Unofficial Royal Enfield Community Forum
Royal Enfield Motorcycles => 535 Continental GT => Topic started by: ace.cafe on September 29, 2014, 07:01:16 pm
-
I will be meeting with Mondello's at the end of the week to discuss a new project that is aimed at the Continental GT 535 cylinder head.
The details will be decided at the meeting, so I cannot provide them right now. However, this will be a pretty ambitious project that will break some new ground for this platform, and I have some really exciting design ideas which I plan to implement into this GT project. this is definitely not going to be a "me too" project in any sense. As we usually do, Ace will be providing something that sets us apart from the crowd.
Of course, since the GT is a UCE platform variant, what we develop for the GT will also be able to work on the other UCE models, but we will be making sure that it has the capacity to work with the larger GT throttle body and the larger displacement of the GT, to take full advantage of these additional features that the factory provided in this new sports model. For use on other UCE engines, we would recommend that the 535 displacement and GT throttle body be installed for best results from this GT head project, if possible, but it would still work with normal UCE stuff too.
I will be happy to answer questions, but I may have to be vague about some things. I will be able to give more accurate answers after I get back from the meeting, and the specs are firmed up.
If anyone has suggestions about what they might like to see included, I'd be happy to hear them too. Now would be a good time to voice them.
There's going to be a little more to this than some of you might suspect. 8)
-
:-X
-
You have our attention. ...
-
You have our attention. ...
Okay.
A little more info.
It will have the same attachment points as the factory bike has at the intake and exhaust locations, for the factory inlet and exhaust systems to bolt on to it. It will accept the factory sensors and all such other bolt on things that it needs to have. It will most likely use the factory rocker covers. General shape should be similar, and similar finning.
Everything else in between will be different. It is a complete new cylinder head.
One of the reasons for this is that we are trying to eliminate the long waiting periods for having each customer's head modified by hand. It was taking 3 months for each job, and this was something that we wanted to improve. With the new heads, it should be available at fairly short notice, depending on how much I can stock at any given time, or short production time, so little or no wait. I think that this ready availablity is something that people will appreciate.
Also, it gives us the freedom to make a new head with a completely clean sheet of paper, other than having to have the inlet and outlet connections at the factory locations. We have freedom to design new combustion chamber, new ports, new valve angles and sizes and locations, new rocker arrangements, etc.
We plan to pack this thing full of advanced features, and it will all be in the CNC program to cut it out of a big hunk of billet aluminum.
So, there we are.
Exact details will come later, but I have outlined the idea for you.
Weren't expecting that, were we!???
;D
-
This going to be epic. ::)
-
Very Impressive, but then again, coming from Ace we should expect impressive things. I guess modding the stock head would have been too predictable... ;D
An all new head is a huge undertaking, so I can understand that this is not a 'quick' project by any means. I guess it would allow you full control over combustion chamber flow and pattern, as well as compression ratio? If the CR could be bumped up without having to open the motor any more than the top end, that would be an added bonus
-
Very Impressive, but then again, coming from Ace we should expect impressive things. I guess modding the stock head would have been too predictable... ;D
An all new head is a huge undertaking, so I can understand that this is not a 'quick' project by any means. I guess it would allow you full control over combustion chamber flow and pattern, as well as compression ratio? If the CR could be bumped up without having to open the motor any more than the top end, that would be an added bonus
Actually, there will be a way to externally alter working compression in a certain way, but I will think about that a little more and see what I might come up with. That's an interesting thought.
-
Okay. We will keep this vague for now.
But I need to know .
Will this mod make it faster , stronger,.. better then it was before?
-
Okay. We will keep this vague for now.
But I need to know .
Will this mod make it faster , stronger,.. better then it was before?
This will be the equivalent to bolting on a set of Dart racing heads onto a Chevy small block. Complete custom head design.
-
Maybe this question is out of place, but this topic has raised it in my mind. How much power can the bottom end handle before custom cases and/or crank is required?
-
Okay. We will keep this vague for now.
But I need to know .
Will this mod make it faster , stronger,.. better then it was before?
Yes. :)
-
Maybe this question is out of place, but this topic has raised it in my mind. How much power can the bottom end handle before custom cases and/or crank is required?
The ultimate upper limits of the UCE bottom end have not been reached so far, so it is somewhat unknown at which power level or rpm level will cause some failure of the stock parts. The things which have been done so far by others, such as the recent Bonneville record run, indicate it should handle what we plan for it as a street machine.
With the stock throttle body and the available exhaust systems in place, it is unlikely that the power or rpm level will reach anything destructive to this bottom end.
-
This going to be epic. ::)
You got that right Scottie !
-
Okay.
A little more info.
It will have the same attachment points as the factory bike has at the intake and exhaust locations, for the factory inlet and exhaust systems to bolt on to it. It will accept the factory sensors and all such other bolt on things that it needs to have. It will most likely use the factory rocker covers. General shape should be similar, and similar finning.
Everything else in between will be different. It is a complete new cylinder head.
One of the reasons for this is that we are trying to eliminate the long waiting periods for having each customer's head modified by hand. It was taking 3 months for each job, and this was something that we wanted to improve. With the new heads, it should be available at fairly short notice, depending on how much I can stock at any given time, or short production time, so little or no wait. I think that this ready availablity is something that people will appreciate.
Also, it gives us the freedom to make a new head with a completely clean sheet of paper, other than having to have the inlet and outlet connections at the factory locations. We have freedom to design new combustion chamber, new ports, new valve angles and sizes and locations, new rocker arrangements, etc.
We plan to pack this thing full of advanced features, and it will all be in the CNC program to cut it out of a big hunk of billet aluminum.
So, there we are.
Exact details will come later, but I have outlined the idea for you.
Weren't expecting that, were we!???
;D
Now that the cat is out of the bag....Can the B5 throttle body be bored out to match the GT throttle body?
-
Now that the cat is out of the bag....Can the B5 throttle body be bored out to match the GT throttle body?
I don't know what might be involved with that. We have never tried.
Given that it is only a millimeter difference, I doubt it would be worth the trouble. It would only affect the very top rpms. It would be like the difference between a 33mm and a 34mm carb.
I'd bet it would be a lot cheaper to buy the throttle body from RE, than to pay hundreds of dollars to modify one.
-
Is it reasonable to assume that you'll produce more aggressive cams to take further advantage of higher flow rates in the ports? And sell it all as a kit?
-
Is it reasonable to assume that you'll produce more aggressive cams to take further advantage of higher flow rates in the ports? And sell it all as a kit?
It is possible, but we don't envision that as necessary in the street package which we see as a 6500 rpm range target.
The head will be equipped with high-ratio roller rockers which will give about .500" max lift at the valve, using the stock cams with .300" lobes. This puts the lift at the max that the valve springs can take before coil bind, and is as much or more lift than you will likely get from any cams in this engine. Our proven Ace beehive valve spring kit will handle all this lift and acceleration with no problems. We expect the package to be sufficient for 6200-6500rpm with the stock cams and our head.
This boils down to the idea that you won't need new cams with this head. The rockers do the job instead. That means you get the results at lower overall cost this way. However, if you already have other cams, or want to buy other cams for some reason, we can likely supply lower ratio rockers to accommodate that without exceeding the max lift height of the springs. I would recommend discussing those specifics with me beforehand. It is expected that NField Gear will release some cams, and once I find out those specs, I will work on configuring a rocker ratio to work with those, for anyone who wishes to pair these things up.
The throttle body size is going to be the limiting factor for max hp rpm, and we will try to make the most of what it allows. It should be good for the rev range we target.
Something like the Power Commander will be needed. Or a carb conversion kit. The rev limiter will need to be programmed to a higher limit than stock, and there will be some mixture map programming needed, and possibly some ignition adjustments. We can be more detailed about this part of it after we get into testing when it's done.
-
Thanks for the response! With breathing made more optimal it might be best to contemplate a conversion to a carburetor since adjusting mixtures is thereby not so dependent on arcane digital mysteries unsolvable in my garage (and probably 99.9% of everyone else's). This then requires a change in the ignition system (probably replacing the original with one from Royal Enfield's pre-EFI past if it would fit), and pretty soon we're where we ought to be with a retro motorcycle - long stroke, deep breathing, manually adjustable, rev limited hot rod. Sign me up!
-
Thanks for the response! With breathing made more optimal it might be best to contemplate a conversion to a carburetor since adjusting mixtures is thereby not so dependent on arcane digital mysteries unsolvable in my garage (and probably 99.9% of everyone else's). This then requires a change in the ignition system (probably replacing the original with one from Royal Enfield's pre-EFI past if it would fit), and pretty soon we're where we ought to be with a retro motorcycle - long stroke, deep breathing, manually adjustable, rev limited hot rod. Sign me up!
Carb conversion would be fine.
We plan a 34mm port on the intake. 34mm carb would be good, such as a TM34 Mikuni flat slide. We can bore our 32mm alloy manifold to 34mm to match, and it fits the existing UCE stud spacing, so it will bolt right on.
Hitchcock has an ignition conversion kit available with their carb conversion kit, and it may be available separately too. I believe it is derived from the AVL Bullet ignition system. Perhaps it even IS the AVL ignition package, maybe.
-
Which setup has potential for more HP? Also any difference in throttle response (assuming proper tuning of each)?
-
Which setup has potential for more HP? Also any difference in throttle response (assuming proper tuning of each)?
I personally think that the hp potential of EFI or carb would be the same, given good tuning of each. Throttle response too.
The Mikuni TM series flat slide carbs are motocross racing carbs that we re-jet for our purposes. They have extraordinarily good response and power. We have been using them on all our Fireball and racing builds for years. Great carbs.
Basically, the port diameter will set the rpm limit at which the flow will be restricted with a given displacement. So, whichever the fuel delivery system might be, it is the port diameter that will govern the max rpm. And the max rpm will govern the max hp output.
So, with either system using a 34mm inlet diameter and the same port and valve, they will perform about the same as each other. Should be roughly in the 6200-6500rpm neighborhood for max hp rpm. Estimated power could be about 40hp or more, at the crank. Should do The Ton. That's basically what I'm aiming at for the output.
I'm trying to keep the whole thing as a head swap installation, so it's easy for people. And a new set of pushrods too.
I can control almost everything that needs changing, in terms of the performance parameters, with the design of the head. Get some mixture and ignition control for it, and it's in the bag. Pretty much can't get any easier than that, for a performance build.
-
Sounds good to me!
-
How close to piston-valve interference does the increase in valve lift beget? Since the camshafts are gear-driven there's little possibility that the cam drive will fail as a chain or belt drive system could, but is there a possibility that interference could occur by over revving the motor into valve float?
-
How close to piston-valve interference does the increase in valve lift beget? Since the camshafts are gear-driven there's little possibility that the cam drive will fail as a chain or belt drive system could, but is there a possibility that interference could occur by over revving the motor into valve float?
We are going to set the piston-to-valve clearance distance when we design the chamber. We know the cam lift, and we know what rocker ratio we want to use, and we will be setting a valve angle and a chamber shape. So, once we have these parameters all decided, we can set a chamber depth which allows the necessary valve-to-piston clearance around the TDC area, so that the standard pistons may be used without clash. This is part of the design plan.
You see, since we are in full control of nearly all the parameters in this head, we do not have to perform gymnastics to fit things into some already existing design and casting that is basically set in stone. We can make it any way we want. And we will.
Regarding valve float, while this is always possible with a serious over-rev, our Ace valve spring package is high performance with advanced beehive springs and lightweight hardware that has excellent control over the valve and the spring harmonics and damping. It is the same basic package that has been successfully proven for years in our other Fireball engines, and has been reliable at over 6500rpm in those engines, and has shown perfect reliability and longevity for over 50k miles so far in those engines. So, we have a very good handle on the control of the valves, and it is not a worrisome problem in my mind. Never broke or lost any valve spring, or dropped or bent any valves, in any Fireball yet.
A few things we have planned for the package, and will be discussed for implementation in the design are:
New valve angle: The standard UCE valve angle is 26 degrees for each valve, 52 degrees included angle. This is relatively old architecture, and the more modern and efficient designs will use lower angles(such as 23, or 18, or 15 degrees, etc). This allows a more compact and efficient chamber for better combustion efficiency, allowing higher compression ratio, less ignition advance, faster burn, etc. However, it also can limit valve size a bit more, so a decision between valve size and valve angle need to be weighed, as well as how the port flow will work with the new valve angle. These all mesh in together, and we don't have a final decision on these details as of yet.
Valve size: We plan a bigger intake valve, and possibly a smaller exhaust valve to make room for it. This entails moving the intake valve guide and port inboard a little bit, which is no problem since we are designing the whole thing from scratch anyway.
Combustion Chamber size and shape: We plan a modern efficient compact(around 50cc) combustion chamber which optimizes flow and also allows higher compression ratio and more efficient burn for more power overall. Looking at somewhere between 9.5:1 and 10:1, depending on piston type and displacement. This will be a single spark plug chamber design.
Intake port: We cannot move the intake entry location from where it is, because we need the standard intake system to be able to bolt up, so that will remain where it is. However, we will port the head with the right shape to work with the new valve angle and the existing entry location, and the largest cross sectional area that is efficient with the existing intake system. Aiming at around 200+ cfm peak flow, with a nice fat low lift flow profile too.
Exhaust port: We are going to work with the smaller exhaust valve and a high efficiency exhaust port to utilize the exit speeds for best scavenging using a smaller valve and port, to allow us to use a larger intake valve and port. This maximizes torque, especially in the critical midrange rpms. Will bolt up with the standard exhaust header, the normal way.
Rockers: We will machine a mounting system for an entirely different rocker design on this head than the stock type. The stock rockers will not be used. The design will include a high ratio full-roller type rocker system, which will provide the maximum valve lift that we can fit with the valve springs that we use in our Ace Fireball packages(about .500" lift max). Ratio rockers also have the effect of extending the effective valve duration for increased rpm range, even though the actual numeric "seat to seat" duration is not actually increased., but everything between is lifted higher for longer. So, we get more duration and a LOT more lift with the same stock cams, which gives the performance increase we want, but saves money on not having to buy cams.
I realize that all these features will sound like a lot of money, but we have taken this into account, and we will be using available parts that do not need to be custom made, and are reasonably priced, so we can put the money in the machining of the head, and the parts and hardware are greatly reduced in cost compared to the custom parts we had to have made before, and all the hand porting and welding up chambers and lots of time on the various machines. So, this "should" come out in a very reasonable price range, not too different than what the hand-done head mods cost before, and give a lot more features and benefits in the package. It makes sense.
-
Hi Ace,
I assume a lot of thought has gone into this one already, but, would there be any advantage in using two inlet valves and one exhaust valve for this head? The reason I ask is one of several, in fact - two inlet valves can obviously be smaller and lighter, but the inlet valve is also the most likely to get too close to the piston when higher lifts and / or longer durations are applied - two valves of a smaller size would not only give better piston crown clearance, but they might not have to be opened so far, either. A central spark plug could be fitted right in the centre of the combustion chamber, between both these valves and a single exhaust valve which could possibly be larger than standard and / or have greater lift imparted on it. I realize two, three or even four valves might be possible, but the 87mm bore size might work well with three valves?
Just a thought!
B.W.
-
Hi Ace,
I assume a lot of thought has gone into this one already, but, would there be any advantage in using two inlet valves and one exhaust valve for this head? The reason I ask is one of several, in fact - two inlet valves can obviously be smaller and lighter, but the inlet valve is also the most likely to get too close to the piston when higher lifts and / or longer durations are applied - two valves of a smaller size would not only give better piston crown clearance, but they might not have to be opened so far, either. A central spark plug could be fitted right in the centre of the combustion chamber, between both these valves and a single exhaust valve which could possibly be larger than standard and / or have greater lift imparted on it. I realize two, three or even four valves might be possible, but the 87mm bore size might work well with three valves?
Just a thought!
B.W.
Hi B.W.,
Yes, I have given that 3 valve arrangement a great deal of thought, and also the 4 valve. I really wanted to do something like that.
However, the cost issues involved were a lot higher, and the target power level could be served well enough by a good 2 valve layout. So, while I was(and am) quite attracted to the multi-valve layouts, I had to come back to reality with a price point that would attract enough buyers.
I had to make the call about feature/benefit/price analysis, and the 2 valve comes out ahead in that fight, based on a 6500 rpm limit from the 34mm inlet tract. We can flow all that 34mm tract's capacity thru a good 2 valve layout. Most buyers will want to stick with the maximum available RE throttle body which is already present on the GT, due to the cost of buying a different EFI system, so 34mm is basically it. Our valve spring package can easily control these valves at 6500 rpm, so there is no need for the lighter valves of the 3 or 4 valve system unless we move into a significantly higher rpm range along with a bigger throttle body EFI system, which I don't see happening on a street bike in an affordable range. Perhaps a carb conversion would be better for that kind of application.
However, I am fully open to anyone who wants to have us develop a 4 valve head, and is willing to purchase one, and pitch in a significant deposit to get the ball rolling. It is certainly within our capability, and Mondello's is already currently producing 4-valve billet heads for American V8 engines. So, it is very do-able. But we need customers who would pay that much for a more exotic cylinder head. In a "cost no object" market, this head would have 4 valves in it.
This advanced 2 valve head gives a lot of bang for the buck, and should be in an affordable enough price range to attract buyers.
That's the reality of it.
:)
-
I agree that 2 valves is the best route, all considered. Exacting the maximum power isn't of primary concern to me (YMMV), but a more hearty midrange that yanks on the bars when asked for, is. Others may want to hop this thing up to its absolute max and that's fine. But the balance you've taken between cost, feasibility, outcome and cost (sic) is right on for me. 40 hp at the motor would be just right, and a 6500 rpm red line is okay with me - long stroke motors with high redlines just wears out pistons and rings too fast IMO.
-
Keep in mind Ace, even if you design the initial head with a 2 valve set up, you will still have a CAD designed saved for the CNC machine work. It would be relatively easy to go back down the road, take the existing head design and modify it to a 3 or 4 valve design. And if the application seems to suit, it would be just as easy to modify and open up the intake and exhaust ports for a full custom race application where a custom aftermarket EFI system and custom fabbed exhaust could be installed on the build. The joy of CAD design is that once you have your initial head designed and produced, using your imagination to push the limits of something more radical becomes more affordable, as the basic layout is already there and not nearly as much time is required to modify things in the CAD program like valve placement and intake/exhaust ports.
I've been excited about this since I first heard about it. I'll be following this with great interest. 8)
-
This advanced 2 valve head gives a lot of bang for the buck, and should be in an affordable enough price range to attract buyers.
That's the reality of it.
:)
Sounds sweet! You've obviously given some thought to the costs involved... when will you be able to give us an idea of how much all this goodness will set us back?
-
Sounds sweet! You've obviously given some thought to the costs involved... when will you be able to give us an idea of how much all this goodness will set us back?
I'm going by estimates right now. The development of the billet is on a "time and materials" basis from my guys at Mondello's, and that is just the way this kind of thing is. They have told me about what they expect it should be, based on their experience. It will all become more clear as we progress.
The aim is for it to be similarly priced as our other Fireball type head work. They say that they think they can do that. In fact, they suggested it to me as something they thought they could do in the similar price range.
When we get the figures more firmed-up, people can contact me about it, because I have a general policy to not directly discuss our pricing here on the forum.
-
Had the meeting at Mondello's.
They are a little busy right now, and they won't be able to start on it until later in the month.
It was decided to go specifically with the 87mm bore(535). That is the stock displacement of the GT, and the other UCE bikes can be bored out for the 535 piston. The whole valve and porting thing revolves around the bore size, and it just wasn't suitable to try to make a "one size fits both bores" kind of thing, so it will be 87mm bore only. This was a pretty important matter that affected the whole design, so we had to make the decision about that.
All the other things were discussed, but some of the things like valve angle and such will have to wait until they get it all programmed into the computer, which they won't get done until later in the month, and also get a few grand of my money to get them started with the development of the programming.
They were non-committal about the actual cost per unit, which is understandable because they have not actually made one yet, but they still seem to think they can do it for around the same prices as our other roller rocker head conversions, so until I find out otherwise, I have to stick with that estimate.
Just to be clear, this is not going to cost similar to the non-roller-rocker conversions which would use the standard rockers and stuff like that. We will still offer the basic type head work to use with the standard rockers for the low cost like we have been doing. But the billet head with roller rockers is going to be in the price neighborhood of our other roller rocker heads. If you need to know what price range that is, please email me or PM me.
-
When we get the figures more firmed-up, people can contact me about it, because I have a general policy to not directly discuss our pricing here on the forum.
Yeah, I figured... which is why I didn't even ask for numbers - just a time-frame.
It was decided to go specifically with the 87mm bore(535). That is the stock displacement of the GT, and the other UCE bikes can be bored out for the 535 piston. The whole valve and porting thing revolves around the bore size, and it just wasn't suitable to try to make a "one size fits both bores" kind of thing, so it will be 87mm bore only. This was a pretty important matter that affected the whole design, so we had to make the decision about that.
Always a bridesmaid...
-
i've been looking for the O2 sensor today and did not find it, i assume its a difference in the indian version which i imported. Instead there is some sensor going directly inside the cylinder head. Will the new ace head work with this setup? Anybody knows what this sensor does?
-
i've been looking for the O2 sensor today and did not find it, i assume its a difference in the indian version which i imported. Instead there is some sensor going directly inside the cylinder head. Will the new ace head work with this setup? Anybody knows what this sensor does?
Our head will work not with that, whatever that is. However that may not be needed. Find out what tjat is, and we can then know if it is needed or not. Since it is not on US models, it may not be a necessary thing..
The india models use open loop EFI which don't have the O2 sensor in the exhaust. Also, the Power Commander systems do not use the O2 sensor either. So you are okay with that aspect of it.
-
Not to get too far off the topic here, but let me ask this: Would a GT motor fit in an earlier frame? I've always been enchanted by sidecar rigs; I almost bought a Ural but bought my GT instead. A year or so ago the RE dealer (nicest guy I ever met in a motorcycle shop in 50 years - Gary at American Harley-Davidson (!) on Erie Street in Tonawanda, NY) had a Rocket with the Steib clone on it which I got to drive. The only disapointment was that it was really underpowered even with the hack empty. Seems to me a GT motor with your mods on it would elevate a Royal Enfield rig to "highway useable" even with a passenger in it. I can't imagine a sidecar would fit on a GT, but if the GT motor would fit in a frame that does accommodate a sidecar... now there's an interesting project IMO!
-
Not to get too far off the topic here, but let me ask this: Would a GT motor fit in an earlier frame? I've always been enchanted by sidecar rigs; I almost bought a Ural but bought my GT instead. A year or so ago the RE dealer (nicest guy I ever met in a motorcycle shop in 50 years - Gary at American Harley-Davidson (!) on Erie Street in Tonawanda, NY) had a Rocket with the Steib clone on it which I got to drive. The only disapointment was that it was really underpowered even with the hack empty. Seems to me a GT motor with your mods on it would elevate a Royal Enfield rig to "highway useable" even with a passenger in it. I can't imagine a sidecar would fit on a GT, but if the GT motor would fit in a frame that does accommodate a sidecar... now there's an interesting project IMO!
No, the UCE is a much shorter overall power unit than the older pre-unit Bullets. They won't match up.
But, not to worry!
We have been building high performance Bullet engines for the older Bullets for years, and we have packages that are very strong for those bikes. Our experience is VERY deep on those older platforms, and we also make the highest performance modification packages for those engines too. We have about 36 of them on the road right now, and some of them have 50k miles on them with excellent reliability. Our Ace Fireball 535 is legendary.
We just had a report on this very forum, in the Classic Bullet section, from one of our Super Fireball owners. He reported breaking The Ton in 4th GEAR on a 5-speed Bullet, going up a long uphill grade, and hitting 6940 rpm. Broke The Ton, and wasn't even in top gear yet. This bike has a carb, with our roller rockers hi-port head, and our cams and piston, and our build specs. It probably has in the vicinity of 50 hp at the crank.
That's the kind of stuff we make.
No problem!
-
Not to get too far off the topic here, but let me ask this: Would a GT motor fit in an earlier frame?
Earlier frame... meaning a UCE Bullet frame? If not, please ignore me.
If so, it sure looks to me like it should fit. But, re-boring a 500 UCE will give you the same 535 that the GT has, yes?
-
Earlier frame... meaning a UCE Bullet frame? If not, please ignore me.
If so, it sure looks to me like it should fit. But, re-boring a 500 UCE will give you the same 535 that the GT has, yes?
Yes, if he means a regular UCE frame, then you are correct. And yes, 535 is 535, so it can bored for that displacement.
-
I have a little time this morning, so I thought I'd write what's on my mind.
I'm doing a lot of thinking about getting the most from this upcoming ACE GT Billet Head, and there's a lot that goes into that.
The first matter is the valve angle(stem angle). This is about 26 degrees for each valve on the standard UCE head. It was 40 degrees on each valve in the old Iron Barrel head. As a relative matter, the side-draft inlet system which we have on these engines can get a straighter port into the engine with wider valve angles and deeper chambers. This favors flow, typically. However, on the UCE, we have a little bit of downdraft angle in the EFI throttle body and injector body, and so that helped to work with the 26 degree valve angle.
Modern heads have even lower valve angles which stand up more vertically, such as 23, 20, 18, 15, 12, 11, 10, etc.. As the valve angles get more vertical, typically the ability of the head to make more power is improved. Most of this comes from the more efficient combustion chamber that is shallower and more compact, for faster and more complete burns, yielding more power. However, as the valves get stood up more vertically, this has some effects on the port, because it either needs to get more downdraft angle, or there needs to be more turn in the port. We really can't get more downdraft angle because we have to hook up to the stock EFI inlet system where it is, or we start to get into clearance problems with the frame. So that's out. Then, we will have to put more turn into the port, making it less of a straight shot in. This requires some really good port work to make the most out of that, but it can be done.
The other thing that happens as the valve angle gets more vertical is that there is less room for the valve size, because they are no longer "tilted" upwards somewhat into the deeper part of the combustion chamber like the
standard head has. We are restricted almost to the bore diameter distance in terms of our valve size combination. We have a 3.425"(87mm) bore in the GT. And we need to have at least a little bit of room between the valves in the center, and have enough room on the edges to avoid flow shrouding by the chamber walls and bore walls. So, it's a tight fit for valve size with these modern valve angles. If we are going to get the flow we want out of these smaller valves and ports with more turn in them, we are going to have to be good at maximizing what we are working with.
So, what the current school of thought says on these matters is to make the exhaust valve as small as you can, and move it over toward the exhaust side as far as reasonable, while still having it work good. Then, that allows you to move the intake valve over more toward the middle, and use a larger size intake valve to make use of all the rest of the room that you got from moving the smaller exhaust valve over. This puts a lot of emphasis on having a very good working exhaust valve and port, which will be high speed because of the smaller size, and that should help with extraction effects during overlap. The exhaust valve is always smaller because the exhaust operates with high pressure to help it get out, which the intake does not have. We just want it to be as small as it can be to be effective enough with our overall flow, so that it isn't a restriction but gives us more room for a bigger intake valve. So, that is the direction we will be going.
-
The other thing that happens as the valve angle gets more vertical is that there is less room for the valve size, because they are no longer "tilted" upwards somewhat into the deeper part of the combustion chamber like the
standard head has. We are restricted almost to the bore diameter distance in terms of our valve size combination. We have a 3.425"(87mm) bore in the GT. And we need to have at least a little bit of room between the valves in the center, and have enough room on the edges to avoid flow shrouding by the chamber walls and bore walls. So, it's a tight fit for valve size with these modern valve angles. If we are going to get the flow we want out of these smaller valves and ports with more turn in them, we are going to have to be good at maximizing what we are working with.
Hi Ace,
I know I have already mentioned it and you gave valid reasons for not doing so, but this is shouting 'three valves', with two inlet valves, to me ;)
B.W.
-
Hi Ace,
I know I have already mentioned it and you gave valid reasons for not doing so, but this is shouting 'three valves', with two inlet valves, to me ;)
B.W.
I get it. :)
But it's $500 more for the custom shaft rocker, and 8 months wait for the custom rocker to be produced. I am trying to avoid those issues on this head.
-
Okay, well I have done some math, and it appears sound.
