Belt Drive
41 - 60 of 74 Posts
Joined
·
13,983 Posts
What Rope said.>
Joined
·
4,369 Posts
So you're asking why someone wouldn't want to get the shaft....? >
Joined
·
3,109 Posts
Embrace the shaft.
Joined
·
6,429 Posts
Probably for the extra 20-30 ponies it would unleash.
Joined
·
3,773 Posts
Elevator, elevator we got the shaft!:biggrin:
Joined
·
2,960 Posts
What I was thinking. A lot of work for in reality what is more like 12-15 hp and more to the point same torque numbers.
Joined
·
4,369 Posts
that's some riding attire...they really let him out of the office?
Joined
·
39 Posts
@Ordinary_Biker, when you're only talking about 50 RWHP to begin with, but adding an additional 30% would run that up to 71 RWHP, that is a HUGE jump in felt power! If it was going from 150 to 171, THAT might not be much to scoff at, but you're talking about adding what would equate to a whole 'nother cylinder to the engine.
Thanks, everyone, for the info, the flash will hopefully open 'er up a good bit; but i did NOT know about the cams. That will certainly come in handy. But a grand for pipes is insane!!! What gives on that...?
Also, it seems like it has been long enough, and there is a good bit of interest in the frame, why not take it to the next level? Why not beef up the frame and release a Fury: Hellhound, or something new like the Honda Wraith or Honda Savage... JTOL.
Joined
·
2,960 Posts
I am quite confident that I am in the range of 75ft/lbs torque as I have had the reflash done. A shaft drive is generally acknowledged to have about a 30% loss at the wheel, so I am loosing around 22 to 22.5ft/lbs. Belts are around 11% loss, so you will be loosing around 8ft/lbs. So going from shaft to belt should net you 14 to 15ft/lbs. Your assumption here seems to be that the belt is lossless. The closest to that would be a chain, as they are very low loss, around 3%. I used torque numbers here, but HP is roughly the same.
For myself, I am just not interested in top speed on my Fury. If that was what interested me I would have bought a different bike. But everybody has their own point of view.
I think there are options for pipes that are cheaper. There are a couple of guys on here that do pipes, I think their prices are more manageable.
Joined
·
4,369 Posts
Horsepower is kind of a bullshitters number. HP is basically trying to sell torque via RPMs, as you have to gear HP down to get torque, and that's what causes the rear wheel to turn faster (or slower), and that's really what we're interested in. In the Fury, it's geared pretty low and has a lot of torque, so the combination gives it huge launch ability. The problem is it runs out of RPM, and you have to shift, and that time period has no acceleration. Off the line you can beat squids (sportbike types) due to the Fury having torque at low RPM, but once they reach high RPM that's geared down to more torque and more acceleration.
Quick story, guy has an older car with a heck of a turbo in it and makes way more power than my race car. He's also 2,000 pounds heavier. In a straight line he's ahead of me on paper due to his massive horsepower, but on corners and braking I have the advantage due to less weight. Everyone thinks this is going to be an awesome head-to-head race. We launch and he pulls ahead by a bit, because I have lower gearing and therefore make more torque at the wheels I'm only behind by 1/2 a car length. His turbo hits the sweet spot and he gets 3/4 car length on me. Then he readlines and has to shift. I have 2,500 RPM left and blow his doors off.
What happened? At the start he was slipping the clutch to keep his RPMs high enough to spin the turbo, and as his speed came up he was able to ease the clutch out fully and give full power to the rear wheels since the compressor was creating enough boost to keep his torque up. Basically he made sure the tires had all the power they could handle at all times. I had the clutch fully engaged and had to moderate the throttle as the normally-aspirated engine made gobs of torque through the entire RPM range and would break the rear end free if it got full power, but with less weight on the tires I didn't have as much grip as he, and he was an excellent driver who was also pushing the tires to the limit. At high speed where the vehicles couldn't break the tires free due to gearing, my car had a disadvantage because his gearing allowed more torque to the wheels than mine, and he had more power on tap than I, and he started to pull ahead. However, he hit the RPM ceiling sooner, and my somewhat taller gearing and way higher RPM ceiling allowed me to keep accelerating while he shifted, and the race was won. It's about the same with a Fury and a sportbike.
...which brings up the concern with putting a turbo on the Fury, and that's maximum RPM.
Quick story, guy has an older car with a heck of a turbo in it and makes way more power than my race car. He's also 2,000 pounds heavier. In a straight line he's ahead of me on paper due to his massive horsepower, but on corners and braking I have the advantage due to less weight. Everyone thinks this is going to be an awesome head-to-head race. We launch and he pulls ahead by a bit, because I have lower gearing and therefore make more torque at the wheels I'm only behind by 1/2 a car length. His turbo hits the sweet spot and he gets 3/4 car length on me. Then he readlines and has to shift. I have 2,500 RPM left and blow his doors off.
What happened? At the start he was slipping the clutch to keep his RPMs high enough to spin the turbo, and as his speed came up he was able to ease the clutch out fully and give full power to the rear wheels since the compressor was creating enough boost to keep his torque up. Basically he made sure the tires had all the power they could handle at all times. I had the clutch fully engaged and had to moderate the throttle as the normally-aspirated engine made gobs of torque through the entire RPM range and would break the rear end free if it got full power, but with less weight on the tires I didn't have as much grip as he, and he was an excellent driver who was also pushing the tires to the limit. At high speed where the vehicles couldn't break the tires free due to gearing, my car had a disadvantage because his gearing allowed more torque to the wheels than mine, and he had more power on tap than I, and he started to pull ahead. However, he hit the RPM ceiling sooner, and my somewhat taller gearing and way higher RPM ceiling allowed me to keep accelerating while he shifted, and the race was won. It's about the same with a Fury and a sportbike.
...which brings up the concern with putting a turbo on the Fury, and that's maximum RPM.
Joined
·
282 Posts
IMHO, Turbos are more suited to vehicles with auto trans due to spool time / lag. Unless you hold the throttle open and speed shift you lose power and momentum every shift with a standard. For this reason alone a supercharger is a superior option for anything with a standard trans as it's belt driven and doesn't have to spool up to make power.
Interested in any thoughts / comments on this either way
Interested in any thoughts / comments on this either way
Joined
·
4,369 Posts
^^^ superchargers make torque, the compressor rolls off in volume at high speed. Some of this can be overcome with a bigger pulls, but you're fighting other battles then.
Turbos make horsepower, they need exhaust to spin them, so they keep building more power with more RPM. Modern compressors are very light so there's almost no lag. Basically you pick a compressor that's making low pressure at 2,000 RPM and then don't lug the engine because you'll blow it up from too much power.
If, for some strange reason you don't have enough torque with a turbo, and that's quite strange, you can twin-charge the engine. That's where you put both a supercharger and a turbocharger on it. The supercharger will make predictable, linear power, the turbo has to be monitored for air-fuel ratio or eventually the engine will go "pop" and that will be the end of it, same as without the supercharger.
The old tuners taught me an engine is good for only so much total power output, whether you burn through it fast or slow is up to you. In other words you might get 100K problem-free miles out of it with no boost, or 50K miles with moderate boost, or 20K miles because you're on it all the time. Whatever the case, when it's spent you rebuild. "There is no free lunch"--that's something else they said. They're right.
One thing I'll caution against when running a turbo is not running a full set of gauges, one of which is a data logging gauge. I've been told repeatedly that's not necessary when running "low boost," and sure as shit they're right--when nothing is going wrong, anyway. Buy the gauges, save your engine. It's that simple.
Turbos make horsepower, they need exhaust to spin them, so they keep building more power with more RPM. Modern compressors are very light so there's almost no lag. Basically you pick a compressor that's making low pressure at 2,000 RPM and then don't lug the engine because you'll blow it up from too much power.
If, for some strange reason you don't have enough torque with a turbo, and that's quite strange, you can twin-charge the engine. That's where you put both a supercharger and a turbocharger on it. The supercharger will make predictable, linear power, the turbo has to be monitored for air-fuel ratio or eventually the engine will go "pop" and that will be the end of it, same as without the supercharger.
The old tuners taught me an engine is good for only so much total power output, whether you burn through it fast or slow is up to you. In other words you might get 100K problem-free miles out of it with no boost, or 50K miles with moderate boost, or 20K miles because you're on it all the time. Whatever the case, when it's spent you rebuild. "There is no free lunch"--that's something else they said. They're right.
One thing I'll caution against when running a turbo is not running a full set of gauges, one of which is a data logging gauge. I've been told repeatedly that's not necessary when running "low boost," and sure as shit they're right--when nothing is going wrong, anyway. Buy the gauges, save your engine. It's that simple.
Joined
·
1,128 Posts
Wow, lots of great talk here, but I think we're still perpetuating some older/incorrect ideas...
Nitrous, Blowers, Turbos all make torque... in fact all engines make torque. HP is nothing more than a calculated number based off torque output and engine RPM and is only used to pretend-measure cock size and sell vehicles.
