia, Michigan
  • Nancy -- 201.913 mph record on a production ZX15!
    • Nancy and Jon's personal website.
Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
« Reply #3619 on: June 28, 2020, 11:01:08 AM »
Tangent - about tach calibrating.

Hundreds of yesrs ago my dad was sales manager at Electro-Voice, and they brought out a line of tachometers that were non-contact, non-powered.  They used a signal from a sensor sensing the magnet of the flywheel as it passed (I think).  Each tach was shipped with a calibration device - basically a corrected-length fine wire solidly attached to a hard base (thumbnail sized??), and that base was to be held in contact with the running engine.  The wire would vibrate according to engine speed, and at some speed the wire's movement would let you know that the engine was turning at XXXX RPM.  You'd then adjust the tach's needle to read the speed indicated by the wire -- and viola, your tach was pretty danged close to spot-on (at least at that one speed and you sure hoped throughout the range of the tach.  I had one on my kart - Power Products AH51, it was, with a 4,800 rpm governor.  The 8 grand tach was pinned, I remember seeing, at about the time the rod went south as I was headed north, so I never learned just how fast that big end bushing would go. . .other than not quite as fast as I did. muutt
Jon E. Wennerberg
 a/k/a Seldom Seen Slim
 Skandia, Michigan
 (that's way up north)
2 Club member x2
Owner of landracing.com

Offline WOODY@DDLLC

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 1467
  • Age: 75
  • Location: Morrow, OH 15 minutes from Mike Brown!
  • ECTA made it to AR-Kansas!
    • Design Dreams, LLC
Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
« Reply #3620 on: June 28, 2020, 11:32:50 AM »
So when the rod vibrates at 8 grand that calibrates the crankcase?  :cry:
All models are wrong, but some are useful! G.E. Box (1967) www.designdreams.biz

Offline Seldom Seen Slim

  • Nancy and me and the pit bike
  • Administrator
  • Hero Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 12611
  • Age: 72
  • Location: Skandia, Michigan
  • Nancy -- 201.913 mph record on a production ZX15!
    • Nancy and Jon's personal website.
Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
« Reply #3621 on: June 28, 2020, 11:45:35 AM »
Yeah, it calibrated the case to infinity. 8-)  It did teach me a few things about playing with engines, though.
Jon E. Wennerberg
 a/k/a Seldom Seen Slim
 Skandia, Michigan
 (that's way up north)
2 Club member x2
Owner of landracing.com

Offline wobblywalrus

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 5307
  • Age: 67
  • Location: backwoods Oregon
Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
« Reply #3622 on: July 22, 2020, 05:08:15 PM »
The coated main and rod big end shells arrived from PolyDyn.  Usually I start a build from the inside out.  There is no part more "inside" than the crank and its bearings so the new build will start here and now. 

A set of bearing shells were inspected five years ago by a very nice fellow from Mahle Aftermarket, Inc.  He recommends 0.00075 to 0.001 inches clearance per inch of shaft diameter plus 0.005 inches clearance for a race engine.  This is 0.0017 to 0.0021 inches clearance for the 1.6120 inch diameter rod big ends.  It is 0.0016 to 0.0020 for the 1.495 inch diameter crank journals.








     

Offline wobblywalrus

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 5307
  • Age: 67
  • Location: backwoods Oregon
Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
« Reply #3623 on: July 26, 2020, 09:57:04 AM »
My eyes are old and I need a lot of light and time to inspect things.  This setup is made on the back porch.  It gives magnification, illumination, and a comfortable place to sit for hours. 

Offline wobblywalrus

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 5307
  • Age: 67
  • Location: backwoods Oregon
Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
« Reply #3624 on: July 26, 2020, 10:01:57 AM »
The crank inspection did some good.  This ding in the primary drive gear was found and it was filed down so it would not damage the driven gear.  Metal swarf was found in the end of the iol passages where the chamfer was reground.  A jeweler's file was used to remove it.

Offline wobblywalrus

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 5307
  • Age: 67
  • Location: backwoods Oregon
Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
« Reply #3625 on: July 26, 2020, 12:38:56 PM »
The crank was from another bike and it was installed the race bike in 2017.  The journals were at the maximum production tolerance diameter.  The loosest "white coded" shells were installed and there was not enough clearance to get the minimum value for racing.  The main journals were ignored.  They had enough clearance for a production bike so I took some risk and did not downsize them.  The rod journals were reduced to minimum racing clearance by hand using fine sandpaper and polish.  It was a Mickey Mouse solution that worked OK for the 9,000 rpm rev limit.

After race inspection showed this idea worked but it is a sketchy proposition for 10,000 rpm.  Several local grinders said the journals would need to be welded up and reground to reduce their size.  I was worried about the effects on crank temper from welding heat and mainly a loss of strength due to annealing.  An expert with these cranks in racing applications was located.  He could polish the journals down to size.  The crank was sent to him for this and to rework the chamfers around the oil holes in the journals.

The journals were measured.  He did a good job.  Now they are near or at the minimum production diameter.  This will give wider racing bearing clearance and allow the room for polymer shell coatings. 

   

Offline wobblywalrus

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 5307
  • Age: 67
  • Location: backwoods Oregon
Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
« Reply #3626 on: July 27, 2020, 11:18:17 PM »
A new use for a old lathe.  A crankshaft holder.

The crank was washed in solvent and soapy water and Q-tips were used to clean and dry the oil passages.  The swabs were used and changed until they came out of the passages in a clean state.  The job was done based on my old standards.

An experiment was tried.  Gun solvent and a brand new cleaning brush were swabbed through the passages.  Another new Q-tip was pushed through.  Note all of the carp that it collected.  It seems that oil and stuff can bake onto the passage walls and it takes some work to dislodge it.  From now on I will use more physical effort to clean those oil passages.

Offline manta22

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 3607
  • Age: 81
  • Location: Tucson, AZ
  • What, me worry?
Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
« Reply #3627 on: July 27, 2020, 11:58:12 PM »
A new use for a old lathe.  A crankshaft holder.

The crank was washed in solvent and soapy water and Q-tips were used to clean and dry the oil passages.  The swabs were used and changed until they came out of the passages in a clean state.  The job was done based on my old standards.

An experiment was tried.  Gun solvent and a brand new cleaning brush were swabbed through the passages.  Another new Q-tip was pushed through.  Note all of the carp that it collected.  It seems that oil and stuff can bake onto the passage walls and it takes some work to dislodge it.  From now on I will use more physical effort to clean those oil passages.

WW;

I recommend using "Hoppe's Number 9" gun cleaning solvent for crankshaft passages. It is formulated to clean bores of powder residue and loosen debris, just the ticket for what you are doing. The old formulation contained a significant percentage of nitromethane which made it a better solvent so you might add a little of that to the modern over-the-counter Hoppe's Number 9 formulation to make it work better.
Regards, Neil  Tucson, AZ

Offline wobblywalrus

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 5307
  • Age: 67
  • Location: backwoods Oregon
Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
« Reply #3628 on: July 28, 2020, 11:19:54 AM »
Thanks for the advice.  I will look for some of that oil when I go up to Portland today.  It was my father's favorite gun oil.

Offline wobblywalrus

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 5307
  • Age: 67
  • Location: backwoods Oregon
Re: Team Go Dog, Go! Modified Partial Streamliners
« Reply #3629 on: July 28, 2020, 11:50:43 AM »
The big end shells are measured using a Mitutoyo Model 115-313 tubing micrometer.  The measurements D, E, and F are the most important.  They determine the minimum clearance between the shell and the journal.  These shells are of identical thickness when measurement acccuracy, error, and precision are considered.  There will be no gain by swapping them around to different journals in order to "fine tune" the installation clearances.

The thickness measurements near the parting lines do not mean much - except that a taper is there.  It is hard to get any quantifiable measurements on a tapered section.  There would be alarm and grounds for rejection if no taper was detected.

This looks to be a good batch of shells.  Only four are needed.  The other two are extras to be used if one or two of the other shells had issues.   

There is an oil film between the journal and the shell during operation and there is argument about whether of not a polymer coating is justified.  The old crank was raced with coatings and without.  There was less distress with coated shells.  So, they are used.