Steve Saunders Goldwing Forums banner

61 - 80 of 609 Posts

·
Premium Member
Joined
·
1,175 Posts
Discussion Starter #62
imported post

escogold wrote:
The typical performance quests: increased hp, torque vs. reliability, fuel economy, drivability, cost/value.
Don't forget the meaning of life.

Because the bikes don't have a huge resale value, there isn't much market for performance parts that would likely cost more to develop thing could be recovered in sales.

There's been a lot of talk about swapping heads on these bikes but I'm even more convinced today that the information that's been available is misleading.

Steve
 

·
Premium Member
Joined
·
6,422 Posts
imported post

CaptainMidnight85 wrote:
Lightin wrote:
Por boy Paint booth PVC pipe for frame and door. Painters plastic, cheap Box fan with $3.00 AC filter
...and duct tape. Don't forget the duct tape. :smiler:
How in the world did i over look that :smiler:
 

·
Premium Member
Joined
·
1,175 Posts
Discussion Starter #64
imported post

Well I didn't get a lot done today but I did get three heads cleaned up and a couple things are obvious.



If you put a 1000 head on a 1200 engine you'll have a lower compression ratio than either the stock 1200 or the 1000. It turns out that, contrary to what's been talked about on the site, that the 1200 has the smallest combustion chamber of the group.



It also has the lowest stock compression ratio. That's at least partly because the pistons have the smallest dome on the tops.

It'll take some doing to figure out what the actual compression ratio of 1200 engine with a 1000 heads on it will be. And to determine if the lower compression ratio will be outweighed by the bigger valves in the larger cam.

It does look to me as though it would be possible to put the mechanical lifters on the 1200 engine instead of the hydraulic lifters. I would have to modify the oil gallery to get oil to the cam and rocker arm shafts.

Steve
 

·
Premium Member
Joined
·
909 Posts
imported post

Ken if you swap the 1000 head (with the larger chamber) onto the 1200 motor wouldn't that drop the CR?

Ya Steve I figured the dearth of performance mods was due to demand/supply but I welcome any ideas. Most topics on the tech forum seem to deal with the challenges of diagnostics, repairs. Solid lifters? Good thinking but, performance vs. practicality not so much.
 

·
Premium Member
Joined
·
1,175 Posts
Discussion Starter #66
imported post

I Ken Bergen wrote:
Don't you have that reversed Steve?
If you compress 300cc of fuel/air mixture into a combustion chamber designed for 250cc that would raise the compression ratio not lower it would it not?
If the pistons are domed or dished that would change the chamber volume but I believe all the Goldwing 4's used flat top pistons.
Ken

The issue isn't how many cc the engine is designed for its the volume of the combustion . The 1200 has a smaller combustion chamber, considerably smaller than the 1000. Also both engines have dome top pistons. But the pistons from the 1200 have a smaller dome.

What it amounts to is that your taking a combustion chamber that was design to work with a piston that has a larger dome and putting it on an engine that has smaller domed pistons.

here's a picture of a 1200 pistons, you can see the slight dome.


and here's a picture of the 1000 piston.


I'm not sure how I'm going to calculate the volume of the domes, but I'll have to figure out something. Perhaps I can do something with modeling clay and I have to rig up a way to cc the heads. I also need to measure the deck height on the 1200 engine. One things for sure just slapping a 1000 head on a 1200 engine isn't the answer.

Steve
 

·
Premium Member
Joined
·
12,683 Posts
imported post

I cant claim to know anything about calculating Comp ratio . You mention the piston dome is smaller on the 1200 and its easy to see in the pictures . I think thats not the total question though , because yes its a smaller dome but the piston is larger diameter and longer stroke . Therefore it is moving a larger volume . You may have a calculator if not and for others who may want to play with numbers here is a link to an online calculator . : RSR Static Compression Ratio Calculator and another :Engine Compression Ratio (CR) Calculator
 

·
Banned
Joined
·
12,287 Posts
imported post

SuperSkypilot wrote:
One things for sure just slapping a 1000 head on a 1200 engine isn't the answer.
...that's what I've been saying. "...Most can't handle the math involved."

