Steve Saunders Goldwing Forums banner

Status
Not open for further replies.
1 - 20 of 21 Posts

·
Registered
Joined
·
34 Posts
Discussion Starter #1
The old "men" in the GL lineup ('75, '76) are mostly forgotten about and sure seem to be small by today's standards, but you can have a lot of fun playing around and hot-rodding them. Their engine layout just begs for all sorts of hand-made goodies, and the basic boxer layout is ready made for doubling, and even tripling output. My final grade from GM Institute in 1978 was to pick an engine and squeeze 3hp/ci out of it without pressurizing it, and on pump gas. (actually, pump gas included Sunoco 360 and 104 av-gas!)

CaptainMidnite wanted to know about my "single-fire" ignition, so here's the whole story of this project, starting with the ignition.

The goal was 180+hp, but that means lots of fuel/air and higher cylinder pressures, which means much higher spark voltage. I've never been a fan of the usual double-ended coils. First, trying to contain that much voltage in such a small package is just asking for a short lifespan and limited output. Also, If your plug gap on each plug is .050", then the coil is looking at an equivalent of .100". That requires a lot of push to jump. As the rpms climb, so do the spark voltage requirements and those stock coils are just very limited.

My solution was to use the points box as a base for fitting a custom distributor. In this case I used the optic pickup from a Toyota pickup truck, a cap and rotor from a Fiat 850, and an old Heathkit CDI unit driving an Accel coil. Had to machine up adapter rings to mount the pickup, the cap and another adapter to hold the rotor. The slotted rotor from the pickup system only need very little material removed from the inside to press tightly over the stock point cam.

After the rest of the work was done, quite a bit of dyno time was spent tuning the advance using different springs. Ended up ruining several sets of stock springs by heating them slightly to weaken them. That's kind of an art, and I'm no artist! My dealer looked at me kinda weird when I kept coming in for advance springs. He said he had never sold any others to anybody!

I really don't know what a stock 1000 engine is capable of doing with good coils and everything in tune, but mine seemed to stumble starting around 8200rpm. The new ignition was smooth all the way to 10,500 which is where I detected some valve float. And, this is where the rest of the story begins about the other mods to this bike. But, first, just a couple more issues with this distributor before anybody runs out to try this!

Notice the 90 degree plug towers on the cap. Naturally, they had to be to clear the rider's left foot. Still, my foot only cleared them by maybe 1/2". That all worked well under normal conditions, but when you roll the throttle on hard and rpms climb, so does the spark voltage. I lost count how many times I got bit hard not paying attention to that fact! Eventually moved the peg back 1" and shortened my shift lever 1". That was fine, except for riding in rain! Had to hook my foot on the rear peg and be sure I wasn't "on it" when I would slide forward to shift it. Not exactly a rider-friendly setup! Again, eventually I made a mica shield to block my foot from the wires! The Accel coil and higher spark voltages took their toll on the Fiat's cap and coil. A distributor driven off the front of one of the cams and sticking out forward, and having a larger diameter cap would work much better. Even a GM HEI cap/rotor, using just four towers, would be much better, but what did I know back then?

That's the distributor part of this build. More later. BTW, it eventual put out 182hp at the output shaft.





 

·
Banned
Joined
·
12,287 Posts
Thank You for posting!
A single-fire solution that appears to be next on my list of upgrades.
I've gotten all that I can get from factory coils and this is the next step in my interests of ignition.

Do not be offended if I duplicate what I see and read of this thread.
It will happen.
I look forward to more..
:D
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
34 Posts
Discussion Starter #3
I don't mind at all. If you have machine and welding skills and equipment available to you, I would suggest, as I did above, to modify a late '70's-late '80's GM HEI distributor. It would handle the abuses of the higher spark voltages better and be easier to find parts for. Ever tried to find a cap and rotor for a Fiat 850? Also, you can cut off four of the eight reluctor points from the pickup's rotor to give you just four firings. Might as well keep the whole thing GM if you can. I wish I had! You will have to figure out how to mount it to the front of one of the timing belt covers, then connect it to the nose of the cam.

Another solution would be to run a toothed belt from the stock points box up to another pulley above the valve cover and face the distributor forward!

But, if you are a glutten for shock therapy, then the pickup assembly I used was out of my 1979 Toyota SR5 work truck. Had to eventually put it back in the truck to keep my boss happy, but once it proved itself I went out and bought a whole new set. You might want to look around for newer, smaller optic pickups. Check the automotive speed supplies. Speedway Motors, Jeg's, etc.

