Author Topic: DWMS RACING CB550F SUPER REVERSE PORT! NEW ENGINE COLORS AND PHOTOS! (Read 115378 times)

Tintop · « **Reply #375 on:** February 22, 2011, 08:05:23 PM »

Quote from: ffjmoore on February 22, 2011, 07:44:42 PM

Did i miss the part where you made the Modern fork fit the 550 neck? How did you adapt it?

Not sure that is the 550 neck ffj.

Raef · « **Reply #376 on:** February 22, 2011, 08:07:58 PM »

good grief dude, I thought mine was long (about a 5" stretch) ... what is the wheel base on that monster.

I do like the look, very cool

Mark

FunJimmy · « **Reply #377 on:** February 22, 2011, 08:12:03 PM »

ProStreet screams BIGGER motor though.

Retro Rocket · « **Reply #378 on:** February 22, 2011, 08:29:28 PM »

Quote

We have a saying on this continent.. all Show & no Go..

We have the same saying Frank, but i said "all show" not "no go. It was a compliment and included the "whole bike, engine and all, remember he built it because he can...."all show" It was in answer to FFJ

Quote

let me beat everyone to the punch. if you make it longer it will not handle as well....bla bla bla, its not a performance based bike.

Put back into context it all makes sense....

Mick

Hasenkopf · « **Reply #379 on:** February 22, 2011, 08:35:35 PM »

Never mind that, I want to hear it run !

joeyputt · « **Reply #380 on:** February 22, 2011, 08:42:19 PM »

Me too Brother! As soon as I get her running I will post a video!

I did not take offense to the show referance and understood what Brother Retro Rocket meant but thank you for having my back Brother 754!

I am going to take the front suspension off of the bike so that I can start polishing it soon so I will take photos of what all I had to do to the neck, it was a lot of work.

The wheelbase from the center of the front axle to the center of the rear axle (with the rear axle in the center of the 4 inch adjustment that I built into the frame section) is roughly 63 inches and the bike overal from the front to the rear is roughly 7 feet 1 inches. There is a little extra in the front from the rake and the rest is from the rear frame section.
I have not measured how tall it is yet but the table behind the bike in these photos is roughly 24 1/2 inches tall.

754 · « **Reply #381 on:** February 22, 2011, 09:36:16 PM »

What do you think about a corkscrew exhaust, heading down..?

Flying J · « **Reply #382 on:** February 22, 2011, 09:38:21 PM »

I say split the exhaust and make it the structural piece of the rear frame.

Zaipai · « **Reply #383 on:** February 23, 2011, 05:39:26 AM »

joeyputt my man, that bike looks more awesome by the post. Great vision. Can't wait to see it completed..

.: Scott :.

joeyputt · « **Reply #384 on:** February 23, 2011, 02:20:38 PM »

Brothers 754 and ffjmoore there are a lot of different ways I can run the exhaust, my original plan was to run a polished can that I shortened straight off of the back of the header but I may change that. I want to get the seat built and on the bike and save the exhaust for one of the last things to complete so that I have more time to think about different designs.

Thank you for the compliment Brother Zaipai!

joeyputt · « **Reply #385 on:** February 23, 2011, 02:25:40 PM »

Here are a few more photos I took today while I did a little welding.

In this photo you can see how wide the rear tire is.

Flying J · « **Reply #386 on:** February 23, 2011, 02:28:40 PM »

Man that would look real cool with a mono shock setup. Not to late.

joeyputt · « **Reply #387 on:** February 23, 2011, 02:34:33 PM »

Quote from: ffjmoore on February 23, 2011, 02:28:40 PM

Man that would look real cool with a mono shock setup. Not to late.

Brother I have several shocks here at the shop and set them up to see what they would look like but I personally thought that it looked a lot cleaner without it.

Flying J · « **Reply #388 on:** February 23, 2011, 02:40:40 PM »

Its your bike. Curious to see how you do the rear section. Most bikes just have a straight tube down to the back wheel but i would assume you have other plans seeing that you have not done one thing like "most bikes".

scroggins5000 · « **Reply #389 on:** February 23, 2011, 02:42:57 PM »

This keeps getting more and more interesting.

mlinder · « **Reply #390 on:** February 23, 2011, 03:00:31 PM »

It may have been addressed already, but I haven't seen it...

Soo, with the bellmouths facing forward on this carbed machine causing forced air, are you pressurizing the fuel tank and carb bowls?

If so, how, and if not, how are you proposing to keep the pressure from pushing fuel back into the fuel line instead of into the intake stream?

Syscrush · « **Reply #391 on:** February 23, 2011, 03:38:22 PM »

Quote from: mlinder on February 23, 2011, 03:00:31 PM

If so, how, and if not, how are you proposing to keep the pressure from pushing fuel back into the fuel line instead of into the intake stream?

I would expect that he can almost certainly ignore any pressure increases from a ram effect. Do you have experience running such intakes that suggests this will be a problem?

I'm no expert, but I remember reading that a good ram air system will give you about 1% increase at 100mph. I think that falls into the "OK to ignore it" range.

Raef · « **Reply #392 on:** February 23, 2011, 03:45:36 PM »

depends on the carb set up. the stock cb carbs will not work with out negative pressure thats why you have to run disproportionately lager jets when you remove the restriction from the intake side of the carbs.

I know nothing about the carbs he's running but if they have a diaphragm pump or some other type of accelerator pump it could minimize some of these effects.

mlinder · « **Reply #393 on:** February 23, 2011, 04:02:39 PM »

Quote from: Syscrush on February 23, 2011, 03:38:22 PM

Quote from: mlinder on February 23, 2011, 03:00:31 PM
If so, how, and if not, how are you proposing to keep the pressure from pushing fuel back into the fuel line instead of into the intake stream?
I would expect that he can almost certainly ignore any pressure increases from a ram effect. Do you have experience running such intakes that suggests this will be a problem?

I'm no expert, but I remember reading that a good ram air system will give you about 1% increase at 100mph. I think that falls into the "OK to ignore it" range.

You'd be mistaken. Carbs work by vacuum. A ram air induction system negates vacuum and becomes pressurized. At what speed is the variable.

However, even before it become pressurized, the vacuum is decreased until that point, pulling less fuel per pulse until the 0 point is reached. Of course, since you aren't getting enough fuel to continue increasing speed, you'll never reach that point anyway.

A good ram air will get you quite a bit more than that, and I'm pretty sure whatever you were reading involved fuel injection. Which, of course, injects fuel under pressure, instead of being drawn from the bowl by vacuum.

mlinder · « **Reply #394 on:** February 23, 2011, 04:06:58 PM »

Quote from: raef on February 23, 2011, 03:45:36 PM

depends on the carb set up. the stock cb carbs will not work with out negative pressure thats why you have to run disproportionately lager jets when you remove the restriction from the intake side of the carbs.

Correct

Quote

I know nothing about the carbs he's running but if they have a diaphragm pump or some other type of accelerator pump it could minimize some of these effects.

Those carbs are just.. carbs. An accelerator pump works mechanically to squirt extra fuel through another circuit, briefly, when a quick and large turn of the throttle is made. It cannot produce fuel under pressure for any length of time.

Raef · « **Reply #395 on:** February 23, 2011, 04:22:44 PM »

tryin not to hijack but...

When I was racing alcohol karts there were a few running a diaphram carb of sorts that work off engine pulses pumping fuel in, some even ran a electric turbo through the carb.

I was around 15 hp some were claiming well over 20

back to the joey show

Syscrush · « **Reply #396 on:** February 23, 2011, 05:12:26 PM »

Quote from: mlinder on February 23, 2011, 04:02:39 PM

You'd be mistaken. Carbs work by vacuum. A ram air induction system negates vacuum and becomes pressurized. At what speed is the variable.

That vacuum is created by the venturi effect as a result of Bernoulli's principle. Even if there is a positive pressure in the mouth of the carb, you should still get vacuum at the nozzles to draw the fuel from the bowl.

Quote

A good ram air will get you quite a bit more than that, and I'm pretty sure whatever you were reading involved fuel injection. Which, of course, injects fuel under pressure, instead of being drawn from the bowl by vacuum.

What I was reading was a Hot Rod magazine in the mid 80's, talking about an automotive-type 4bbl being fed by a hood scoop. With that said, Kawasaki was building bikes with ram-pressurized airboxes before they switched to EFI, and I'm not aware that they had to pressurize fuel bowls.

I really think that a much bigger concern is going to be turbulent flow due to the design of the carbs and stacks, and maybe some resonance effects due to 1&2 and 3&4 intake tracts being paired up.

That, and how to deal with all the hot ladies throwing themselves at him as a result of this amazing ride.

MasterChief750 · « **Reply #397 on:** February 23, 2011, 05:25:52 PM »

im no expert but i beliefe that the faster air is moving the more vacuum it will pull. never had issues with the ram air on my dads 66 impala

joeyputt · « **Reply #398 on:** February 23, 2011, 05:42:08 PM »

Quote from: Syscrush on February 23, 2011, 05:12:26 PM

That, and how to deal with all the hot ladies throwing themselves at him as a result of this amazing ride.

Hahahaha! Brother Syscrush you are the man!

Brother raef I did not know you raced karts! I come from a kart racing family, I have not raced them in awhile but I still have three here to play on!

As far as the carburetors go I am building a plate with a ring on the front of it to mount to the front of each carburetor, for slow speed cruising around I will probably leave the stacks on but for real riding I will probably take the stacks off and slip on uni filters for the best filtration and engine protection. The carburetors are not actually paired 1&2 and 3&4, each carburetor has its own throat that is connected to its own intake to the port so it is still the same as running four carburetors they are just like two carburetors built into one body.

mlinder · « **Reply #399 on:** February 23, 2011, 05:46:28 PM »

Quote from: Syscrush on February 23, 2011, 05:12:26 PM

Quote from: mlinder on February 23, 2011, 04:02:39 PM
You'd be mistaken. Carbs work by vacuum. A ram air induction system negates vacuum and becomes pressurized. At what speed is the variable.
That vacuum is created by the venturi effect as a result of Bernoulli's principle. Even if there is a positive pressure in the mouth of the carb, you should still get vacuum at the nozzles to draw the fuel from the bowl.

Only partly true. Pressure is pressure, and there wont be anything for the venturi to pick up if air is being forced down the jets instead of fuel being drawn up.

Quote

Quote
A good ram air will get you quite a bit more than that, and I'm pretty sure whatever you were reading involved fuel injection. Which, of course, injects fuel under pressure, instead of being drawn from the bowl by vacuum.
What I was reading was a Hot Rod magazine in the mid 80's, talking about an automotive-type 4bbl being fed by a hood scoop. With that said, Kawasaki was building bikes with ram-pressurized airboxes before they switched to EFI, and I'm not aware that they had to pressurize fuel bowls.

They did pressurize the bowls with the ram air.

Quote

I really think that a much bigger concern is going to be turbulent flow due to the design of the carbs and stacks, and maybe some resonance ?

Perhaps an issue, but not the main issue.

News:

Author Topic: DWMS RACING CB550F SUPER REVERSE PORT! NEW ENGINE COLORS AND PHOTOS! (Read 115378 times)