Certainly not saying you cannot SSP. It's consuming, but enjoyable... :)

:cooler:
 

·
Premium Member
Joined
·
1,175 Posts
Discussion Starter #69
imported post

OnaWingandaPrayer wrote:
I cant claim to know anything about calculating Comp ratio . You mention the piston dome is smaller on the 1200 and its easy to see in the pictures . I think thats not the total question though , because yes its a smaller dome but the piston is larger diameter and longer stroke . Therefore it is moving a larger volume . You may have a calculator if not and for others who may want to play with numbers here is a link to an online calculator . : RSR Static Compression Ratio Calculator and another :Engine Compression Ratio (CR) Calculator
Thanks for the links Mike they will be helpful. I hope I can get all of the numbers together tomorrow.

Steve
 

·
Premium Member
Joined
·
52 Posts
imported post

Can't say I'm the brightest mathematician around but I would figure that if you install the head and turn the piston all the way down. Have the cam disconnected so the valves dont open. Rig up some type of water pitcher with a hose out the bottom. Hook up the hose like a compresion tester to the cylinder. Fill the cylinder with water until it is full and water is in the pitcher and mark the side. Turn the engine till the piston is fully up and remark the pitcher. Then all you need to do is calculate the colume between the two line and you don't need to worry about calculating a dome seems a cylinder of water would be easier to calculate than the dome.
 

·
Junior Grue
Joined
·
8,153 Posts
imported post

SuperSkypilot wrote:
I Ken Bergen wrote:
Don't you have that reversed Steve?
If you compress 300cc of fuel/air mixture into a combustion chamber designed for 250cc that would raise the compression ratio not lower it would it not?
If the pistons are domed or dished that would change the chamber volume but I believe all the Goldwing 4's used flat top pistons.
Ken

The issue isn't how many cc the engine is designed for its the volume of the combustion . The 1200 has a smaller combustion chamber, considerably smaller than the 1000. Also both engines have dome top pistons. But the pistons from the 1200 have a smaller dome.

What it amounts to is that your taking a combustion chamber that was design to work with a piston that has a larger dome and putting it on an engine that has smaller domed pistons.
I'm not sure how I'm going to calculate the volume of the domes, but I'll have to figure out something. Perhaps I can do something with modeling clay and I have to rig up a way to cc the heads. I also need to measure the deck height on the 1200 engine. One things for sure just slapping a 1000 head on a 1200 engine isn't the answer.

Steve
The volume of the head's cambers minus the piston's dome will give you the static compression ratio.
However the cam profile and valve over lap will affect the dynamic compression ratio.
How you test the results without a multi-million dollar R&D department I don't know other than trying the combination and seeing what happens.
 

·
Premium Member
Joined
·
203 Posts
imported post

the figures ive seen on combustion area in stock form in ccs is 36.9 for 1200 33 for 1100 and 30.5 for 1000 ...the best thing i get out of all this is from looking at steves pics is ....theres not going to be much problem with to much compression or valve clearense thats all good to me ....after putting 75 cams in my 1100 last week in the 1100 heads and putting about 100 miles on it even thow its cold ....is im on the fast track to doing the 1200 now ....the better flow of the 1000 heads is big over the 1200 and i wouldnt consider them at all ....the only big question to me is rather the 1200 cams with twice the overlap 20 degrees than either 1000 or 1100 cams at 10 degrees the 1200 cams are a milder grind than the early 1000 but the overlap might compete well against the early 1000 cams im thinking of trying the 1200 cams in my 1100 test bike they will go right in the 1100 head and i will proably gravity feed carbs with a full tank of gas to test it seeing there is no fuel pump drive on the 1200 cams....my 82 1100 is my prission tool or caculator so to speak
 