I'm good friends with the guy who bought the bike from me. He sold it long ago, but he might still have the distributor parts laying around. He removed the carbs immediately after I delivered the bike to him and handed them to me. I still have them, too. I could ask him if he has the ignition stuff. Would sure save you a lot of time!
 

·
Banned
Joined
·
12,287 Posts
I'm up for it.
 

·
Premium Member
Joined
·
2,444 Posts
How 'bout using the distributor to trigger power transistors located near the coils. All the high voltage stuff will be solid state. That way the spark gap at the distributor will be almost nothing, extending it's life expectancy and keeping the high voltage away from your foot.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
34 Posts
Discussion Starter #6
How 'bout using the distributor to trigger power transistors located near the coils. All the high voltage stuff will be solid state. That way the spark gap at the distributor will be almost nothing, extending it's life expectancy and keeping the high voltage away from your foot.
You've sure got my head spinning trying to figure out the system you describe.

"...spark gap at the distributor..."? The cap and rotor determine the non-adjustable spark gap, and with any gap at all they also can't be used to drive power transistors.

"All the high voltage stuff will be solid state." The "...high voltage stuff..." is simply the output from the coil. I must be missing what you are calling high voltage.

"...coils." This system uses just one coil and a cap/rotor to "distribute" the spark, just like "old-school" automotive practice. What I think you are hinting at is using multiple pickup sensors firing multiple coils. The stock GW points box is not large enough to fit four sensors into. It is possible to make a larger box to fit on top of the stock one that will hold multiple sensors. This would require mounting four coils under the "tank", one for each cylinder. Yes, that would move the high voltage away from the foot.

There are several possible modern variations to move the "high voltage" away from the foot, and to eliminate the small, double-ended coils, as well as the cap/rotor type of distribution.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
34 Posts
Discussion Starter #7
Fighting the worst flu in my life here, so my keyboard time is limited. But, moving on with the bike's description.

Today I'll describe the intake.

Hp increases mean higher fuel/air flows, and the stock carbs can't flow enough for much more than about 110hp, theoretically. So, new carbs were in order. Enter the Weber 40IDF's. A Maseratti V-6 has roughly the same per-cylinder displacement as the GL1000, and Italian makers are notorious for oversizing their carbs, so the 40IDF seemed perfect! It's big enough that I could have even jetted them for alcohol if needed. To start out I ordered them exactly as they come jetted for M engine. Of course it took lots of jet changes to get it dialed in just right. I also hand polished the bores, tapered the edges of the butterflies, contoured the shafts and hand fit the venturis and blended them into the bores. Just a lot of detail work to be sure they were efficient.

The manifolds were fabricated, too. The bases were made from 1/2" aluminum bar-stock and matched to the ports on the heads after the heads were reworked. A one-piece carb base plate was cut out of 1/4" aluminum. Tubes were fit between the bases and carb base plates and welded. Some grinding and rewelding had to be done inside to fill gaps after blending all the joints smoothly. A flow bench test showed a huge air bubble right at the point where these manifolds meet the heads, so a bit more weld buildup and contouring reshaped the stream to cover the port's whole mouth at the head. Perfect! And, all this grinding of aluminum made my hands black! That stuff doesn't just wash off!

Along with the manifolds I made a cross-bar to tie on carb to the other across the engine to help stabilize them and prevent any cracks from vibrations. Welded to that bar is the throttle cable anchors, too. Stock GL1000 cables were used. I did have to fabricate the cable wheels to fit the ends of the throttle shafts, so I made them identical, although the cables just hook to the left one. A 1/4" brass tube with Heim joints on each end connect/sync the two carbs. Air cleaners were a couple of off-the-shelf K&N units. (more about the air cleaners issue later)

OK, now that's the ignition and carburetion. Still gotta cram all that fuel/air into the cylinders to pump out real power. But, that's for another day!
 

·
Premium Member
Joined
·
2,444 Posts
You've sure got my head spinning trying to figure out the system you describe.

"...spark gap at the distributor..."? The cap and rotor determine the non-adjustable spark gap, and with any gap at all they also can't be used to drive power transistors.

"All the high voltage stuff will be solid state." The "...high voltage stuff..." is simply the output from the coil. I must be missing what you are calling high voltage.

"...coils." This system uses just one coil and a cap/rotor to "distribute" the spark, just like "old-school" automotive practice. What I think you are hinting at is using multiple pickup sensors firing multiple coils. The stock GW points box is not large enough to fit four sensors into. It is possible to make a larger box to fit on top of the stock one that will hold multiple sensors. This would require mounting four coils under the "tank", one for each cylinder. Yes, that would move the high voltage away from the foot.

There are several possible modern variations to move the "high voltage" away from the foot, and to eliminate the small, double-ended coils, as well as the cap/rotor type of distribution.
I think you got the jist of what my clumsy description was trying to say.

Spark gap at the distributor:
What I'm referring to here is the gap between the rotor and the tower. When pumping high voltage through this OldSchool (snicker) setup, it's going to arc. That arcing will erode the metals over time. By using a power transistor and low voltage pickups, you can eliminate the arcing and increase the life of the rotor/tower by quite a bit. Let's call it infinite if you use optical pickups instead of metal contacts..

High Voltage is SolidState:
My original statement was quite clumsy on this point! On my CB750 and 550, I have transisterized the primary of the coils, not the secondary. This reduces even the modest voltage (or more accurately, current) at the mechanical points to almost nothing and has pretty much eliminated the need to resurface and adjust my points every friggen weekend! I'm coming from this experience/application for this whole discussion.

Coil(s):
Will there be enough dwell time to generate the massive EMF in the primary to cause the secondary to produce that highly desired phat spark? You may know better than I on this. It seems reasonable as my old Mustang had a single coil. Lower RPMs for sure, but twice as many towers.

Room for Pickups:
If you went with 4 optical pickups, using a slotted disk to make/break the beam, you might be able to cram it all in there. By adjusting the length of the slot, you can adjust dwell time. And adjustable weights on the disk perimeter would give you fine tuning for advance.

Something Not Said:
And a key point that I totally missed is that the rotor/distributor in my scenario would be connected to the primary of the coil(s) and not the primary. This may also require 4 coils, not just one (still thinking on this point). So totally NOT the OldSchool (snicker again) setup you describe.

Just spitballing here. Please continue your explanation, I'm learning much!
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
34 Posts
Discussion Starter #9
"Spark gap at the distributor:
What I'm referring to here is the gap between the rotor and the tower. When pumping high voltage through this OldSchool (snicker) setup, it's going to arc. That arcing will erode the metals over time. By using a power transistor and low voltage pickups, you can eliminate the arcing and increase the life of the rotor/tower by quite a bit. Let's call it infinite if you use optical pickups instead of metal contacts.."

This cannot even be responded to since you have mixed up the primary and secondary sections of the ignition system.

"On my CB750 and 550, I have transisterized the primary of the coils, not the secondary. This reduces even the modest voltage (or more accurately, current) at the mechanical points to almost nothing and has pretty much eliminated the need to resurface and adjust my points every friggen weekend! I'm coming from this experience/application for this whole discussion."

OK, now you have made a comment that makes sense and is true! However, there are more modern ways to do this as well as eliminate the need to worry about setting "dwell" with the mechanical points. Small CD drivers (capacitive discharge) eliminate the need for any dwell time. The mechanical points merely tell the CD driver when to fire the coil. The gap on those points can be quite small with no adverse effects, and they will last until the rubbing blocks wear off.

"Will there be enough dwell time to generate the massive EMF in the primary to cause the secondary to produce that highly desired phat spark? You may know better than I on this. It seems reasonable as my old Mustang had a single coil. Lower RPMs for sure, but twice as many towers."

Again, using CD drivers eliminates any concerns for dwell. Wow! You truly ARE OldSchool! A four cylinder engine should have absolutely no problem developing enough dwell, especially since there are only two sets of points in your engines. I'm not going to go into a tutorial about that. You had better know this point gap versus dwell stuff!

"If you went with 4 optical pickups, using a slotted disk to make/break the beam, you might be able to cram it all in there. By adjusting the length of the slot, you can adjust dwell time. And adjustable weights on the disk perimeter would give you fine tuning for advance."

First of all, adding a set of four optic pickups would mean using four separate coils, Then, the "slotted disk" you speak of would simply mount onto the stock point cam, which already has the correct weights and springs for the advance the engine needs. However, where you are lost is that the width of those slots has nothing at all to do with dwell. Each slot simply gives the trigger point for the CD driver to fire it's coil. Forget DWELL! Except in cars made before about 1972, there is no more dwell. CD ignition (which most cars have) has eliminated that term!

"And a key point that I totally missed is that the rotor/distributor in my scenario would be connected to the primary of the coil(s) and not the primary. This may also require 4 coils, not just one (still thinking on this point). So totally NOT the OldSchool (snicker again) setup you describe."

WHAT????????

Could we please keep this thread on the subject of describing the background to a 36 year old hot rod Gold Wing build, and not debunking other mystical ignition systems? Got questions about what I did, or why? I will answer those.
 

