[arizonawarrior]

The stock Warrioris 97mm bore 113mm stroke, set up for higher torque. I wonder if there's any crank-turners out there that could make a hodrodcrank kit? What happens if a 102mm stroke aftermarket crank, and 11mm shorterjugsbored to 106mm, w/rods, are installed? This would give 106mm bore 102mm stroke, set up for higher horsepower. BTW it would be 1800cc. It used to be fun to 'stroke' a small block Chevy. I was just daydreaming.

 

[Churchkey]

Normally when you stroke an engine you make the stroke longer.


The way I readthis is that you want to destroke it 11mm = .440 inch.


If you want to keep things relative the jugs would only have to be 1/2 of the destroke change shorter. The other 1/2 of the destroke takes place in the crankcase.


The jugs would not have to bemade shorterfor the destroke, the piston pin location in the piston would need to be changed. However I do not think the jugs could stand that much over bore & new jugs wouldneedto be cast.


Destroking kills torque & since the Warrior rides the torque curve during 90% of the rpm cycle this configuration would probably be slower than a stock 1700cc bike.


If the 1800 cc can be made to rpm up to the 7K or so mark it will make more HP than a 1700 motor but by the time the 1800cc motor starts making hp the big torque 1700cc will be way ahead.


Now: because the 1800 will rev higher you can put gear to it to get it into the HP band quicker.


It goes on & on.


IMHO your shooting yourself in the foot with this configuration. The results will be disappointing & the cost will be astronomical.


A cost effective approach to going faster: Drop about 16K on a turbo Busa that puts down 250/300 HP.

 

[joker75]

Yup, Shorter stroke and larger bore = higher top end HP but with the loss of torque. Keep in mind like Churchkey said to get that extra hp you will also have to run the rpms up. If your goal is to spend a lot of $$$ on something no one else has without getting much in return, your idea is excellent.


However if you are really trying to increase the performance of your bike you would definitely be better just putting a Orient express or Patrick racing big bore kit in it with all of the fixins, cam, valve train, and head work. And don't forget Churchkey's v-bak and a PCIII to get the most out of your mods.

 

[davidd]

A perfectly balanced/blueprinted de-stroked warrior would be kinda fun. I love the torque of the warrior, but if I had two warriors, I wouldn't mind if one of them redlined at a few 1000rpms higher. A longer stroke warrior could come in handy for pulling a camper/boat or something!

 

[arizonawarrior]

Its just as well it was just daydreaming.Besides your excellent daydream-smashing bullet-points (**** you!)there's also the fact that 11mm is a huge swept volume change.Let's just say the concept is fun,but in the real world you're right its no good.Oh,I came up in an area of the country, and at a timewhen to 'stroke' a motor could mean either anincrease or decrease. Many don't use it interchangeably, especially today with all these nifty go-fast parts readily available forrace motors. Still your point is taken.

 

[arizonawarrior]

Another Daydream . . . don't spoil it . . .

 

[BOSSMAN2677]

If you stroke it too much, you will go blind.

 

[Churchkey]

Another Daydream . . . don't spoil it . . .

This design has serious conrod angularity problems but would be ok for a very low rpm engine. Maybe.


Hahaha, notbustin on you,I just can't help myself.


Getting back to the original topic: Maybe consider stuffing a Liner crank in a Warrior. 118mm stroke. One could install taller gearing & ride the torque curve for a really long time.

 

[ratphlem]

Another Daydream . . . don't spoil it . . .

I think if the piston were moving horizontally - it would be quite efficient.

 

[robriguez]

Another Daydream . . . don't spoil it . . .

Better/faster usually = LESS moving parts, not more.

 

[swisswarrior]

If you stroke it too much, you will go blind.

beat me to it

 

[ratphlem]

Better/faster usually = LESS moving parts, not more.

What's interesting about this - is if you move the pivot point, you could change the compression ratio on the fly. Could be useful...

 

[curiositywasframed]

Cheapest way to improve performance....cut weight. I recommend nutrisystem. It worked for Larry the Cable Guy.

I feel highly underqualified for this conversation, but I had to make some kind of comment.


That little animated engine design looks like a logistical nightmare. Three additional joints to overcome friction, not to mention the stress put on those pins. what's the point anyway? are they trying to take advantage of leverage to gain power?

 

[tomba]

I feel highly underqualified for this conversation, but I had to make some kind of comment.

it's a cranky crank cranker

 

[curiositywasframed]

it's a cranky crank cranker

that's great. I love it. High Five!

 

[arizonawarrior]

I haven't studied it, and won't, but its a combination motor/compressor in a French air engine. Its runs on some gas and each downstroke double double-duty by also compressing air into a series of tanks. Then the air is released to assist acceleration.


The developer just built their first 'real' car after building three engineering-tinker-around-platforms and a couple proof-of-concept vehicles over the last several years. From what little I did scan, yes its low rpm but is capable of a brisk 60mph.


Wanna bet maintenance is sorta high?


http://www.aircarcompressedairtechnology.com/

Its also being tested in a fake tourist bus in Nice France: