Joined
·
930 Posts
Oh I think you will also want to make sure the front engine is always the lead engine. Otherwise, you may be putting way too much force on your idler gear and it's support
Twin Engine GSXR Land Speed Racer
41 - 60 of 338 Posts
Joined
·
731 Posts
First just want to say this is an impressive bit of machinery. I really like it especially since I also have an 86 GSXR 1100. 
unk
OK so I played around with Power point and did a quick spreadsheet (the problem was intriguing :dunno). I attached a somewhat more complicated design, but it is certainly more balanced.
I won't claim to understand all (any) of the issues with trying to couple the two motors but assume the crank to crank spacing is required to get an integral number of links within that spacing. The idea is that the front lead motor will pull the most and the straight section of chain will establish the relative timing (I realized this just before I posted the pic :sad). The motors are spaced exactly N links apart and with N links on the sprockets they are in sync (nominally at least). If the chain stretches you have to slide the motors further apart.
That must be the reason for trying to pull out all the chain slack on the bottom. Of course is this is very unbalanced . Additionally the adjuster is pushing "in" and so the small idler has to spin so much faster as well as the increased chain deflection angle.
Here are some highlights:
1.) Lower chain deflection angles on the chain adjusters because there are two adjusters. Slight increase on the lead drive sides with a decrease on the follower drive side
2.) Idlers have reduced load because the chain is wanting to fly out away from the idler rather than pushing against it (this might be a minimal effect).
3.) I believe that there is sufficient adjustment to get 1 full 530 link of slack adjustment on the leader drive side with less chain deflection. Then the lower follower side can be set for slack adjustment. Depending upon the symmetry of the idlers, it may be close to identical.
4.) Since there is more space inside the chain, larger idlers can be used reducing the idler RPM in proportion to the chain in #of teeth
5.) The adjusters are angled for improved fit as well as to better oppose the drive side chain tension even though the angles are reduced.
6.) By simply using the timing marks on both motors, the tensions can be set to synchronize the motors without moving (crank shaft spacing) either motor as required in the current version.
I also threw in some guides (inside and outside in blue). Also little squirter's for an oiler would be easy to add as show rather than going to a full bath.
I have now way of knowing, but I would certainly think that this configuration would be much more stable and once the engines were synced (using timing marks and tensioning) that the bike would run longer in sync as there is likely to be less chain wear and stretch and even the chain wear and stretch will be symmetrical and nominally not change the timing (as the existing will if there is any stretch). It is easy to do a quick after run alignment adjust if required and you are off and running again. :burnout
Nice bike what ever you happen to decide.
Posplayr
P.S I'm just looking at the pic again, It seems now you might have enough room to sync the cranks instead of the transmission and then run a separate chain and gearing for the tranies if you think a single transmission will handle the power.
unkOK so I played around with Power point and did a quick spreadsheet (the problem was intriguing :dunno). I attached a somewhat more complicated design, but it is certainly more balanced.
I won't claim to understand all (any) of the issues with trying to couple the two motors but assume the crank to crank spacing is required to get an integral number of links within that spacing. The idea is that the front lead motor will pull the most and the straight section of chain will establish the relative timing (I realized this just before I posted the pic :sad). The motors are spaced exactly N links apart and with N links on the sprockets they are in sync (nominally at least). If the chain stretches you have to slide the motors further apart.
That must be the reason for trying to pull out all the chain slack on the bottom. Of course is this is very unbalanced . Additionally the adjuster is pushing "in" and so the small idler has to spin so much faster as well as the increased chain deflection angle.
Here are some highlights:
1.) Lower chain deflection angles on the chain adjusters because there are two adjusters. Slight increase on the lead drive sides with a decrease on the follower drive side
2.) Idlers have reduced load because the chain is wanting to fly out away from the idler rather than pushing against it (this might be a minimal effect).
3.) I believe that there is sufficient adjustment to get 1 full 530 link of slack adjustment on the leader drive side with less chain deflection. Then the lower follower side can be set for slack adjustment. Depending upon the symmetry of the idlers, it may be close to identical.
4.) Since there is more space inside the chain, larger idlers can be used reducing the idler RPM in proportion to the chain in #of teeth
5.) The adjusters are angled for improved fit as well as to better oppose the drive side chain tension even though the angles are reduced.
6.) By simply using the timing marks on both motors, the tensions can be set to synchronize the motors without moving (crank shaft spacing) either motor as required in the current version.
I also threw in some guides (inside and outside in blue). Also little squirter's for an oiler would be easy to add as show rather than going to a full bath.
I have now way of knowing, but I would certainly think that this configuration would be much more stable and once the engines were synced (using timing marks and tensioning) that the bike would run longer in sync as there is likely to be less chain wear and stretch and even the chain wear and stretch will be symmetrical and nominally not change the timing (as the existing will if there is any stretch). It is easy to do a quick after run alignment adjust if required and you are off and running again. :burnout
Nice bike what ever you happen to decide.
Posplayr
P.S I'm just looking at the pic again, It seems now you might have enough room to sync the cranks instead of the transmission and then run a separate chain and gearing for the tranies if you think a single transmission will handle the power.
Attachments
I may have missed something but it seems the bikes setup is running with clutches linked on both motors and I am guessing both shifters linked toghter as well. If that is the case it doesnt matter if the motors are timed together seeing as its not coming from the engine output shaft.
Joined
·
3,047 Posts
To answer some of your comments...
Yes it has both clutches and transmissions, they are both shifted together, it is the countershafts that are coupled together.
As shown, yes there is a cover for the coupler, with a bit of work, it could be made oil tight.
Its too long to fit on a dyno. I would estimate the previous 1255cc engines were each capable of an honest 175 rear wheel hp in a conventional bike. I'm sure we lose a bit through the coupler and probably lots when we are frying it.
No, it didn't need more hp considering the wheel spin and the weak coupler but I consider big blocks to be the "holy grail" of oil coolers so I was happy that I scored 2 new ones. We'll also add some ballast and improve the rear suspension in hopes of helping it hook up.
Thanks again for your suggestions!
Scott
Yes it has both clutches and transmissions, they are both shifted together, it is the countershafts that are coupled together.
As shown, yes there is a cover for the coupler, with a bit of work, it could be made oil tight.
Its too long to fit on a dyno. I would estimate the previous 1255cc engines were each capable of an honest 175 rear wheel hp in a conventional bike. I'm sure we lose a bit through the coupler and probably lots when we are frying it.
No, it didn't need more hp considering the wheel spin and the weak coupler but I consider big blocks to be the "holy grail" of oil coolers so I was happy that I scored 2 new ones. We'll also add some ballast and improve the rear suspension in hopes of helping it hook up.
Thanks again for your suggestions!
Scott
Attachments
Joined
·
930 Posts
If you keep that chain well oiled and can keep the salt out, your set up will probably serve you well for your purposes. Chains seldom break catastrophically so most likely you will probably only see a reduction in performance. So if you would check the chain stretch and sprockets periodically, it would give you early warning.
The idler is there only to take up excessive slack due to chain stretch (since the engines can't be moved) - you really don't need it for anything else. Actually if you have plenty of replacement chain (to replace when it stretches), you could eliminate the idler altogether if it keeps giving you problems. Don't over tighten the chain either, allow it to move some. Chains will move up and down on the tension side (top in your case) - they are supposed to. If you start seeing excessive wear on the front sprocket (assuming it is the lead engine) you may want to remove chain guides or at least widen them allowing alittle chain movement. Good luck
The idler is there only to take up excessive slack due to chain stretch (since the engines can't be moved) - you really don't need it for anything else. Actually if you have plenty of replacement chain (to replace when it stretches), you could eliminate the idler altogether if it keeps giving you problems. Don't over tighten the chain either, allow it to move some. Chains will move up and down on the tension side (top in your case) - they are supposed to. If you start seeing excessive wear on the front sprocket (assuming it is the lead engine) you may want to remove chain guides or at least widen them allowing alittle chain movement. Good luck
Joined
·
3,047 Posts
Ohhh what was I thinking?...this is what it looked like when it showed up at my local Suzuki dealer after having it shipped to Alberta from Pennsylvania. I was stuck on a rig in Mexico and they sent me this teaser shot.
It had not run in over 15 years. I was happy to score a Performance Machine "Chicane" front rim that matched the rear. I wan't really feeling the old spoked top fuel rim. It had drag slicks on it, which is odd because they are illegal at Bonneville and the bike had passed tech there a couple times.
I ordered a land speed front fender and early GSXR competition fairing from Air Tech. I think I bought 3 fairing mounts off ebay before I got a good one. It had a pair of rechargeable tachometers which I figured were junk from being so old, I replaced them with a couple of Trail Techs, cheap and easy.
It had not run in over 15 years. I was happy to score a Performance Machine "Chicane" front rim that matched the rear. I wan't really feeling the old spoked top fuel rim. It had drag slicks on it, which is odd because they are illegal at Bonneville and the bike had passed tech there a couple times.
I ordered a land speed front fender and early GSXR competition fairing from Air Tech. I think I bought 3 fairing mounts off ebay before I got a good one. It had a pair of rechargeable tachometers which I figured were junk from being so old, I replaced them with a couple of Trail Techs, cheap and easy.
Attachments
Joined
·
731 Posts
Yes the small idler will always have a higher RPM and a higher load and is by far the weak link in the setup.
If possible pull out another link and reduce the deflection that the idler has to put into the chain.
With even more Hp planned, I would hate to see than chain break at 200MPH +
Joined
·
3,047 Posts
The new chain has one less link than the one we thrashed, it is also has a rivet master link where as the old one had a clip style which was certainly easier to install. The 2 counter sprockets and the chain are installed at the same time now, it probably doesn't show in the picture but you end up spreading the counter sprockets as far as you can to get them on and its pretty tough with the short chain. Its not possible to remove another link, I wish it was.
Yeah, we'll just stick to the short course and inspect it after every run.
The record is only 208mph in this class, obviously we are looking to shatter it, not many of these old twin engine dinosaurs left. It was last set in '79 by Tom Elrod on a twin engine Kawasaki.
Yeah, we'll just stick to the short course and inspect it after every run.
The record is only 208mph in this class, obviously we are looking to shatter it, not many of these old twin engine dinosaurs left. It was last set in '79 by Tom Elrod on a twin engine Kawasaki.
Joined
·
4,629 Posts
Great to see this thread is alive and well.
Scott, I think Posplayr had a much improved diagram for reducing the wear and tear on your chain drive synchro setup. Have you given it any thought?
Scott, I think Posplayr had a much improved diagram for reducing the wear and tear on your chain drive synchro setup. Have you given it any thought?
Joined
·
3,047 Posts
I'm stuck in sandy Saudi Arabia for the next month or so. I'm looking forward to getting back in my garage and enjoying a beer while I have a good look at the coupler.
I certainly appreciate all of the positive suggestions. I'm definitely interested in trying to run a larger idler, I'm undecided about two of them.
I've saved Posplayr's diagram (THANKS!! I don't even know how you can make something like that..very cool) and will run it by my engine builder and team mates.
Whatever I do this year depends on how much time that I get home. The engine rebuilds are dragging on, I'm told today that my new big blocks and pistons are being shipped but I've heard that every week for a month. I definitely need to get the engines back in the bike and we'll go from there, it will probably be an all night thrash as usual but thats racing. If all goes well, I'll focus on finishing up my 1693cc Busa when I get home and my engine guy can play with the Double once I do the grunt work and install the engines. We do have some ambitious long term projects for the Double, I want EFI.
I certainly appreciate all of the positive suggestions. I'm definitely interested in trying to run a larger idler, I'm undecided about two of them.
I've saved Posplayr's diagram (THANKS!! I don't even know how you can make something like that..very cool) and will run it by my engine builder and team mates.
Whatever I do this year depends on how much time that I get home. The engine rebuilds are dragging on, I'm told today that my new big blocks and pistons are being shipped but I've heard that every week for a month. I definitely need to get the engines back in the bike and we'll go from there, it will probably be an all night thrash as usual but thats racing. If all goes well, I'll focus on finishing up my 1693cc Busa when I get home and my engine guy can play with the Double once I do the grunt work and install the engines. We do have some ambitious long term projects for the Double, I want EFI.
Joined
·
3,047 Posts
Thanks, I appreciate that!
I always plan on running Speed Week every year in mid August. That is put on the table immediately with who ever I work for, non-negotiable.
El Mirage is 28 hours straight from my place, there are only two 2 day events each year, one in May and another in November, its hit or miss with my schedule and its too hard to justify the travel for the 1 day events.
I always plan on running Speed Week every year in mid August. That is put on the table immediately with who ever I work for, non-negotiable.
El Mirage is 28 hours straight from my place, there are only two 2 day events each year, one in May and another in November, its hit or miss with my schedule and its too hard to justify the travel for the 1 day events.
Joined
·
3,047 Posts
Here's a teaser....
This is the body that we will be running next year, this is sitting loose on a Buell but you get the idea.
Although bikes have a small frontal area, they suck aerodynamically because they are too short, the air never gets a chance to re-attach which results in drag. A long bike like the Double has the chance to be very slippery. It also helps that the SCTA has relaxed some rules concerning the rear of the bikes, length, height, amount that the wheel is covered etc.
So once we get the coupler sorted, we're planning on going fast!
This is the body that we will be running next year, this is sitting loose on a Buell but you get the idea.
Although bikes have a small frontal area, they suck aerodynamically because they are too short, the air never gets a chance to re-attach which results in drag. A long bike like the Double has the chance to be very slippery. It also helps that the SCTA has relaxed some rules concerning the rear of the bikes, length, height, amount that the wheel is covered etc.
So once we get the coupler sorted, we're planning on going fast!
Attachments
Joined
·
220 Posts
Looks awesome.I'll ship those carbs next week if that's cool.I would love to buy some spare gsxr 1100 parts grom you if have any sell?
Joined
·
3,047 Posts
Sure, ship the carbs next week, no problem. I'm buying up GSXR 1100 parts myself, I have a feeling the Double is going to be hard on parts.
Joined
·
1,700 Posts
Have you talked to my buddies at MDR?
They are big into the land speed stuff
Expect them to set a new electric record this year as well as beating the normal 500cc records they do.
I have some inside info about that electric airstream they are going to run.
Lets just say the dyno wasnt happy
They are big into the land speed stuff
Expect them to set a new electric record this year as well as beating the normal 500cc records they do.
I have some inside info about that electric airstream they are going to run.
Lets just say the dyno wasnt happy
Joined
·
3,047 Posts
I buy land speed body work from Air Tech. Kent Riches, Air Tech, MDR, same crowd.
Thanks!
Thanks!
41 - 60 of 338 Posts