Become one with the force. Clear your mind of all HP emotion, and focus on 2 things:
1. Area under the torque curve within your usable RPM range
2. torque multiplication (aka gearing, both rear differential and transmission)
Those two will tell you everything you need to know about who's going to win a race
But back to turbo vs. blower... both of them 'spool' up to operating output pressure but what you refer to as lag is primarily seen only in a turbo setup because of how the two setup operate
A blower is directly driven by the engine RPMs via belt drive (most common), while the turbo relies on exhaust flow to spin the turbine side impeller that then drives the compressor side impeller. Both systems require a mechanism to regulate the maximum boost levels generated within the intake manifold.
A turbo typically has a wastegate that bleeds or bypasses exhaust gases from the turbine side impeller which limits the amount of compressed air generated by the compressor side impeller. This is where your lag for a turbo exists; from the time you crack open the throttle, to the time the wastegate starts dumping exhaust is how long the lag is to reach full boost. This is affected by size of the turbo, desired boost level, amount of exhaust flow (think engine displacement), the weight of the internal turbo components, and a couple other smaller factors.
Believe it or not, a blower's most common mechanism for limiting intake manifold boost levels is to adjust the pulley/gearing sizes such that at maximum engine RPM, the blower is making your max boost levels. Effectively once it starts making positive pressure, it's always still 'spooling' up to max intake pressure. There are some fine tuning details in compressor design/style/sizing that can help flatten out the pressure levels through the RPM range, but ultimately your 'max boost level' will be @ peak engine RPM.
Because of these differences in behavior, there are very drastic differences seen in the torque curves. A blower setup will have a nice smooth, gradual torque curve that generally mimics the torque curve of the same motor without boost, just at a higher output level. There are some minor differences before boost is being made, but those are usually inconsequential.
A turbo setup torque curve will jump tremendously during the spooling RPMs, but once fully spooled will be relatively smooth. Depending on the boost level targeted and the engine setup, the torque curve may be very smooth and remain high, or it may drop off as engine RPM increases. These factors are entirely determined by the turbo and engine pairing and setup.
Always keep in mind that turbo lag will be more of a factor with the higher boost levels desired. If you're planning to run low boost (4-5 psi), you'll likely never even notice the lag time if you pick the right turbo.
Personally, I would go with a turbo setup over a blower on any daily driven vehicle, but that's just personal preference. My reasoning for this is that IMO turbos are more easily tweaked/tuned and require less parasitic loss in order to drive them.
Nitrous, Blowers, Turbos all make torque... in fact all engines make torque. HP is nothing more than a calculated number based off torque output and engine RPM and is only used to pretend-measure cock size and sell vehicles.
Become one with the force. Clear your mind of all HP emotion, and focus on 2 things:
1. Area under the torque curve within your usable RPM range
2. torque multiplication (aka gearing, both rear differential and transmission)
Those two will tell you everything you need to know about who's going to win a race
But back to turbo vs. blower... both of them 'spool' up to operating output pressure but what you refer to as lag is primarily seen only in a turbo setup because of how the two setup operate
A blower is directly driven by the engine RPMs via belt drive (most common), while the turbo relies on exhaust flow to spin the turbine side impeller that then drives the compressor side impeller. Both systems require a mechanism to regulate the maximum boost levels generated within the intake manifold.
A turbo typically has a wastegate that bleeds or bypasses exhaust gases from the turbine side impeller which limits the amount of compressed air generated by the compressor side impeller. This is where your lag for a turbo exists; from the time you crack open the throttle, to the time the wastegate starts dumping exhaust is how long the lag is to reach full boost. This is affected by size of the turbo, desired boost level, amount of exhaust flow (think engine displacement), the weight of the internal turbo components, and a couple other smaller factors.
Believe it or not, a blower's most common mechanism for limiting intake manifold boost levels is to adjust the pulley/gearing sizes such that at maximum engine RPM, the blower is making your max boost levels. Effectively once it starts making positive pressure, it's always still 'spooling' up to max intake pressure. There are some fine tuning details in compressor design/style/sizing that can help flatten out the pressure levels through the RPM range, but ultimately your 'max boost level' will be @ peak engine RPM.
Because of these differences in behavior, there are very drastic differences seen in the torque curves. A blower setup will have a nice smooth, gradual torque curve that generally mimics the torque curve of the same motor without boost, just at a higher output level. There are some minor differences before boost is being made, but those are usually inconsequential.
A turbo setup torque curve will jump tremendously during the spooling RPMs, but once fully spooled will be relatively smooth. Depending on the boost level targeted and the engine setup, the torque curve may be very smooth and remain high, or it may drop off as engine RPM increases. These factors are entirely determined by the turbo and engine pairing and setup.