·
Administrator
Joined
·
24,395 Posts
I think today's answer to the ignition issue would be a 4 coil (over plug) set up. You could still fire 2 at a time using the points as a trigger for an electronic control with no ill effects. In fact someone on this forum has done that on an 1100 using the stock electronics.
Interested in knowing what you did to the heads, keep going.
 

·
Banned
Joined
·
12,287 Posts
2 cents here - I tried that, ..sort of. I never finished what I was doing with it.
4 MP08's through my Dyna III.
I tried running 2 individual coils as a single factory dual coil and had a voltage/current issue in performance. I used no additional amplifiers. I think 1 amplifier per coil is required to move forward with what I was doing.
I had put no real study on it and needed to move onto other more necessary stuff to keep the bike road-ready.
My thread of it is still waiting for some follow-up.
I've no desire to stick with a wasted spark ignition.

EDIT: for the thread I started and never finished in what I was trying to do.
No intention of hi-jacking here. Just some background.
http://www.goldwingfacts.com/forums/showthread.php?p=2451169
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
34 Posts
Discussion Starter #12 (Edited)
Cap'n, what Dave said is absolutely the solution, in addition to using the right CD drivers for each coil. What is being left out of most discussions actually goes back to a bit of what OldSchool has been harping on. (Sorry Dave for digressing here just a bit to clarify some ignition basics. In the morning I WILL post the details of the head work!)

An ignition coil, if driven simply by 12 volts being turned on, then off to create a higher output, needs a relatively long "on" time to saturate the whole coil with it's magnetic field. It's not as instantaneous as we humans might believe. As a historical note here, it is also what blocked the development of higher performance engines back in the '20's! Lack of a strong enough spark to ignite more fuel/air. They just didn't know that the closed-points time (dwell) was critical to providing sufficient secondary voltage to fire a plug. Sorry if you don't understand how the saturation of a coil works, but it's rooted in basic electronics principles. All that capacitance, inductance, resistance stuff! For all you oldies out there, it's also why the capacitor had to be matched to the coil being used or your points would burn away quickly.

Anyway, just asking 12 volts to saturate a coil for better spark takes a lot of time relative to an engine's "time schedule". All things averaged out, it has been found that most passenger car four bangers with a single coil/distributor ignition system can get good coil saturation from just 12 volts up to about 6000rpm. The points can be adjusted easily to give good dwell for this. BUT, just try to cram twice that many cylinders into the mix and ask a single set of points to give each of those eight cylinders sufficient dwell time for good saturation and all the components start arguing like members of Congress about who's function is most important! I sure hope you guys know all the basics of setting mechanical points on the old systems. If not, maybe we can start a new thread on ignition basics and work up to today? Just let me know.

When you ask for more power you are asking for more fuel/air and that drives the required spark voltage sky high! That also means that some coils can't saturate fast enough. Flash back to the mid-'60's when the capacitive discharge system was added to the ignition circuit. A CD unit takes the 12 volts and creates up to 90 volts (in the case of the old Heathkit units!), then charges a large capacitor with that 90 volts. At the right time a transistor dumps part of that stored up medium voltage into the coil. The best analogy I can give between driving a coil with just 12 volts and driving one with a CD unit is blowing up a balloon by mouth until it is full (saturated), or blowing up a balloon using a firecracker in the nipple! Of course, the firecracker will destroy the balloon, but the difference in speed of "saturation" should be evident.

Now, let's sidetrack just a bit here. Double-ended coils, which almost all bikes have had for a long time, fire two plugs at the same time. Ever thought about the polarity of spark voltage and the direction of the spark current that results? One is backwards from the other! And, in very high performance engines this is critical for combustion flame propagation. Might not be so critical for street applications, but it just shows that it does make a difference! A well blueprinted, tuned and maintained engine will show the difference in plug color, but not enough that most will know the difference. The reversal of polarity also causes the two plugs fired by the same coil to erode differently! One will eat the center electrode and the other will eat the side electrode.

Anyway, back to the CD units. When you use just 12 volts to saturate a coil you turn the 12 volts on to begin the saturation (blowing up the balloon). While the points are still closed the saturation point of the magnetic field is maintained. Nothing else is happening. Then, when the engine wants spark the points open (like releasing the fill nipple of the balloon) and that magnetic field collapses across the secondary windings inducing all that higher voltage to create the spark. Two things must be noted here. In a 12 volt system a relatively low voltage is used to drive the coil to saturation and the natural action of the magnetic field collapsing is used to induce the higher spark voltage. Both of these are relatively weak sources of energy and the 12 volts just takes time to build the field! If you simply let the air escape from a balloon through the nipple, it also takes time. Same thing happens with the coil's secondary. It takes time for the magnetic field to collapse.