·
Premium Member
Joined
·
1,175 Posts
Discussion Starter #74
imported post

joedrum wrote:
the figures ive seen on combustion area in stock form in ccs is 36.9 for 1200 33 for 1100 and 30.5 for 1000 ...the best thing i get out of all this is from looking at steves pics is ....theres not going to be much problem with to much compression or valve clearense thats all good to me ....after putting 75 cams in my 1100 last week in the 1100 heads and putting about 100 miles on it even thow its cold ....is im on the fast track to doing the 1200 now ....the better flow of the 1000 heads is big over the 1200 and i wouldnt consider them at all ....the only big question to me is rather the 1200 cams with twice the overlap 20 degrees than either 1000 or 1100 cams at 10 degrees the 1200 cams are a milder grind than the early 1000 but the overlap might compete well against the early 1000 cams im thinking of trying the 1200 cams in my 1100 test bike they will go right in the 1100 head and i will proably gravity feed carbs with a full tank of gas to test it seeing there is no fuel pump drive on the 1200 cams....my 82 1100 is my prission tool or caculator so to speak
where did you get the CC numbers from? They must be net volume in the stock engine. If that's the case they still don't tell us what the net volume in a 1200 engine with 1000 heads on it. And the question still remains whether the 1000 heads actually flow better than the 1200 heads and if that improve flow is enough to make up for what looks to be an obvious loss of compression ratio.

Steve
 

·
Premium Member
Joined
·
1,175 Posts
Discussion Starter #75
imported post

CHELMBOLD wrote:
Can't say I'm the brightest mathematician around but I would figure that if you install the head and turn the piston all the way down. Have the cam disconnected so the valves dont open. Rig up some type of water pitcher with a hose out the bottom. Hook up the hose like a compresion tester to the cylinder. Fill the cylinder with water until it is full and water is in the pitcher and mark the side. Turn the engine till the piston is fully up and remark the pitcher. Then all you need to do is calculate the colume between the two line and you don't need to worry about calculating a dome seems a cylinder of water would be easier to calculate than the dome.
I think you're onto something, I have a 1200 engine that's taken apart I think I can use your method to get the information we need. I'll see if I can set it up tomorrow .

Steve
 

·
Banned
Joined
·
12,287 Posts
imported post

Ken Bergen wrote:
How you test the results without a multi-million dollar R&D department I don't know other than trying the combination and seeing what happens.
There are programs available for modeling...

I use Engine Analyzer Pro for my stuff. I had a thread going last yearasking for information that nobody seemed to have. It took quite a while to gather all the data by hand, ...measuring each individual component.

http://www.goldwingfacts.com/forums/forum1/81471.html
 

·
Premium Member
Joined
·
1,175 Posts
Discussion Starter #78
imported post

I use Engine Analyzer Pro for my stuff. I had a thread going last yearasking for information that nobody seemed to have. It took quite a while to gather all the data by hand, ...measuring each individual component.

http://www.goldwingfacts.com/forums/forum1/81471.html
Captain

Your post were from before I joined the group and I never saw them. Hopefully we will be able to fill in some more of the blanks . I'm not much of a mathematician but I get frustrated when people aren't willing to look at the whole picture. I have an older Dos program called Desk Top Dynos.

Steve
 

·
Premium Member
Joined
·
1,175 Posts
Discussion Starter #79
imported post

I use Engine Analyzer Pro for my stuff. I had a thread going last yearasking for information that nobody seemed to have. It took quite a while to gather all the data by hand, ...measuring each individual component.

http://www.goldwingfacts.com/forums/forum1/81471.html
Captain

Your post were from before I joined the group and I never saw them. Hopefully we will be able to fill in some more of the blanks . I'm not much of a mathematician but I get frustrated when people aren't willing to look at the whole picture. I have an older Dos program called Desk Top Dynos.

Steve
 

·
Premium Member
Joined
·
688 Posts
imported post

Steve, I saw a post somewhere showing how to simply fill the heads with liquid and use a syringe to suck it out to get the volume on the head. Valves head to be in, and head laying flat on a bench. I think it was on a site for porting heads. I suppose you could do the same with the piston in the cylinder. I am still hoping you can get some definitive answers to this. I remember in some of my earlier reading that the 1200 pistons came above the top of the block a bit, but I remember someone else saying that wasn't true.
 
61 - 80 of 609 Posts
Top