G
Guest
Guest
Well mine is being done anyway
Mine for the Beast came ported. Looks like a nice job, too. Nice and smooth.
-
Required reading for all forum users!!!
Welcome!
Register to access the full functionality of the GSResources forum. Until you register and activate your account you will not have full forum access, nor will you be able to post or reply to messages.A note to new registrants...
All new forum registrations must be activated via email before you have full access to the forum.A Special Note about Email accounts!
DO NOT SIGN UP USING hotmail, outlook, gmx, sbcglobal, att, bellsouth or email.com. They delete our forum signup emails.A note to old forum members...
I receive numerous requests from people who can no longer log in because their accounts were deleted. As mentioned in the forum FAQ, user accounts are deleted if you haven't logged in for the past 6 months. If you can't log in, then create a new forum account. If you don't get an error message, then check your email account for an activation message. If you get a message stating that the email address is already in use, then your account still exists so follow the instructions in the forum FAQ for resetting your password.Have you forgotten your password or have a new email address? Then read the forum FAQ for details on how to reset it.
Any email requests for "can't log in anymore" problems or "lost my password" problems will be deleted. Read the forum FAQ and follow the instructions there - that's what we have one for...
-
Returning Visitors
If you are a returning visitor who never received your confirmation email, then odds are your email provider is blockinig emails from our server. The only thing that can be done to get around this is you will have to try creating another forum account using an email address from another domain.
If you are a returning visitor to the forum and can't log in using your old forum name and password but used to be able to then chances are your account is deleted. Purges of the databases are done regularly. You will have to create a new forum account and you should be all set.
Mine for the Beast came ported. Looks like a nice job, too. Nice and smooth.
B
Billy Ricks
Guest
I had Britt Turkington do my head for me. He's been around enough top notch tuners to know what to do. All new valves and guides checked when he did it. Matched the manifolds to the ports and cleaned things up.
DRH
You are right about that laminar air flow. I saw some pics of a highly polished port where atomised fuel was reverting back to fuel droplets while passing through the port area. If you decide to port, leave the finished surface as if it had been rubbed with some 320 wet and dry paper. That's slightly finer than than Suzuki leave their port surfaces standard.
You are right about that laminar air flow. I saw some pics of a highly polished port where atomised fuel was reverting back to fuel droplets while passing through the port area. If you decide to port, leave the finished surface as if it had been rubbed with some 320 wet and dry paper. That's slightly finer than than Suzuki leave their port surfaces standard.
G
Graeme Sydney
Guest
A lot of interesting comments. My observations;
1/ When you talking improvements always define what you need from the mods. Drag racing or road riding etc.
2/ Even on 25 year old bikes the manufacturers did an amazingly good job of meeting a wide range of performance criteria including reliability, rideablity and tractability.
3/ Manufacturer tolerances can be improved (or blueprinted). For most street bikes this is normally the most productive and most cost effective.
4/ an engine is an air pump. The more efficiently it moves air the more power more easily. The two easiest areas to improve OEM are intake (filter/airbox) and exhaust ? but both will probably come at the expense of noise.
5/ Because the OEM allow for great variance in fuel quality, good and cheap improvements can be made with higher compression ? but you better be prepared to seek out reliable source of hi qual fuel or put up with detonation (and associated potential damage).
6/ Measuring peak anything (HP, airflow etc) can be misleading ? even in drag racing 100hp over 6,000 rpm can be faster than 150hp over 1,000 rpm.
7/ The engine works best as a package. Since about 1975 (GS750) the OEM engineers have done a remarkable job in getting a package that works well in unison. Vary too far away from the standard specs and you better be prepared to vary other specs of the package (and you better know what you are doing or you might actually go backwards).
8/ In the past 25years engine tech has moved on, especially in porting and electronic ignition and EFI. It would be more ease to apply the electronics than the porting improvements.
Having said that I?m very interested in the following article.
http://mototuneusa.com/super_sonic_nozzle.htm
What do you guys think of these porting mods?
I?ll finish my resto first but I?ll have enough bits left over for a ?hot rod?. I might muck with the porting then. But I think I?ll start with the EFI for the simple reason that EFI will make mucking about with the jetting after the porting mods so much easier (I think:-D ).