A small bit of fact here before we go on. You can induce the high voltage in the secondary of a coil by either BUILDING UP the magnetic field, or by COLLAPSING it! Remember this!

OK, let's look at the action of the CD driver and how it affects the coil's performance. As the CD dumps a part of that stored up 90 volts into the primary of the coil, the magnetic field BUILDS UP extremely fast (like popping the balloon with a needle!), inducing the wanted high voltage spark voltage we want as it BUILDS! WOW! Now were getting spark from the magnetic field building rather than collapsing. Also, the 90 volts has enough energy behind it to make this happen much faster than the 12 volts could, and even much faster than the magnetic field collapsing on it's own! And here is where the beauty of the CD system shines through! As you can see, there is no "dwell" time required for saturation before achieving spark! Also, follow along the events timeline of the cyclic process and you will see that even after the main spark has been created on the BUILDUP phase of the magnetic field, you will then get a followup, slower (longer lasting), lower energy spark from the collapse of that magnetic field! If you've ever used an old CRT engine scope on a CD driven system you can see this clearly as two distinct spark sections!

(Geeze, when WILL this guy get to the point???)

OK, Dave (and this applies to part of what you commented about Cap'n!), you usually can't just tie two coil inputs to the output of the same "electronic control" to fire them unless the controls were designed to handle the doubled current required. Certainly we are talking about very low current levels here, but they still have to be designed for that. What works best is to use some type of small control unit for each coil, with one set of points to trigger each pair of controllers. Points can handle that well since they were intended to handle MUCH higher coil primary currents anyway!

Here's where I will address you, Cap'n, about the term "wasted spark ignition". Wasted spark is not a bad thing at all, performance-wise, except that it needlessly robs just that much more power from the already puny output of most Gold Wing alternators! Otherwise, who cares if there is a spark during the exhaust cycle? It has even be argued that that extra spark as the exhaust opens can help to ignite unburnt fuels. I personally don't buy it because it takes more than just fuel/air/spark to ignite the fuel at these mixture levels. It also takes compression.

So, Cap'n, to my way of seeing all of this, using the stock pair of points to drive the inputs of two pair of CD drivers/coils would be the best way to eliminate double-ended coils (the real criminals in all of this!). Each set of points is more than able to handle two CD driver inputs, and you would retain the stock advance curve. Four pretty-much generic coils, like used on so many millions of GM pre-'70 cars, shouldn't be too hard to find a home for. If you've removed the stock crap from under that false-tank lid to install a Weber, then maybe there's room around it to fit the coils? With my two external Webers I had absolutely nothing under that lid, so my single little coil felt lost and all alone!

Cap'n, later today I will go read your thread and see if I can shed some more light on your situation. We did kinda take a detail-side-journey from this thread, but glad you included the link to your thread to add to this discussion! Thanks! All I intended to do was to present some old GL1000 hot rod eye candy with a background explanation!

One last caution I would like to make. Don't be sucked into trying some of the smaller, compact coils! Spark voltages range from around 3700 volts all the way up to around 15,000 volts for higher performance street engines, which most bike engines are. The voltage is determined by a "soup" of values of rpm, fuel/air ratio and completeness of atomization, compression pressure, temperatures of all elements involved, and the condition of the combustion chamber. Higher rpm, full throttle conditions usually require the highest voltage to push the spark across that gap. A spark plug set at .030" gap will fire in room air at around 3200 volts. Start adding all of those values listed above and that voltage requirement to fire goes up. The coil will fire the plug at only the needed value. The problem is, with our high-output small engines we are asking a lot out of those coils to reliably contain all that voltage! The dielectric materials they use are scary thin at best, and it's no wonder they break down regularly! 15000 volts can push through quite a bit of insulation! And, once it does, that's it! Once flashed, always burned is an old saying about distributor caps. That coil may seem to work OK for a while, but it is constantly "leaking" through any previous flash hole, causing a carbon track until it finally shows an actual black hole where it keeps sparking. All of the bike makers use bare minimums of dielectric materials to get the job done for normal street/highway use, but don't ever drive one with a CD driver or you will kill that coil quickly! There is a reason why Accel has super thick cases around their coils and that pretty yellow stuff is not just fluff to catch your eye. It is close to the actual color of the super dielectric material they developed to build their coils with. They just made it a more appealing yellow for marketing! Get GOOD coils, like from Accel, Mallory, or even some good ol' Delco GM-style coils!
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
34 Posts
Discussion Starter #13
Ok, here's a bit more for Dave0430.

Honda head castings leave a LOT to be desired for flow rates if left stock. Actually, they are great for street performance because all the roughness of the casting process on the port walls helps keep the mixture stirred up and even (homologous!). But, it does severely slow down the max flow rate when higher performance levels are required. So, lots of hand polishing, flow-bench testing and re-contouring was done.

I didn't have access to a sonograph machine, so it was a crap shoot as to how much material I could remove while re-contouring and shaving the heads. Yep, I junked two heads finding out! AND, Honda isn't very good at making such things even from one side to the other. Water and oil passage walls seem a bit thinner on the left heads, by as much as 1/8". So, after finding the right places to make changes I finally ended up with two workable heads. Valve pockets were unshrouded, valve guide bosses were narrowed and given an airfoil shape. Everything in the ports before the valve was highly polished. The valves received the old "swirl-polish" trick (never was too sure just how effective that is!). All-in-all there was more man hours and hand work value put into the heads than I paid for the bike brand new! But, my grade depended on it!

FWIW, Dave, to do any port reshaping and contouring, it is a crap shoot unless you have a flow bench. With a little ingenuity you can make one yourself using a high velocity blower used to suck. Make a chamber below the head being tested out of plexiglass so you can see the flow of food coloring as you inject it into the intake. Even with a flow bench it still isn't perfect since it doesn't EXACTLY duplicate the environment of the combustion chamber/piston below the head! But, it's better than nothing! When they perfect the all-Pyrex-glass engine so we can watch all the goings-on inside one, then we can fine tune port shapes. However, you can achieve a lot of gains in higher rpm power by simply polishing the stock port shape. Maybe a bit of valve pocket unshrouding and smoothing any blunt edges, like around the valve guide bosses, etc. Incorrect reshaping can actually diminish stock port performance. A BIG issue is blending the intake manifolds to the ports. This is almost always overlooked and creates so much turbulence at higher rpms. This all takes a lot of time, and a lot of hand lotion to help remove all the oxidized aluminum from your hands! Hope you're a patient man!

One of the times I destroyed one of the heads was due to shaving too much off the surface. I was shooting for 11.5:1 compression, and custom pistons can help with just part of that. So, I cut (IIRC) .210 off each head. I tried .250", but that broke through into a water passage on the left head. So, with the heads now safely shaved I had Wiseco machine up some piston blanks that I later shaped on top to fit the heads and valves. In the end I didn't quite make the 11.5:1, but ended at 11.2:1 after each chamber was cc'd and matched. The tops of the pistons were shaped a lot like a Dodge 440 wedge engine's, with fairly deep valve pockets (more about valve pockets/seats later). BTW, Honda isn't really good at matching combustion chamber volumes closely, either. Good enough for average street/highway use, but a Honda engine can benefit greatly from some detail blueprinting. Cc'ing chambers can make an engine sound so smooth and even! Most stock engines are actually very uneven!

OK, the heads were now done, the pistons were in and the whole long-block was back together. Time for the cams and drives.

I talked to the cam designer at Norris cams about my project and he got back to me a week later. Basically he took one of their off-the-shelf drag cams and modified the opening and closing ramps to be much faster. Good thing the nation was already in the middle of that old anti-leaded gasoline movement so we now had hardened valve seats and flame-hardened valve edges.

(Side note here.) Racing has contributed so much to the passenger car. Here is one area in particular. Racing engines have such radical cam profiles that they routinely slam their valves opened and closed so hard that the relatively soft valves and seats from the '50's and '60's cars would not have lasted even one round of drag racing. Hardened valves and seats were created for racing applications, then the no-lead mandate sent the passenger car makers scrambling for a solution to making their valves last longer without the lead to "cushion" them (Yes! It DOES make a difference!). Chrysler was the first to jump on the speed equipment bandwagon as a solution, and Ford and GM weren't more than about a week behind them! (End of side note.)

Radical cams demand radical valve springs to prevent float. 245lb springs were used. Norris said they were good for 15000rpm. Pistons were cut for a valve clearance of .180".

To maximize the cam timing, adjustable drives had to be made. I cut the integral hubs out of two cam timing wheels and fit them with custom machined adjustable ones. It took about eight dyno runs but I finally got the timing just right. I didn't really like the adjustable function of the hub/timing wheel arrangement so I re-made both parts with fixed holes for bolting them together. A machinist friend of mine took one of them and welded up two one-piece units from four stock wheels.