The basic limitation is that the 34mm throttle body will be the limiting factor on rpm, and it should be good up to the general vicinity of 6500 rpm, give or take a little. What is going to limit it to that rpm range is the mach index of the air speed thru that throttle body. It can flow enough air to do what we want, but it starts getting into the choked-flow category around 6500 rpm.
Since most people will want to use the standard throttle body and injector body that came with the bike, for ease of use with the PC-V or other ECU modifications, this is going to be the most common arrangement. Also, since most people don't generally run around at 6500 rpm on these bikes, and the advertised peak hp rpm if the stock bike is around 5000 rpm, we can feel pretty confident that increasing the rpm range to 6500 rpm will be enough for most GT riders, especially for use with the stock bottom end.
Okay, so now that we have established the mach index factor as the primary limitation on rpm and power, let's have a look at the math for flow.
34mm throttle body and port entry equals 1.407 square inches area.
It has been established long ago by Superflow Flow Bench company that the max flow that you are able to get at the normal 28" water column vacuum that these flow benches operate at, is 146 cfm per square inch. So, 1.407 square inches times 146 cfm per square inch equals 205 cfm. That's what the throttle body can flow. We know from previous 535cc Bullet modifications that we really only need about 190 cfm or so to get our target power level, and reach about 6500 rpm with a 34mm carburetor.
So, we need an intake valve size to suit.
It looks as if we could fit a 1.7" intake valve into this chamber with nearly any valve angle we choose. So, let's do some math on that.
A 1.7" valve that is lifted to .500" at full lift has a valve curtain area for flow of 1.7 x 3.1416 x .5 = 2.67 square inches.
Max theoretical flow for that area would be 389 cfm.
But at high valve lifts, the flow discharge coefficient at the valve curtain area is not generally very high. We normally can get between .5 to .55 for a discharge coefficient at that kind of lift. So, we can then take that 389 cfm theoretical max, and multiply by .52 as a middle ground estimate for discharge coefficient, and that gives us an estimated 202 cfm flow out the valve curtain at full lift.
Pretty good match. 205 cfm into the throttle body, and about 202 cfm out the valve into the cylinder at full valve lift. Estimated, based on flow areas involved.
So, it looks like we can match a suitable valve size to the flow capacity of the 34mm throttle body, to make maximum use of the flow we can pass thru the system, using a 2-valve arrangement.
-
I get it. :)
But it's $500 more for the custom shaft rocker, and 8 months wait for the custom rocker to be produced. I am trying to avoid those issues on this head.
Fair comment, Ace and I am not trying to interfere. I am sure you have left 'no stone unturned' and I see you have gone over all the maths and science stuff in great depth. I will watch with interest from the sidelines to see how this interesting project develops ;)
B.W.
-
Fair comment, Ace and I am not trying to interfere. I am sure you have left 'no stone unturned' and I see you have gone over all the maths and science stuff in great depth. I will watch with interest from the sidelines to see how this interesting project develops ;)
B.W.
I'm sure that you know that I greatly value your input.
And that I am in agreement with your assessment from a pure performance point of view. The 3 valve would give more inlet flow at less lift, and would extend the performance envelope of this head.
I'm just making this call based on the economics and convenience-of-purchase issues, so that it is more affordable and accessible to the customers to buy off the shelf at the earliest possible time. And, that it reaches the reasonable goals for performance that people want, at a price that would be within reach of buyers, and utilize much of their existing hardware already on the bike.
Obviously, if I thought the market could withstand a significantly higher price and waiting time, I would move to the multi-valve arrangement. But, if we can do the expected things, such as reach the Ton, cruise at 75mph easily, have very good acceleration and a punchy broad torque curve, at a somewhat affordable price for a very premium kind of product, that has shown to be a successful combination in the Bullet market in the past.
Perhaps in the future, we can take this to the next step with larger inlets and multi-valve for racers or other people who want more, and have a bigger budget. I am certainly not against it at all. But I need to be conscious of the price tag, if I expect these heads to move into the general marketplace. The price will already be high enough as it is, to be somewhat exclusive in the Bullet world.
-
I'd like to point out that although we feel that no aftermarket cams are necessary for this kit to work properly, we are not against aftermarket cams. It's just that the rocker ratio would need to be different to accommodate higher lift cams, and not exceed the available max lift at the valve. So, since we will have different available rocker ratios, that may very well be possible, and other cams may possibly be used.
I can't speak specifically about any of these cams, because none of the aftermarket cams have emerged on the market yet, so I have no idea what lift height they are going to have. If necessary, it may be possible for us to make a custom valve and spring set-up for even higher lift using these aftermarket cams and our ratio rockers.
We will have to see what specs that the aftermarket cams have, and how it all shakes out for possible use with our stuff.
It's hard for us to plan the possibilities of incorporating any of these other parts from other manufacturers, if we don't know the specs.
If people want to combine these future upcoming aftermarket cams with our stuff, we will do our best to make it happen, if it is possible and has good potential.
-
Just speaking at purely hypothetical concepts, the advantage of the three valve configuration seems to me to be at the higher rev range...reducing reciprocating mass Vs flow,shrouding,clearance ect...but this motor is limited in that region anyhow courtesy of being a long stroke with an old style piston.
Or am I wrong? would the three valve configuration provide a torque advantage in the lower rev range.....Is it even possible to know without modeling it and crunching the numbers -(something I am incapable of by the way)....would three valves be an aesthetic crime against the Enfield Nature....Excellent project.....Looking forward to the Eta and costing! Best Regards ,Dave
-
Just speaking at purely hypothetical concepts, the advantage of the three valve configuration seems to me to be at the higher rev range...reducing reciprocating mass Vs flow,shrouding,clearance ect...but this motor is limited in that region anyhow courtesy of being a long stroke with an old style piston.
Or am I wrong? would the three valve configuration provide a torque advantage in the lower rev range.....Is it even possible to know without modeling it and crunching the numbers -(something I am incapable of by the way)....would three valves be an aesthetic crime against the Enfield Nature....Excellent project.....Looking forward to the Eta and costing! Best Regards ,Dave
Your intuitions are basically correct.
The main advantages of the 3 valve arrangement would be for higher rpm improvements. The valves are lighter, allow more flow area at all lifts, allow a centralized spark plug location, and generally offer all the improvements that the higher rpms would need.
However, all is not rosy with multi-valve. The lower rpms favor the swirl of the 2 valve configuration, compared to the "tumble" motion that comes from the multi-valves. And the 3 valves' extra flow tends to be "over-valved" for the lower rpm ranges, thus flowing slower, and reducing torque potential. So, some of the stuff that makes the 3 valve arrangement better at higher rpms, is not as good at lower rpms. Variable valve timing is what gives these multi-valve engines the "crutch" to handle the lower rpms better, while offering the inherent multi-valve advantages at higher rpms.
With the limitations of the long stroke regarding rpm range, and the goal of moderate rpm limits within the capacity of the throttle body size and exhaust system size for street riding use, it is a much closer call about what way to go.
For racing, the multi-valve would be the obvious choice, and larger throttle body and tuned exhaust, longer duration cams, and beefed-up bottom end, etc, would be the way to go, but it's expensive. And in my mind it is questionable about whether that is really what people would want out of their street bike, in most cases.
The bottom line is that this GT is not a vintage race bike, there is no racing class that it could qualify for that it could be competitive in, and so the improved street machine is the category that needs to be filled. We know that there is a somewhat price-sensitive market to some degree, and so it is important to use as much of the existing ancillary equipment as possible to reduce expenditures on those parts. And we want to make it as easy as reasonably possible to install, because not every owner is an experienced engine builder.
In our case, we reckon that 6500 rpm is a reasonable rpm limit which is even higher than our previous 6000 rpm Fireball rpm ranges. We have a 34mm throttle body, which is larger than the 32mm carb that we used on those other Fireballs, and it is suitable to reach the 6500 rpm limits we envision, and it can flow as much or more air as the other Fireballs too, so we can employ that intake system that is already there, keeping costs under control.
We know that all the other Bullet owners were very pleased with the results they got from the other Fireballs, so we know that this is a sweet spot that people can appreciate, and it does the things they want on the street.
So, it becomes a matter of recognizing that we can get where people want to go with this project, while not going overboard. Certainly, we could get into more rpms and even more hp, and more exotic packages to suit that. But there is something to be said for engineering a moderate package that is very exotic in its own right, but intended to reach the goals that people want at a more affordable price. That was something that I learned from our Fireball work over the years. It's not the technology that was most important, nor the peak hp figure, but how it performed on the road. And I believe we will be on track for that with this head that we are working on now.
-
The bottom line is that this GT is not a vintage race bike, there is no racing class that it could qualify for that it could be competitive in, and so the improved street machine is the category that needs to be filled.
What about the "Sound Of Singles" class in AHRMA? Their handbook states:
10.13 SOUND OF SINGLES®
10.13.1 Machine eligibility: All competition classes are intended for single-cylinder motorcycles only. All classes may be run together and scored separately as determined by the number of entries and track conditions. Classes include (section 9.8 for additional mechanical requirements):
a) Sound of Singles 1 (SOS1): Unlimited displacement single cylinder four-strokes.
b) Sound of Singles 2 (SOS2): Water-cooled single-cylinder four-stroke machines to 450cc and air-cooled single-cylinder four-stroke machines to 610cc. MZ Skorpions are permitted in Supersport spec (see rule 9.8.1); otherwise, see SOS 1.
c) Sound of Singles 3: (SOS3)Two-strokes single cylinder machines up to 550cc and four-strokes single cylinder machines up to 250cc.
As you know from my emails to you, I am toying with the idea of running my GT on track. Could it be a winner? Could I be a winner is the bigger question, regardless of the machine! LOL. Looks like SOS2 might be a decent fit though. Anyone know what the competition looks like in that class?
At any rate, I'm looking for respectable power without re-engineering the entire engine. At that point, you might as well start with something else. My GT won't be a full time dedicated track bike, but I think I'd like to take it out to see what it would do. Yes, I could just do a track day somewhere, but I've always preferred real competition over just turning laps. Plus actually having raced a cafe racer adds a little validation to it, me thinks. ;)
That being said, I am interested to see what the final price point will be on this head. If it makes me pucker too much I may just need to stick with the head work that you currently do.
-
We feel capable of reaching approximately 2hp per cubic inch in a full-out racing Bullet, and we have produced cylinder heads for the older Bullets which have that potential.
That would be about 60hp at the crank, on methanol, with 14:1 compression, and a fully strengthened bottom end capable of handling 8000 rpm at that power level.
This level of power could not be a road bike under any circumstance. Track only.
If that is enough power to be competitive in that class, then we can get into that neighborhood.
I cannot say that it will be cost effective vs buying a modern bike that may have short stroke ohc 4-valve configuration from the factory.
If you want to have a road bike that can race on the track occasionally as a fun day out, then that will be a much lower power level that can work on pump gas, and be able to idle and ride around town. We can do that too, but I wouldn't count on any race wins with it. ;)
It all depends on what you want, and what the budget is.
Nobody anymore wins races with a bike that can ride on the road, unless it's a restricted stock bike category, or something like that. It's just too different.
I suppose the competition would be things like the Yamaha SR500, and the KTM 390 water-cooled, and maybe even some old Brit singles like the Manx 500 and Matchless G50. We could do well against those with a full-out Iron Barrel Big Head racer. We haven't tried doing it with a UCE engine yet. Should be able to be done, but racing like that is costly. Kevin said that the custom EFI package that they used on the Bonneville racer was $3500 by itself, just for the external induction parts and control computer.
If you are very serious about racing a Bullet, my advice would be to buy an Iron Barrel model, and have us do our Big Head roller rocker conversion package for it, and run it on methanol, just like the kit that is used by Paul Henshaw(Bullet Whisperer) in the UK. That is one of the most competitive 500cc vintage racers in the UK, and we expect that it will be the top performer in the class in this upcoming season. We are also just finishing up a similar package for Guy Brown, one of the leading vintage Bullet racers in Australia. He plans to race it this year at the Phillip Island Classic race.
This package is already developed and ready.
-
If you want to have a road bike that can race on the track occasionally as a fun day out, then that will be a much lower power level that can work on pump gas, and be able to idle and ride around town. We can do that too, but I wouldn't count on any race wins with it. ;)
I think this is what I'm after. I don't have illusions of being a front runner, but would like to have decent power and mix it up with somebody. As long as I'm not just turning laps a half lap behind everyone else, I'll be fine. Otherwise, I can just do a track day, which I'm not absolutely opposed to, but prefer actual race weekends. There's just a difference between the two...
-
;D Where and when do I send the down payment ?
-
;D Where and when do I send the down payment ?
Please contact me by email about those particulars.
Thanks!
;D
-
Done ! :D
Ace: Will the exhaust port match the stock exhaust pipe or will I need to get the wider bore pipe from DnD/Hitchcocks?
For any of those who are sitting on the fence on this one I can speak from personal experience (I have the fireball #9) the Ace stuff just works. Its carefully thought out and planned and Ace and Chumma provide unparalleled technical support. With the riding season closing for most of us in the North its a good time to begin planning mods....although this one is going to be plug and play.
-
Done ! :D
Ace: Will the exhaust port match the stock exhaust pipe or will I need to get the wider bore pipe from DnD/Hitchcocks?
For any of those who are sitting on the fence on this one I can speak from personal experience (I have the fireball #9) the Ace stuff just works. Its carefully thought out and planned and Ace and Chumma provide unparalleled technical support. With the riding season closing for most of us in the North its a good time to begin planning mods....although this one is going to be plug and play.
We plan to be compatible with the standard exhaust header. But other pipes should also work with it. Hitchcock's pipe has an internal reducer which would match it with the port.
-
Hello sir, I have a gt and I am looking to get it to do the ton. I would like to be one of the first on your list when the package is ready...I have the header and pipe, power commander, and air cleaner, but really feel the need for the fireball 535 head you are developing for the gt. The research and info shared on this site show that you are the guy to go to for upgrades...
-
Hello sir, I have a gt and I am looking to get it to do the ton. I would like to be one of the first on your list when the package is ready...I have the header and pipe, power commander, and air cleaner, but really feel the need for the fireball 535 head you are developing for the gt. The research and info shared on this site show that you are the guy to go to for upgrades...
Hello, and thank you for your interest!
I will be posting updates as the project gets further along, and we would be happy to correspond with you about any questions you may have.
Thanks!
Tom
-
Been doing some work at the drawing board and calculator recently, and thought I'd give some insight into what I'm thinking here.
One of the big reasons for defining the displacment to the 535cc with the 87mm bore is because it permits larger valve size. I touched on this subject earlier in this thread, but I have a little time now, so I can go into the concept a little further.
Basically, when designing an engine, the first thing decided is the displacement, along with what bore and stroke it will have. That's the start. The stroke defines how high the thing can rev, by the piston speeds associated with that stroke length. The bore defines the outer limits for valve sizes, and how much flow you can get in/out the engine for making power.
So, there's a progression of sizes dictated by these things.
The displacement and stroke together define the bore size.
The bore size dictates maximum valve size. In a typical closed combustion chamber, with the term "closed" meaning that the chamber area is smaller than the overall bore area, and there is some squish area associated with it, there are some limits to available valve size. Typically, the intake valve size will be limited to about 53% of the bore diameter, or else the edges of the chamber are likely to impede the flow around certain parts of the valve, called "shrouding". This is counterproductive because even though the valve is bigger and should produce more flow area, some of that flow area gets shrouded by the combustion chamber walls or bore walls, and so not all of the flow area can be fully used. So, you could probably get as much flow from a smaller valve that is less shrouded, and more optimally flowing around all the entire valve. This is key, because an oversize valve requires an oversize throat and oversize port, and if it doesn't flow to its optimal extent, then the response of the flow is sluggish, and robs throttle response and can also reduce low rpm torque.
Next, the valve size dictates the throat diameter of the port right behind the valve.
And that throat diameter dictates some critical dimensions in the port runner, and also may influence the size of the throttle body or carb.
So, we can see now that right from the "get go", we will be able to set our entire inlet pathway to flow more, and flow better, if we use the biggest bore size that we can fit in the engine. This is critical, because we do need to get a certain amount of flow to produce certain torque/hp amounts, and also rpm speeds.
And, as we stand the valves up more vertically for improved combustion chamber shape, we get less room for valve size because the angle is coming down closer to the actual bore diameter, and doesn't have as much angle upward toward the center which can provide more room for valve size. This is kind of a "compromise" situatiion where we want to get enough valve for flow, but still get the chamber efficiency where we would like it.
I have done some basic drawings and figures, and it looks like we could get a 1.8" inlet valve into this chamber with an 11 degree valve stem angle from vertical. It so happens that a 1.8" valve is 53% of the 87mm bore of the 535. And we might get a 1.45" exhaust valve in there too, but we might need to use a slightly wider angle on the exhaust valve, like 13 degrees or so. Or if we can get enough exhaust flow from a smaller valve, then we might not need to widen the angle there because a smaller valve might fit. This is still up in the air about which final valve sizes and angles we'll finally settle upon, but I am doing some preliminary drawing and calculating what will fit.
Since we have a set limit with the 34mm throttle body and injector housing on the GT, I am trying to get the rest of the design to work maximally with that size. The idea being to get as much as we can get out of the existing parts that people already have on the bike, to make the package more affordable, because they won't have to go out and buy a whole new bigger throttle body and injection system. And for regular UCE owners, they can get the GT piston and throttle body and injector housing as reasonably priced bolt-on parts from RE, if they want to maximize the rpm.
Now, for the exhaust valve, we typically will see closed chambers with exhaust valve diameter about 40% of bore diameter. That's a 1.37" exhaust valve, or basically 1-3/8". This is a bit smaller than the stock exhaust valve, and it requires a very good design to make the most out of that, but it should do really well for exhaust extraction and low rpm torque production. I am going to discuss this deeply with Mondello's to see how small we can make this exhaust valve without restricting the top end hp. I think that this valve will end up being between 1.375" and 1.45". I am leaning toward 1.45", but we'll see if they make a convincing case to go smaller. If we can go smaller, we can enlarge the intake valve a little more and move it over toward the center to avoid shrouding, or we can use a more vertical valve angle, or maybe a little of both.
We are going to try to center all this around the flow capacity of a 34mm throttle body, which is around 205 cfm. We want to reach that same 205 cfm flow capacity with all the other aspects of the inlet system, so it can make the most of what we can get in thru the stock system. For people who want to use carburetors of larger diameter, we can custom port for that alternative. The basic package is going to be designed to extract the most power possible using the stock injection parts, as a cost containment strategy.
-
Just an update for those interested.
The project schedule has slipped into February, due to Mondello's not being able to get to it this month.
They have a porting seminar to teach in the first week of Feb, so hopefully we can get started after that.
I know it's disappointing, but I have to defer to their schedule. It's just the way it is.
-
Nice!
-
Stoked to see the results, though, regardless of the wait.
I'm looking forward to making a similar mod, installing power commander, and changing exhaust...
-
Update!
The programming phase for the Ace GT Billet Head has begun!
I will bring more updates as it progresses. I will be going over there again on Friday.
I expect that I will be able to show some screen shots of the CAD rendering by then, or maybe even before.
Start saving your pennies. Once the CAD is done, we are ordering the billets and the special tooling, and making heads! Won't be long now.
;D
-
Hello again
Several years ago now on the UCE thread I posted a tongue in cheek message about "Announcing 40 hp UCE" . Basically at that time I wanted to explore ACE's thoughts about the potential for doing to the UCE what he has done with the iron barrel Fireball. And, in my recollection , he was not initially overly enthused but waxed to the idea as the responses came in .
Looks like that day is here (well, almost) .......and, if I understand from the tid bits in this thread , even more than I had dreamed of .
A couple of questions:
1) It may be already discussed in the thread or elsewhere, but if so I didn't see it: Will the new 535 head work with the exisition OEM EFI , or does it need a replacement or add on like Power Commander ?
2) Can the new 535 head be bolted onto a 500 UCE? Or is it diplacement specific : If so, can an aftermarket 535 be applied to 500 UCEs to take advantage of this?
3) I am guessing the vibrations will be the same as the 535 (since the big reciprocating mass elements won't really change) , though riding it may be different as it may prefer to "live" in a different rev range in daily use becuase of enhanced torque ......Would that be approximately correct?
4) Can you tip your hand on a power estimate for this new 535 format ?
5) "Tractable , roadworthy , useable power band " if I recall were some initial objectives for the project: How do you think this would translate to real world riding? Easier upgrades? Better passing power? More comfortable highway cruising speed with a little left?
All very exciting. Thank you , Nigel Ogston
-
Since the RE line seems to have been aimed at the market in India where mileage is paramount, but recent developments have broadened their niche to world-wide dimensions where higher performance is sought, I wonder if RE would have any interest in producing your head design (with royalties, of course) as the standard head on production GTs, and/or as a factory-approved modification for existing bikes. What might the effect on emissions be with it?
-
Hello again
Several years ago now on the UCE thread I posted a tongue in cheek message about "Announcing 40 hp UCE" . Basically at that time I wanted to explore ACE's thoughts about the potential for doing to the UCE what he has done with the iron barrel Fireball. And, in my recollection , he was not initially overly enthused but waxed to the idea as the responses came in .
Looks like that day is here (well, almost) .......and, if I understand from the tid bits in this thread , even more than I had dreamed of .
A couple of questions:
1) It may be already discussed in the thread or elsewhere, but if so I didn't see it: Will the new 535 head work with the exisition OEM EFI , or does it need a replacement or add on like Power Commander ?
2) Can the new 535 head be bolted onto a 500 UCE? Or is it diplacement specific : If so, can an aftermarket 535 be applied to 500 UCEs to take advantage of this?
3) I am guessing the vibrations will be the same as the 535 (since the big reciprocating mass elements won't really change) , though riding it may be different as it may prefer to "live" in a different rev range in daily use becuase of enhanced torque ......Would that be approximately correct?
4) Can you tip your hand on a power estimate for this new 535 format ?
5) "Tractable , roadworthy , useable power band " if I recall were some initial objectives for the project: How do you think this would translate to real world riding? Easier upgrades? Better passing power? More comfortable highway cruising speed with a little left?
All very exciting. Thank you , Nigel Ogston
Hi Nigel,
Thanks for your patience!
Regarding the questions, I'll try to give the most accurate info that I can, with the caveat that things are not finalized yet, and I can revise my statements as the CAD becomes final.
1) The existing EFI parts will all bolt right on as they are now, but the programming will most likely need to be altered with a Power Commander or similar product. I say "most likely" because it will flow more air than a stock head, and this would likely need more fuel. However, in our previous products, we have seen that our heads require little or no more fuel than the stock versions of the carbureted models. This is because the efficiency of our heads in atomization of the fuel, and the improved combustion efficiency, was able to make use of the previously wasted fuel that the stock bike under-utilized. Whether this will still be the case with the fuel injection, must be evaluated. My gut feeling is that some changes with a Power Commander will probably be necessary. We will find out when the heads are on bikes, and see how they work.
Additionally, the stock ECU has a rev limiter which would be nice to get out of the way, so we can access the higher rpm limits that we have in mind. We expect rpm limits around 6000-6500, and that will need a Power Commander or the like.
2) The 535 GT head can physically bolt on to the 500. However, we are using all the room we have for the bigger valve sizes that are permitted by the larger bore. This means that on the smaller bore, the valves will be shrouded by the closer proximity of the smaller bore, and thus will flow less air in that environment than with the larger bore. Actually, only the inlet valve will be shrouded to any significant extent. There is a "fix" for this, if a person wanted the big valves on the small bore. The top of the cylinder barrel may be fly-cut or cut with a significant chamfer at the location where the inlet valve is closest to the cylinder liner, right at that edge of the barrel. This is sometimes called "notching" or "relieving" the barrel. We can perform that machining operation on barrels if requested. The effect of this mod provides a little extra room around that edge of the valve for flow to get out, by removing the restriction in that portion of the barrel. It will add a couple of cc's to the chamber volume, and slightly lower the compression ratio, but probably not noticeable.
The other possibility would be to use a slightly smaller set of valves in the head with the 500 bore. I have discussed this option with Mondello's, and it may be possible too.
One of the reasons for this is that the valve angle is steeper by about 8 degrees, and so the valves move more directly downward than before.
3) The vibrations will most likely remain unchanged, unless bottom end work is performed. It is possible that the added hp will cause the bike to labor less at the higher speeds, and that might help some. All the Fireballs do seem to be much more relaxed at speed than the standard Bullets. But if the bike currently vibrates badly at some rpm range, I would probably expect it to still do that because we are not doing anything to modify the bottom end parts that would be causing it. But, modifying the bottom end is an option for owners who wish to do so.
4)Regarding power, the available rev range will be higher, but the torque curve is going to still be real fat and wide. The power increase will be everywhere in the rpm range. You will still be able to ride at whatever rpm you want, and have more power. This will include better acceleration, passing, top speed, cruising, everything. It should be able to do everything the other Fireballs can do. The one question mark is that the stock cams are pretty short duration, and so I don't know exactly how high the rpm limit will be until we try it out. The much higher valve lift can go a long way to helping increase the rpm range, but at some point the duration will fall short. I don't know exactly what rpm that is going to occur yet, but I think it will be around that 6000-6500 rpm range we target. We'll have to see how far those stock cams can take us with our added valve lift and breathing improvements. I do have another option for custom cams that has opened up recently, which may offer more rpm range for those desiring it. I really think that for most users, the stock cams with our head will give all the power and rpms they realistically will use, unless racing.
We also can offer smaller rocker ratios as options, if other cams from other makers might be desired, but I cannot guarantee compatibility with other makers cams. I could offer opinions based on the specs of the cams that might be considered.
I think 40 hp is plausible, but that will not be the rear wheel figure. Rear wheel peak hp realistically will probably be in the 33-34 hp range, as a guesstimate. But peak hp at 6000 rpm is much less important in the real world than the power curve in the normal riding range. Peak hp is a big buzz word, and it is mostly driven by high rpms. This engine is going to be rpm limited to 6000-6500 rpm, and that is going to hold down the peak hp number. But peak hp at high rpm really isn't the story with these engines, although it gets the attention in print. The torque is going to get a huge bump from these high ratio roller rockers, larger valves, and higher compression with a fast burn squish chamber. That's where people are really going to feel it in the real world. This is what will impress with pulling up a hill, riding with a passenger on the pillion, passing cars on the highway, accelerating from any rpm, cruising at higher speeds with authority, and generally feeling very powerful. Because the power will be increased all thru the range, and not just at the top. Most people do not ride at the very peak top of the power range, unless at the track. We have learned from all our past experience with road bikes that the wide power range is what people really want.
A few tidbits of info on the current status of the CAD rendering is showing the valve angle made more vertical, changing from a measured 27.5 degrees(stock) to 20 degrees(ACE). The roller rockers will be individual shaft type, with 1.7:1 ratio, giving about .500" max lift at the valve(inlet), and about .470"(exhaust). Valve sizes at this point in time appear to be 1.8" inlet, and 1.6" exhaust. Flow is probably going to peak around 200 cfm, but that remains to be tested. All inlet and exhaust and other bolt-on things are located exactly the same place as before, so all stock equipment will go right on where they normally are now. Compression will be increased to between 9.5:1 - 10:1 with a smaller chamber that has a new efficient shape with squish and dual plug capability.
Hope that helps.
Tom
-
Since the RE line seems to have been aimed at the market in India where mileage is paramount, but recent developments have broadened their niche to world-wide dimensions where higher performance is sought, I wonder if RE would have any interest in producing your head design (with royalties, of course) as the standard head on production GTs, and/or as a factory-approved modification for existing bikes. What might the effect on emissions be with it?
Hi Uncle Billy.
Well, hope springs eternal, but as of this time we have never seen any interest from RE Chennai in anything that we have ever done, or really anything that anybody else has done. The one lone thing that they used was Fritz Egli's 535cc piston and barrel, and his hi-cap oil pumps, in the limited production factory Lightning 535 in the 1990s.
To be honest, I am not even sure that RE knows that Ace exists. I have never heard anything from them.There are still a lot of RE owners out there that have never heard of Ace. I sometimes get emails from folks who just found out about us, even now.
Regarding your question about emissions, I suspect our head would pass. It will have more efficient and modern design than the OEM UCE head. All our designs have been quite "clean" for their types.