Cheers, Graeme.
1/ When you talking improvements always define what you need from the mods. Drag racing or road riding etc.
2/ Even on 25 year old bikes the manufacturers did an amazingly good job of meeting a wide range of performance criteria including reliability, rideablity and tractability.
3/ Manufacturer tolerances can be improved (or blueprinted). For most street bikes this is normally the most productive and most cost effective.
4/ an engine is an air pump. The more efficiently it moves air the more power more easily. The two easiest areas to improve OEM are intake (filter/airbox) and exhaust ? but both will probably come at the expense of noise.
5/ Because the OEM allow for great variance in fuel quality, good and cheap improvements can be made with higher compression ? but you better be prepared to seek out reliable source of hi qual fuel or put up with detonation (and associated potential damage).
6/ Measuring peak anything (HP, airflow etc) can be misleading ? even in drag racing 100hp over 6,000 rpm can be faster than 150hp over 1,000 rpm.
7/ The engine works best as a package. Since about 1975 (GS750) the OEM engineers have done a remarkable job in getting a package that works well in unison. Vary too far away from the standard specs and you better be prepared to vary other specs of the package (and you better know what you are doing or you might actually go backwards).
8/ In the past 25years engine tech has moved on, especially in porting and electronic ignition and EFI. It would be more ease to apply the electronics than the porting improvements.
Having said that I?m very interested in the following article.
http://mototuneusa.com/super_sonic_nozzle.htm
What do you guys think of these porting mods?
I?ll finish my resto first but I?ll have enough bits left over for a ?hot rod?. I might muck with the porting then. But I think I?ll start with the EFI for the simple reason that EFI will make mucking about with the jetting after the porting mods so much easier (I think:-D ).
Cheers, Graeme.
How much work would you need to rebuild the components of the head not including valves,springs,seals,etc. on an 82 GS1100ED ?
Looking at polishing of the body while not knowing if I require porting:-s
No smoking and only slight blow-by on cyl. #3.:-s
My Parts.
I am only having the work done as I felt at 41,000 miles and I have the head off to repair a leak, why not get the top end freshened up?\\
/ I ride moderate to occassionally fast, sport-touring GSR style
I would be cautious about doing a valve job on an engine with 41K on it since your liable to get more blowby from the restoration of compression. Typically a car engine won't tolerate a valve job after 40K because the rings become beveled and restoring the compression increases ring pressure. I would go with new rings since your practically there anyway with the head off it.
A wise man once said: don't make a racehorse out of a mule.
Some heads and engines were designed for mudane performance and reliability. Not everything can be hopped up. Not only does the bottom end need to handle the added stress of increassed power the head and intake are critical. The ratio of the rod length to stroke is important because it affects the amount of leverage the engine has. This translates to an engine's ability to respond to changes. Another factor is the ratio of bore to stroke. Short stroke wide bore engines respond to high rpm power better than long stroke small bore combinations. THe latter gets better emissions because the spent gas cools more as it expands. Long stroke motors make good drivers at the expense of nascar performance. For 90% of the time that is the better choice.
Some heads and engines were designed for mudane performance and reliability. Not everything can be hopped up. Not only does the bottom end need to handle the added stress of increassed power the head and intake are critical. The ratio of the rod length to stroke is important because it affects the amount of leverage the engine has. This translates to an engine's ability to respond to changes. Another factor is the ratio of bore to stroke. Short stroke wide bore engines respond to high rpm power better than long stroke small bore combinations. THe latter gets better emissions because the spent gas cools more as it expands. Long stroke motors make good drivers at the expense of nascar performance. For 90% of the time that is the better choice.
Thanks for the advice.
I was planning on replacing the rings,piston clips,have the bore and pistons checked for critical measurments.
My compression before the teardown was similar across the board with good numbers.
No smoke or running issues.
D
ducpilot
Guest
Hi, the article is right on. Back in the early seventies I had a Suzuki Hustler built into a very, very fast racer which had a factory race kitted engine. The ports were HUGE and were they ever ROUGH. I could not believe they were so unfinished and figured I would clean them up and polish them. I was told very emphatically to LEAVE THE BLOODY THINGS ALONE!
