INTERNAL ENGINE MODIFICATIONS Valvetrain |Heads | Strokers | Design | Assembly

Counter Revolution Engine

Old Jun 2, 2009 | 06:07 PM
  #11  
Spoolin's Avatar
Thread Starter
GFYS and STFU
iTrader: (8)
 
Joined: Jan 2007
Posts: 13,870
Likes: 4
From: Here and sometimes there too.
Default

Originally Posted by MikeGyver
I think because the rule makers keep changing the engine size and configurations, even the factories are having trouble funding constant redesign. Czysz is now developing an electric bike.
http://www.motoczysz.com/club/
Yup, I saw that too! Team C1 had originally planned on competing in the 2007 season but because there was a rule change in MotoGP to where the engine size was limited to 800cc instead of 990 cc they couldn't design and build a smaller engine on their non-sponsored/funded budget.
Kinda shady if you ask me that MotoGP would change the rules the first season that the only American sport bike company wanted to enter.
Reply
Old Jun 2, 2009 | 09:12 PM
  #12  
PathfinderJr's Avatar
TECH Enthusiast
iTrader: (6)
 
Joined: Nov 2006
Posts: 721
Likes: 2
From: Texas
Default

Originally Posted by Spoolin
Kinda shady if you ask me that MotoGP would change the rules the first season that the only American sport bike company wanted to enter.
I can just about assure you that had absolutely nothing to do with the rule changes.

They were trying to make it "safer" by slowing it down with smaller engines but the riders are still breaking lap records almost every race due to higher corner speeds and just evolution of the bikes.
Reply
Old Jun 2, 2009 | 09:23 PM
  #13  
Spoolin's Avatar
Thread Starter
GFYS and STFU
iTrader: (8)
 
Joined: Jan 2007
Posts: 13,870
Likes: 4
From: Here and sometimes there too.
Default

Originally Posted by PathfinderJr
I can just about assure you that had absolutely nothing to do with the rule changes.

They were trying to make it "safer" by slowing it down with smaller engines but the riders are still breaking lap records almost every race due to higher corner speeds and just evolution of the bikes.

Ohhh gotcha! I don't follow it much except for maybe stumbling on a race here or there but do enjoy watching it. It is a shame that they couldn't enter when they were planning it though!
Reply
Old Jun 2, 2009 | 09:38 PM
  #14  
charcold-bowtie's Avatar
TECH Junkie
iTrader: (10)
 
Joined: Jul 2006
Posts: 3,198
Likes: 0
From: Midland Texas
Default

Originally Posted by Spoolin
The advantage achieved within a motorcycle frame was that there is no longer a tendency for the motorcycle to right itself when you get on the throttle when in a hard turn. The gyroscopic effect of the crank on most bikes causes a leaning bike to become upright in a corner if too much throttle is applied or if a driver is not strong enough to keep the bike leaned over. With this design the bike can remain in an hard turn and you could literally go full throttle and you would not have the bike trying to rip you upright.
Seems to me centripetal force of acceleration would make more of that effect? and no I didnt read any of the links or anything lol.
Reply
Old Jun 2, 2009 | 10:23 PM
  #15  
MikeGyver's Avatar
TECH Veteran
20 Year Member
Loved
Liked
Community Favorite
iTrader: (5)
 
Joined: Jun 2005
Posts: 4,515
Likes: 242
From: Suburban Chicago
Default

Them's all might purty words, but the effect is to lessen the gyroscope's resistance to changing direction. If you have dirt bike experience, you know that a 450 turns the hardest, a 250 is easier, an a 125 the easiest. Although a 250 (two stroke) is only about 15 lbs heavier than a 125, most of the difference is in the crankshaft. When you try to forcefully turn them, the 125 feels 50 lbs lighter, because its gyroscope is so much smaller.
Reply
Old Jun 3, 2009 | 01:36 AM
  #16  
Keith's Avatar
TECH Addict
 
Joined: Oct 2002
Posts: 2,544
Likes: 0
From: Mefis
Default

The C1 takes an inline four and mounts it longitudinally, vs. the transverse setups found in most motorcycles.

They change it up by slitting the four into two parallel twins. The crankshafts spin in opposite directions, effectively canceling any gyroscopic tendencies found in an engine with a crankshaft spinning only one direction. Plus, if I remember correctly, the two banks of cylinders are on a 15* included angle.


Czysz also had some really trick linear bearings on the forks to virtually eliminate sticktion caused by regular telescopic forks.
Reply
Old Jun 3, 2009 | 02:19 AM
  #17  
Spoolin's Avatar
Thread Starter
GFYS and STFU
iTrader: (8)
 
Joined: Jan 2007
Posts: 13,870
Likes: 4
From: Here and sometimes there too.
Default

Originally Posted by Keith
The C1 takes an inline four and mounts it longitudinally, vs. the transverse setups found in most motorcycles.

They change it up by slitting the four into two parallel twins. The crankshafts spin in opposite directions, effectively canceling any gyroscopic tendencies found in an engine with a crankshaft spinning only one direction. Plus, if I remember correctly, the two banks of cylinders are on a 15* included angle.


Czysz also had some really trick linear bearings on the forks to virtually eliminate sticktion caused by regular telescopic forks.
Yeah! He also designed a new swing arm and a completely new transmission that was pretty revolutionary! Guy is a smart one but it's sad to see that the MotoGP governing body changed the rules on him the same year he was planning on running his bike in the series.
From what I've read he's building an electric motoGP bike...
Reply
Related Topics
Thread
Thread Starter
Forum
Replies
Last Post
superchomper2003
GM Drivetrain & Suspension
3
Aug 26, 2015 09:39 AM
Allgonoshow
Tuning, Diagnostics, Electronics, and Wiring
5
Aug 25, 2015 02:56 PM
DrX
FORCED INDUCTION
4
Aug 11, 2015 07:25 AM
GMCtrk
Tuning, Diagnostics, Electronics, and Wiring
38
Aug 9, 2015 08:50 PM
85SS/85GN
GM Parts Classifieds
5
Jul 22, 2015 12:48 PM


Thread Tools
Search this Thread

All times are GMT -5. The time now is 04:43 PM.