-
ACE I frequent a lot of classic brit bike facebook pages and forums and everytime an enfield comes up theres always someone saying how slow they are and how they have no potential. Thats where I jump in and tell them about ACE Performance group and some are even impressed. I would love if every single brit lover and RE owner knew you guys, maybe prices would drop a tad ;).
-
Replying to "ACE's response to my post:
Thanks again , Tom , for your very thorough response. Your posts are always very instructive and authoritative . I have learned a lot . From the beginning of my enquiry about this project my interest was as much as anything to stimulate conversation on the Forum and to promote the possibility of aftermarket improvements for the UCE generation engines "done right" (like the Fireball) , and to ask the questions I think other readers may want to know. There are a lot of silent readers out there. Job done. I love that RE is making these bikes and look forward someday to bolting one of your heads on one . (First I would still have to get one !-----soon---) but it sounds like there is a line up of customers ahead of me and that's great. Congratulations on the imminent fruition of your work and planning, and , on behalf of everyone who loves these machines, thanks for your tireless work. Nigel
-
Preliminary tool path diagrams.
Obviously not complete, but represents the current stage of programming progress.
Attachments:
1) Top
2) Base
3) Fins
-
Machined out of a solid block. Do you expect the volume to be so low that a cast is not an option? It will be looking beautiful, i am saving the pennies. Any price estimates?
-
Notice on the view of the top, the stud holes and gasket outline implies the use of OEM rocker covers.
This is cost control, and also trying to not re-style the whole appearance of the engine. The head will look a little different than stock as it is, so we are trying to keep the styling as consistent with the OEM bike as possible.
Machined out of a solid block. Do you expect the volume to be so low that a cast is not an option? It will be looking beautiful, i am saving the pennies. Any price estimates?
At this time, billet will be the manufacturing method. It gives the most consistent performance results with no core shift or port variations.
Price will be announced on our Yahoo group forum. I try not to discuss our pricing on here, because it is not our site and we defer to politeness by not doing that.
I can say that it will be a high end item, similar to our other roller rocker heads for the other models.
-
A CAD basic block diagram with the locations and orientations of the parts and layout. The shapes are generic block shapes and do not indicate the actual shapes of the parts involved.
The ports are just generic representations, and are not the actual port shapes, but the locations are accurate. The combustion chamber and ports will be done by hand, and tested on the flow bench and optimized/finalized, and then those areas will be scanned and digitized and added to the final cutting program.
However, the positions and angles and orientations of these parts is accurate.
-
3 aluminum billets have been ordered for development finalization.
Roller rockers have been ordered.
Valves and guides have been ordered.
Valve springs and hardware are our normal Ace fare, and are in stock.
Should be about a week for these items to come in. Then the preliminary metal cutting process will begin.
;D
-
3 aluminum billets have been ordered for development finalization.
Roller rockers have been ordered.
Valves and guides have been ordered.
Valve springs and hardware are our normal Ace fare, and are in stock.
Should be about a week for these items to come in. Then the preliminary metal cutting process will begin.
;D
Exciting times ahead !
So, here are the some scenarios:
1. GT head on the GT (535 cc, 34 mm throttle body, stock dished piston)
2. GT head on the GT (535 cc, 34 mm throttle body, flat top piston)
3. GT head on the UCE 500 ( 500 cc, 32 mm throttle body, stock dished piston)
4. GT head (smaller intake valve) on the UCE 500 [500 cc, 32 mm throttle body, flat top(AVL)/dished piston]
There are several more depending on if you can source the GT throttle body and piston.
Here is the question:
What would be the power difference (estimated percentage) between the full on (GT with flat top piston) and the UCE 500 with stock dished piston and 32 mm throttle body.
-
I would guess about 2hp for the bigger bore, and maybe another 1hp for the higher compression, if the fuel quality will allow any higher compression. We are pushing the compression pretty much all the way to begin with, using the dished piston. It will have to be seen how much compression this thing can handle with typical US premium pump gas. I can't make a statement of certainty about that before the head is running on the engine. It has to be seen in action.
-
Brilliant news!
There must be a God!
-
I suppose the same bottom end beef up would be ideal for the Billet GT head?
Carrillo rod, alpha roller big end and NTN main bearings?
What's likely to go bust without the bottom end upgrade... Rod or big end?
-
I suppose the same bottom end beef up would be ideal for the Billet GT head?
Carrillo rod, alpha roller big end and NTN main bearings?
What's likely to go bust without the bottom end upgrade... Rod or big end?
We are going on the assumption that the bottom end is going to hold up.
There is no data on bottom end failures from increased power. So, it would only be conjecture, and likely that there could be different potential failure modes based on what weak part or method they used that day.
So, we will proceed and see what data comes in. The few UCE bikes that have been modified by others have not failed so far, and so we are optimistic.
Certainly there will be some level of power which stresses the bottom end beyond its ability. We don't know what that power level is yet. However, with an example of one that has failed, we may be able to deduce the necessary improvements.
My general conjecture would be that the rod should be okay, but it might need an improved big end bearing, and better main bearings. This would be a typical set of requirements for handling more power. It wouldn't hurt to have a Carrillo rod, especially one that is significantly lighter than the OEM.
-
My general conjecture would be that the rod should be okay, but it might need an improved big end bearing, and better main bearings. This would be a typical set of requirements for handling more power.
What are the current options for improving the big end bearing on the stock crank?
-
Currently, Hitchcock has a stock con rod with an Alpha bearing in it.
That's all there is at this time, AFAIK.
We could pretty easily get a Carrillo rod and have an Alpha bearing installed in it, but we have not done that as of yet.
-
Billets are in.
Chips are flying.
The pic in the attachment was the stage of progress that the machining was at when I was there this afternoon.
!
-
I have a crank that failed in my g5 that I have not yet taken apart . Perhaps I could send it to you for an upgrade , ( along with my stock g5 barrel )and kill two birds with one stone ?
-
I have a crank that failed in my g5 that I have not yet taken apart . Perhaps I could send it to you for an upgrade , ( along with my stock g5 barrel )and kill two birds with one stone ?
If you'd like to do that, it would be fine. However, it is probably best to ship these large parts separately because heavy items can move around inside the box and cause breakage during shipping. And heavy boxes often get rough handling.
-
Good thinking . :)
-
Billets are in.
Chips are flying.
The pic in the attachment was the stage of progress that the machining was at when I was there this afternoon.
!
Awesome news! Keep us updated. Can't wait to see how this thing does in real life.
-
Awesome news! Keep us updated. Can't wait to see how this thing does in real life.
You know that I will!
;D
Anyway, the basic scoop on the performance is this:
For a head that will bolt up to the standard inlet and exhaust tract sizes, this is as good as it is going to get.The limiting factors in this project are the factory inlet and exhaust sizes. Everything else has been optimized to make as much power as possible with those factory inlet and exhaust sizes.
Additionally, the Power Commander has rev limiter limitations imposed, and the software only allows 500 rpm increase on the rev limit, but you can contact Dynojet for a code that allows more. I think it is another 500 rpm on top of that. So, about 1000 rpm increase over the stock 5500 rpm limiter gives 6500 rpm rev limit.
The long stroke(90mm) of this engine gets into high piston speeds around those rpms, and so it is really not prudent for a street machine to be revving any higher than that anyway. At least not on a regular basis. This is a similar rpm limit as we have used on the earlier Bullet models, and it is plenty high revs for this kind of bike on the street.
Serendipitously, the larger GT throttle body size is just about big enough to hit the 6500 rpm area with some authority, although I suspect it will peak hp just a little bit lower than that.
So, when you add it all up together, it comes out in a way that 6000-6500 rpm limits is defined by several factors on this engine, and this is probably where most people will want to stay.
To go higher than that will take larger throttle body and larger ports and larger exhaust, and possibly different ECU/EFI controller, and bottom end work, and a lot of pretty expensive stuff. That will be the territory of a racer.
For street riders, and normal budget limitations, the power this head will put out at the rpms that the engine can access with the mods will be as much as can be done with it. We are not leaving anything left on the table with this head. It is going to tap as much as the aforementioned physical limits will allow it to make.
Edited to add:
At this time, it appears as if we will provide new bolts for the rocker covers. The stock head has some cockamamie thread size in there that is neither std or metric, and so we are going to thread those holes metric and provide bolts for the rocker covers.
-
Sounds good. I can't wait to see a dyno chart on the new head to see how the curve is. Peak HP ratings are a bit of a misnomer as you don't stay there long. A flatter curve is much more desirable than a really high peak.
-
Sounds good. I can't wait to see a dyno chart on the new head to see how the curve is. Peak HP ratings are a bit of a misnomer as you don't stay there long. A flatter curve is much more desirable than a really high peak.
Yes, we agree.
That's why all our builds accentuate torque production as a priority. All the Fireballs have been done that way.
Increasing lift with the 1.7:1 roller rockers and upping the compression by a point should really perk up the midrange very well.
An anecdotal "rule of thumb" is that lift improves torque, and duration adds rpms. We are adding about 40% more lift and about 10° effective duration with these hi-ratio roller rockers on the stock cam lobes, so it's looking pretty stout in that department.
I think it's going to really surprise some people with the grunt.
A good illustration would be the BW race bike that we did the headwork on, and it has our hi-ratio roller rockers in it. Even though it has incredibly long duration cams in it, it still held 87% of max torque(35 ft lbs) over a 4000 rpm range, from 3500 to 7500 rpm. And it lifted the front wheel off the ground with a throttle roll-on at 60mph in 3rd gear. So big lift and good porting, and some high compression can really be the ticket for a wide torquey power curve, which is our intention.
We're not saying it will be a "miracle", but we are going to squeeze as much out of this as can be attained from it in street trim on pump gas, with still bolting up to the stock inlet/exhast systems, and having good street manners and stable idling.
-
will this head directly bolt onto the avl barrel?
will carbs be bolt on as well?
-
will this head directly bolt onto the avl barrel?
will carbs be bolt on as well?
Will it bolt on an AVL?
Yes.
Will there be plenty of other modifications that you'll need to do to make it work?
Yes.
So, "bolting on" is NOT meaning that there is nothing else needed.
It won't even work if you don't start off with making the AVL a 535, just for starters.
Then, there's a whole lot more other things like re-routing your oil system, plugging an oil passage in the new head, getting custom pushrods, possibly having to mod your exhaust system because I haven't looked to see if the UCE header fits the AVL or vice versa. If the UCE and AVL header attachment arrangement is identical, then that would help out a lot.
It "bolts on", but needs other work. It will NOT work if you don't do these other modifications. Engine building and fabrication experience would be a big plus for a job like this.
This is a head for the Continental GT, and also for the UCE when modded to a 535.
The fact that it "could" be used on an AVL 535 is great, but the builder will be responsible for making the conversion and other mods needed to complete the package on an AVL.
It will take a carb like a Mikuni TM34, with our ACE alloy manifold without any other mods to the intake area.
If you understand what is needed, and you are careful and diligent to make sure the conversion is done correctly, it can be done.
-
This is a great project! I believe that you sell cams for your fireball upgrade?
If this head is as "blessed" as the Oldsmobile heads have been by Joe it is really going to be a winder. Will you be having new cams ground to take advantage of this head low potentials?
Please keep the pictures coming!
-
AIR FLOW POTENTIALS !
NOT LOW POTENTIALS
sorry, it has been a long week ???
-note to self, read your post before you post
-
The aim is to reach our street goals without special cams. The high ratio roller rockers are intended to exploit the flow potential of the ported head and big valves, so that the modest rpm increase should be attainable with this package while accenting the broad torque curve for a very ride-able result.
-
The ride ability of the stock cam with a little added lift, brilliant.
Thanks you
-
The ride ability of the stock cam with a little added lift, brilliant.
Thanks you
Actually, it will be quite a LOT of added lift!
We are increasing the lift by about 40% more than stock, taking max lift to .500" with this head and the stock cam lobes. That's a 1.7:1 ratio on the roller rockers.
;D
-
Would it be a good idea to put new push rods in when changing to the new head with the roller lifters? And are any roller lifters available for this engine?
-
Would it be a good idea to put new push rods in when changing to the new head with the roller lifters? And are any roller lifters available for this engine?
Yes, it will need new pushrods.
We can supply them if you wish.
All the UCE engines already have roller lifters in them standard.
-
Thank You ACE,
I did not know that the GT had roller lifters. We have a "black" GT on order and we should receive it in about a month !
-
Thank You ACE,
I did not know that the GT had roller lifters. We have a "black" GT on order and we should receive it in about a month !
It has roller lifters, and we are adding the high ratio roller rockers in place of the std non-roller rockers. This will give a full roller valve train, and will need some good strong pushrods to handle the pressures which arise with high lift. We will have the lengths specified for them, and we can order some from our NASCAR pushrod makers if you wish.
With this project, we are in control of all the performance parameters, so we are matching the port flow and valve size and valve lift and everything together to best effectiveness. This also makes it easier for the owner to have a perfectly matched product without needing to spend so much time studying a bunch of diverse products trying to figure out what will work correctly together.
Part of our experience with Bullets over the years has been finding that people prefer quick and easy solutions for their needs, so they don't have a lot of down time in the shop. This project is aimed at a "one shot" upgrade for the CGT 535, and is our most advanced effort to make it as quick and easy and effective as we can. We are packing a lot of major upgrades all together in this one package.
-
Yes, it will need new pushrods.
We can supply them if you wish.
So...besides the new head and the push rods...is there anything else need for this performance mod?
Thanks...Jimmy
-
Power Commander with user interface software to tune it in for the new head.
Free flow filter and free flow exhaust silencer of your choice.
Any/all of those items are available from NField Gear.
-
I currently have all that. I assume the PC V would need to go to the Dyno to get tuned for the new head? Or could this be done once and then distributed just like the pre maps we use now?
-
I currently have all that. I assume the PC V would need to go to the Dyno to get tuned for the new head? Or could this be done once and then distributed just like the pre maps we use now?
On the dyno would be best, but it can be done without a dyno by "feel", and reading plugs.
It may be possible to distribute maps, or just provide the grid data for end users.
-
Curious question for current PC V owners......
Does the O2 sensor get replaced with a wide band sensor or a dummy resistor of some type? CAN the PC V utilize a wide band O2 that will read/log actual A/F ratios? If so, it would make tuning without a dyno much much easier.
-
The PC V comes with a Jumper to eliminate the O2 sensor. BUT! Dyno Jet sells an autotune system that comes with it's own O2 sensor and is suppose to tune the PC V as you ride. By the way the O2 sensor does not fit in the stock hole on a GT, so will require some grinding, cutting, welding etc.
-
Auto-tune is a great feature, but will only put you in the ball park of 14.7:1 stoichiometric A/F ratio. For performance tuning, you then need to data-log and see just where exactly you A/F ratio is, and clip or add fuel as necessary. This is where the wide band O2 really comes in handy. Because while a 14.7:1 stoichiometric A/F ratio is "optimum" or "recommended" for standard use, power comes on a bit harder at 13.5-14.2:1. But you also can't rely on that either, because too rich and you'll foul plugs, too lean and the engine will run hot. Anything over 15.5-16:1 is borderline dangerously lean. Especially for an air cooled motor.
So, there really is no set number. You just have to know what the numbers mean and how to correct them.
-
This is from the Auto tune website, sounds promising.
For advanced users that would like to change the Air/Fuel ratios from our baseline they are fully adjustable. Each throttle opening/rpm combination is individually adjustable, so that you can have both fuel economy, during cruise, while maintaining peak output at larger throttle openings. For most models of bikes it is also possible to adjust the Air/Fuel ratios "per gear". This gives you total control of the fueling in every gear and throttle/rpm area if required.
-
I was stunned (while maybe just surprised) when we built the fuel map for the Bonneville bike. For many reasons we had to do it on the fly on the salt but....
It took days to tweak it even with a very experienced map builder, a laptop and tech support from the manufacturer.
For example the factory spec of (doing this from memory so give me a break) of ,6 volts to .9 volts on the TPS reading is a huge variation. If you are going to build a performance map you need to coordinate throttle position in a very fine way with an exact starting voltage. Even with the very best people on it and many many test runs with experienced riders it took quite a bit of dyno time after the fact to get it totally right.
-
There have been a few 400ishHP turbo Subarus that I have helped my friend Alex data log and map exchange. Basically, we'd do about 5-6 logs a day with 3 stages per log. We'd go out and log the first stage at 3000 rpms at 30mph, the next 4000 rpms at 45mph, and the funnest of all WOT 4th gear to redline! ;D
After each log, we'd email it to the tuner. He'd examine the A/F ratios on the logs and build a new map off of that info and email it back. This usually went on for 10-12 logs and maps. THEN, if the customer wanted a FULL performance tune they would put the car on the dyno. With that said, yes, Auto Tune is a great feature for a good clean standard tune. But if you want true performance, you have to bust out the lap top and play. ;)
-
When I used to set up fuel injected maps on the chassis dyno, a normally aspirated car would take four hours to get in tune close enough for acceptable behavior on the street. If you had to actually pass emissions you would be there for at least 15 hours. If was a turbo car it would take several days and by the time you were done you needed a new motor.
-
A half a day, a hand full of jets and a six-pack to split afterwards were all it took to dial in a Carter or a Holley or the four carbs on your UJM.
-
Ace would you recommend going ahead and getting a good crank and rod for the bottom if someone were to be getting your head? I understand that you're designing the head for a one stop shop type of situation, but wouldn't it be wise to go ahead and beef up the bottom end to feel a little better about running it hard (like on track type hard)?
What else could be a failure point that you would suggest upgrading?
-
Ace would you recommend going ahead and getting a good crank and rod for the bottom if someone were to be getting your head? I understand that you're designing the head for a one stop shop type of situation, but wouldn't it be wise to go ahead and beef up the bottom end to feel a little better about running it hard (like on track type hard)?
What else could be a failure point that you would suggest upgrading?
It wouldn't hurt to beef up the bottom. So far, we have not seen indications of bottom end problems with the UCE like we did with the Iron Barrel Bullets.
However, we do realize that bearings are things that Enfield likes to "save money" on. In this engine, the big end has been seen to have occasional failures, which I attribute to the absence of a proper outer race in the con rod for the big end roller bearing. But it has not been epidemic, and so I don't want to make too much of an issue about it.
For a person wanting to go racing, and wishing to make the most robust package for that, the minimum would be new main bearings from a real good maker such as NTN or FAG. We can get them from their factory warehouses to assure authenticity.
Then, a Carrillo rod and appropriate Alpha big end roller bearing would be the next thing, along with the necessary crank rebuild and truing which would come along with that change.
This ends up being well over $1k worth of work. The Iron Barrel engines require it. We are expecting the UCE to use the stock bottom end for street use, but the rigors of racing could need the upgrade.
AsI said, it wouldn't hurt to have it, if you can afford the cost.
-
Looked at the Carrillo website and they look impressive. Apparently you have to order through a dealer? Are you one, or do you know a good one?
-
Looked at the Carrillo website and they look impressive. Apparently you have to order through a dealer? Are you one, or do you know a good one?
We have been a Carrillo dealer for a long time. All our Fireball builds have used Carrillo rods. It's our standard rod.
We are a performance specialist. Everything we do is at that level.
-
How much more can a 535 be bored out? Any? Could it go from the current 87mm to 90mm? If so, and a person were so inclined to destroke the crank to 84mm from the current 90mm, how would the head you're creating respond? Basically by increasing the bore 3mm and decreasing the stroke 6mm, the overall volume stays the same. I know that the engine will rev higher/faster by decreasing the stroke, but how will the head respond to the changes in dimension?
If the bore cannot increase that much, is there a performance benefit to decreasing the stroke even if you lose overall volume?
And at what point would a larger throttle body be required based on the flow dynamics of the proposed scenarios?
-
How much more can a 535 be bored out? Any? Could it go from the current 87mm to 90mm? If so, and a person were so inclined to destroke the crank to 84mm from the current 90mm, how would the head you're creating respond? Basically by increasing the bore 3mm and decreasing the stroke 6mm, the overall volume stays the same. I know that the engine will rev higher/faster by decreasing the stroke, but how will the head respond to the changes in dimension?
If the bore cannot increase that much, is there a performance benefit to decreasing the stroke even if you lose overall volume?
And at what point would a larger throttle body be required based on the flow dynamics of the proposed scenarios?
With the existing OEM barrel, 87mm is the max allowable bore. Anything more leaves the bore liner too thin for proper rigidity, and the resulting wall flex will lose more from that than it could gain from the bore increase.
90mm bore would be possible with a new billet barrel with a thicker bore liner. This would require some enlarging of the engine case mouth where the bore liner extends into the case. This is all possible, and we have converted 350 cases to 500 like this(using existing 500 parts)but it is expensive to create a new barrel to go to 90mm. We could do it if someone wanted to pay the cost to design and make the barrel. We can also make 90mm pistons to suit, with a minimum quantity order of 4 pistons. It would be a lot easier to swallow the cost if a few others went in on the deal to make 4 sets of barrel/piston.
The head will always respond to a larger bore, and we would recommend a mod to larger valves to suit that.
I can set the port diameter and flow to suit whatever rpm you wish. We can do the de-stroke work on the crank. We can basically do anything you want.
The throttle body would need to increase like the port size, commensurate to the intended rpm range. We can bore the throttle body and make a new throttle plate for a larger size, as much as the existing wall thickness of the throttle body housing permits. Maximum flow speeds dictate inlet passage sizes, so the passages need to be sized so that you don't exceed half-mach at the rpm you want to reach peak hp. We have all these calculations, and do this for all our builds and racing heads. Nothing out of the ordinary for us.
So the bottom line is that we would make the head changes to suit the need. We would not tell you to try to put this head on a 90- bore engine "as is". We would custom make it for the application so you could get the maximum result. The regular GT head is for regular GT application. We would consider a 90-bore racer a different application, requiring special internals, but worked on to the same billet form.
For higher rpms into the 7000 or higher rpm range, we are going to need to design and make cams for that. The existing cams, or the Hitchcock cams won't support that kind of rpms. I currently am working with a customer who has the Hitchcock cams, and I know their specs. They are not for high rpms. We will need to make cams.
The main issue then would be the money and time in development. If you can afford it, we can do it, and do it real well.
I personally would like to work on a package like that, because I think that is the route to the most power out of this platform. But the cost would be pretty high. If a few other guys got in on the deal, the costs could be spread out more over the group to make it more financially feasible. But we could do a "one-off" if you want it.
If you are contemplating a max effort type racing build, we need to talk on the phone in detail. In essence, we will need to design you a complete racing engine package for this basic platform.
-
What about keeping the bore at 87, but reducing the stroke by xx amount? At what point would (or would it at all) the increased revs benefit more than the reduced volume?
Here's my thoughts. If I'm gonna spend the money to get a built from scratch performance head to take to the race track, then I'm not leaving the bottom end like it was when it hit the ship to come across the ocean blue! ;D I'd definitely spring for the extra to do a bottom end job if I'm gonna do the head. Maybe that's not what is needed for your head as designed, but in my mind knowing the abuse that an engine will take at the track, I wouldn't do it without the bottom too. THAT being said, if I'm going to get a race crank, then I might as well adjust the stroke at that time if it would be beneficial. If it's a wash to shorten the stroke because of the reduced volume, then I'd just true the crack, go with the good rod and piston and be done with it.
And yes, I'd like to talk at some point if/when things get to where I don't feel like I'd be wasting your time. Once again, the Warden could come crashing down on all of my boy-in-a-man's body dreams at any point in time! lol. (Actually she's not that bad) Or more realistically, business could slow for me and make this unrealistic. But for now, construction is pretty decent in SC.... ;)
-
The short stroke is worth doing if you do the other things to go with it. Even with the 87 bore.
87 and 84 would work for 500. The smaller displacement just shifts the power curve further up the rpm scale.
And yes of course, at that level, the full race bottom end would be done, that goes without saying if you want it to live.
-
Hi, ACE!
I'm a new member and a new owner of a CGT. Been skulking around looking at the head since I bought the bike. Do you have an updated ETA?
Thanks!
-
Hi, ACE!
I'm a new member and a new owner of a CGT. Been skulking around looking at the head since I bought the bike. Do you have an updated ETA?
Thanks!
Hi,
Thanks for asking!
Yes, after a few delays due to machinist's vacations, I am really expecting to have the initial prototype done in a few weeks. This does not include road testing or anything like that, but the head should be done. Announcements will be made at the time on our Ace Performance Bullets Yahoo Group page, and I'll try to announce here too.
We have been waiting for the custom valves to arrive, and they will probably be in this week. They didn't come last week like we had hoped. When the valves come in, the ports and chamber shapes can be finished, and that's about all that's left to do. We will be supplying custom head gaskets and ARP head studs and hardware for the head. It will use different spark plugs, which we will provide, and we will also provide racing plug wires and boots.
Here's a few of the latest pics in the attachment.
-
Damn that looks good! 8) Is that just the outer beehive spring for mock up, or the actual valve spring that will be used?
-
Damn that looks good! 8) Is that just the outer beehive spring for mock up, or the actual valve spring that will be used?
That valve spring is just a "test spring" of very low tension, which is used to keep all the valve hardware in place while measuring and testing things. The flimsy wire and low tension hold the stuff together, but it's easy to move around and take measurements. The regular ACE beehive springs will be the ones in the final product. It will have .600" lift capacity, and 1.7:1 rocker ratio. With the stock GT cams, it should have about .510" lift on the intake, and about .476" on the exhaust. So, there is room for some other aftermarket cams up to a max valve lift of .600", if anybody wants to go there. The main idea was to give a bunch of lift with the rockers, so people don't have to spend the money for aftermarket cams. And keeping the stock cams keeps the OEM auto-decompressor in place, for those wanting to protect the sprag as the factory intended.
-
The valves finally arrived.
Chamber and ports being finished up today.
Will be meeting there for pics and final details tomorrow. :)
-
The antici....
-
..pation ;D
-
Okay, well it's a little anticlimactic because I didn't pick up the head today, but it is basically done. Some minor clean up mods are needed, and we have to get the stud hardware in, and also the head gaskets.
We did work out the pricing, but that will only be discussed on our Yahoo Group forum.
I uploaded some pics of the combustion chamber, a top view shot with the rocker covers on, and a sort of fuzzy side view, but it gives the idea what the thing looks like with the C5/GT style rocker covers on it. I have a set of B5 rocker covers coming in to see how they work out on it. The C5/GT rocker covers will need a minor modification in the area of the mounting bolt because it fouls on the end of the rocker arm a bit. We need to mod the rocker covers in those areas, and it couldn't be avoided. Very inexpensive mod, but you'll have to send in your rocker covers.
Combustion chamber as you see it is 53cc, and is slightly bigger than the regular production heads will have, because this first one is slated for a bike that can't get gasoline with octane higher than 91 octane. So we added a few cc's to the chamber volume to keep the compression down a little lower. Regular version will have chamber volume about 50cc. This will give about 10:1 compression ratio with a 500, and a bit more with the 535. After the bore reliefs are added, it will lower the compression ratio by a few cc's, and should be very torquey. The Power Commander may need to retard the timing curve a couple of degrees to take best advantage of this new chamber. We'll see how it does.
The head will work as it comes on any of the bore sizes, ie: 84mm, 87mm, and up to 90mm. The valves will not hit the edge of the bore. However, the bore will shroud some of the flow if it isn't relieved(notched) for flow. This will be up to the individual user to decide. We will provide bore notching service for anyone wishing it. Not a very expensive mod, and worth it for best flow results.
All bore sizes will require the 90mm head gasket to clear the edge of our chamber. We will have these 90mm gaskets available soon.
A new addition to the feature set is that we will provide "dual oiling" to the top end with this head. The hydraulic roller lifters that are standard in the UCE are equipped for "pushrod oiling" in stock form. However, the UCE does not offer pushrod oiling because the standard rockers are not equipped to be oiled via the pushrods, so they put an oil passage up the side, into the rocker blocks to pressure feed them. Our roller rockers are equipped to be pressure fed via the pushrods, and have internal passages in the rockers to pressure feed the roller rockers this way. Our head will have this pushrod oiling to our roller rockers. Our head will also have the other UCE oil feed passages set up as spray jets to generally lubricate all the areas under each rocker cover, so that there will be "dual oiling" and plenty of lubrication and cooling oil in the top end. Of course, this is an exclusive for the Ace head, and a very nice feature for top end longevity and cooling.