Basically, if you want more power in a street bike - iether buy a more powerful bike or have your present engine blueprinted. Another way to improve performance is to shed weight off the bike-or yourself. A change to lightweight wheels (real magnesium) will make an astounding change to the handling of most bikes.
Cheers,
Mike
Basically, if you want more power in a street bike - iether buy a more powerful bike or have your present engine blueprinted. Another way to improve performance is to shed weight off the bike-or yourself. A change to lightweight wheels (real magnesium) will make an astounding change to the handling of most bikes.
Cheers,
Mike
Graeme
You make some very valid points.
A very thought provoking article. Quite controversal, but many a performance advantage has been gained by tuners taking a punt outside the square.
For me, the intreging part was the test on the Yamaha R6 after the inlet ports size had been reduced by 30%. The improvement in HP was evident over the complete rev range and the increase remained steady at 5 hp from 8000 - 12750 rpm over the stock port size.
It reinforces my decission not to enlarge the ports on my 850. Blueprinting and blending in any casting lumps, should do the job.
Very few tuners would consider reducing their exhaust port diameters. Makes you wonder how many standard exhaust headers are above optimium size as well.
When a tuning combination is working really well on your road bike, it often pays not to tinker with it. It's easier to loose 5hp when trying to gain 10hp.
Cheers
Ian
You make some very valid points.
A very thought provoking article. Quite controversal, but many a performance advantage has been gained by tuners taking a punt outside the square.
For me, the intreging part was the test on the Yamaha R6 after the inlet ports size had been reduced by 30%. The improvement in HP was evident over the complete rev range and the increase remained steady at 5 hp from 8000 - 12750 rpm over the stock port size.
It reinforces my decission not to enlarge the ports on my 850. Blueprinting and blending in any casting lumps, should do the job.
Very few tuners would consider reducing their exhaust port diameters. Makes you wonder how many standard exhaust headers are above optimium size as well.
When a tuning combination is working really well on your road bike, it often pays not to tinker with it. It's easier to loose 5hp when trying to gain 10hp.
Cheers
Ian
L
lecroy
Guest
This is the route I am taking. Very cheap, just stop eating so much and get off the couch.
B
BadBillyB
Guest
Graeme, heres an old thread discussing the mototune article
http://www.thegsresources.com/_forum/showthread.php?t=88787&highlight=school
yeah, we went round and round on that one. The greatest gain is had by raising the floor, that's always been known. In 1962 Ford had a 260 V-8 at Indy in which the intake flow was straight through the valve cover right into the chamber. The carb throat was lined up with the cylinder. It was the ultimate in breathing capability since there was no turn in the intake path. They used 8 carbs.
Reducing the port size does all that wonderful stuff but it will limit the maximum rpm of the engine, it's no different than not opening the throttle all the way. Port mods are best done with cam changes that take advantage of the new tuning effects. Changes in the port accompanied by more aggressive cam timing can get you big gains in SPECIFIC RANGES. If you adjust your riding to suit those changes (change gearing for example) then the net result is a +.
It's interesting to note that they don't state how small is too small or why those dummies
at Suzuki made them the size they did. I'm sure Mr Motoman is real clever and all that but I like to think a company like Suzuki ws hell bent on getting the most out of their engines while having them be streetable and well behaved on the road. Remember, you only use 90% of an engines power 5 % of the time anyway. I feel things are best left alone since I spent many weekends on cylinder heads, carbs, and all that stuff with cars. I also think it's easier to buy a bigger bike and if that isn't enough buy a bigger newer one. When you get to a Busa or a ZX14 if your still not satisfied then join the air force and try a F-16. 48,000 lbs of thrust kind of beats all.
I found this little ditty on his site particularly amusing and narcissitic. I don't think he "knows something nobody else knows", especially about Japanese Motorcycle Companies like the nonsense about next years improved model.
"MotoMan" Has A Brief Conversation With
"Hearing-But-Not-Actually-Listening-Man".