Some other minor details were the Kerker 4-into-1 headers, with primaries cut down to a calculated resonant length targetted for max power at 11,000rpm. For testing I ran 50/50 distilled water and plain old rubbing alcohol for coolant. No thermostat!

Added two new timing belts, dumped the Sunoco 360 for some 104 AV-gas, changed the 30wt break in oil for some 40wt Kendahl, fresh plugs, removed the air cleaners, disconnected the alternator output and did a final dyno session for grade. Yaaaay! 182 hp at 11,200rpm for three minutes! Well, technically I fell short by 1 hp! 1000cc is 61 cubic inches and the project called for 3hp/c.i. I should have got 183hp to meet requirements exactly, but they allowed that one HP discrepancy since I did everything myself except the piston blanks. Actually we figured it may have hit maybe another 300rpm with 30wt instead of the 40wt, which would have given me about three more HP! But, shear strength values of the 30wt weren't high enough to make me feel comfortable with those speeds and loading. During discussions I pointed out that if I had used the 30wt I could have lowered the rpm by about 500 to be safe, and the lower "drag" of the 30wt MIGHT have increased the torque value of the power equation to give me the 183 that I needed! Oh, well!

More history and quirks of this bike tomorrow. Any questions, Dave?
 

·
Banned
Joined
·
12,287 Posts
WOW!
...likely my last post for a while unless specifically directed to respond so as not to break the continuity yet again.

I've have stressed the importance of airflow and delivery to more deaf ears than I can count. My induction conversion not just requires it but mandates it. It is not a option. The bullet-points you've touched on above are my experience. So much so that I had to build my own flowbench for my intake manifold to know what to do next. I've flowed, scoped and dyno tested. I've no one to collaborate with on this as a peer. I damn-near begged for collaboration without having to teach, as I have nowhere near the time for that. I was given permission from the Haynes Publishing Group to offer their Weber manual as a free downloadable .pdf so that WE could ALL use the same terminology and understanding to develope an obsolete pursuit in their eyes.
I've wanted a verification of my work for so long that I've all but given up on getting it.

A member here has sat in my garage and watched me make and install a single intake port gasket for my manifold. It takes me an hour for each gasket for a reason. Now, with a 2-1/2 year old daughter and a new Mother, I've no resources left to offer, including my time.
I am no sacred-cow or self-imposed guru of any kind.
I've simply done my homework to get 108rwhp, naturally-aspirated with my own cams and ignition.

Apparently, I've been lying all along.

You Sir, whoever you are, are the reason that I am still here and active. This thread and your posting to Dave is the Christmas gift that I mentioned elsewhere.

This is not my thread and I have nothing to technically offer over and above what I am reading. I know when to shut-up and listen as a Student, as you are now the Teacher I and otjers have been waiting for. I've either done or touched upon all that you've mentioned and, for that, ...
...I am out until called upon.
Thank You again.
(...my apologies Dave)
Steve
 

·
Administrator
Joined
·
24,395 Posts
No questions, I was just curious about the head work, I have looked at them and seen where some improvements could be made. Not likely I will ever go to that much trouble or make any changes at all since the performance of a stock 4 cyl. wing properly tuned and with my own ignition upgrade suits me just fine. I could get all the fast driving awards I want from the law with any of them.
 

·
Premium Member
Joined
·
1,446 Posts
Nice bike and kool set-up.

A few things:

No t-stat does not always make an engine run cooler.
GM HEIs don't do that well much over 5K RPM.
IMHO: The lifespan of timing belts would be short.

Building an engine with twice that displacement is tough to get to the HP numbers you claim, and running one on the street could be very problematic.


Bill
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
34 Posts
Discussion Starter #17
Nice bike and kool set-up.

A few things:

No t-stat does not always make an engine run cooler.
GM HEIs don't do that well much over 5K RPM.
IMHO: The lifespan of timing belts would be short.

Building an engine with twice that displacement is tough to get to the HP numbers you claim, and running one on the street could be very problematic.
First, I disagree about the HEI, because they were used on all of the GM muscle engines with 8500 red-lines with no problems. What specific application(s) are you refering to? However, if you re-read what we were talking about, it was to use four of the eight towers of an eight cylinder cap. That would give more clearance between towers for better cross-fire resistance. The little Fiat cap I used had very cramped towers which were problematic with crossfire after a very short lifespan with this engine.

Second, removal of the t-stat was for the testing, not for street use! It reduced the resistance to the water pump.