Port flow came out nicely. We used 1.8" intake valve and 1.6" exhaust valve. This is slightly smaller valve set than the Iron Barrel Fireball, but it actually flows a bit more than the Iron Barrel Fireball. So, we expect very good things out of it. Intake peak flow turned out to be 224 cfm, which is very good flow from a 1.8" valve. The Iron Barrel Fireball has a 1.85" intake valve, and flows 212 cfm peak. So we got more flow out of a smaller valve with this head, and I'm quite happy with that.
Chamber shape is a lot like the new Mopar Gen 3 Hemi, which is a good chamber shape for this application, with the dual plugs. Good squish area that aligns well with the flat areas on the piston.
We ended up about 15% over budget on this, so that should help any of you who have been paying attention to our projected price estimates figure out how much this head will be.
All in all, I'm very pleased. It will be a very good performing head.
8)
-
Looks great!
-
The bore relief will be require on all bores or just on the 500? Do you think this head with the new pushrods will reduce the valve train noises? And i assume adjusting valve play will be necessary, how often will that have to be done? Thanx, looks good the head, what are the next steps? Will you take it to the dyno? Questions over questions :)
-
...it gives the idea what the thing looks like with the C5/GT style rocker covers on it. I have a set of B5 rocker covers coming in to see how they work out on it.
The B5 rocker covers have always been the same as those on the C5 - maybe you could save yourself the trouble. The G5 covers, however...
-
Looks great!
Thanks! It'll look great on the bike too!
The bore relief will be require on all bores or just on the 500? Do you think this head with the new pushrods will reduce the valve train noises? And i assume adjusting valve play will be necessary, how often will that have to be done? Thanx, looks good the head, what are the next steps? Will you take it to the dyno? Questions over questions :)
Otto,
The bore relief becomes less necessary with the 87mm bore size, but a small relief would still be helpful for flow. The flow test was done on an 87mm fixture, and it flows well, but could do a little more with small reliefs. A 90mm max overbore would not need any reliefs at all.
I would like to reiterate that the head will run fine on any of the bore sizes, if the owner does not wish to do any relieving of the bore. It will run better if the bore is slightly relieved, and we are only talking about 1.5mm relief on the intake side, maybe about 1mm deep, with a radius of about 2". It's just a little "eyebrow" cut. But, it can be run without it, if the owner chooses to not relieve the barrel. For an 84mm bore, it would shroud the valve a lot more. The 87mm barely needs it, and could go without if necessary. 90mm bore does not need it.
Regarding this new valve train and noise, I expect no noise from this valve train, unless it comes from the OEM cam with auto-decompressor because that will still be in there. Our pushrods will be steel, not aluminum, and will be filled with oil for the pushrod oiling, and that should add some damping to the pushrods. Also, our rockers are needle bearing trunnions with no clearance that could make clicking noises. The hydraulic tappets take up the lash, so there should be no clicking from that. Our rockers have adjustable cups for the pushrods, so the pre-load depth of the pushrods into the lifters is adjustable. Our recommendation is at least a half-mm(.020") pre-load into the lifter, so that it can take up the lash from heat expansion of the barrel and head, but not be so much preload as to allow excessively holding the valve open if there was a "lifter pump up" condition. We have almost 4mm distance from the valve(seated) to the piston crown at TDC, which allows plenty of room for lift at TDC, and still have sufficient piston-to-valve clearance without any valve reliefs in the piston crown. If sufficient pre-load is done at installation, there should be no need for future adjustments.
The next step is to fit it on the bike, and ensure that all the intake and exhaust parts fit on right, which we expect that they will. Then we will begin taking deposits.
The B5 rocker covers have always been the same as those on the C5 - maybe you could save yourself the trouble. The G5 covers, however...
Matt,
Yes, I made a mistake. I will have to modify his covers anyway. But I will need to see if the G5 covers will fit without mods, or if they need it to.
Thanks for the clarification!
-
Ok great. I was somehow of the opinion that you plan to remove the hydraulic lifters....no idea how that came into my mind. Anyway this would be great if valve train noises are eliminated. Would be good to see also some dyno figures.
-
Great work!! Really looking forward to see the performance figures.
-
Okay, I'm seeing the comments about dyno figures and performance figures coming out here, and also on the other forums regarding this cylinder head system.
I feel the need to address this, for clarification and for keeping the expectations realistic in terms of what a product like this is capable of doing, and the target parameters for performance.
First, I can see that there are attempts to quantify this by figures of horsepower, or dyno charts which ultimately will reflect the horsepower figures that people are looking for. So, let's understand what the limits are for 500 class machines, and what can be done on pump gas on the street, and what can be done without blowing out the bottom end of the engine. These are critical factors that are directly going to affect the result.
How much power can a 500/535 class single cylinder air-cooled machine make, and how does it make it?
The answer is that a racing class machine of that category is currently around 55-60hp. This comes with very high rpms, typically well over 8000 rpm, with a power curve that begins at rpms higher than the redline of our street machines. We make heads for applications like this, and it is not even remotely realistic to expect hp out of a street engine like the GT to come anywhere near that amount of power at rpms we can do, on fuel we can buy at the pump.
So, what are the targets that we aimed at for this head?
The targets are to make hp and torque from the engine which are sufficient to permit making The Ton at top speed, cruising power sufficient to cruise at 75-80mph on the highway, make good fuel economy, provide very broad and useful torque curve for street riding, idle well and have good street manners, and do it on pump fuel from the filling station. AND, try to make a correct power delivery level which will not blow the bottom end out of the stock engine that we want to put this head on.
There are limits that this engine can reach in terms of torque and rpm, due to the engine size, compression level on pump fuel, and max rpms allowable by the rev limiter and the factory throttle body size. It is not going to do 55 hp. It's going to peak somewhere in the 30s for hp at the rear wheel, which is a big step up from the stock peak of about 21 hp at the rear wheel. The key is not how much power it makes at the very tippy top of is redline, just as the rev limiter kicks out. This is not where you will be riding in the real world. The key is how broad and strong the torque curve is in the critical midrange where you will be riding every day. That's the mark of everything that we have ever done for all the Fireball type engines that we have ever made. That's what we do. We do overall performance, with reliability, longevity, and the power to do what people realistically want their bikes to do, to make them "punch above their weight class", in the real world on the road. Our goal is to make the bike perform as "what you always wanted it to be, and do what you always wanted it to do", but was not powerful enough from the factory to suit its role as a real cafe racer machine.This is exactly what we have done for all the previous versions of Enfield singles and vintage twins that we have kitted up in the past.
So, a hp race for some "top hp figure" that might be put out by an engine like this is not the metric that we target, although we are not averse to having a real nice big peak hp figure. Our metric is as stated above. Best overall performance machine. If you look at how we approached this job, it was obvious immediately that the rpm range was going to have a lid on it at probably around 6k rpm. This is not a figure that is going to produce a lot of hp. HP = TQ x RPM/5252.
So, a lot of HP requires a lot of rpm, just by definition. If we have a limited rpm ceiling, we automatically have a limited HP ceiling. The best we can do with a fixed displacement engine and a fixed rpm limit, is to raise torque production as high as possible, and broadly as possible.
That is what we have done. The results will be seen. We are confident that the result will be most appealing to the riding user of this system.
In pursuit of this goal, we incorporated as much cutting edge technology as we could put in, including may features that have never been seen in any Enfield of any kind, ever. It is the most advanced engine product that has ever been introduced for any Enfield. All these features included are designed to make the system perform better in many ways, even beyond what many users even really understand., but we know the benefits and included them because we realize how the users will benefit from them.
So, I want to make it clear that it is very likely that the peak hp output of the UCE engines or GT engines equipped with the Ace Billet GT Head may not exhibit peak hp figures that are significantly higher, or even any higher at all, than other modifications or products from other manufacturers. I cannot guarantee, or even expect, that no other engine kit will make more power. We present an overall package that is advanced, powerful, reliable, useful, efficient, and easy to install with virtually all the mods in the head for least complexity in installation. We hope that the product will be judged in the light of our design goals. We use the most leading-edge designs and implementations to make your GT the most satisfying example of the cafe racer it was intended to be, by people who have been making Ton-Up Bullets our specialty for many years now. A simple peak hp figure is not the sum total of our work.
-
ACE...I don't know if this has been asked...But, for those of us with PC-Vs, what do you think we will need to do if installing this head? Will we need to visit a Dyno to get the fuel and ignition maps sorted out? Also, if someone did that, could the new MAP then be shared? I may willing to do all this...(as long as nobody tells the wife what I'm spending.) ;)
...Jimmy
-
ACE...I don't know if this has been asked...But, for those of us with PC-Vs, what do you think we will need to do if installing this head? Will we need to visit a Dyno to get the fuel and ignition maps sorted out? Also, if someone did that, could the new MAP then be shared? I may willing to do all this...(as long as nobody tells the wife what I'm spending.) ;)
...Jimmy
Hi Jimmy,
The dyno would be the best place to do it, but it could probably be done fairly well "by the seat of the pants" with some trial and error mapping.
We haven't tried to tune this on a bike yet, but we will be installing it at Chumma's pretty soon.
My gut feeling about it is that it will need more fuel across the range, and probably a bit less advance across the range because of the higher compression and better chamber shape. I don't know exactly how much of each, and that will need to be determined.
If you want to get one and work on the map for the PCV, for purposes of sharing the info with others, I would be happy to work with you on that. Please contact me by email for making that happen.
Thanks!
Tom
-
Some pics of the final.
;D
-
That is one sexy bitch right there! 8) Hats off to you and the Mondello team! :D
I hope people understand that while this may only make roughly 30hp, it will have enough torque to rip a stump out of the ground. Seeing this head really makes me want to buy a Bullet or CGT. :)
-
That is one sexy bitch right there! 8) Hats off to you and the Mondello team! :D
I hope people understand that while this may only make roughly 30hp, it will have enough torque to rip a stump out of the ground. Seeing this head really makes me want to buy a Bullet or CGT. :)
Thanks!
I am actually hoping for it to be above 30 hp at the rear wheel, maybe up in the 35 rwhp range. It should do at least as well as all the other Fireballs.
-
Thanks!
I am actually hoping for it to be above 30 hp at the rear wheel, maybe up in the 35 rwhp range. It should do at least as well as all the other Fireballs.
So basically, you expect to almost double the stock whp with a bolt on modification?
-
So basically, you expect to almost double the stock whp with a bolt on modification?
Not quite double, but as close as we can get. ;D
To get close, it will require that the rpms go up, because we can't double the torque. So, assuming that the cams are long enough to allow getting near 6500 rpm with the added lift and flow we give, it should be possible. We don't know if it will happen, but it is possible, and we are aiming at it. The other Fireball bikes are in that neighborhood at that kind of rpm range, so I feel it is within reach.
The reason why it can be all in a bolt on modification, is because we took over a lot of the jobs of the other parts that would normally be required to upgrade hp when we designed this head.
We increased the peak flow by about 150%.
We increased the lift by 170%, for much more area under the lift curve.
We increased effective duration between all points inside the seat-to-seat timing(such as longer between the .050" points, longer between the .100" points, etc.).
We increased the compression by making the combustion chamber smaller and more efficient.
So basically, we don't need a hi-comp piston because we did the compression increase in the chamber. We don't need aftermarket cams because we increased the lift and effective duration and flow in the head. So, those parts that would normally be needed to buy, are not needed with this head, because we took care of all that in the head itself. This is what you can do when you are working off a clean sheet of paper, and can design for the result. 8)
It's not going to go over 6500 rpm in reality anyway, even with cams or whatever, because the 34mm throttle body size is going to max out at 6500 or even a bit earlier. It might rev past 6500 rpm, but peak hp won't be happening above that because it will be starting to choke off by then. So, having cams or bigger ports or whatever that are aimed at higher rpms than the throttle body can do is not going to be productive.
So, we are taking it as high as it can go while it is still equipped with that stock throttle body and exhaust system. Most users will not want to buy aftermarket large throttle bodies and all that kind of thing. That's for racers. For this street application, it only makes sense to use the throttle body that is on there, and take it to its limits, and that will be the limiting factor on the build. I'm sure people on the street will find that to be plenty high rpms, and most of them won't even go there anyway.
As you mention, this build will be really torque-heavy, and will pull really well at all the rpms in the range. I seriously doubt that anyone will feel like they are down on power with this package. It will feel real strong when you twist that throttle. The peak hp number is just what you get at the very top of the rpms. What most people use on the street is in the midrange, and this will really excel there.
Anyway, it will make what it makes. It ain't gonna be no weak sister! ;D
-
There is a God!
Since the Enfield EFI is not quite the best in the business, maybe a better option than modifying the ECU is to put a 36 mm flatslide on it and rig up some sort of ignition, perhaps the CDI unit from the AVLs
-
There is a God!
Since the Enfield EFI is not quite the best in the business, maybe a better option than modifying the ECU is to put a 36 mm flatslide on it and rig up some sort of ignition, perhaps the CDI unit from the AVLs
Very possible.
The UCE head bolt spacing for the injector housing is the same bolt spacing as the normal Bullet manifold bolt spacing. Our alloy billet inlet manifolds will go right on there. I believe that there is a 36mm Mikuni or Keihin 36mm carb with TPS on it.
You could use the standard ECU with Power Commander just for the ignition, or else you could do the AVL ignition conversion, or something like that.
There are plenty of possibilities.
And if it is necessary, we can port this head custom for even larger carbs or throttle bodies, such as 38mm or even 40mm in a high rpm application.
We have ideas for something like that with a de-stroking application for the GT engine yielding a 500cc class legal 90mm bore and 78mm stroke, just like the venerable Matchless G50 racer.
Yup! 8)
-
We have ideas for something like that with a de-stroking application for the GT engine yielding a 500cc class legal 90mm bore and 78mm stroke, just like the venerable Matchless G50 racer.
Yup! 8)
Now you have my attention.
-
Hi Jimmy,
The dyno would be the best place to do it, but it could probably be done fairly well "by the seat of the pants" with some trial and error mapping.
We haven't tried to tune this on a bike yet, but we will be installing it at Chumma's pretty soon.
My gut feeling about it is that it will need more fuel across the range, and probably a bit less advance across the range because of the higher compression and better chamber shape. I don't know exactly how much of each, and that will need to be determined.
If you want to get one and work on the map for the PCV, for purposes of sharing the info with others, I would be happy to work with you on that. Please contact me by email for making that happen.
Thanks!
Tom
I will gladly share the map for the 500 motor with 32 mm throttle body (C5, B5, G5) and stock piston.
-
I'm amazed -but not surprised - by this new head. Impressive design and great execution...this brings the UCE motor where it should have been all along. I think I see another UCE bike in my future.
ACE truly is the go-to source for Royal Enfield performance, new or old.
-
+1 :)
-
Any idea of how much it will cost? <holding my breath>
-
Any idea of how much it will cost? <holding my breath>
Yes, but I can't say it on this website.
I have announced it on my Ace Yahoo Group forum.
Sales and advertising not permitted here in these forums.
My threads are information based, and not for sales purposes here.
I will contact you.
-
Ace, has there been any talk between yourself and CMW about distribution through them, so your hard work need not be so shrouded?
It would seem to be a mutually beneficial idea...
-
Ace, has there been any talk between yourself and CMW about distribution through them, so your hard work need not be so shrouded?
It would seem to be a mutually beneficial idea...
Not on this item, but there has been in the past. The bottom line is that my cost on this is so very close to the retail price that there would not be room for even a minimal dealer or distributor profit margin. There isn't even a reasonable profit margin for me! It would necessitate a very large price increase to add in dealer mark-up.
I hope that explains it.
:)
-
Yessir, I understand margins and revenue generation.
Sounds like a rather selfless thing you're doing.
-
Flow numbers for the prototype Ace Billet GT head are as follows:
The flow of the prototype billet head is as follows:
Lift " Inlet/Exhaust
.050" 30.0/29.5
.100" 61.6/62.7
.150" 88.7/77.3
.200" 115.1/93.9
.250" 141.3/112.1
.300" 166.4/126.7
.350" 189.9/141.3
.400" 208.5/158.8
.450" 208.9/169.2
.500" 215.2/176.7
.550" 220.2/182.0
.600" 224.5/186.3
-
So beyond 0.5" lift the flow does not increase in any substantial way?
-
So beyond 0.5" lift the flow does not increase in any substantial way?
It begins to flatten-off because it is reaching limits of the 34mm minimum port cross-sectional area. However, it does gain about 5 cfm at .550" and at .600", which is substantial IMO. However, in the standard configuration which we envision for this package, which we expect will use the standard cams that are already in the engine, the rocker ratio will cause the lift at the valve to be .510" on the inlet valve. So, the flow at .500" lift will be about the highest that it sees in the actual application with standard cams in place.
All port flow graphs show a flattening-off behavior as they reach their maximum potential flow for the port size involved. We could get more with a larger port, but as long as the throttle body and injector housing are 34mm, there is no point to larger ports because the limitation is set by the 34mm size of those items. They are the limiting factor. A larger port would not help unless a larger throttle body and injector housing, or larger carb and manifold, were installed, and then we could port the head to suit that size, and reach a higher rpm range because of it.
These things are application specific, and need to be compatible with the other ductwork in the system, or mismatches and reduced performance occur.
-
Another uneducated question: The flow is more or less proportional to the torque? Is there a measurement of the original head as comparison?
-
Another uneducated question: The flow is more or less proportional to the torque? Is there a measurement of the original head as comparison?
Flow is both torque and hp.
Torque is the force that the engine can make, and hp is how much power over 1 minute of time at a certain engine rpm that it can make. So, hp is a function of torque applied rapidly and repeatedly over a time period.
HP = TQ x RPM/5252
When we increase flow, we increase the ability of the engine to improve cylinder filling, so that it has more mixture to compress and burn on each stroke, and make more torque per stroke, and thus make more hp at a given rpm engine speed. Also, more flow over a given time period is required to reach higher engine speeds(rpm), so more flow basically allows the engine to rev higher before running out of breath, too.
For comparison basis, here is a flow test that we did on a standard UCE head a couple of years ago. This is a C5 head in stock form. We have not tested a stock GT head, and the GT probably flows slightly more, but probably not much more than this C5 head.
I only have inlet port data on the stock head, though.
Flow data for stock UCE head.
CFM flow @ 28" water column, on the same flow bench as above.
.050" lift = 35.9
.100" lift = 65.338
.150" lift = 89.09
.200" lift = 111.74
.250" lift = 125.64
.300" lift = 135.9
.350" lift = 141 * Max stock lift at the valve.*
.400" lift = 142.5
The stock cams with the stock rockers only lift to somewhere between .350" - .360" at the valve, so that's as far as we flow tested it, just up to .400". It was flattening off there anyway.
IIRC, the stock inlet valve is a 1.65", and we use a 1.8" on our head.
There's quite a substantial difference, as you can see.
Our design accents the higher lift flow quite a bit more, and is just a little behind the stock head for low lift flow numbers. This is typical, because the valve seat angles can be optimized for what you want the port to do, and we wanted to accent the higher lifts where the bulk of the flow will be happening.
At .250" lift, we are flowing as much(141.3) as the stock head can flow at its maximum lift(,360"). And at .250" lift, we only have the valve halfway up to where its full lift will be at .510" and 215 cfm in our head.
That's a big difference.
-
Am I too far off assuming the power at a given rpm should hence be 215/141 = 1.5 times the power at the crank. That would be for the bullet 41 instead of 27 hp and -9 hp at the rear wheel. That is 32 vs 18 hp. And somewhat more with the rpm increase? Just checking my logic....and if I understand the relations.
-
It is possible, and the logic is accurate. We do expect things to be around that power range.
However, it is not always certain that the bike will make full use of every available cfm of air, and so we cannot be sure until things are assembled, running, and tuned to best effect. And there are effects of increased compression and combustion efficiency that may add to the mix, which are not directly related to the air flow, but do affect torque production.
We are aiming at that range, and with any luck, maybe a little more than that. We shall see when it's done.
But more importantly, the power curve that is below the max hp figure is where all the action is, because few riders on the street are riding their bikes at maximum rpm all the time. The midrange power is very important. The big lift and flow has a lot of impact on torque production around the torque peak rpm range especially. This is where most riders will feel the power surge.
-
Will you be providing PC maps with the head? Enough questions for today. ;) Thanks for your informative and educational replies.
-
Will you be providing PC maps with the head? Enough questions for today. ;) Thanks for your informative and educational replies.
No, we are not a Power Commander dealer.
But we will share info about tuning.
-
The "legendary" Fritz EGLI is apparently offering some heavy tuning mods for the GT as well :)
http://www.egli-racing.ch/files/2015_02_17_%20RE%20GT%20und%20EFI%20Tuning%20Preise%20de.pdf
Tuning Kit 1 includes,
- Porting
- Combustion chamber and valve seats optimization
- Increased compression, head face milling
- Thinner gasket under the barrel
- Free flow exhaust of choice
- Powercommander to correct injection and ignition
- Power of 34hp at 4900 rpm
Tuning Kit 2 includes,
- Tuning Kit 1, without face milling
- Set of competition Cams, Valve Springs and Rods
- Power 41 hp at 5500 rpm
About Egli:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fritz_Egli
The stated power should be at the crank i would believe. Which means 41 hp - 9,5 hp loss in transmission = 32,5 rwhp.
Not bad but probably not enough to do the ton, feels like we are getting much more with the ACE head considering an all new head design has of course much more room to maneuver and optimize things. The prices can be found on EGLI website.
Vincent Eglis are however beautiful machines, if i find an old viking treasure in my garden i will get one. 8)
-
I think that the drivetrain losses are more like around 7hp, from what we have seen in the past. So, just to be fair, the rwhp figure is likely to be a couple hp more.
-
Call me old fashioned but when I see published values for horsepower I assume it is the horsepower at the crankshaft unless the value is stated as being measured "at the rear wheel".
It wouldn't surprise me a bit to find the "Power of 34hp at 4900 rpm" is precicely that. 34 horsepower at the crankshaft when the shaft is turning at 4900 rpm.
By giving horsepower at the crankshaft, the value is always more than the rear wheel horsepower so the number always sounds more impressive than it actually is in the real world where the rear tire meets the asphalt.
-
Deleted.
-
It will be possible to order the head with standard rocker ratio and use it with the hitchcock cams if I remember correctly. Would this combination be of any advantage?
-
It will be possible to order the head with standard rocker ratio and use it with the hitchcock cams if I remember correctly. Would this combination be of any advantage?
I don't know what the lobe lift of the Hitchcock cams are.
Our max lift at the valve is .600". I think the smallest rocker ratio we can get is 1.5:1. So probably .400" or lower lobe lift is allowed with lower ratio rockers.
I do know what the duration of the Hitchcock cams are. I don't see any advantage to using lower ratio rockers just to use those cams. I think the stock cams with 1.7 :1 ratio rockers would be better.
Rocker ratio almost always trumps lobe lift, unless you are already at max rocker ratio, because it isolates the majority of increased moving mass inertia on the valve side of the rocker. Cam lobe lift increases moving mass inertia on the entire valve train. With rocker ratio, all the mass of the tappets and pushrods and half of the rocker itself continue to operate at the relatively lower speeds of the stock lobe profile. Only the masses of the valve/spring/retainer, and half the rocker are subjected to higher speeds. This is a big advantage when controlling the valve train at higher rpms with the valve spring.
The only time to consider cams in this platform would be for more duration when reaching for a higher rev limit. This would require other changes, such as bigger throttle body or carb, and more flxibility to move the rev limiter up the rpm range. In a higher budget racing application, we could envision needing longer cam duration. I don't think it will be needed for the intended street application within the PC-V rev limiter potential.
-
Do you have a website that gives all the information about the head
-
Do you have a website that gives all the information about the head
No, not at this time. I have a Yahoo Group which has most of our stuff, and a full open discussion forum.
We are not a catalog type outfit, and our custom work does not lend itself to little snippets of info and a price tag. We make things to order, based on the application. This billet head is as close to a retail product as we have ever done, and it isn't really even available yet. The first production is closed, and I will call for a list of interested buyers when we are ready to do another run.
Pretty much everything known about the head is found right here on this thread.
There is no possible way that I could put everything in this thread into a sales blurb on a web page. If you have any specific questions that have not already been covered here, or that you didn't understand, just ask me and I will be happy to explain.
:)
-
Im looking at the GT head pics and wondering; the pushrods are not perpendicular to the rocker axles. Is the rocker bearing made to withstand some axial load? ...maybe it is just the pic that looks bit extreme?
-
Im looking at the GT head pics and wondering; the pushrods are not perpendicular to the rocker axles. Is the rocker bearing made to withstand some axial load? ...maybe it is just the pic that looks bit extreme?
This is correct.
The pushrods are not perpendicular to the rocker axles.
The rocker bearing is made to withstand much more axial load than could ever be presented in this application. It is extremely common that the pushrods are not perpendicular to the rocker axles. Most American cars are made this way. Not unusual.
However, that is the reason why there are shaft mounted rockers in there, and not stud mounted rockers.
Just for the record, these rockers are the same rockers made for Pro Stock drag racing big block Chevy racing engines with more than one inch of lift, and about 1200 pounds of spring force, turning 11000 rpm at the drag strip. These are not just "any old rockers".
;D
-
Tom,
The head looks great, but one of the best feature of your design is the rockers. Very clean and professional - with room to be tweaked if someone would dare;It is just boss set up!
-
Im looking at the GT head pics and wondering; the pushrods are not perpendicular to the rocker axles. Is the rocker bearing made to withstand some axial load? ...maybe it is just the pic that looks bit extreme?
Otto,
Also, I might point out that the pushrods are not going to be vertical either. Some of that angle is going to be taken up in the pushrod which will come up on an angle from the tappet. So, all the side thrust is not going on the rocker axle. Some of it is shared as side thrust on the tappet guide. The pushrod/rocker impingement angle is not severe.
-
I'm not worried, it just looks unusual to me. Most ohv engines I've seen the desing tends to be as perpendicular as possible. But I've not seen many american engines....maybe a reference picture?
-
I'm not worried, it just looks unusual to me. Most ohv engines I've seen the desing tends to be as perpendicular as possible. But I've not seen many american engines....maybe a reference picture?
(http://static.shop033.com/UserFiles/2024-Files/image/Checking-Push-rod-length-micrometer-Crow-Cams-how-to.jpg)
-
I see most of the angle goes in the tappets. So the holes for the pushrods in the head will not be straight or have the required clearance.
-
I see most of the angle goes in the tappets. So the holes for the pushrods in the head will not be straight or have the required clearance.
This is the best shot that I have of the pushrod tunnel area. It was from an earlier machining stage, but it shows the wide clearance area pretty well.
-
Well, can't wait to see this head on my bike.....till than I keep looking at the pictures and asking annoying questions ;D
-
if you keep asking, I won't have to start...
-
New confusion; on the stock head there is a bolt just before the sparkplug hole, I don't see a hole at that place in your pics only the tap for the plug?
-
New confusion; on the stock head there is a bolt just before the sparkplug hole, I don't see a hole at that place in your pics only the tap for the plug?
Yes, it's there. The photos just are taken on angles that don't show it. Our head doesn't have as much cut-out there around that area, but the stud hole is there, and provision to get a socket on it. The spark plug will need to come out to torque the head nuts.
I have a meeting tomorrow with a machine shop to discuss various matters, including some ideas about getting castings done, and also for some small parts that I have been wanting to do. I don't know what will come of this meeting, but we shall see.
-
Exciting; good luck!
-
Ace, I like the way you support the marque. I sincerely hope we end up doing some business in future times.
-
I have a meeting tomorrow with a machine shop to discuss various matters, including some ideas about getting castings done, and also for some small parts that I have been wanting to do. I don't know what will come of this meeting, but we shall see.
Any luck with the casting ideas?
-
No, not yet.
I am meeting with some CNC shops to assist us with production, and also after I can get that squared away, I will discuss having them make a casting mold from our CNC program. This casting option is probably not something that we will see in the near term, but we will see what we can do.
To do castings, it will require that we see a lot more popular interest than the two people who have committed so far. If it's going to be one at a time, we are never going to be able to get away from the CNC billet production.