H-B-N-A-L-M:If smaller ports really do make more power, then why wouldn't the manufacturers make the ports the correct size in the first place ??
MM:By gradually reducing the port size in small increments each year, they can easily add more power and thus offer the "new and improved" version with a few
more horsepower than last year's model.
H-B-N-A-L-M:No way... the manufacturers would all have to agree to that, because if one factory broke out and made the ports really small, business competition would force the others
to make their ports smaller also.
MM:They cooperate with each other, the competition is mostly an illusion.
H-B-N-A-L-M:No way ...sorry, I just can't believe that.
MM:Okay, well then you've got to believe that back in 1991 one guy working out of his house for 3 months with a $2,000 flowbench out smarted 4 industrial giants that have employed thousands of the world's finest engineers doing 50 years worth of R&D with billions of dollars at their disposal and they still haven't figured this all out yet.
"MotoMan" Has A Brief Conversation With
"Hearing-But-Not-Actually-Listening-Man".
H-B-N-A-L-M:If smaller ports really do make more power, then why wouldn't the manufacturers make the ports the correct size in the first place ??
MM:By gradually reducing the port size in small increments each year, they can easily add more power and thus offer the "new and improved" version with a few
more horsepower than last year's model.
H-B-N-A-L-M:No way... the manufacturers would all have to agree to that, because if one factory broke out and made the ports really small, business competition would force the others
to make their ports smaller also.
MM:They cooperate with each other, the competition is mostly an illusion.
H-B-N-A-L-M:No way ...sorry, I just can't believe that.
MM:Okay, well then you've got to believe that back in 1991 one guy working out of his house for 3 months with a $2,000 flowbench out smarted 4 industrial giants that have employed thousands of the world's finest engineers doing 50 years worth of R&D with billions of dollars at their disposal and they still haven't figured this all out yet.
U
U.P.dragracer
Guest
8-[ I must say I am very interested in some of the stuff motoman has to say I myself have found many of his theories to be true . I have built circle track engines , and mud race engines , as well as many all out small block chevy drag engines as well . I usually farmed out all the machining work with the exception of the cylinderhead work wich I was equipped and did them myself .
I was always skeptical of flowbench numbers , for the simple reason of . hey , cam timing and max lift needs to be in the equation when doing a cylinderhead . not to mention what type of flow does the engine actually need to make big power at what specific RPM ????
Hmmmmmmm ? well the circle track engine needs to make some serious mid range power to get off the corners . {4500 to 8500 RPM}sb chevy's I built a few
the mud racer needs to make good power off the converter and pull hard to the top RPM . {428 cu in ford I built ran 8200 RPM}:shock: with a 2800 stall converter it would damn near snap your neck LOL!!
The drag engine needs to pump big air at high RPM . this was the easiest engine to build LOL!!! I got a nice big set of CNC ported Dart Machinery heads and did a bowl blend with a little epoxy as a air foil heading towards the valve guide on the intake port . 377 cu in 735 HP on the dyno @ 9800 RPM {this engine tossed a old school 1964 street driver chevelle to 10.36 @ 132 MPH} the heater radio and wipers still work 9" wide slicks 4 speed }
I also had a camshaft custom ground for this bomb
in all I have just recently started my motorcycle engine building I have my own bikes and just love em . most likely I will never do any race engine work on bikes for anyone else . but I can't help myself for grinding and tearing up my own bikes LOL!!!
I'm not a part's buying kind of guy and I like to experiment on my junk . heck even my chainsaw has a port and polish job on it .{yeah it rips }
:-D
I was always skeptical of flowbench numbers , for the simple reason of . hey , cam timing and max lift needs to be in the equation when doing a cylinderhead . not to mention what type of flow does the engine actually need to make big power at what specific RPM ????
Hmmmmmmm ? well the circle track engine needs to make some serious mid range power to get off the corners . {4500 to 8500 RPM}sb chevy's I built a few
the mud racer needs to make good power off the converter and pull hard to the top RPM . {428 cu in ford I built ran 8200 RPM}:shock: with a 2800 stall converter it would damn near snap your neck LOL!!
The drag engine needs to pump big air at high RPM . this was the easiest engine to build LOL!!! I got a nice big set of CNC ported Dart Machinery heads and did a bowl blend with a little epoxy as a air foil heading towards the valve guide on the intake port . 377 cu in 735 HP on the dyno @ 9800 RPM {this engine tossed a old school 1964 street driver chevelle to 10.36 @ 132 MPH} the heater radio and wipers still work 9" wide slicks 4 speed }
I also had a camshaft custom ground for this bomb
in all I have just recently started my motorcycle engine building I have my own bikes and just love em . most likely I will never do any race engine work on bikes for anyone else . but I can't help myself for grinding and tearing up my own bikes LOL!!!
I'm not a part's buying kind of guy and I like to experiment on my junk . heck even my chainsaw has a port and polish job on it .{yeah it rips }
:-D
G
Guest
Guest
Exactly. At least as I understand it (so far).
duaneage said:
That's funny!:lol:
duaneage said:
The Japanese are a very shrewd people. I wouldn't put anything past them. If they came out with the "most improved" bike one year, what would they do the next year? But then again, there are some GS models that have the same performance specs for a few years. Stock GS's are definately over built and under powered.
I just bought a ported head with a fresh valve job for my new project, a '78 1000. I am going to try and take advantage of what I have with some aftermarket cams and better carbs. I need to learn a bit more about cams. I don't yet fully understand why you lose bottom end while gaining mid-range or top end.
U
U.P.dragracer
Guest
I just bought a ported head with a fresh valve job for my new project, a '78 1000. I am going to try and take advantage of what I have with some aftermarket cams and better carbs. I need to learn a bit more about cams. I don't yet fully understand why you lose bottom end while gaining mid-range or top end.
__________________
Well I learned tons about cam selection from reading book's and also monkeyin around with PC programs like Desktop Dyno 2000 even though it is a automotive oriented it is all for the same end result and concept :-D most of today's high performance cam technology had humble beginnings as trial and error LOL!!!
__________________
Well I learned tons about cam selection from reading book's and also monkeyin around with PC programs like Desktop Dyno 2000 even though it is a automotive oriented it is all for the same end result and concept :-D most of today's high performance cam technology had humble beginnings as trial and error LOL!!!
Last edited:
C
Commodus
Guest
Yeah I dunno, I don't think that's so incredible. I mean, motorcycle history is full of engineers who've done amazing things with little funding and sometimes little formal training. Look at the Britten, for a modern example. Look at Scott, or even Vincent. On a different, related note, look at Ducati, who competed on a comparatively tiny budget with seemingly old-school technology. Money doesn't always equal success - big companies are good at developing things that exist, sometimes not so good at chasing new ideas - there can be a lot of bureaucratic inertia involved.
I do, however, find it very hard to believe that there's a worldwide conspiracy going on here. Keep in mind, it's not just the Japanese big four that would have to be on board, after all. Yep, that's absurd.
I also find it a little odd that nowhere on that guy's site does he have a simple, straightfoward: "here, engine A with dyno; compare it to engine B with dyno with X mods performed. There's my evidence." I mean, he clearly has the equipment to do so. Unless I missed it...?
G
Guest
Guest
Again the engine is an air pump. The more in and out, the more power. Any of you guys ridden a GSXR1000? What is the difference powerwise between it and a GS1150? The 1150 has 150 more cc's, but the 1000 has a cylinder head that breathes nearly twice as much as the 1150. It also has probably twice the power.
The only thing that makes a ZX6R more powerful than a GS1150 is a head that flows and electronic fuel injection.
Jay
The only thing that makes a ZX6R more powerful than a GS1150 is a head that flows and electronic fuel injection.
Jay
E
ehra
Guest
Here are a couple of pictures of a 16V GS head on a 1400+ cc all motor pro-mod, runs mid 7?s at 175mph. This head is $5000+ to have done and makes 200+hp (they won?t tell me the actual number). It is all about how efficient the port is not the size of the hole in the head. They fill the floor with epoxy to improve the flow by reducing the turbulence from the short side of the port.
Glenn
Glenn
Similar threads