Always keep in mind that turbo lag will be more of a factor with the higher boost levels desired. If you're planning to run low boost (4-5 psi), you'll likely never even notice the lag time if you pick the right turbo.
Personally, I would go with a turbo setup over a blower on any daily driven vehicle, but that's just personal preference. My reasoning for this is that IMO turbos are more easily tweaked/tuned and require less parasitic loss in order to drive them.
Joined
·
4,369 Posts
I'm up for the challenge of refining that (why not beat this horse a bit more, eh?) :surprise:
We agree from my previous post HP is kind of bullshitarian, other than when people say "torque" they usually mean low RPM torque and when they say "HP" they usually mean high RPMs geared down to get torque. You nailed it with "area under the curve," coupled with weight and traction.
A supercharger is belt-drive and typically has no spool time since it's already spinning. It still tends to reach peak volume before the engine does, then runs out of ability to keep compressing. The reason is at high RPM the blower needs to turn faster to compress the required amount of air, kind of like it needs "second gear" to spin it up "more faster!" Of course you can put a bigger pully on, but at some point the compressor, no matter how fast you turn it, can't compress more air--kind of like you can't fly a plane with a box fan even if you spin the fan "really fast." A plane needs a bigger propeller, much like the engine at high RPM needs a bigger fan. Like the plane example, you don't want to put an airplane prop in your house, that's too much air, just like at low RPM a bigger supercharger compressor will make "too much pressure." It's a balancing act.
The advancement to the supercharger is the "radial driven axial compressor" or turbo-supercharger, also called the turbocharger. As exhaust gasses build that pressure is used to spin the radial fan, which is on the same shaft as the axial compressor fan, and can build much greater pressures at high speeds--so much so that too much pressure is easy to build, and if you push a compressor rated for 400 HP to 375+ HP you're bound to blow the engine with a pressure surge (turbos are known for surging under just the wrong conditions). To combat that, use a bigger compressor. (For instance, my 400 HP Slingshot engine uses a compressor rated for 600 HP.) The mass of the bigger fans is what introduce lag, they're spinning, but when you hit the gas you used to have to wait for the exhaust gas to build volume, which would slowly spin up the compressor, which would slowly build boost, which would build more exhaust and slowly continue to build boost, until you were easing up on the throttle and the boost was still catching up. Nowadays the components are so light that lag is minimal, and if you're already generating boost at 2K RPM by the time you need it at 4K RPM the pressure is already there, there is no lag. Spinning up or down to match the needed boost is pretty quick because the fans are much lighter than they used to be, and while there is still "boost lag" it's really minimal. (People have commented on the Slingshot the boost hit is phenomenal, you just step on the gas and you're instantly gone, there's no lag, just gobs of power everywhere. In reality the lag is so short and so small it's almost imperceptible from normally aspirated engines, and that's how well-designed modern setups are.)
I'd therefore say that supercharger power tends to fade nearing maximum RPM, much like the stock Fury power fades, and turbochargers tend to keep building boost to the point they'll keep going "To Detonation And Beyond!" to borrow from Buzz Lightyear.
Superchargers are mainly bolt-in and go (with a retune). Turbos make far more [dangerous] power, but require a dump valve (to keep exhaust pressure under control), blow-off valve (to keep built-up pressure under control), and lots of feedback to watch all the squirrely things the compressor can do, since it's basically free-spinning and does what it damn well feels like. So I'll counter your statement as say superchargers, with their liner and well-defined [stable] boost curves are more for the daily driver. Turbos are for those who like life on the edge.
And yes, the higher the boost the more lag you'll see as the system builds pressure--but you'd best not be running that on the street, because longevity won't be there, and that makes for one expensive daily driver (although the exhaust sound it *tits*).
*No offense to our female readers, "*tits*" is an officially sanctioned race term denoting excessive awesomeness, in no way meant to insult nor degrade anyone.
We agree from my previous post HP is kind of bullshitarian, other than when people say "torque" they usually mean low RPM torque and when they say "HP" they usually mean high RPMs geared down to get torque. You nailed it with "area under the curve," coupled with weight and traction.
A supercharger is belt-drive and typically has no spool time since it's already spinning. It still tends to reach peak volume before the engine does, then runs out of ability to keep compressing. The reason is at high RPM the blower needs to turn faster to compress the required amount of air, kind of like it needs "second gear" to spin it up "more faster!" Of course you can put a bigger pully on, but at some point the compressor, no matter how fast you turn it, can't compress more air--kind of like you can't fly a plane with a box fan even if you spin the fan "really fast." A plane needs a bigger propeller, much like the engine at high RPM needs a bigger fan. Like the plane example, you don't want to put an airplane prop in your house, that's too much air, just like at low RPM a bigger supercharger compressor will make "too much pressure." It's a balancing act.