Of course timing belts didn't live as long, but that's one of the trade offs accepted for this level of performance, as with all mods to a stock engine. In the 15,000+ miles I rode it like this I never had to replace one, though. I call that reasonable longevity.

If you are looking at this from the perspective of a docile street engine, it is a rediculous project, but did you read what the background was for the build in the first place? Yes, idle wasn't normal (very lopey), but manageable.

3hp/ci isn't that hard to do! A stock 30 year old Kawasaki Voyager 1300c six cylinder engine pumps out 140hp and is very smooth on the street. That's 1.77hp/ci in stock factory form! You're saying that an engine of 122ci would be hard pressed to build to 182hp? That would e only 1.5hp/ci. Almost every bike made today does better than that.

"...running one on the street could be very problematic." The reality of it was that running it on the street was very .......... FUN!

I have one more installment of the story of this engine to post. It's about some of the details of dyno performance and also how it performed in the bike. Maybe Monday.
 

·
Premium Member
Joined
·
1,446 Posts
First, I disagree about the HEI, because they were used on all of the GM muscle engines with 8500 red-lines with no problems. What specific application(s) are you refering to?.....
First, what engines are YOU referring to? Its been well documented for decades that the factory HEIs have rpm issues. You post about an engine you claim turns over 10K and mention HEIs parts in the same thread.


....A stock 30 year old Kawasaki Voyager 1300c six cylinder engine pumps out 140hp......
FYI: You are quoting numbers from a 30% larger engine making almost 25% less power.



Bill
 

·
Premium Member
Joined
·
688 Posts
:popcorn::popcorn: keep writing, it's interesting. I would love to read more or even see the ignition setup. I have been trying to wrap my brain around using the Ford EDIS with Megajolt. It has the ability to give separate timing curves. I havent found a lot of data on actual use of it. It's probably out there, but stuck in obscure posts from the many different builds of car engines. It seems a 36-1 gear could be made to go on the crank, maybe between the belt pulleys.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
34 Posts
Discussion Starter #20
First, what engines are YOU referring to? Its been well documented for decades that the factory HEIs have rpm issues. You post about an engine you claim turns over 10K and mention HEIs parts in the same thread.

FYI: You are quoting numbers from a 30% larger engine making almost 25% less power.

Bill

OK, Pinto, I'll take your bait, THIS time, but I also expect you to post your evidences.

First, You are obviously out to simply discredit what has been said here between myself and another reader, but you have not read the whole background between he and I to know what was REALLY said. You took one of my comments completely out of context and applied it to a situation where a WHOLE early HEI distributor is used. All I had refered to was using the HEI's cap and rotor pair to better separate the FOUR plug wires used on a totally custom fabricated distributor for a Honda GL engine instead of the too-small Fiat 850 cap/rotor which I had used, which was relatively short-lived due to the higher voltage spark requirement of my particular application. Steve is having the same issue I did and all I was doing was making an untried suggestion as to what I would have tried next to achieve my goal.

You are taking an OLD issue with the very early HEI's out of context for your argument here! The rpm limits you refer to are not from the cap/rotor, so they have nothing to do with what Steve and I were talking about. The issue came from the pickup module and controller circuits and was quickly addressed by GM. Then, aftermarket companies took it even farther. If there was a weakness of the large-diameter HEI platform, it was that if they got ANY moisture inside them, they quickly quit due to internal crossfire.

"You are quoting numbers from a 30% larger engine making almost 25% less power." What point are you trying to make here? I wasn't trying to compare the Kawasaki's STOCK engine to my highly MODIFIED GL1000 engine except to show that it isn't such a huge jump in HORSEPOWER PER CUBIC INCH as you alluded to.

Here is one of the best articles I have seen about the HEI's PERCEIVED faults. READ IT, then note they mention nothing at all about any issues with the cap/rotor, and that the rpm issue is with the module on earlier units. Specifically they talk about 7000+ rpm, and guys like Grumpy Jenkins and Smokey Yunick were pushing them past 8500 rpm and even 9000. I'm really sure they weren't using stock GM modules, but it does prove that the cap/rtor assemblies are good for those rpms usig EIGHT CYLINDERS, and all I was saying is that I was planning on using four of those towers.

http://www.superchevy.com/how-to/engines-drivetrain/sucp-0606-hei-distributors/

Pinto, since you won't read everything posted, and insist on taking things out of context before commenting, I won't respond to you anymore. This thread isn't about whether or not an early HEI distributor would work above 5000rpm. If you want to debate that, go start another thread about it. I won't waste any more time with it.
 
1 - 20 of 21 Posts
Status
Not open for further replies.
Top