-
The question really is how much of a price drop can be expected. It will for sure take lot of time to work out the correct figures and design. Until than there will be some hard data from the billet head like videos, dyno diagrams and experience which will attract attention and make the decision easier to a wider audience to go for this head. Till then it will be mostly people like me who believe to know what they are doing who purchase the GT head :)
-
The question really is how much of a price drop can be expected. It will for sure take lot of time to work out the correct figures and design. Until than there will be some hard data from the billet head like videos, dyno diagrams and experience which will attract attention and make the decision easier to a wider audience to go for this head. Till then it will be mostly people like me who believe to know what they are going who purchase the GT head :)
In about 10 days, I will be at the meeting with the CNC shop, and I am taking the head there with me for them to look at, and also the CNC program. After that, I am shipping the head and related parts to MeVoCGT for installation on his bike. Then we will have reports.
-
If I knew this summer is going to be rain, rain and more rain... :(
-
Is some one going to dyno this head to get the mapping right?
-
Yes, from what I have been told, that is what the owner plans to do.
I will not be providing maps. However, people plan to share map info that they develop.
-
Yes, from what I have been told, that is what the owner plans to do.
I will not be providing maps. However, people plan to share map info that they develop.
I have no issues sharing my map once done. A dyno run costs me about 100$, the competition among the yamakawasuki tuners is strong.
-
Someone install this thing, dyno it, and let me buy one!
-
Someone install this thing, dyno it, and let me buy one!
I am working on it!
I had to unexpectedly switch machine shops for producing them, and once that is finalized and they get tooled up, we can go forward.
I could have put more units in the first run, if I had the orders. Now it has to wait for the new CNC shop to tool up.
It's just the way things went.
It's not like we are Lockheed-Martin over here, or anything like that. It is just me and Chumma, running things out of our very flat wallets, trying to produce the most advanced products ever made for RE engines, on our own.
-
It's not like we are Lockheed-Martin over here, or anything like that. It is just me and Chumma, running things out of our very flat wallets, trying to produce the most advanced products ever made for RE engines, on our own.
Good point. I should give my contact at Boeing a ring.. ;)
-
Website or Blog would be really good for this project.
I know it is easy said, but in todays world marketing is everything when it comes to sales. It would give an overview and it would not be necessary to read through 100 posts to figure out who ACE is and what this project is about.
-
Tom have you looked into investment casting for the heads ?
If you 3D print the positives in casting wax you would completely eliminate the necessity of a master mold and its expense.
-
Tom have you looked into investment casting for the heads ?
If you 3D print the positives in casting wax you would completely eliminate the necessity of a master mold and its expense.
hmmm, might be expensive...
http://www.wisconsinprecision.com/rapid-prototypes.php
http://www.investcastinc.com/prototype-casting-process/
-
I am working on it!...I could have put more units in the first run, if I had the orders....It's not like we are Lockheed-Martin over here, or anything like that. It is just me and Chumma, running things out of our very flat wallets, trying to produce the most advanced products ever made for RE engines, on our own.
I want to do business with you for the same reason I bought from the dealer I bought from. I just want see success with such a unique product (which it is in our age).
I have 2 options for upgrading. 1 is a higher compression piston, which is just that. Bumps it to 9.5:1. 2 is your head. And I like the idea of increased performance through efficiency.
It's just a matter of money...I'm saving...secretly (wedding is sort of going to get in the way).
-
once we have some data available it might be worth to give a try one of those crowdfunding scheems for the required tooling to bring the cost down.
...i too want to see success.
https://www.kickstarter.com/discover/advanced?term=motorcycle&category_id=0&woe_id=0&sort=magic
-
I want to do business with you for the same reason I bought from the dealer I bought from. I just want see success with such a unique product (which it is in our age).
I have 2 options for upgrading. 1 is a higher compression piston, which is just that. Bumps it to 9.5:1. 2 is your head. And I like the idea of increased performance through efficiency.
It's just a matter of money...I'm saving...secretly (wedding is sort of going to get in the way).
Increased compression allone won't bring you very far. With this head you have:
- Increased Compression
- Increased Valve Lift
- Bigger Size Valves
- Better Valve arrangement
- Better combustion chamber
- Ideal Porting for a good flow
- Better Lubrication and Cooling of the Head
- Material is better
- Something i forgot?
This would be never achievable with the classic tuning aproach of improving the stock components piece by piece.
-
All those things I realize, I just condensed it down to increased efficiency.
-
Thanks guys! I do appreciate your interest and support.
I am doing as much as I can to move forward with the project at present.
I will keep people apprised as progress occurs.
:)
-
Will it be required/recommended to match port the intake manifold?
-
Will it be required/recommended to match port the intake manifold?
No, it should be a very close match as machined. But if you want to match it perfectly by hand with a die grinder or file, it should not need much work.
-
Any updates on production?
Just curious.
How much difference would there be to have the stock head modded? I know the valve angles help get more in and out of the engine and that the higher ratio rockers are based on the valve angles and work together.
But in street terms, how much would I be leaving on the table? How much of what you've designed into this head could possibly transfer over?
-
Any updates on production?
Just curious.
How much difference would there be to have the stock head modded? I know the valve angles help get more in and out of the engine and that the higher ratio rockers are based on the valve angles and work together.
But in street terms, how much would I be leaving on the table? How much of what you've designed into this head could possibly transfer over?
We have done a few jobs on the stock head. They come out pretty well, given the limitations. We can do just a little, or a lot, on a custom basis.
The way it works out is that the closer it gets to the features of the billet heads, the closer it gets to the cost. In the end, it can't get all the way there, but it still costs a lot for a high end job. There is a lot of welding and hand work that adds up.
When the mods started costing over half of what the billet heads would cost, and still lacked lift, needing cams or custom rockers, it really started making sense to make the whole new head and all the design improvements.
But, we can still do the stock head work at a variety of lower price points, depending on desire and budget. Starting at a pretty low cost for a basic performance port and valve job.
The thing is, that these heads need lift. That is expensive to do whether you buy cams or custom rockers. But, ya gotta have it, or the flow just isn't there.
We can port it with the stock valves still in it, and get about 190 cfm intake flow, which is pretty good, especially for the money. But it needs over .400 " lift to do that, and needs cams that will lift that much or more. With stock cams and rockers it only flows a few percent more than stock. So you would absolutely have to buy cams to get anything worthwhile from it. With the billet head, you don't need to buy cams, so that offsets around $300 of the cost right there.
So, for people on a budget, we can do a lot for a little money. But if you really want a better chamber and the best ports and the max lift at the valves, it makes sense to go all the way to the billet. It goes beyond what can be done with the stock head in a lot of ways. I realize that it is a lot of money, but it is a whole new head, and not a modded stock head.
We are working with the new shop, and are hoping for production to begin sometime in September.
-
It all makes sense and I'm not really looking to cheap
Out if (more like when...I've never had a bike that has grabbed my Moto soul like this bike has. Hell, I'm about to have one off [$$$$$$] carbon bits made that'll really do nothing other than give me a look NO ONE else has...) I do the mods.
I'm just going to the "what if" process of what to do should you not go to production (which it sounds as if it will).
The price doesn't even scare me, but if it comes in for the same or less with production and you're still making money, then we both profit.
-
When I say "production ", I mean that I will be making them to order. I do not have the means, nor the demand, to produce quantities of scale for shelf inventory. Unless things radically change in the Enfield market, this stuff will always be made a few at a time, or one at a time.
-
"hoping for production to begin sometime in September."
My recovery for riding again is around the middle of October. September shouldn't be a slow down for me anyway. Looking ahead here!
-
Any news?
-
Any news?
Yes, I reported on the Ace forum that fixtures for holding the heads on the CNC machine are being made, and should be arriving this week. The program has been converted to the latest version, and tooling is ordered.
When all this is at the shop, which should be probably by next week, we will be ready to start making heads. We will be ready to accept orders. Since some parts(valves, rockers, guides, seats, head gasket, studs) are special order, they may take a few weeks to arrive. We can then assemble the parts into the heads and do set-ups when they arrive. Delivery will be ASAP after all the parts are there.
This is all based on what we expect right now. Hopefully, there won't be any further delays.
-
Would it be best to install a Power Commander V?
-
Would it be best to install a Power Commander V?
Required.
-
Then the saving and budgeting shall commence.
-
Then the saving and budgeting shall commence.
It is also required... ;)
-
I'm in two topics at once here???!!!
Ordered the PC V at nField. Out of stock today. They will ship when more arrive, next week.
-
Progress!
;D ;D ;D ;D
-
That's the new Transformer?
What's it morf into?
-
That's the new Transformer?
What's it morf into?
It's a "stealth" transformer, designed to mimic the OEM styling, whilst concealing it's Optimus Prime attributes inside.
;D
Actually, I felt that the styling of the bike was a strong point that people like, so I didn't want to dramatically alter the appearance too far from stock.
The external appearance is intended to look similar, but with a vintage "sandcast look" finish as an added touch. However, the inside of the head is 100% different than a stock head, with nothing at all inside remaining the same as stock. Ports, port angles, combustion chamber shape and size, valve angles, valves, springs, retainers, hardware, and design are all ACE.
I would like to remind everyone that the goal is the Ton, and good streetable power all thru the range, withthe health of the stock bottom end in mind.The goal is not to make more peak hp than anybody else in some kind of "dyno hp race". It's a street kit.
For those who want to race, or are willing to do more internal mods, we can pull more hp out of this head than any possible modified stock head, so if you want that, we can make that happen. Please be realistic with the expectations of the street kit, considering the physical restraints of the stock size inlet and exhaust system, and the rev limit.
Also, we need to sort this thing out. It may take some tuning and adjustments before it hits it's stride. We never have got the highest output results on the first trip to the dyno.
This has never run on an engine before. I am just as curious as anyone about what it will do on the stock cams and stock piston.
-
Speed is horsepower so to do the ton atlest 35rwhp will be required no matter what - for a naked bike that is. That much can be expected I think ;)
-
Oh, I won't be blowing the doors off those ZX 10s in the straights? ;) ;)
-
I expect that it will do fine.
If it unexpectedly comes out a little low, we can make some adjustments.
It is very hard to predict power accurately. We just have to see what it does, and move along from there.
-
And if it comes unexpectedly too high? ;D
-
And if it comes unexpectedly too high? ;D
Then pray that the bottom end is bullet proof ...
-
Then pray that your bottom end .......err your bikes bottom end... is bullet proof .
Bear in mind that the rockers are "off the shelf" and the head was built around them. So, lower (or maybe even higher) lift , and therefore performance, could be had with swapping them out. Although I wonder if the ports would flow anymore with a higher lift.
-
Ya, changes on lift and duration will be a CAM job than...
...probably duration is more likely to be of an benefit than lift.
-
The rockers specified are 1.7:1 ratio.
Theoretically, we could go to 2:1 ratio with the stock cams, in terms of lift room at the valve. I don't know if the valve mass accelerations would be too high at that ratio, but we could try it.
Alternatively, there is also room for any of the available UCE cam designs in terms of valve lift too. Again, the valve accelerations would have to be tested, but we can adjust valve spring pressure too, if needed.
There's a lot of room to do things in this head, and we can take it wherever we want. The "as delivered" form is the minimum level, and it can go up from there, if necessary.
My main concern is to give enough to give the desired result, but not too much that might compromise longevity of the stock bottom end. It's a tight-rope walk. Trying to hit that target off a piece of paper and calculations is a pretty tough assignment. But we'll see how it goes.
As far as being "too powerful", that sounds like a nice problem to have!
;D
We'll cross that bridge if/when we come to it.
8)
-
Ace, could you give us some assessment of the bottom end, did you see some damage? If so at what mileage and under what conditions? Also how much stronger you think it is compared to the stock iron barrel? Does it have bigger bearings? What about the conrod?
-
Ace, could you give us some assessment of the bottom end, did you see some damage? If so at what mileage and under what conditions? Also how much stronger you think it is compared to the stock iron barrel? Does it have bigger bearings? What about the conrod?
There was no bottom end damage seen on the blown engine that I got. It was a holed piston, and a dropped valve, and the valve beat the piston and the combustion chamber until it looked like the craters on the moon.
I don't know where the limits of the bottom end are. I'm just trying to play it safe, by not trying to push it too hard. There is plenty of upward power potential in this head, so I'm not worried about making more power for anybody who wants more. The Iron Barrel bottom ends were very weak. The UCE bottom ends are like the AVL, which is much stronger. I don't know about the stock bearing limits. We have to push it until something gives up. That is the only way that the data points are found with things like this.
-
Any updates Ace?
-
Any updates Ace?
The programming is still underway.
In order to negotiate the price down lower than the $10,000 programming quote that was first given, I had to accept a longer time period for it to get done. It will be at least a few more weeks until the programming is done.
-
Tom, I think I know the answers but...
Could you please explain once again what was the design decision behind the reduced valve angle. An uneducated mind could come to the conclusion that a bigger angle would permit bigger valves as well as a straighter port and both those parameters would appear be better as far as flow is concerned.
-
Tom, I think I know the answers but...
Could you please explain once again what was the design decision behind the reduced valve angle. An uneducated mind could come to the conclusion that a bigger angle would permit bigger valves as well as a straighter port and both those parameters would appear be better as far as flow is concerned.
It's primarily about compact and more efficient combustion chamber.
The most modern and powerful engine designs over the last 20 years or more are using steeper valve angles almost universally.
The power results of the chamber improvements outweighs the flow number or valve size compromizes.
We did very well with this design, getting a much more compact chamber with better flame path, reduced surface area in the chamber for better thermal efficiency, higher compression while retaining the flat or dish piston that doesn't need a dome or raised crown, we got much better flow than the stock head, and bigger valves than the stock head too, at the same time with this design, and we got a lot of our desired flow from the increased valve lift and better area under the flow curve with the ratio rocker system.
It's really all a matter of working with the compromises arising from the physical limitations involved, and working the different parts of the design to reach the desired overall goals.
-
When the heads are all said and done, will this be something available to the public or just under special order? Is it something as simple as swapping the old heads with the new heads or do you have to make other engine modifications to complement the new head?
-
They will be special order. The market is too small for mass production, and I don't have the funds to produce quantities of shelf inventory of this kind. But, it should be fairly short wait time after order.
They will bolt on, but you'll need the ancillary kit with custom composite head gasket, custom pushrods, and custom head studs. And your rocker covers will need to be modified, with some welding and grinding for internal clearance of the rockers.
And it will require the use of a Power Commander and free flow exhaust.
There will be a selection of rocker ratios available for the head, which may be useful for specific applications.
-
Well, I have my stock head down for some time and looking at it from all the angles. The sad thing is that RE could have done lot of those things virtually at no cost. I think they must really be lacking the know-how what it takes to do a good engineering compromise.
But hey, than there would be nothing fun to do...
Rebuilding the stock head to similar performance would be IMO almost equally costly task...
-
Well, I have my stock head down for some time and looking at it from all the angles. The sad thing is that RE could have done lot of those things virtually at no cost. I think they must really be lacking the know-how what it takes to do a good engineering compromise.
But hey, than there would be nothing fun to do...
Rebuilding the stock head to similar performance would be IMO almost equally costly task...
I have said the same thing for many years now, right here on this forum.
They could have incorporated these kinds of things into their basic production for very little money at the factory level.
Regarding the stock head mods, we have done some, and we did some big jobs on a few AVL heads too, which have some similarities. They came out fine, but the cost was quite high, and there were limitations in the basic head casting which precluded us from being able to add the other features that we would like to include. So, trying to do all that stuff as modding would be prohibitively expensive and time consuming. The obvious answer was to make a whole new head that has those features already in it.
But we still can do much more affordable modifications to the stock cylinder head for those people who don't feel the need for a top-of-the-line product, and still get some added power in their engine. And we can do valve jobs and repairs too. And more recently we have done some nice jobs on the vintage twins like the Interceptor MK1 and Mk2, and Super Meteors and Constellations, as well as all the various versions of Bullets.
-
Ace, maybe it can be added to the installation manual of the GT head that the barrel may need shortening. (Unless my bike has an exceptionally long barrel, which I doubt.) That could be a good thing to do even on a stock bike as i see it.
-
Ace, maybe it can be added to the installation manual of the GT head that the barrel may need shortening. (Unless my bike has an exceptionally long barrel, which I doubt.) That could be a good thing to do even on a stock bike as i see it.
Yes, good idea.
I don't know why they left that piston a mm down the bore at TDC, when they had a squish chamber and piston design, and then set it up to have no squish?
:o
-
I rode in total 3 x CGT's and I've found 2 to be extremely knock sensitive. I blame now this design miss interpretation for it. Someone in the company had the right idea but something certainly went wrong in the realisation process. Not unusual for big organisations.
http://www.business-standard.com/article/management/continental-hits-a-speed-breaker-115121401095_1.html
IMO the general market expected somewhat better performance out of a Café. RE should order few hundred Ace.GT heads and market it as Continental GTR or GTA ;)
I honestly believe that my modified GT with your Head on and marginal RPM increase will be a better performer as well as all rounder than any twin cylinder engine RE may come up with.
-
They will be special order. The market is too small for mass production, and I don't have the funds to produce quantities of shelf inventory of this kind. But, it should be fairly short wait time after order.
They will bolt on, but you'll need the ancillary kit with custom composite head gasket, custom pushrods, and custom head studs. And your rocker covers will need to be modified, with some welding and grinding for internal clearance of the rockers.
And it will require the use of a Power Commander and free flow exhaust.
There will be a selection of rocker ratios available for the head, which may be useful for specific applications.
Other than the stage 1 kit bits, will the other stuff be sold by any chance as a kit?
-
Other than the stage 1 kit bits, will the other stuff be sold by any chance as a kit?
Ace's company isn't CMW. You know, the company that provides free of charge this forum, in hopes that not only will you do some business with him, but not promote or funnel business somewhere else? CMW, along with Hitchcocks market the stage one kit.
Mr. Ace seems to have a relationship with CMW though respects it by not dealing directly through our gracious host's generosity...
No offense meant to anyone, just something that bugs me.
-
It's really not a mystery.
We both work very hard to help Bulleteers get the most from their bikes, and have known each other via this forum for probably a decade.
Also, I only make certain speed parts, most of which require an engine rebuild, and for every buyer of my parts, there are plenty of parts sold by CMW as the rest of the items necessary to complete the build.
So, there you have it.
I'm sure that many of the old hands on this forum who have been here for the duration will be happy to fill in any further details.
Regarding questions about a "kit" please email me with questions.
Thanks!
:)
-
It's really not a mystery.
We both work very hard to help Bulleteers get the most from their bikes, and have known each other via this forum for probably a decade.
Also, I only make certain speed parts, most of which require an engine rebuild, and for every buyer of my parts, there are plenty of parts sold by CMW as the rest of the items necessary to complete the build.
So, there you have it.
I'm sure that many of the old hands on this forum who have been here for the duration will be happy to fill in any further details.
Regarding questions about a "kit" please email me with questions.
Thanks!
:)
Just for clarity, I wasn't by any means referring to you, sir. Your knowledge and enthusiastic love of these bikes is to be commended.
-
I spoke with the shop machinist this morning, and he said he hopes to have the first billet head finished cutting next thursday. Not assembled, but cut.
He has been running the cutting program very slowly in this first one, to assure that nothing clashes or breaks tooling off, or anything like that.
So anyway, it is going along, and that is the latest info that I have. I plan to go there when the cut is finished, and inspect it for correctness.
I have one set of 1.7 rockers and one set of 1.8 rockers ordered at present. If anyone with an order in wishes to specify their rocker ratio, or wishes info on how to decide what ratio they want, please let me know as soon as possible.
Sorry it is taking so long. I am basically at the mercy of the machine shop, and I'm doing the best that I can.
-
Good news Tom. The neering spring, increasing temperatures and more frequent sunshine induce "Sturm und Drang" feelings in me.
Regarding the rockers; Since you have new cams coming up, will those have the same lift as the stock cams?
-
Good news Tom. The neering spring, increasing temperatures and more frequent sunshine induce "Sturm und Drang" feelings in me.
Regarding the rockers; Since you have new cams coming up, will those have the same lift as the stock cams?
The cams are planned to have a .050" lift increase over stock, and some duration increase too. Similar to the Ace Magnum cams for the Iron Barrel. I don't know when they are coming.
The splayed pushrod geometry is going to result in less lift at the valve than if the pushrods were straight vertical, so I am looking at more ratio to counteract that effect. The 1.8 ratio rockers that I ordered are based on that geometry issue.
We can go as high as 2.0 rocker ratio if desired.
-
The cams are planned to have a .050" lift increase over stock, and some furation increase too. I don't know when they are coming.
The splayed pushrod geometry is going to result in less lift at the valve than if the pushrods were straight vertical, so I am looking at more ratio to counteract that effect. The 1.8 ratio rockers that I ordered are based on that geometry issue.
We can go as high as 2.0 rocker ratio if desired.
I am at work right now and don't have the numbers infront of me, but if I remember correctly, your new cam with 1.8 ratio will give about 0.6" lift at the valve. And if I remember the flow numbers there is not much more in it beyond that lift.
So the 2.0 rocker might be something to be preferably used with stock cams?
-
I am at work right now and don't have the numbers infront of me, but if I remember correctly, your new cam with 1.8 ratio will give about 0,6" lift at the valve. And if I remember the flow numbers there is not much more in it beyond that lift.
Actually, it will only come out to about .500" valve lift, due to the geometry issue. It's about a 20% penalty for the splay in the pushrods.
-
Ace Billet GT Head Gen 2 pics.
Cutting taking place right now, today.
:)
Billet Head on computer screen.
(https://forum.classicmotorworks.com/gallery/medium_1119-220316141834.jpeg)
Raw billet, 6061-T651.
(https://forum.classicmotorworks.com/gallery/medium_1119-220316142636.jpeg)
Partial cut.
(https://forum.classicmotorworks.com/gallery/medium_1119-220316142921.jpeg)
Another angle.
(https://forum.classicmotorworks.com/gallery/medium_1119-220316143203.jpeg)
-
Awesome. 8) Gen. 3 will be casted than....glad to be one of the rare privileged to own a cnc version. ;)
-
Wow, that's a block of aluminium, ain't it? That's awesome....
-
Wow, that's a block of aluminium, ain't it? That's awesome....
Yours looked like that at the beginning, too!
:)
-
What is the weight of that block before cutting? If you don't mind me asking....
-
What is the weight of that block before cutting? If you don't mind me asking....
I don't know. But, I can find out.
8)
-
What is the weight of that block before cutting? If you don't mind me asking....
If that was a block of gold or lead a forklift truck would for sure be needed to load it on the mill... ;D
-
Generic aluminum weighs 168.48 pounds per cubic foot.
That billet is about half a cubic foot, so it should be around 84.5 pounds or thereabouts.
Of course, a lot of it gets removed during machining.
:)
-
If that was a block of gold or lead a forklift truck would for sure be needed to load it on the mill... ;D
Looks like gold to me ;)
-
6061-T651.
Good stuff! :)
The T651 process makes the material more stable and less likely to distort after machining when compared with the more common T6 condition aluminum.
-
Ace Billet GT Head Gen 2 pics.
Cutting taking place right now, today.
:)
Looks Awesome Ace.
Billet Head on computer screen.
(https://forum.classicmotorworks.com/gallery/medium_1119-220316141834.jpeg)
Raw billet, 6061-T651.
(https://forum.classicmotorworks.com/gallery/medium_1119-220316142636.jpeg)
Partial cut.
(https://forum.classicmotorworks.com/gallery/medium_1119-220316142921.jpeg)
Another angle.
(https://forum.classicmotorworks.com/gallery/medium_1119-220316143203.jpeg)
-
That looks fantastic!!!
-
That looks fantastic!!!
Thanks! It's coming along.
Unfortunately very late, but better late than never.
-
These shots of partial cuts just came into my inbox.
(https://forum.classicmotorworks.com/gallery/medium_1119-240316184752.jpeg)
(https://forum.classicmotorworks.com/gallery/medium_1119-240316183159.jpeg)
-
Excellent! Are these exact replicas of the prototype ?
-
Excellent! Are these exact replicas of the prototype ?
No, there are some minor changes.
-
Very nice! :)
-
No, there are some minor changes.
What kind of changes?
-
What kind of changes?
Mostly refinements in the machining process because the entire CNC program needed to be re-written.
There is some slightly more smoothing of the ports, and the edges and surfaces are smoother, and some of the things which were done by hand on the proto are now done CNC.
-
Will the ports be completely included in the CNC program or hand finish?
-
Will the ports be completely included in the CNC program or hand finish?
There will be some finish work in the bowls when the valve job is done.
-
There will be some finish work in the bowls when the valve job is done.
The exhaust port will have some surface treatment to block the heat if I recall right? Any blasting or glas beating on the Intake?
-
The exhaust port will have some surface treatment to block the heat if I recall right? Any blasting or glas beating on the Intake?
None of that was on the prototype.
Port injection EFI does not require textured intake finish because there is no atomized fuel drop out like a carb system that carries fuel all the way in. The valve job will still have fuel-shearing attributes which can handle any droplets that might be on the walls. Billet should have sufficient mass to not need exhaust port coating. I did it in the Iron Barrel Bullet heads because they were low mass and overheated easily. UCE seems okay in that regard, and the billet is much denser in mass than the casting.
-
None of that was on the prototype.
Port injection EFI does not require textured intake finish because there is no atomized fuel drop out like a carb system that carries fuel all the way in. Billet should have sufficient mass to not need exhaust port coating. I did it in the Iron Barrel Bullet heads because they were low mass and overheated easily. UCE seems okay in that regard, and the billet is much denser in mass than the casting.
Ok, I could polish my exhaust port and chamber up if I wanted to gain some additional heat benefit? Or is it not worthwhile doing?
-
Ok, I could polish my exhaust port and chamber up if I wanted to gain some additional heat benefit?
Yes.
If you want coatings, I can send it out and get it done. I just didn't want to push the price even higher for something that doesn't seem necessary. The price is already pushing the limits. But I can add any option for those willing to pay more.
-
Yes.
If you want coatings, I can send it out and get it done. I just didn't want to push the price even higher for something that doesn't seem necessary. The price is already pushing the limits. But I can add any option for those willing to pay more.
I am happy with polished finish which I can invest my own time into doing, even if the benefit is small. I think that will do fine. :)
-
Getting further along.
Still more work before final.
The cone shape that you see around the chamber is part of the machine fixture plate that holds the head. That is not part of the head itself.
Pics below.
-
Looks awesome! 8)
Is it possible to put a date on it already?
-
Looks awesome! 8)
Is it possible to put a date on it already?
I have to call and ask about how soon the rest of the parts will arrive. I will update when I can. I have a very heavy work schedule this week at my other job which is paying for all this.
:)
-
Floor looking real good in the port. :)
Does it have expanded both sides?
I found my stock port very strangely shaped, it looked like the shrinkage of the cast deformed the shape of it at some places more than at others. It would have strange waves in it. Other than that I've found that the factory tried to improve the shape of it with some sort of substance which has a rubber like touch to it....anyone seen this before?
-
Stock Intake Port:
The raised floor flattens out before it reaches the valve. The yellow substance on the roof is some kind of glue. The expanded right hand side looks more like a casting shrinkage to me than intention...
-
The ports are not yet complete in the billet head.
Regarding your stock head, the flattened floor prior to the short turn is a good general shape. The different port volumes on either side of the valve is port bias, intended to create a swirl activity in the mixture .
-
What I ment is, the floor would look like this on the sketch...
...is that good? Basically the flat floor turns back to a circle before it takes the short turn.
-
What I ment is, the floor would look like this on the sketch...
...is that good? Basically the flat floor turns back to a circle before it takes the short turn.
No, as a general statement, that would not typically be a good thing on the floor. But it is hard to say what the actual effects are without a flow test.
-
Fins should be cut this week.
Some detail work with threading and rocker pedestal clearance for covers.
Next week(18th ) the shop is closed for a trip to a drag racing event, and they will return the following week.
I plan to visit that week on my day off.
-
Hello ACE (and everyone else)
I hope I'm not hijacking this thread, but I've been checking in on the progress of this project over the past few months and finally decided to register. I'm looking forward to seeing these become available and you can definitely count me in on purchasing one when they do.
(I'm currently running the performance package from Hitchcock and a 32mm mikuni. I'm currently on the road and can't figure out how to post photos so here is a link to the bike: http://thebikeshed.cc/2016/03/22/chris-zahners-enfield-continental-gt/ )
-Chris
-
Hello ACE (and everyone else)
I hope I'm not hijacking this thread, but I've been checking in on the progress of this project over the past few months and finally decided to register. I'm looking forward to seeing these become available and you can definitely count me in on purchasing one when they do.