The advancement to the supercharger is the "radial driven axial compressor" or turbo-supercharger, also called the turbocharger. As exhaust gasses build that pressure is used to spin the radial fan, which is on the same shaft as the axial compressor fan, and can build much greater pressures at high speeds--so much so that too much pressure is easy to build, and if you push a compressor rated for 400 HP to 375+ HP you're bound to blow the engine with a pressure surge (turbos are known for surging under just the wrong conditions). To combat that, use a bigger compressor. (For instance, my 400 HP Slingshot engine uses a compressor rated for 600 HP.) The mass of the bigger fans is what introduce lag, they're spinning, but when you hit the gas you used to have to wait for the exhaust gas to build volume, which would slowly spin up the compressor, which would slowly build boost, which would build more exhaust and slowly continue to build boost, until you were easing up on the throttle and the boost was still catching up. Nowadays the components are so light that lag is minimal, and if you're already generating boost at 2K RPM by the time you need it at 4K RPM the pressure is already there, there is no lag. Spinning up or down to match the needed boost is pretty quick because the fans are much lighter than they used to be, and while there is still "boost lag" it's really minimal. (People have commented on the Slingshot the boost hit is phenomenal, you just step on the gas and you're instantly gone, there's no lag, just gobs of power everywhere. In reality the lag is so short and so small it's almost imperceptible from normally aspirated engines, and that's how well-designed modern setups are.)
I'd therefore say that supercharger power tends to fade nearing maximum RPM, much like the stock Fury power fades, and turbochargers tend to keep building boost to the point they'll keep going "To Detonation And Beyond!" to borrow from Buzz Lightyear.
Superchargers are mainly bolt-in and go (with a retune). Turbos make far more [dangerous] power, but require a dump valve (to keep exhaust pressure under control), blow-off valve (to keep built-up pressure under control), and lots of feedback to watch all the squirrely things the compressor can do, since it's basically free-spinning and does what it damn well feels like. So I'll counter your statement as say superchargers, with their liner and well-defined [stable] boost curves are more for the daily driver. Turbos are for those who like life on the edge.
And yes, the higher the boost the more lag you'll see as the system builds pressure--but you'd best not be running that on the street, because longevity won't be there, and that makes for one expensive daily driver (although the exhaust sound it *tits*).
*No offense to our female readers, "*tits*" is an officially sanctioned race term denoting excessive awesomeness, in no way meant to insult nor degrade anyone.
Joined
·
282 Posts
Loving this discussion, and no shame admitting you guys are way more technical on the subject than I
Also like seeing the different opinions on what is best....
So, let's keep it going by turning to Chapter 3 - Nitrous
Compare it to Turbos and Blowers in terms of performance.
You can skip the part about always having to refill the bottles - that's a given
and... go
Also like seeing the different opinions on what is best....
So, let's keep it going by turning to Chapter 3 - Nitrous
Compare it to Turbos and Blowers in terms of performance.
You can skip the part about always having to refill the bottles - that's a given
and... go
Joined
·
6,429 Posts
Although I haven't interjected my voice in this discussion, as I sometime just enjoy listening, I will give you the same piece of advice I give to anyone who starts talking to me about "the gas".... make absolutely sure that you carry a broom and dust pan with you to sweep up your engine. I am certain that there will be those that will disagree but I still stand by this assessment. I know there are people who run NOS with great success, and if done properly on a **"RACE"** engine it is great... but it is not designed to be on a daily driver. I have know many people who grenaded there engine because they played with the button one time to many. The turbo would be my first choice and the blower my second. As a general "rule of thumb" it will take about 20-25% of the power you make to spin the blower... the turbo is much more efficient.Loving this discussion, and no shame admitting you guys are way more technical on the subject than I
Also like seeing the different opinions on what is best....
So, let's keep it going by turning to Chapter 3 - Nitrous
Compare it to Turbos and Blowers in terms of performance.
You can skip the part about always having to refill the bottles - that's a given
and... go
**** By race engine I mean something that is going to be torn down and rebuilt on a regular basis.
Joined
·
282 Posts
OK so what about twin turbos vs one unit. I believe the twin turbo setup is based on the notion that two smaller turbos can spin up to provide positive pressure faster than one can. Any other plus's and minus's to talk about?
41 - 60 of 74 Posts