(I'm currently running the performance package from Hitchcock and a 32mm mikuni)
Welcome, PrometheanLiver! We know who you are... 8)
-
Welcome, PrometheanLiver! We know who you are... 8)
Ha! Thanks for the warm welcome. Glad to be here. :)
-
Ha! Thanks for the warm welcome. Glad to be here. :)
Hi!
Glad to see you come into the forum, and on to this thread, Chris.
It's getting close to release!
I will continue to update here.
Thanks,
Tom
-
Ha! Thanks for the warm welcome. Glad to be here. :)
Enjoyed your videos! Welcome.
-
Ha! Thanks for the warm welcome. Glad to be here. :)
You know that posting pictures of you bike basically counts as 'posting porn'? :) I love the short tank conversion, I find the reach to the bars a bit of a stretch. So many bit of your bike I'd like to copy.
-
Thanks again guys! There has been a new development with the bike... It's kind of a story and it might be too much of a tangent so I'm going to start a separate thread, but it will involve some major surgery to the engine (and in the end I hope will incorporate this head). I'll title the new thread "the brown trout needs a new heart." I'll leave this thread to stay on topic.
-
It is now a fully functional unit on an engine. Proof of concept and function.
The first 20 degree head ever on any Enfield, and a first in many other ways too. The head might resemble the stock head externally, but it is completely a new Ace design internally.
8)
Here's a video of the prototype head on a GT, starting and running a little bit on the center stand.
(http://i148.photobucket.com/albums/s29/twlmgi/Mobile%20Uploads/th_20160413951146331.mp4) (http://i148.photobucket.com/albums/s29/twlmgi/Mobile%20Uploads/20160413951146331.mp4)
Some sorting and tuning will be the next steps, as we begin to gather data about it, but we have the first important step of having it running on an engine now.
:)
-
Fins should be cut this week.
Some detail work with threading and rocker pedestal clearance for covers.
Next week(18th ) the shop is closed for a trip to a drag racing event, and they will return the following week.
I plan to visit that week on my day off.
Nice, does that mean shipment around end of April?
-
Nice, does that mean shipment around end of April?
If the rockers and valves come in by then, it seems likely. Custom parts delivery has been slow. The stuff was ordered a month ago.
-
One thing I notice is the absence of any "clickety clackety" valve/rocker noise which some have mentioned hearing in the UCE platform.
Top end sounds quiet to me.
Idle is very stable, and even, and has some decent thump in it.
During the moderate revving portion of the video, the engine was velvety smooth sounding, and I really liked that. And a pretty nice little snarl when he closed the throttle down.
I think the overall sound profile of the engine in that video was pretty good, and I was pleased with what I heard.
:)
-
I hope it "snarls" as hell, that's my favourite part of the Manx, G50 orchestra! Although the airbox may dampen it somewhat.
-
I hope it "snarls" as hell, that's my favourite part of the Manx, G50 orchestra! Although the airbox may dampen it somewhat.
A lot of that snarling sound comes from the exhaust valve opening timing.
Our Iron Barrel Fireballs sound just like a Manx, with the Ace Magnum Cams.
I have some prototype UCE cams in process that should be coming along fairly soon, which will mimic a similar cam timing as on our Fireballs, so that should be of interest to you.
;D
-
One thing I notice is the absence of any "clickety clackety" valve/rocker noise which some have mentioned hearing in the UCE platform.
Top end sounds quiet to me.
Idle is very stable, and even, and has some decent thump in it.
During the moderate revving portion of the video, the engine was velvety smooth sounding, and I really liked that. And a pretty nice little snarl when he closed the throttle down.
I think the overall sound profile of the engine in that video was pretty good, and I was pleased with what I heard.
:)
Just as info. I have now sorted the squish which brought the head down a fair bit. All this distance has been compensated at the hydraulic lifters as I did not put shorter pushrods in there. There is hence no way there could be any play left in the valve train. The "clickety clackety" from the valve train did not change a bit.
-
Just as info. I have now sorted the squish which brought the head down a fair bit. All this distance has been compensated at the hydraulic lifters as I did not put shorter pushrods in there. There is hence no way there could be any play left in the valve train. The "clickety clackety" from the valve train did not change a bit.
I've also sorted the squish (partially), and while I was at it I've gone over the cylinder/piston assembly with a micrometer and a set of feelers. The results are all within the max limits for new parts with the exception of the two compression rings, which are both a bit worse, approx. half way between the 'new max' and the 'service max'. Hence I'll probably replace them at about 15,000 miles or so, as I'm at about 8,000 now.
-
Spent the early part of the day at the shop, going over various details for finalizing the billet head. Some of the stuff on MeVoCGT's proto billet head was done manually, and not in the CNC program, and so those things are being put into the program, and I had to go over there and be sure they get it right.
There are a lot of painstaking details in this thing.
On another subject, I asked for a quote on billet rocker covers with some "signature" style that identify with the Ace brand. If they can do them somewhat affordably, I will get some made. This would simplify things instead of having to modify the stock covers, but would cost more.
We'll see what shakes out :)
The fins were still being cut when I left, but the machinist said he would email some photos when he gets a chance.
Left a bunch of Fireball parts there, and some heads to be worked on. A couple of heads almost ready to be shipped as soon as custom valves come in.
That's today's report.
8)
-
Eventually there will be heads. ;D I'm a bit confused about the details. Aren't those included in your cad model so that they can import it in their cam software to create the tool path accordingly or how does it work?
Rockers and valves did arrive?
-
Eventually there will be heads. ;D I'm a bit confused about the details. Aren't those included in your cad model so that they can import it in their cam software to create the tool path accordingly or how does it work?
Rockers and valves did arrive?
On the prototype, some was done on a 5-axis CNC some was done on a 4-axis CNC, and some was done on a Bridgeport mill, a drill press, and a die grinder. This was done at Mondello's prior to their closing.
Then, we had to take the CAD model that they had, and add in the stuff that was done manually by them, convert it all from an earlier version of Mastercam into a later version of MasterCam, do toolpathing for different tooling on a different CNC machine so that it could get everything done on the one 5-axis CNC and make 2 fixtures(one stationary and 1 rotary) to bolt it into this new CNC for doing everything, buying all the new tooling for it, and proving it out (which is going on as we make this first one) and setting cutting depths and speeds.
So, it was a huge undertaking which involved re-doing most of what had been done, adding more programming to do things that had previously been done manually, and re-fixturing and re-tooling, all of which has been extremely expensive and time consuming, and requiring me to get a regular full time day job to pay for all of it.
They didn't show me any rockers or valves, so I am assuming that they have not arrived.
-
Mondello's closing was certainly a big setback for the project, but things of this scope rarely go accordingly to plan IMO, the result will sure be worth it.
-
Mondello's closing was certainly a big setback for the project, but things of this scope rarely go accordingly to plan IMO, the result will sure be worth it.
Yes, a big setback.
I am having to transfer all the knowledge and experience of our sum total of work to this new shop.
Anyway, here's a video on the Centroid A560 5-axis machining center that we are using for the billet head.
At about 90 seconds into the video, the Centroid Tech that they introduce is Lee, and he is the person doing the programming and set-up for our head, and I was working with him yesterday at our meeting at the shop.
https://youtu.be/4mt2Hgk-hbM
Regarding scheduling, these guys are NASCAR CUP builders near Charlotte NC, and we get them between Cup car work and Pro-Stock Drag car work. This is a very high level shop. One of the best in the nation. It is not a local NAPA machinist down on the corner.
:)
-
Awesome video, that's what I love to see. Looks like the perfect place/machine for this kind of a job. :)
...got to use the urban dictionary for all those acronyms though. The stacks I have are from a NEPA machinist. ;D
-
(https://forum.classicmotorworks.com/gallery/medium_1119-250516102427.jpeg)
(https://forum.classicmotorworks.com/gallery/medium_1119-250516102348.jpeg)
(https://forum.classicmotorworks.com/gallery/medium_1119-250516102301.jpeg)
-
(https://forum.classicmotorworks.com/gallery/medium_1119-250516102427.jpeg)
(https://forum.classicmotorworks.com/gallery/medium_1119-250516102348.jpeg)
(https://forum.classicmotorworks.com/gallery/medium_1119-250516102301.jpeg)
Now that does look good. 8) Not much left from the aluminium cube only the useful stuff ;D
-
That is sexy!!!
-
Just got off work.
:)
The pics are the fin rough-in job, and some hole threading such as the oil temp sensor hole.
This is not the finish cut yet.
But it is getting close.
The roller rockers have arrived, and we have 1.7 and 1.8 for the first two heads coming off the line. Valves are not here yet.
It's coming along.
8)
-
Once everything is figured out and the process is finalised, how long would it take the machine to knock one of these out? Just for interests sake...
-
Once everything is figured out and the process is finalised, how long would it take the machine to knock one of these out? Just for interests sake...
I don't have a final machine time figure yet, but probably around a couple of days. Ordering the custom rockers and valves will be the longest waiting issue. They take weeks to come in from their respective manufacturers. If I could stock an inventory of those, it could be a pretty quick delivery time after order. Maybe I will be able to.
:)
-
It's still pretty time consuming then. I guess someone would need to be around to keep an eye on things, change tools and stuff? A couple guys I know CNC machining toy aeroplane moulds. They can set it motion in the evening and leave it going, then in the morning the moulds are cut and ready for polishing. A buttload of work leading up to that point though. Way outside of my skill set.
-
Just got off work.
:)
The pics are the fin rough-in job, and some hole threading such as the oil temp sensor hole.
This is not the finish cut yet.
But it is getting close.
The roller rockers have arrived, and we have 1.7 and 1.8 for the first two heads coming off the line. Valves are not here yet.
It's coming along.
8)
Looking good.
Is everything as it should be?
-
Just wondering, what kind of valve seat inserts? Custom made? ... or are those kind of things off the shelf articles?
-
Looking good.
Is everything as it should be?
That area at the exhaust gasket location is being corrected. It got "out" instead of "in" at that spot.
:)
-
Just wondering, what kind of valve seat inserts? Custom made? ... or are those kind of things off the shelf articles?
We have always used powdered metal seats. They cut well, and are basically industry standard.
They are an off the shelf size.
-
We have always used powdered metal seats. They cut well, and are basically industry standard.
They are an off the shelf size.
OK, so unleaded fuel will do. ;D
-
OK, so unleaded fuel will do. ;D
Yes, all seats on all our heads will work with unleaded.
:)
-
Tom, I remember you mentioned the possibility of making a head with more than two valves. Just out of plain curiosity, does a 3 or 4 valve head with an OHV arrangment exist on the market somewhere?
-
Tom, I remember you mentioned the possibility of making a head with more than two valves. Just out of plain curiosity, does a 3 or 4 valve head with an OHV arrangment exist on the market somewhere?
Yes, on some aftermarket heads for cars. There are heads for Ford and Chevy V8 pushrod engines, also some diesels such
as Duramax.
There is no question that we could do it. I just had to make some hard decisions regarding cost vs intended use of the product. For most people's use, they would not see any significant advantage of the 4-valve package over this more affordable 2-valve which we went with.
All the custom rocker gear would be much more expensive. Currenty, we are using slightly customized shaft mounted roller rockers for a 427 Chevy. This costs us right around $300. For a fully custom 4-valve roller rocker system that could operate off the existing UCE pushrod location, cost would be over $1000 . Plus twice as many valves, seats, springs, etc., and we would have to reconfigure the rocker covers which would require custom billet covers. It's just a lot of money.
I can get almost anything made if someone is willing to buy it. But for most GT owners using a 5500-6500 rpm limit, on stock bottom ends, the 2 valve has plenty of potential.
If someone is intent on a full-out race engine with a short stroke and 4-valve and all the goodies, we absolutely can do it. But it will be a big budget project.
Truthfully, I would love to do it, but I can't afford to bankroll it myself. If I have a buyer with deep pockets, I could get started on it very soon.
8)
-
That would be a fun project, even to just watch.
-
That area at the exhaust gasket location is being corrected. It got "out" instead of "in" at that spot.
:)
The joys of machining,
I guess this is why your checking for these types of anomalies.
-
We have always used powdered metal seats. They cut well, and are basically industry standard.
They are an off the shelf size.
Is it the valve shafts that need specific length in this case and prohibit some of the shelf items?
-
Is it the valve shafts that need specific length in this case and prohibit some of the shelf items?
The valves are all custom in terms of length, stem diameter, head diameter, back shape, keeper groove type and location, seat angles, tip specs, etc.
This is all based on the flow bench research, and for what fits the head, and to set the spring installed height for seat pressure.
-
Some new pics.
Some tool marks are present.
Currently in the media tumbler for deburring.
Top view
(https://forum.classicmotorworks.com/gallery/medium_1119-050616082012.jpeg)
Port
(https://forum.classicmotorworks.com/gallery/1119-050616081936.jpeg)
Intake
(https://forum.classicmotorworks.com/gallery/1119-050616081901.jpeg)
Exhaust
(https://forum.classicmotorworks.com/gallery/1119-050616081823.jpeg)
Oil temp sensor location.
(https://forum.classicmotorworks.com/gallery/1119-050616083608.jpeg)
Fins
(https://forum.classicmotorworks.com/gallery/medium_1119-050616083844.jpeg)
Bottom view
Chamber not finished yet.
(https://forum.classicmotorworks.com/gallery/medium_1119-050616084529.jpeg)
-
Tom, I remember you mentioned the possibility of making a head with more than two valves. Just out of plain curiosity, does a 3 or 4 valve head with an OHV arrangment exist on the market somewhere?
O.k. it's a diesel but the possibility is there.
This D.E.R.A. / R.M.C.S Bike (below) produced in1995 has an Enfield Bullet crankcase (beefed up) and a specially made top end which boasts 4 valves! It is of 547cc and produces between 16-18 BHP. Diesel injector is a modified unit from a car while the gearbox has but 4 gears.
-
O.k. it's a diesel but the possibility is there.
This D.E.R.A. / R.M.C.S Bike (below) produced in1995 has an Enfield Bullet crankcase (beefed up) and a specially made top end which boasts 4 valves! It is of 547cc and produces between 16-18 BHP. Diesel injector is a modified unit from a car while the gearbox has but 4 gears.
Interessting, I'm not getting the point of 4V in a low rev. diesel however. IMO, a 4V head would make sense only in pure race application. With OHV arrangement the longlivity may not be achievable at lets say 10.000rpm. It might be a NASBIKE ;D ;D
-
Some new pics.
Some tool marks are present.
Currently in the media tumbler for deburring.
Top view
(https://forum.classicmotorworks.com/gallery/medium_1119-050616082012.jpeg)
Port
(https://forum.classicmotorworks.com/gallery/1119-050616081936.jpeg)
Intake
(https://forum.classicmotorworks.com/gallery/1119-050616081901.jpeg)
Exhaust
(https://forum.classicmotorworks.com/gallery/1119-050616081823.jpeg)
Oil temp sensor location.
(https://forum.classicmotorworks.com/gallery/1119-050616083608.jpeg)
Fins
(https://forum.classicmotorworks.com/gallery/medium_1119-050616083844.jpeg)
Bottom view
Chamber not finished yet.
(https://forum.classicmotorworks.com/gallery/medium_1119-050616084529.jpeg)
That looks very nice. What plugs are we going to use in these heads again?
-
That looks very nice. What plugs are we going to use in these heads again?
I have all the parts list and stuff at the shop. I don't remember the number off the top of my head.
It's an NGK V-Power racing plug and it is commonly used in the new Dodge Hemi.
-
Resistor plugs?
https://www.ngksparkplugs.com/products/spark-plugs/v-power
I'm going to get the Dynatek coil(s). I don't know if that works with a resistor plug.
-
Resistor plugs?
https://www.ngksparkplugs.com/products/spark-plugs/v-power
I'm going to get the Dynatek coil(s). I don't know if that works with a resistor plug.
I provided the above plugs to MeVoCGT for his installation, and I think he used those coils.
-
Good news. I finally stopped in there yesterday and met Rush. He suggested the new coils to me. I bought a velocity stack.
Meanwhile I'm working on my fuel cable as a priority.
-
Good news. I finally stopped in there yesterday and met Rush. He suggested the new coils to me. I bought a velocity stack.
Meanwhile I'm working on my fuel cable as a priority.
Great!
Rush has been very supportive and engaged in this project, providing a lot of needed information, and providing "boots on the ground" to handle any changes and sorting as they came up. He did a very good job, and I would enthusiastically recommend him to anyone wanting to convert their GT to the Ace head, and needing an experienced mechanic to do it. He has proven himself.
Also, he does have the capacity to provide velocity stacks, as you have seen.
I would like to see more people in that area setting up appointments to have their Ace heads installed by a real pro. And I know that he hopes to see the same. He wants to really open up the Royal Enfield performance market in that area. I want to help him, too.
;D
-
I would like to see more people in that area setting up appointments to have their Ace heads installed by a real pro. And I know that he hopes to see the same. He wants to really open up the Royal Enfield performance market in that area. I want to help him, too.
;D
Would certainly be mutually beneficial. Thinking big picture, using Racetech and Dynojet as examples, having "tuning centers" that are approved facilities would be a great end game!
-
I've known Rush for ten years, and he has always amazed me at his understanding of the combustion engine. He's one of those guys who just gets it. One of those mechs that hears the problem as you pull into the lot.
He and Jeremy are talking about putting together an aftermarket coil kit for the UCEs. They have been noticing a lot of problems with the stock ones.
-
He and Jeremy are talking about putting together an aftermarket coil kit for the UCEs. They have been noticing a lot of problems with the stock ones.
I'd be interested in a twin spark setup. My stock coil isn't great either - the sodding cap came of in my hand the other day! Luckily it's only the screw in type. Not very confidence inspiring....
-
I'd be interested in a twin spark setup. My stock coil isn't great either - the sodding cap came of in my hand the other day! Luckily it's only the screw in type. Not very confidence inspiring....
PM me if you want the shop contact info.
-
I am interested too if they come up with some plug & play solution and save myself some headache.
-
Here's a couple of pics of the head after the walnut shell media tumbling process.
(https://forum.classicmotorworks.com/gallery/medium_1119-160616085453.jpeg)
(https://forum.classicmotorworks.com/gallery/1119-160616085616.jpeg)
There are some light tool marks on some surfaces, and chatter marks on some of the edges that we are working on smoothing, and then another tumbling job.
:)
-
Nice, It's going to look even better once its on our bikes! ;)
-
Nice, It's going to look even better once its on our bikes! ;)
It would look fine on the bike right now. These superficial marks wouldn't even be noticed with the head on the bike. I am not being obsessive about it, but we do want to get the finishing process standardized, and looking as good as possible.
I an looking at using this kind of finish as standard on the Gen 2.
-
It would look fine on the bike right now. These superficial marks wouldn't even be noticed with the head on the bike. I am not being obsessive about it, but we do want to get the finishing process standardized, and looking as good as possible.
I an looking at using this kind of finish as standard on the Gen 2.
I think the finish looks very good. When it come's to me I have a quality over time preference, so no worries. My bike is ridable and already pretty good with the mods I did. I've made over 1000miles after reassembly with zero issues.
-
There are some light tool marks on some surfaces, and chatter marks on some of the edges that we are working on smoothing, and then another tumbling job.
:)
[/quote]
I think that will look good then.
-
Dyno chart from the first prototype Ace Billet GT on CGT.
I just wanted to also have it here on this thread for people who are following this thread for progress.
:)
(https://forum.classicmotorworks.com/gallery/medium_1119-290616150709.jpeg)
-
Latest combustion chamber work.
(https://forum.classicmotorworks.com/gallery/medium_1119-020716160555.jpeg)
-
This will help with understanding dyno's and dyno pulls. http://www.drdyno.com/AIM_2006-07.html
-
Yes, on some aftermarket heads for cars. There are heads for Ford and Chevy V8 pushrod engines, also some diesels such
as Duramax.
There is no question that we could do it. I just had to make some hard decisions regarding cost vs intended use of the product. For most people's use, they would not see any significant advantage of the 4-valve package over this more affordable 2-valve which we went with.
All the custom rocker gear would be much more expensive. Currenty, we are using slightly customized shaft mounted roller rockers for a 427 Chevy. This costs us right around $300. For a fully custom 4-valve roller rocker system that could operate off the existing UCE pushrod location, cost would be over $1000 . Plus twice as many valves, seats, springs, etc., and we would have to reconfigure the rocker covers which would require custom billet covers. It's just a lot of money.
I can get almost anything made if someone is willing to buy it. But for most GT owners using a 5500-6500 rpm limit, on stock bottom ends, the 2 valve has plenty of potential.
If someone is intent on a full-out race engine with a short stroke and 4-valve and all the goodies, we absolutely can do it. But it will be a big budget project.
Truthfully, I would love to do it, but I can't afford to bankroll it myself. If I have a buyer with deep pockets, I could get started on it very soon.
8)
I've just found out from a colleague who happens to own a Rudge, that they have a 4 valve head with OHV arangement. It seams Triumph & Indian did build 4 valve heads with OHV arangements too in the 30s. Pretty interessting that they did experiment with 4 valves so long time ago.
http://earlymotor.com/forsale/rudge-radial/index.htm
-
I've just found out from a colleague who happens to own a Rudge, that they have a 4 valve head with OHV arangement. It seams Triumph & Indian did build 4 valve heads with OHV arangements too in the 30s. Pretty interessting that they did experiment with 4 valves so long time ago.
http://earlymotor.com/forsale/rudge-radial/index.htm
As did Honda with the CX500-650s I the late 70s, early 80s.
Highly underrated engine in a really under developed chassis.
-
3 or 4 valve is do-able.
But trying to find enough market at the price it would cost to make very low production is another matter.
If I was a motorcycle factory making hundreds of thousands of motorcycles, then it would be a much more feasible thing, because of scale of production.
If Enfield had hired me for induction engineer last year, there wouldn't be any more power problem needing to be solved by the aftermarket.
-
If Enfield had hired me for induction engineer last year, there wouldn't be any more power problem needing to be solved by the aftermarket.
That depend's who would be your boss in that organisation and how much he would be scared of you undermining his authority. ;)
-
If Enfield had hired me for induction engineer last year, there wouldn't be any more power problem needing to be solved by the aftermarket.
And they would possibly have saved themselves the costs of hiring Pierre Terblance formerly of Ducatti, James Young and Simon Warburton from Triumph, Mark Wells and Ian Wride from Xenphyia.
-
And they would possibly have saved themselves the costs of hiring Pierre Terblance formerly of Ducatti, James Young and Simon Warburton from Triumph, Mark Wells and Ian Wride from Xenphyia.
Good point!
:)
-
And they would possibly have saved themselves the costs of hiring Pierre Terblance formerly of Ducatti, James Young and Simon Warburton from Triumph, Mark Wells and Ian Wride from Xenphyia.
Do you chase Ace around the board to kinda just snidely give him shit or am I missing something?
-
Do you chase Ace around the board to kinda just snidely give him shit or am I missing something?
No I do not and yes you are missing something. So to avoid getting further off on the wrong foot I will send you a PM.
-
No I do not and yes you are missing something. So to avoid getting further off on the wrong foot I will send you a PM.
mmmmmmk
-
Any new updates with the Heads progress?
-
Any new updates with the Heads progress?
Last week they were working on the rocker pedestals. He didn't have the height figure for the shaft, and the original prototype head is on MeVoCGT's bike, so he is re-doing the pedestals to get rocker geometry and fit under the covers.
I didn't talk to him Friday, so it will be at least Monday until I can ask him anything.
-
any progress on the head?
-
any progress on the head?
I am waiting to get some pics after the latest tumbling.
He wasn't able to work on it this week because some other work was needing attention at his shop.
In other news, he has added another A560 5-axis CNC, and hired the programmer full time.
:)
-
All the holes have been threaded.
Final valve job and valve installation is scheduled for next week.
Then setting the pedestal height for the rocker shafts, and fitting under the rocker covers comes next.
At that point, it should be done!
-
Nice.. ;D
-
The billet heads will have threaded oil squirter passages for both intake and exhaust, so that orifices can be changed to adjust oil squirter volume individually.
We will use Holley carburettor jets for metering. We plan to install .028" orifice on the heads as standard. Adjustment may be easily made by the owner, if desired, simply by installing different jet size.
:)
-
Pics
Valve guides installed.
(https://forum.classicmotorworks.com/gallery/1119-250816131241.jpeg)
Valve job being done
(https://forum.classicmotorworks.com/gallery/medium_1119-250816131417.jpeg)
Head on valve job machine
(https://forum.classicmotorworks.com/gallery/medium_1119-250816131635.jpeg)
Exhaust port close-up
(https://forum.classicmotorworks.com/gallery/1119-250816131528.jpeg)
-
And here is a pic of the oil feed hole that is threaded for a Holley carb jet for metering the oil squirter feed. Located at right center area of the picture. It provides general top end oiling, in addition to the pushrod oiling to the rockers.
8)
(https://forum.classicmotorworks.com/gallery/medium_1119-260816062058.jpeg)
-
It's a work of art! :)
The 0.028" orifice will be slowing the flow down a bit I assume or is it's purpose to distribute the oil better?
-
It's a work of art! :)
The 0.028" orifice will be slowing the flow down a bit I assume or is it's purpose to distribute the oil better?
It is a little bit of both.
The previous bare oil feed hole in the prototype was .040 (~1mm). Report was posted of heavy oiling of the top end, so we decided to make it adjustable by installing metering jets, so the user could set it the way he wants. We are using .028" as a reducer, which cuts some of the volume, but makes the oil jet stronger for plenty of splash off the inside of the top of the rocker cover.
Holley air bleed jet is the spec.
-
Update!
:)
Rocker posts installed.
Roller rockers in place, with light test springs on valves.
Setting rocker geometry, and testing fit under the rocker covers.
(https://forum.classicmotorworks.com/gallery/1119-020916071143.jpeg)
(https://forum.classicmotorworks.com/gallery/medium_1119-020916070941.jpeg)
Valves installed in chamber at specified depth with all valve job flow cuts and seat cuts done.
Note that we pulled the threaded spark plug holes further down into the chamber, compared to the original prototype, for a little more compression and ignition a bit closer to center of chamber.
(https://forum.classicmotorworks.com/gallery/medium_1119-020916072041.jpeg)
The chamber looks shallower than a stock chamber because it is. Remember that this is a 20-degree head (valve angle). It's the only 20-degree head ever made for an Enfield, and it follows the current trend of improvements in 2-valve performance head design.
-
...well, a rised intake port and it would have all features of a racing machine I guess. :)
-
...well, a rised intake port and it would have all features of a racing machine I guess. :)
To raise the port any higher would require changes to the head steady, the airbox, and possibly the frame and fuel tank.
It is as high as it can feasibly be for the existing platform.
It could be higher if there is willingness to make changes in those physical areas.
-
To raise the port any higher would require changes to the head steady, the airbox, and possibly the frame and fuel tank.
It is as high as it can feasibly be for the existing platform.
It could be higher if there is willingness to make changes in those physical areas.
Yes I know, I was just being excited about how close it is to ideal... ;D
-
Looking good Tom.
Yes I know, I was just being excited about how close it is to ideal... ;D
oTTo I think your just excited ;)
-
Otto, You should be.... ;)
-
Looking good Tom.
oTTo I think your just excited ;)
You bet I am.... :)
-
Looks great, Tom. Can't wait 'till this winter to finally get going on mine. Chumma shared that idea about the oiling jets with me a ways back. Clever. I truly hope the response is worth all of the effort.
-
Thanks, Chuck!
I have an upgrade for your GP head that is getting worked out now on Rod's and Justin's. I will let you know.
Regarding this billet head, I'm taking the "Field of Dreams" approach. "If I build it, they will come."
:)
-
Thanks, Chuck!
I have an upgrade for your GP head that is getting worked out now on Rod's and Justin's. I will let you know.
Regarding this billet head, I'm taking the "Field of Dreams" approach. "If I build it, they will come."
:)
Upgrade, huh? I'm intrigued.
-
Regarding this billet head, I'm taking the "Field of Dreams" approach. "If I build it, they will come."
:)
...nothing for the Pockemon Go crowd I guess, but maybe some of them will be set straight in not to distant future. ;D
Tom, the head looks like it will be soon finished , how is it going with the cams?
-
Upgrade, huh? I'm intrigued.
I spoke with Chumma about it last night. He has the details.
-
...nothing for the Pockemon Go crowd I guess, but maybe some of them will be set straight in not to distant future. ;D
Tom, the head looks like it will be soon finished , how is it going with the cams?
At present, I only have one set of those cams I showed before. They are longer duration, but no more lift. Should extent top end some, at possible expense of some low rpm torque.
Am conversing with AusGT about some other options, currently.
I think that the Hitchcock cams have a bit too much lobe lift, but it might be worth measuring the actual valve lift with them in there. If it fits, it may be a real rip-roaring package, however potentially somewhat short-lived.
-
Ok..my goal for this bike is to make it a good road bike. I don't want to go beyond 6Trpm as I don't want to sacrifice life-length neither too much of the low rev torque. Ideally the peak torque should come 500rpm later than what it does with stock cams. The peak hp should be as much as possible peaking at 6000 or slightly before. I think i may not get this out of the HMC cams as they may reach their full potential at little too high revs. So the duration extended cams might be the way to go for me. If available?
Maybe AusGT has similar goals?
-
At present, I only have one set of those cams I showed before. They are longer duration, but no more lift. Should extent top end some, at possible expense of some low rpm torque.
Am conversing with AusGT about some other options, currently.
I think that the Hitchcock cams have a bit too much lobe lift, but it might be worth measuring the actual valve lift with them in there. If it fits, it may be a real rip-roaring package, however potentially somewhat short-lived.
Tom, could you define "short lived"?
-
At present, I only have one set of those cams I showed before. They are longer duration, but no more lift. Should extent top end some, at possible expense of some low rpm torque.
Am conversing with AusGT about some other options, currently.
I think that the Hitchcock cams have a bit too much lobe lift, but it might be worth measuring the actual valve lift with them in there. If it fits, it may be a real rip-roaring package, however potentially somewhat short-lived.
At the loss of low rpm torque might not be all that bad. Right now, it pulls below 3000 rpms. Before the head was installed, I wouldn't try pulling on the motor till between 3000-3500 rpms anyway. So it may be a good combination.
-
Tom, could you define "short lived"?
Probably not exactly the way you would like it defined.
But, suffice it to say that putting 350 pounds of spring pressure on the valve train at 3000 times per minute ( 6000 + rpm) is going to increase wear in a significant way. I am not worried about my parts handling it, but the Enfield parts down below might not like it much.
-
Probably not exactly the way you would like it defined.
But, suffice it to say that putting 350 pounds of spring pressure on the valve train at 3000 times per minute ( 6000 + rpm) is going to increase wear in a significant way. I am not worried about my parts handling it, but the Enfield parts down below might not like it much.
And just to refresh my memory, your head sidesteps this issue how? It would seem increasing the stresses in any way through increased performance would lead to accelerated wear. Yet, if I'm not mistaken, you have stated the bottom end is sufficient as stock to handle the increased performance.
Am I confused? I want increased performance eventually, but not at the cost of greatly increased wear to the point of early failure.
-
Ok..my goal for this bike is to make it a good road bike. I don't want to go beyond 6Trpm as I don't want to sacrifice life-length neither too much of the low rev torque. Ideally the peak torque should come 500rpm later than what it does with stock cams. The peak hp should be as much as possible peaking at 6000 or slightly before. I think i may not get this out of the HMC cams as they may reach their full potential at little too high revs. So the duration extended cams might be the way to go for me. If available?
Maybe AusGT has similar goals?
I am working on it, and yes my goals are similar to yours. I'm also hoping that same profile might increase the performance for those with the stage 1 kit with a re-tune.
-
And just to refresh my memory, your head sidesteps this issue how? It would seem increasing the stresses in any way through increased performance would lead to accelerated wear. Yet, if I'm not mistaken, you have stated the bottom end is sufficient as stock to handle the increased performance.
Am I confused? I want increased performance eventually, but not at the cost of greatly increased wear to the point of early failure.
Okay, to be clear, I was talking about the use of much higher lift cams such as Hitchcock's cams in combination with our high ratio rockers. I was not discussing the use of our head with stock cams as we originally intended. I do not predict high wear issues with our intended applications.
Stock cams, or even some moderate lobe lift increase, do not compress the valve springs to maximum, so the resulting pressures are not extreme.
But, when much higher lifting cam lobes are introduced, which take our valve lift to maximum potential (~.600" lift), spring pressures are also maximized. This increases load on the entire valve operating system, which includes the cams and lifters and spindles. Increased load means increased wear rate.
So to sum up, if higher performance with minimal wear increase is the goal, then using cams with either stock lobe lift, or modest lobe lift increase, won't push spring pressures into a high wear situation.
As a general rule, pushing more power and rpms increases wear on an increasing curve. Hitting the best spot on the curve for your overall expectations is the goal. We set our intentions for this head to provide a good spot on that curve with stock cams. Pursuing more power and rpms is available, but some may/will have some costs in terms of reliabilty/longevity. I'm sure that you understand this. We cannot get around the laws of physics. So, we advise users that this curve of power vs wear is in play when modifying engines. We aimed for what we estimated to be the "sweet spot" on that curve, and also for expense of not having to purchase cams, and ease of installation by keeping it all in the top end of the engine.
But, there is room for plenty more power for users who are aggressively after more power and are willing to recognize that it will cost more and need more frequent service or repair.
:)
-
Okay, to be clear, I was talking about the use of much higher lift cams such as Hitchcock's cams in combination with our high ratio rockers. I was not discussing the use of our head with stock cams as we originally intended. I do not predict high wear issues with our intended applications.
Stock cams, or even some moderate lobe lift increase, do not compress the valve springs to maximum, so the resulting pressures are not extreme.
But, when much higher lifting cam lobes are introduced, which take our valve lift to maximum potential (~.600" lift), spring pressures are also maximized. This increases load on the entire valve operating system, which includes the cams and lifters and spindles. Increased load means increased wear rate.
So to sum up, if higher performance with minimal wear increase is the goal, then using cams with either stock lobe lift, or modest lobe lift increase, won't push spring pressures into a high wear situation.
As a general rule, pushing more power and rpms increases wear on an increasing curve. Hitting the best spot on the curve for your overall expectations is the goal. We set our intentions for this head to provide a good spot on that curve with stock cams. Pursuing more power and rpms is available, but some may/will have some costs in terms of reliabilty/longevity. I'm sure that you understand this. We cannot get around the laws of physics. So, we advise users that this curve of power vs wear is in play when modifying engines. We aimed for what we estimated to be the "sweet spot" on that curve, and also for expense of not having to purchase cams, and ease of installation by keeping it all in the top end of the engine.
But, there is room for plenty more power for users who are aggressively after more power and are willing to recognize that it will cost more and need more frequent service or repair.
:)
Perfect. I do want more, but rarely do I come close to or exceed 5000RPM and don't expect that to change, given the area and way I ride. I'd just like that tractor-like pull we get off the bottom to extend a bit further up the needle.
-
Perfect. I do want more, but rarely do I come close to or exceed 5000RPM and don't expect that to change, given the area and way I ride. I'd just like that tractor-like pull we get off the bottom to extend a bit further up the needle.
Get ready to pull some stumps then. It will pull harder than that with just the head...????
-
FJ, if you don't want to go above 5000rpm, than this head is technically as good as it gets with stock cams. 40hp @ 5000rpm out of 535cc is pretty impressive.
Anyways just my opinion, maybe Tom has one more joker hidden somewhere. ;) ;D
-
On an unrelated note, Carberry, now in production in India, is planning on using the UCE heads for their builds. I am not sure if they plan to source the heads from RE or do their own castings. Collaborating with them may bring the cost down in the second scenario.
Here is a link to their progress on their facebook page: https://www.facebook.com/Carberryvtwin/
-
FJ, if you don't want to go above 5000rpm, than this head is technically as good as it gets with stock cams. 40hp @ 5000rpm out of 535cc is pretty impressive.
Anyways just my opinion, maybe Tom has one more joker hidden somewhere. ;) ;D
It's about 1.25 hp, and 1.12 ft-lbs torque, per cubic inch.
For some perspective in comparison to classic American muscle cars, a big block like a 427 with the same 1.25/1.12 per cube output would be 533 hp and 478 ft- lbs.
Or a small block like a 350 would have 437 hp and 392 ft lbs.
Maybe not race car performance, but quite respectable for the street, and at just a touch over 5000 rpm as Otto points out.
Regarding the next "joker" up my sleeve, Otto's head has a pair of 1.8:1 roller rockers on it, instead of the 1.7:1 ones on the other head. So, it should output even more, especially in torque.
We shall see.
This head being shown in the pics is Otto's. It is getting the 1.8 rockers, and will ship pretty soon.
8)
-
Cool, Santa will be early again. ;)
Other than the performance I am very curious what noises the engine is going to emit. Particularly having the valve train in mind....
-
Cool, Santa will be early again. ;)
Other than the performance I am very curious what noises the engine is going to emit. Particularly having the valve train in mind....
The reports that have been posted by MeVoCGT said valve train was quiet with the Ace billet GT head.
I would be interested in hearing him elucidate further, if he wishes.
:)
-
On an unrelated note, Carberry, now in production in India, is planning on using the UCE heads for their builds. I am not sure if they plan to source the heads from RE or do their own castings. Collaborating with them may bring the cost down in the second scenario.
Here is a link to their progress on their facebook page: https://www.facebook.com/Carberryvtwin/
I think it's unfortunately unlikely that Carberry will cast heads when they can get them ready from RE.
What volume would be required to come below the cost of a billet is nevertheless an interesting question. Some new ways are now available resulting out of the 3d printing methods which are supposed to get the cost down. Apparently it should be possible to print direcly the mould without the need for a pattern...it would need some investigation.
for example
http://www.voxeljet.de/en/services/sand/
-
It's about 1.25 hp, and 1.12 ft-lbs torque, per cubic inch.
For some perspective in comparison to classic American muscle cars, a big block like a 427 with the same 1.25/1.12 per cube output would be 533 hp and 478 ft- lbs.
Or a small block like a 350 would have 437 hp and 392 ft lbs.
Maybe not race car performance, but quite respectable for the street, and at just a touch over 5000 rpm as Otto points out.
Regarding the next "joker" up my sleeve, Otto's head has a pair of 1.8:1 roller rockers on it, instead of the 1.7:1 ones on the other head. So, it should output even more, especially in torque.
We shall see.
This head being shown in the pics is Otto's. It is getting the 1.8 rockers, and will ship pretty soon.
8)
Good perspective. 40 at the crank puts low 30s at the wheel, which will allow me to better run with a few more of the crazies I run into. Their sceptical when I hook on, but generally don't run away until they hit highways between the fun stuff.
I'd like to f@&$ with that a bit...just gotta finish helping wifey nest. House first...
-
The reports that have been posted by MeVoCGT said valve train was quiet with the Ace billet GT head.
I would be interested in hearing him elucidate further, if he wishes.
:)
With the new can and header, it's louder. I wear my earplugs whenever I ride it. It doesn't have that sewing machine ticking that was there on the old head. So, engine sounds seem a lot quieter. I want to try to record the sounds of the engine, but am going to talk to my sound engineer about the best way to do that. Keep you posted on the sound file...
Cool, Santa will be early again. ;)
Other than the performance I am very curious what noises the engine is going to emit. Particularly having the valve train in mind....
That's my line........????
-
Some pics of the assembled head, in basically finished form.
(https://forum.classicmotorworks.com/gallery/medium_1119-210916084700.jpeg)
(https://forum.classicmotorworks.com/gallery/medium_1119-210916084759.jpeg)
Finished chamber
(https://forum.classicmotorworks.com/gallery/medium_1119-210916084950.jpeg)
So, now I need to beg your indulgence for a little more time.
I have sent the head to the rocker company to see if they can provide an offset rocker on the pushrod ends. We are also asking for some low-profile adjusters. This would give us a more vertical pushrod angle, and likely require less(or perhaps no) modification to the rocker covers. I will have to wait a bit for that. I thought it would be worth some wait if we can get an improvement.
:)
-
That sounds like a good idea. It may do also the modification on the pushrod tunnels in the barrel unnecessary.
...but, more waiting. :'(
It looks really good so far.
-
What are those holes about again? ... They are not on the stock head if memory serves. Can't be the oil passage, that's the little hole on the left?
-
What are those holes about again? ... They are not on the stock head if memory serves. Can't be the oil passage, that's the little hole on the left?
Those are where we drill the vertical oil passages that go up to the top for the oil squirters. They intersect the horizontal oil passage that houses the oil temp sensor, and is fed from that feed hole which you alluded to. They get plugged with little set screws that don't protrude. It makes a nice clean-out of the oil passages easy. Any sludge or particles can fall to the bottom like a plumbing trap. When cleaning time comes with the head off for decoking, just unscrew the set screws, and push a small bore brush thru the passages.
The set screws will be Loctited, and they could not back out anyway because the head gasket is under them.
Just part of the manufacturing process that has a side benefit. :)
-
Looks good Ace, Rocker mods sound good.
Did you get a mould of the combustion chamber?
-
Looks good Ace, Rocker mods sound good.
Did you get a mould of the combustion chamber?
He will get that done soon. He is finishing a few Iron Barrel heads right now.
-
Along with the chamber mold, I also asked the machinist for the valve "free drop" figure. Free Drop is how far the valve can open before it passes the plane of the head deck surface.
This will give us a figure of how far we can have the cams lift the valves open around TDC with a flat top piston, and avoid piston-to-valve contact. Crucial information for cam design.
:)
-
If doing a new flat top piston it could have small cut-outs for the valves and not be the limiting factor on the cam design.
-
If doing a new flat top piston it could have small cut-outs for the valves and not be the limiting factor on the cam design.
We will have valve reliefs on our piston, or at least have it as an option. It is a good idea to have compatibility with the standard engine for milder performance options. But, we also want to please the hard core performance enthusiasts.
-
If it was a flat top how high would the compression ratio be?
-
If it was a flat top how high would the compression ratio be?
About 10.5:1 static compression ratio.
As the inlet valve closing timing gets later, more static compression ratio is needed to compensate because there is less remaining compression stroke left to make compression. If you make the inlet valve closing later, and don't bump the static compression, then the lower rpm torque production will have some amount of reduction. The amount varies depending on how much later you close the inlet valve.
-
So how does one estimate the compression ratio at peak torque rpm. Shouldn't that be theoretically higher than the static ratio if a volumetric efficiency over 100% is present due to various dynamic flow effects.
-
So how does one estimate the compression ratio at peak torque rpm. Shouldn't that be theoretically higher than the static ratio if a volumetric efficiency over 100% is present due to various dynamic flow effects.
That's difficult to estimate. We consider the cold cranking test to approximate what we may get up to torque peak, because there is so much time for the cylinder to fill that we figure that's about it.
The static ratio gets specified to make as much cranking compression as feasible for the fuel and chamber characteristics, and this mainly affects rpms up to torque peak. Then, breathing ability takes over from there up to hp peak.
We figure somewhere around 185 psi or so, is probably a good target for this chamber on pump fuel. Maybe some experiments can be done to bump it a little at a time until it can't control detonation. It might be able to go a little higher. We just have no data from experiments yet.
-
Just wondering if I do the installation with the 1.8 rockers as on the pic. Would there be any technical advantage to switch later to the rockers with the offset? I guess no, other that it would have been more installation friendly from the beginning, just double checking.
-
Just wondering if I do the installation with the 1.8 rockers as on the pic. Would there be any technical advantage to switch later to the rockers with the offset? I guess no, other that it would have been more installation friendly from the beginning, just double checking.
The main reasons are to reduce or eliminate the modifications on the rocker covers, and in the same time get a more vertical pushrod angle which can reduce or eliminate the need to modify the pushrod tunnels in the barrel to clearance the pushrods.
It is primarily to ease the installation issues which were seen on the prototype, so that it is as easy to do as we can make it.
It all depends on what the rocker company has to offer. If they don't have something to suit this need, then we will go with what is already there.
-
For me and in my personal experience with the Bullet. All things the same as far as cams, pistons and chamber volume. 10.3 static, seems to be the magic number. Raising the compression above that with deck height for example, it wont ping.... dynamic compression is always lower then static compression. But HP and Torque DOES starts to drop off. Probably the effects fighting to compress that mix....
-
https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Volumetric_efficiency
I'm not sure about that GHG, although in our case it might be true. WiKi says a volumetric efficiency of 130% has been reached in a naturally aspired engine, I would think that in this case the dynamic compression would exceed the static at a particular rpm of course.
-
The dynamic compression is the working compression. The static compression ratio is set to give the desired pressures when working in concert with the intake valve closing timing.
The later that the intake valve closes, the shorter the swept length (volume) of the cylinder remains to build compression. So, the piston crown is made to provide the necessary static compression ratio to compensate for that.
A "10.5:1" piston might be too high for an early closing intake valve, or too low for a very late closing one.
For example, the FAB 500 racer of BW's has a static compression ratio of 13.5:1. But with the very late closing intake cam he uses, the cold cranking compression test pressure is only around 200 psi. He reduced it from 14:1, and 229 psi because it was a little too close to that 2" intake valve, and there were some sign that the valve was just slightly touching the piston at high revs. That bike runs on pure methanol, and could handle 229 psi, but there were the other factors involved. It still hits 1.85 hp per cubic inch.
So basically, this subject must be discussed in context with the valve timing, as well as the displacement and chamber and fuel, etc. It loses meaning when mentioning just the static compression figure alone.
-
...and that's where my question started. The dynamic compression is not constant over all rpms, is it? When the engine turns very slowly all the mixture which is in the cylinder during the ovelap gets pushed out again and does not get compressed. However if the engine runs at peak torque where the most mixture gets compressed making the biggest bang in the cylinder the dynamic compression must be highest. Peak hp has smaller bangs again but more of them per given time period.
So I was basically wondering how much the working compression changes during the rpm range.
Hope I make sense... ::) :)
-
...and that's where my question started. The dynamic compression is not constant over all rpms, is it? When the engine turns very slowly all the mixture which is in the cylinder during the ovelap gets pushed out again and does not get compressed. However if the engine runs at peak torque where the most mixture gets compressed making the biggest bang in the cylinder the dynamic compression must be highest. Peak hp has smaller bangs again but more of them per given time period.
So I was basically wondering how much the working compression changes during the rpm range.
Hope I make sense... ::) :)
Yes, but we have no access to the kind of pressure measuring equipment to measure the "in cylinder" pressure of the running engine.
-
Yes, but we have no access to the kind of pressure measuring equipment to measure the "in cylinder" pressure of the running engine.
....looking at the torque chart, won't it be proportional to the torque and rise by the same ratio? ...the theory might be too simplistic but as a close estimate?
-
....looking at the torque chart, won't it be proportional to the torque and rise by the same ratio? ...the theory might be too simplistic but as a close estimate?
It seems logical, as an estimate.
I have not tried doing that, but it seems an interesting exercise.
:)
-
https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Volumetric_efficiency
I'm not sure about that GHG, although in our case it might be true. WiKi says a volumetric efficiency of 130% has been reached in a naturally aspired engine, I would think that in this case the dynamic compression would exceed the static at a particular rpm of course.
Yes.... I think something got lost in translation and we are mixing up our terminology . ;) Static compression RATIO as measured in a STATIC motor is always fixed, Dynamic compression RATIO is always fixed for a given motor, unless it has variable cam timing.... which our does not. And it will always be less then the static compression ratio... that rod moves and that valve has to close before anything is compressed, as you said. Your Volumetric efficiency WILL increase and vary over the RPM range depending on how the motor is set up and with it, the CYLINDER PRESSURE. So when you do a "static" compression test, which is really NOT static, because your turning the motor over.... It's just giving you an approximation as to what Cylinder pressure will be ... and gauge and judge to get in the ballpark of what it will be at higher rpm's. In our case, for ethanol laced pump piss . ;D
A good demonstration of this is doing a compression test.... I don't want to say "static compression test", but that's what they call it. ::)
Stick a compression tester in your spark plug hole , and do the test with your kick starter. Do it with the throttle plate closed and then do it with the throttle plate open. See the difference ?
Now do it with the starter motor this time, and again with the throttle plate closed vs open, again see the difference ? Now compare those to numbers to what was done the kick starter...
You also can do this test with not only internal engine components... like pistons and cams and compression ratio's and such. But things like different intake's and exhaust's. the numbers will vary to some degree, and maybe be an indicator of things.
-
I guess terminology. Static CR is clear = (swept volume+chamber volume) ÷ chamber volume. I think no further discuss required, this number is the one which the mfgr's provide.
Dynamic CR, however even WiKi is not very clear about but it says the same thing as you said that it is always lower than the static CR. In that case each engine would have a fixed dynamic CR which describes the compression at low revs. Basically the swept volume would be shortened in this calculation until the intake valve is closed.
Now there would need to be a definition of the "actual" CR because that's not fixed. That would require to know the actual amount of mixture getting squashed. And here I argue that it can be more than the static CR.
IMO in your engine what most likely happend is when you increased the static CR beyond the 10.3, the "actual" compression was so high at peak torque rpm that it would partially ping deteriorating the torque.
I hope i didn't open a can of worms again. ;D ....anyway it's academic discussion because the optimum can be found only in an experiment as you already did.
-
I guess terminology. Static CR is clear = (swept volume+chamber volume) ÷ chamber volume. I think no further discuss required, this number is the one which the mfgr's provide.
Dynamic CR, however even WiKi is not very clear about but it says the same thing as you said that it is always lower than the static CR. In that case each engine would have a fixed dynamic CR which describes the compression at low revs. Basically the swept volume would be shortened in this calculation until the intake valve is closed.
Now there would need to be a definition of the "actual" CR because that's not fixed. That would need to know the actual amount of mixture getting squashed. And here I argue that it can be more than the static CR.
IMO in your engine what most likely happend is when you increased the static CR beyond the 10.3, the "actual" compression was so high at peak torque rpm that it would partially ping deteriorating the torque.
Yup.... I think actual cylinder pressure for a given RPM might be about perfect. The term "Dynamic compression ratio " Is also a bit of a misnomer as well. Because it's a measurement of the the location of the piston when the valve is closed, in a fixed position..... not "dynamically" moving. So that swept volume is now less then Static compression ratio, which is measured from TDC to BDC.
And yes, for pump fuel on my bike that may have come into play ..... However , I saw nor heard any indicators of it at 10.5 -1. Flow, timing, fuel type , mechanical advantage of the fuel type, BTU content and afr ratio's and etc.and etc. and etc. come into play as well.
-
So any chance there's 2 pieces of aluminium in the CNC now?
-
So any chance there's 2 pieces of aluminium in the CNC now?
2 new billets have been ordered.
:)
-
2 new billets have been ordered.
:)
So, how fast can they make a head now with all the things already set up?
-
So, how fast can they make a head now with all the things already set up?
We will find out with these 2 units. The only real change will be the use of a fly-cutter tool to rough out the fins, and finish them with the end mill. Doing all the fin cuts with the end mill resulted in a slower cut, and left some tool chatter marks which we hope to reduce.
-
We will find out with these 2 units. The only real change will be the use of a fly-cutter tool to rough out the fins, and finish them with the end mill. Doing all the fin cuts with the end mill resulted in a slower cut, and left some tool chatter marks which we hope to reduce.
I wonder, does a 3d model in step or stl file exist? ...if so it would be fairly easy to add 2-3mm on all surfaces which need to be machined and find out how much the rapid proto cast would be vs billet + lot of machining. It does not need any draft angles and undercuts do not matter either.
-
I wonder, does a 3d model in step or stl file exist? ...if so it would be fairly easy to add 2-3mm on all surfaces which need to be machined and find out how much the rapid proto cast would be vs billet + lot of machining.
There is a 3d model. The machine program is Mastercam 9. If the 3d model is in some other format, then it should be possible. From what I have read, files can be converted to stl or step, if it is not already in that format.
This is an early model screenshot that I had saved from last year.
(https://forum.classicmotorworks.com/gallery/medium_1119-220316141834.jpeg)
-
There is a 3d model. The machine program is Mastercam 9. If the 3d model is in some other format, then it should be possible. From what I have read, files can be converted to stl or step, if it is not already in that format.
This is an early model screenshot that I had saved from last year.
(https://forum.classicmotorworks.com/gallery/medium_1119-220316141834.jpeg)
The CNC/CAM model includes all tool paths and machining information. All that would not be needed, just the solid 3d would do. The surfaces which need machining typically need to be 3mm thickend up. Threads and holes closed, optionally cast on references can be added. Finished is the casting model.... :)
-
I'm considering using a manual decomp. on my ACE head instead of the second plug. Anyone has experience, recommendations?
-
I'm considering using a manual decomp. on my ACE head instead of the second plug. Anyone has experience, recommendations?
We can make an adapter with a decomp that fits the spark plug hole, if you want.
-
We can make an adapter with a decomp that fits the spark plug hole, if you want.
I'm still in the decision process weather two plugs are worth it or not. Sometimes I take too long time. ::) Anyway, there is nothing on the market that would just fit? Also, what sort of plugs fit in the head?
-
I'm still in the decision process weather two plugs are worth it or not. Sometimes I take too long time. ::) Anyway, there is nothing on the market that would just fit? Also, what sort of plugs fit in the head?
Sparky kind????
-
I'm still in the decision process weather two plugs are worth it or not. Sometimes I take too long time. ::) Anyway, there is nothing on the market that would just fit? Also, what sort of plugs fit in the head?
No decomp adaptor on the market that I know of.
It takes a NGK plug for a Gen 2 Mopar Hemi. I forget the number at the moment.
-
How do you determine the plug for a project like this?
-
https://www.ngk.com/product.aspx?zpid=26329
could it be this one? ...that's the super long M14 thread.
-
My box of that stuff is at the shop right now.
The heads will have the plugs in them.
IIRC, it's a V-Power type NGK with a 7 heat range for a Hemi.
We determine the plug by physical fit needs.
-
..ok, that should be the long thread, which means the "chain saw" decomp. (pic) will be too short, if that would work at all.
-
The chain saw types can work.
You just make an adapter which is like a cylindrical shaft with the spark plug thread on one end, and a female thread for the chain saw decomp on the other end. Drill a small hole down the middle.
We have used the chain saw decomps with small 10mm threads.
-
Sounds good, I shall try that.
Googling for Mopar plugs I came across the info that the newer v8 engines are double spark for emission reasons. The second plug sparks at the exhaust stroke.....quite funny if true.
-
I guess it's about time to ask for updates? :)
-
Today the rocker company sent a CAD file of the rocker they propose for improved pushrod angle.
We will review it and see what we want to do.
-
Today the rocker company sent a CAD file of the rocker they propose for improved pushrod angle.
We will review it and see what we want to do.
How does it look?
Have the billets turned up yet?
-
How does it look?
Have the billets turned up yet?
I haven't seen it yet.
The shop has was closed all last week doing a 750 cubic inch sand dune hillclimber engine for the Prince of Qatar. Red Bull is said to be sponsoring.
So, they are trying to catch up with my stuff.
Will advise ASAP.
-
Here's a drawing of the new proposed rocker arm.
There will be mirrored intake and exhaust rockers.
There is an offset on the pushrod end, and the adjuster is canted on an angle to better meet the pushrod.
-
Here's a drawing of the new proposed rocker arm.
There will be mirrored intake and exhaust rockers.
There is an offset on the pushrod end, and the adjuster is canted on an angle to better meet the pushrod.
It looks like a relatively minor adjustment. Will it be good to avoid the interferance with the rocker covers & pushrod tunnels?
-
Here's a drawing of the new proposed rocker arm.
There will be mirrored intake and exhaust rockers.
There is an offset on the pushrod end, and the adjuster is canted on an angle to better meet the pushrod.
Looks good,
will this help with geometry and any lost motion?
-
Looks good,
will this help with geometry and any lost motion?
Yes.
It looks like a relatively minor adjustment. Will it be good to avoid the interferance with the rocker covers & pushrod tunnels?
It should help in both of those.
-
The rocker company is hopeful for the new design rockers to be done in December.
They have the SEMA and PRI automotive shows to be at during the end of this month, and will be closed during those weeks.
-
Soooo, did they send back the head?
-
Soooo, did they send back the head?
Don't know.
Will ask tomorrow.
Do you want us to send it to you with the existing rockers?
-
Don't know.
Will ask tomorrow.
Do you want us to send it to you with the existing rockers?
Well, my rocker covers are already modified and prepared. I don’t mind the original 1.8 rockers, as there is no functional disadvantage other than a bit more challanging installation?
-
Correct.
Will ask tomorrow.
:)
-
http://acefireball.com
;)
-
http://acefireball.com
;)
Very cool 8) 8) 8)!
-
http://acefireball.com
;)
Good on ya, Ace!
-
Thanks guys!
:)
Otto,
I called, and the head is still in California getting the new rockers fitted. It will come back with the new ones in it.
If you prefer the original rockers in it, we can out them back in, because the mountings will remain the same.
-
Thanks guys!
:)
Otto,
I called, and the head is still in California getting the new rockers fitted. It will come back with the new ones in it.
If you prefer the original rockers in it, we can out them back in, because the mountings will remain the same.
Ok, I don't mind any rockers with 1.8 ratio. Just hope it comes soon, so that it doesn't become too hectic in the spring when the riding season starts.
-
Any updates, with more heads being made?
-
The billets are there. No word on machining progress yet.
-
The rocker specialist is at the PRI Show this week. He told our shop that he would send our stuff out before he left for the show. We will find out this week if it arrives.
The CNC specialist for our shop will not be available to begin cutting until the week of Christmas. The billets are waiting for him.
-
Thanks for the updates.
-
The rocker specialist is at the PRI Show this week. He told our shop that he would send our stuff out before he left for the show. We will find out this week if it arrives.
The CNC specialist for our shop will not be available to begin cutting until the week of Christmas. The billets are waiting for him.
...so did he? :)
-
Hasn't arrived yet.
I will be talking with him tomorrow.
Working at the day job all day today.
-
The rocker specialist called the shop today, and the billet head with new rockers will ship out from California tomorrow (Wednesday ).
Otto,
I will ship it out to you as soon as we give it a final look over.
Aus.GT and Guaire,
Billet machining of your heads will commence during the week between Christmas and New Years Day.
;D
-
Very nice! 8)
-
The best news on Royal Enfield is right here. Harris frame, light weight and real highway horse power.
-
Excellent News
-
I'm thinking about it === Fireball #what?
-
Going to need some Fireball sticker!
-
It will be a Fireball 535.
I have Ace stickers, and Fireball 535 stickers. They are gold color dry transfer 3M outdoor rated UV resistant. Just say how many you want.
:)
They look like what you see here.
(https://forum.classicmotorworks.com/gallery/1119_02_06_10_2_48_26.JPG)
-
This is my right side panel already.
-
This is my right side panel already.
;D
-
It will be a Fireball 535.
I have Ace stickers, and Fireball 535 stickers. They are gold color dry transfer 3M outdoor rated UV resistant. Just say how many you want.
:)
They look like what you see here.
(https://forum.classicmotorworks.com/gallery/1119_02_06_10_2_48_26.JPG)
Going to need atleast 3 of each. One for reserve. ;)
-
The billet head is back from the rocker company.
I'm expecting pictures later, and the head is being sent to me tomorrow from the shop.
Liftoff is imminent.
Pics will be up as soon as I get them.
:)
-
Uh oh.
Good news here. The fleet is docked in the garage, well shelters. The 2014 GT. 1982 Nighthawk 450. 1983 BMW R80RT. Fortunately, the bike(s) won't be rotting out. I got new Pirellis on in October.
Got it running about as good as it can without replacing the head. But, when it's ACE time, everything should be compatible. The last engine mods were the Dynatek coil and the Sports muffler.
Gotta get the bar risers on tomorrow.
This may happen.
-
I wish of couse your signature Tom on the rib somewhere like Joe Mondello did on the early Fireball heads.
That would be nice. :)
-
I wish of couse your signature Tom on the rib somewhere like Joe Mondello did on the early Fireball heads.
That would be nice. :)
Otto,
I will see if I can do it with a hard stylus.
:)
PS- I haven't received the pics yet. I guess he will take them when he puts it in the box. I will post them when I get them.
-
I wish of couse your signature Tom on the rib somewhere like Joe Mondello did on the early Fireball heads.
That would be nice. :)
Like this...
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=eWVdBwEjGBs
-
Okay, so I called wondering about my stuff, and it hasn't been sent yet. Supposed to go out today now, apparently because of the snow causing problems.
I asked again for pics, so I hope that he sends some.
Just FYI.
:)
-
Thanks for the update Tom. Been bit overexcited the whole week already. ;)
-
Pics of final, prior to shipping out to me.
Includes the latest rockers shown.
View of top/front.
(https://forum.classicmotorworks.com/gallery/1119-110117073243.jpeg)
Comparison pic of stock head vs Ace Billet GT head.
(https://forum.classicmotorworks.com/gallery/1119-110117073415.jpeg)
Comparison pic of stock head vs Ace Billet GT head from bottom view.
(https://forum.classicmotorworks.com/gallery/1119-110117073524.jpeg)
-
8) ...very professional.
-
That looks great! Will they be media blasted to match the cast-like finish on the stock heads? They'd be pretty stealthy that way...
-
Nice, Have they started on the others yet?
-
I believe that the CNC specialist is in this week, so they should be.
-
That looks great! Will they be media blasted to match the cast-like finish on the stock heads? They'd be pretty stealthy that way...
Other finishes are possible. We did the "casting look" on the first prototype, but it was somewhat costly. Weathering will dull the finish after a little time, and it will blend in pretty well. These things can be discussed and customized for each user, if desired. We have the ability to make unique mods because they are made one at a time. But some changes will add to the price.
-
...if you wanted Tom I could look into a cast for you, with todays tech there may be some possibilities, all is volume dependent of course. Just an Idea.
-
Thanks for the update Tom. Been bit overexcited the whole week already. ;)
Bet you have, Can't wait for mine.
-
In case anyone is wondering ;D, I am waiting for the pushrods and head gasket to arrive. I have the head in my possession.
Otto, do you want head bolts, or do you want to make your own studs of the correct lengths?
I just called the shop for further updates, but they didn't come to the phone. I will try again later.
-
In case anyone is wondering ;D, I am waiting for the pushrods and head gasket to arrive. I have the head in my possession.
Otto, do you want head bolts, or do you want to make your own studs of the correct lengths?
I just called the shop for further updates, but they didn't come to the phone. I will try again later.
I do wonder very much! :) Most likely I should be capable of making the studs myself unless they already exist at your side of the ocean, than I would gladly take the ready ones.
I've also read on your Yahoo Group that maybe the stock head gasket can be reused with the Gen.2 Head?
-
I do wonder very much! :) Most likely I should be capable of making the studs myself unless they already exist at your side of the ocean, than I would gladly take the ready ones.
I've also read on your Yahoo Group that maybe the stock head gasket can be reused with the Gen.2 Head?
Yes, the stock head gasket can be used with the Gen 2 head. If your barrel is working now with the stock gasket, then it will work fine with the new head.
In that case, I will ship it with the pushrods as soon as they arrive.
:)
-
Well well, the Fireball building may start soon. ;D
What about the ACE cams, something that does exist?
-
I have a set of Fireball cams for the UCE, and Aus.GT also has some of his design.
I expect that machining some valve reliefs in the piston will be needed, because the valves will open earlier and the lift multiplier on the rockers is big. Almost no chance that they will work without piston valve reliefs.
If you want them, I can put them in the box too.
-
Yes. I'll take them. I have some time to think of a method of machining the valve reliefs and couple of pistons to try it on.
But what about the valve reliefs in the barrel, will they be doable with the stock gasket? I don't remember unfortunately what hole it has but maybe that can be ground too.
-
Yes. I'll take them. I have some time to think of a method of machining the valve relieves and couple of pistons to try it on.
But what about the valve relieves in the barrel, will they be doable with the stock gasket? I don't remember unfortunately what hole it has but maybe that can be ground too.
If your barrel is working with the stock gasket now, it will be fine. We narrowed the the chamber a little to use the stock gasket. The only reason for the barrel mod for flow at the top was for the prototype chamber on Matt's bike.
-
Than all should be settled. :)
Now before I start fireballing the bike. Would it be worthwhile to do the head only and take it to the dyno with Matt's map and do the cams at a later time? Or is it vise to go all in at once? I'm bit uncertain still how to go about it. Your opinion would be very appreciated.
-
Than all should be settled. :)
Now before I start fireballing the bike. Would it be worthwhile to do the head only and take it to the dyno with Matt's map and do the cams at a later time? Or is it vise to go all in at once? I'm bit uncertain still how to go about it. Your opinion would be very appreciated.
It depends on what data points you want.
I would just go all the way.
We know basically what the head does.
Now you have slightly more rocker ratio and cam lift, and longer duration on approximately the same intake centerline.
I would suspect slightly less low rpm torque, but more hp and higher rpm. I would push the rev limiter up to 6500 if you can. See where the hp peak happens. That would be good info.
-
The other 2 heads have begun cutting.
A small amount of progress was made, and then the CNC guy needed to go to Japan for the rest of this week to install a CNC machine there. He should be back by the weekend.
I asked for a snapshot or two of what has been done so far. Will post them up when I get them.
-
Shipped.
:)
-
Shipped.
:)
8)
-
8)
Now the fun starts!
-
Hay Guys, been missing for awhile. But still alive. We installed the cams Ace shipped me, but are dealing with bearings sliding on one of the valves. Soon as Rush has that fixed, we're going to run it on the dyno again. We think we have the oil leaks chased out though....
-
Hay Guys, been missing for awhile. But still alive. We installed the cams Ace shipped me, but are dealing with bearings sliding on one of the valves. Soon as Rush has that fixed, we're going to run it on the dyno again. We think we have the oil leaks chased out though....
The rocker arm bearing should be captured by circlip on both sides. Check to see if it has popped a circlip off.
-
Hay Guys, been missing for awhile. But still alive. We installed the cams Ace shipped me, but are dealing with bearings sliding on one of the valves. Soon as Rush has that fixed, we're going to run it on the dyno again. We think we have the oil leaks chased out though....
Any chance to get a pic. of that sliding bearing?
-
Shipped.
:)
Seams like USPS needs fireballing too... ;D
-
Seams like USPS needs fireballing too... ;D
It's 6-10 days for International Priority Mail.
-
It's 6-10 days for International Priority Mail.
Ya i know a foul joke to make. :) Just had a little hope it arrives before the Weekend and as I checked it was stuck at Miami all week long.
-
Hay Guys, been missing for awhile. But still alive. We installed the cams Ace shipped me, but are dealing with bearings sliding on one of the valves. Soon as Rush has that fixed, we're going to run it on the dyno again. We think we have the oil leaks chased out though....
How's the progress on your bike going. Keen to here how it goes.
-
Any chance to get a pic. of that sliding bearing?
Ya, I'll be back on Tuesday, and see if I can get photos. As well doublecheck I'm saying the right thing.
-
Any Updates?
-
Any Updates?
I have called each day since Friday to check, but they have not answered. I am assuming that they are at an event, or something like that.
Early last week they said that they were bogged down in some other project that required us to wait.
That's all I have at this time.
-
Thanks.
-
They are supposed to have the new CNC guy call me in a few days to go over the files and program details. They hired this guy in from Texas to work on our project, and he is moving to NC this week.
I think that the bottleneck in progress will be solved.
-
Sounds like Good News.
-
Any new updates to where the heads are at?
-
I will call on Monday.
-
I left a message, and they scheduled a call back tomorrow night with the CNC guy on the phone.
-
Talked to the shop mgr.
The shop is getting its feet back under them after the transition to some new personnel.
I stated clearly that we had the billets, the fixtures, the program, and the tooling, all there awaiting these two heads to be running on the machine. I also stressed that we have been patiently waiting for a lengthy time for them to be completed.
I was told that the new CNC man would consult with the Centroid representative who did the previous work, so that the necessary cooperation could take place, and help speed along the finish.
I asked for them to call me if there are ANY questions about anything, and for any reports.
-
Thanks Tom for giving them the hurry along.
-
Centroid A560 is down, awaiting repair.
I asked for our Iron Barrel work to be started while waiting.
I also reiterated that even though they have a lot of work right now, that our work was in there first, and that I expect that our place in line will be respected.
-
Any updates?
-
Unfortunately, no.
I am stuck waiting.
:(
The only good side of this is that Otto and Matt are bringing in dyno reports and riding report info, so I can still get any improvements into it, based on the latest data coming in.
I am really sorry that it is taking so long.
-
The lead time is unfortunate. My observations and inspection after a thousand miles don't show anything abnormal. The issue with oil consumption is solved now in my bike as well, either the head or the new piston fixed it. Otherwise the head is well good enough to go in mass production with it if the RE market was big enough. :)
-
Otto sent a photo of his exhaust port in the Ace Billet GT head after 2000 kilometers of riding.
The crust around the valve guide is the remains of the assembly lube that burned away.
Looking pretty clean to me!
-
Latest update.
Phone discussion this morning.
They are finally getting back around to our stuff.
The new CNC guy wants to re-write part of our program for better results and less tool changing time and less hand work. He is going to run off a test head in a cheap material to proof the program vs the specs.
The improvements to the Iron Barrel Super Fireball heads will also commence, and the recently received regular Fireball heads will go into the queue.
They will arrange a day for me to drive over there and go over all our stuff with the new guy, so he is fully informed. This is intended to take place in about a week or so, he says.
That's the latest. I hope it works out as quickly as that.
-
Latest update.
Phone discussion this morning.
They are finally getting back around to our stuff.
The new CNC guy wants to re-write part of our program for better results and less tool changing time and less hand work. He is going to run off a test head in a cheap material to proof the program vs the specs.
The improvements to the Iron Barrel Super Fireball heads will also commence, and the recently received regular Fireball heads will go into the queue.
They will arrange a day for me to drive over there and go over all our stuff with the new guy, so he is fully informed. This is intended to take place in about a week or so, he says.
That's the latest. I hope it works out as quickly as that.
Hallelujah!
-
Hallelujah!
Hehehe....my plan is to apply for the job as plant manager at ACE as soon as the head goes into mass production. ;D
-
Got to ask. Any news?
-
Got to ask. Any news?
I will call the shop on Monday.
-
I will call the shop on Monday.
Talked to the the shop today. Unhappy with the report.
Will rent a car and drive to the shop Thursday. I am concerned that the new personnel are putting my things off due to unfamiliarity. I have to go there personally to straighten this out.
-
Talked to the the shop today. Unhappy with the report.
Will rent a car and drive to the shop Thursday. I am concerned that the new personnel are putting my things off due to unfamiliarity. I have to go there personally to straighten this out.
That's disappointing.
-
Talked to the the shop today. Unhappy with the report.
Will rent a car and drive to the shop Thursday. I am concerned that the new personnel are putting my things off due to unfamiliarity. I have to go there personally to straighten this out.
Not smart for them. You are not a 'one and done' client. Do they have competition?
-
Drove 5 hours there, had a 4 hour meeting, drove 5 hours home.
Things seem to be back on track for now. We shall see if they do what they say.
They did have some genuine problems to overcome in their business and staff transition , which seemingly are now handled.
-
Drove 5 hours there, had a 4 hour meeting, drove 5 hours home.
Things seem to be back on track for now. We shall see if they do what they say.
They did have some genuine problems to overcome in their business and staff transition , which seemingly are now handled.
Hoping so.
-
Drove 5 hours there, had a 4 hour meeting, drove 5 hours home.
Things seem to be back on track for now. We shall see if they do what they say.
They did have some genuine problems to overcome in their business and staff transition , which seemingly are now handled.
Where do the "GP" heads figure in all of this?
-
Where do the "GP" heads figure in all of this?
The plan laid out at the meeting was to finish all 3 GP heads first, while the CNC programmer finalizes the billet head program.
So, the GP heads will be the first out the door. They estimated 2-3 weeks. Your heads are first priority. They do not require CNC work, and are all done manually.
-
The plan laid out at the meeting was to finish all 3 GP heads first, while the CNC programmer finalizes the billet head program.
So, the GP heads will be the first out the door. They estimated 2-3 weeks. Your heads are first priority. They do not require CNC work, and are all done manually.
Thanks Tom.
-
Any news yet?
-
Any news yet?
Yes, I got news that the repair on Chuck's head is done, and the repairs on Justin's heads is almost complete, and I am expecting them to bill me for those shortly, and they will be sent out. Then they can then move on the billets.
So, this follows the plan they laid out at the meeting pretty closely, as I described in my previous post about that.
I will follow up with any news or reports on progress.
-
It's time to ask again, Any news on the heads?
-
Stll fighting the battle.
-
We're cutting metal.
This is a trial billet to be sure that it's coming out okay.
Then the real billet will be cut.
Still at least a while to go, but something is happening. They are working on other projects besides ours too, but I got this report today.
-
:) Here's Hoping.
-
Ace,
Do the lifters need adjustment to account for the added lift from the new cams?
-
Longer pushrods.
-
?
-
I will call today and see.
Will report.
-
Shop says that they cannot take the time to do this project.
Due to inability to find suitable manufacturing, I am forced to discontinue this product.
I will be contacting those with deposits about their refunds.
Tom
-
Sorry to hear that. So much for the American business ethic!
-
That is extremely disappointing.
-
Yes, I realize that we are all disappointed, probably nobody more than I am.
Edit:
I have just been contacted by an interested party, who wants to talk about helping. Maybe there is some hope.
-
I'm really hoping someone takes on this project with you. God knows how much time you have invested into R&D, and there is so much potential to be unleashed with that head.
-
Yes, I realize that we are all disappointed, probably nobody more than I am.
Edit:
I have just been contacted by an interested party, who wants to talk about helping. Maybe there is some hope.
I understand your into this as well, and with all the things going on for you it must be a difficult time. Do you have any news on your bike?
Here's hoping this new party can help.
-
No news on my stolen GT.
:(
I will be on the phone for a discussion tonight about the potential new possibilities.
:)
-
Things are beginning to look up. The phone conversation went very well, and we now have a prospect of new manufacturer and other help too.
My first action is to retrieve all my parts and programs from NC, and get ready for our new first meeting with the new group.
So, there seems to still be life for the project.
:)
-
That's great news! Yay! :D
-
That is excellent news.
-
That's awesome news
-
This is a significant development.
RE’s weak points have been flaky manufacturing and lack of power.
Today’s UCE bikes are much better than the old Bullets for quality and reliability. Indeed, there are so many examples here of reliable UCEs.
The solution for making adequate power has been this Fireball project. Once the design/manufacturing has stabilized, Fireballs can be retrofitted to all the UCE engines, making every owner with a UCE Bullet the owner of a highway speed capable classic bike.
Even if RE starts selling 650 twins with good power, they can be made into really good powerful bikes once the R&D is done!
Today is better day than yesterday!
Cheers,
Bill
-
maybe sell 4-5 heads? person buy enfield main thing is price, not to spend million dollar on cyliner head!! niche fantasy dreamworld making pretend market ready to go boom. never get past two handsfull of interest. nothing but pied piper answer to question no one asks, never will ask! ::)
-
WTF does that mean? Everyone here knows they can buy a world of performance for the same money they spent on their Enfield. I don't think anyone in a First World country bought an Enfield because of the price.
-
WTF does that mean? Everyone here knows they can buy a world of performance for the same money they spent on their Enfield. I don't think anyone in a First World country bought an Enfield because of the price.
I agree. The GT in particular, and the UCE in general, just need to up the power level to about where we have it, so that the highway travel is improved, and get the Ton for nostalgic bragging rights.
The truth is that it transforms the bike into a much more useful one for people in the US or Australia or anywhere that higher speeds are needed.
Now, regarding the cost, I cannot make them in "onesies and twosies" in a performance US machine shop at any price that competes with India mass production. That's simple math.
However, a used GT at about $3k plus an Ace Billet head at $3k equals approximately the performance level of what India is putting out with the upcoming twin, for about the same expenditure.
So, when looking at it from that angle, it can make a lot of sense. We did the same basic idea with the Iron Barrel Fireball, which actually cost more to build because the whole bottom end needed rebuilt on those. That cost about $5k plus a used Bullet, and we have more than 40 people who bought those and are riding them today. In light of that, the Ace Billet GT head is a helluva bargain for about the same performance, and easier to do the job. On top of thst, we solved a bunch of factory issues that "could have been done better", shall we say.
I think people would be more ready to do this if I could get the manufacturing settled, and start getting these things out the door. So, it is my fault, including some difficult circumstances, that is holding it back, IMO. It is tough to do this all alone without any funding, and working a 9 to 5 job to pay the bills. I am doing the best that I can, with the current circumstances. I think with the new group getting involved, it will be a good boost for productivity.
-
maybe sell 4-5 heads? person buy enfield main thing is price, not to spend million dollar on cyliner head!! niche fantasy dreamworld making pretend market ready to go boom. never get past two handsfull of interest. nothing but pied piper answer to question no one asks, never will ask! ::)
spooge,
So off base here I don't even know where to start.
First of all, you're mocking the efforts of one of our sagest and most respected (not to mention well liked) forum members. Just search the back pages of this forum for any of Ace's subject headings in the "let's talk about" vein, for a taste. The guy knows his shit backwards and forward. Plus he makes it understandable for those of us who may not have his deep background by patiently answering follow up questions. Sometimes ad nauseum ;). Who have you helped lately? Plus he has the respect of other Enfield "gurus" like "Bullet Whisperer" and "Tim in N.Z."to name a couple. Good company.
Next, you blithely assert that there is no and never will be any interest. Speak for yourself. I and about 40 other Fireballers ( this is going back to the old iron barrel platform) would disagree. We love our little bikes and just want to make them faster and more reliable, while still respecting their limitations. This is a hobby, money be damned.
The rest of us here understand all to well that this is a niche pursuit that doesn't make economic sense. No great revelation there. We also get that ventures like these have their ups and downs, setbacks and small triumphs. Many of us have been following this story for a decade or more.
-
Here are some pics from a user converting to 36mm throttle body.
When was the last time anybody saw a port like that in an Enfield?
8)
-
spooge,
So off base here I don't even know where to start.
First of all, you're mocking the efforts of one of our sagest and most respected (not to mention well liked) forum members. Just search the back pages of this forum for any of Ace's subject headings in the "let's talk about" vein, for a taste. The guy knows his shit backwards and forward. Plus he makes it understandable for those of us who may not have his deep background by patiently answering follow up questions. Sometimes ad nauseum ;). Who have you helped lately? Plus he has the respect of other Enfield "gurus" like "Bullet Whisperer" and "Tim in N.Z."to name a couple. Good company.
Next, you blithely assert that there is no and never will be any interest. Speak for yourself. I and about 40 other Fireballers ( this is going back to the old iron barrel platform) would disagree. We love our little bikes and just want to make them faster and more reliable, while still respecting their limitations. This is a hobby, money be damned.
The rest of us here understand all to well that this is a niche pursuit that doesn't make economic sense. No great revelation there. We also get that ventures like these have their ups and downs, setbacks and small triumphs. Many of us have been following this story for a decade or more.
Yep.
-
but for site here Enfield not even a spec of sand on ocean the motorcycle world. comical talk like on cusp of biggest news ready to break technology ground breaking! significance akin to Puch moped enthusiast shout from mountaintop! ::)
-
Or a spooge shouting out from inside the hole he's digging for himself. Dude, realise that these guys are doing it cause they wanna.
-
chasing performance an share with fellow membership is good, yes yes. observe to the delusional concocted presentation like some ground breaking stop presses best thing sense slice bread pied Piper toot-toot horn brilliance genius only one man? ::) ::) ::) Oi vey!!!!!
Not the first "spooge" to attempt to agitate things here, but I have to give you the credit for being the lamest hack so far. Obviously you have nothing worth adding that is of value. Feel free to give us something to chew on that has some sustenance. Maybe a bit of humor/wit to go along with your colorless spiel. Good luck there, buddy!
-
Clamp, is that you ? Been drinking again ?
;D
-
Clamp, is that you ? Been drinking again ?
;D
You beat me to it, Ice! ;D
-
but for site here Enfield not even a spec of sand on ocean the motorcycle world....
I'm surprised you would even bother to comment about things which deal with something that is less than a "spec of sand".
Especially on a forum of people who appreciate the Royal Enfield as we do.
I suspect you failed the course on "How to win friends and influence people" ?
Maybe you should give it another go before posting again.
-
The schmuck formerly known as spooge is no more on this forum.
Please resume Fireballing????.
-
Still trying to get my parts back from NC. They don't return my phone calls. >:(
-
Count me in too...would love to buy one of your performance head for my Enfield ????
-
Any updates Ace?
-
Latest update.
I got all my parts and stuff from NC. That is the end of that era.
We are working on getting a new CAD program done, modeled on one of the existing heads. This is estimated to take a month or so. Then we will seek manufacturing again.
I have a couple sets of the rockers and some other parts in the box of stuff from NC.
So, we are going to try to pull this together once again.
-
That sounds promising, I can't believe the trials you have been through.
-
First step, digital scan.
-
I've been on and off following this thread for a while. Don't know if I heard what the numbers were as far as added horsepower and torque to a GT with the stage 1 Performance Kit installed. With the installation of the new heads, what other engine modifications need to be done?
-
I've been on and off following this thread for a while. Don't know if I heard what the numbers were as far as added horsepower and torque to a GT with the stage 1 Performance Kit installed. With the installation of the new heads, what other engine modifications need to be done?
The available dyno graphs are posted somewhere in this thread, or Otto's thread, Mevocgt's thread.
Basically, with the head added and no cams, it's about 7hp more than a Stage 1 kit. Stage 1 is about 25hp, and our head added gives about 32.5hp. I can't remember the tq figure. With the cams it's about 36hp/36tq.
This all comes below the factory 5500rpm rev limit. Tq curve is real flat and comes up high real early. Rides well.
Still working on getting mfg back on line. A lot of tribulations have occured, losing mfg several times and having to start up fresh each time. Still plugging away.
-
Sounds promising.
-
Some news.
Programming is still progressing, and we are very appreciative for the efforts of our friend who is contributing his time and talents to the project.
Guaire is also now involved in sales and marketing and website activities. When you see his postings about Ace parts for sale, it is legit.
One of the latest user reports includes a power increase which is causing repeated clutch slipping at anything over 5500 rpm, after some inlet tract mods. The factory clutch just cannot hold the power in this stage of tune. We are looking at solutions for improving clutch holding. Then a dyno run will be scheduled to see exactly how much power increase is actually there now.
-
Here is something we have been experimenting with.
8)
New hardened cam spindles, roller cam bearings, and hardened cam races. Now a full roller valve train from cams to valves.
It drastically reduces the hated valve train noise. Quieter than a KTM or modern Triumph now.
Also helps with the valve train strength which is very helpful with the high lift and valve spring force with our high performance head kit.
We will have some dyno data on all the developments forthcoming when we can.
-
ace.cafe -- are these cam spindles, bearings and races compatible with the 500cc UCE and Peter's C5 cams? I just purchased a 2010 C5 for Peter (and GHG?) to use as a test bed for his piston, valve, etc plus crankshaft alignment upgrades and would like to incorporate both the 500cc and 535cc worlds when possible. As I've stated before my goal is comfortable running in the 45-65mph range on suburban and rural including mountain surface roads. I have the BMW for when I want a freeway cruiser.
I carefully considered your head, a beautiful piece of work and I really enjoy looking at your pictures, but decided to retain the stock exterior looks of the 500cc UCE.
-
ace.cafe -- are these cam spindles, bearings and races compatible with the 500cc UCE and Peter's C5 cams? I just purchased a 2010 C5 for Peter (and GHG?) to use as a test bed for his piston, valve, etc plus crankshaft alignment upgrades and would like to incorporate both the 500cc and 535cc worlds when possible. As I've stated before my goal is comfortable running in the 45-65mph range on suburban and rural including mountain surface roads. I have the BMW for when I want a freeway cruiser.
I carefully considered your head, a beautiful piece of work and I really enjoy looking at your pictures, but decided to retain the stock exterior looks of the 500cc UCE.
Compatibility with any UCE model. The cams must be modified with the new races.
As of this moment, we have no pricing or release date. Still in testing.
Thank you.
-
We will also be testing it with the Carberry plate.
-
Weill you be offereing these for C.I. Fireball Bullet owners too?
A.
-
Weill you be offereing these for C.I. Fireball Bullet owners too?
A.
Possibly.
It depends on demand.
Most regular Fireballs have modest valve lift with moderate spring force. The high lift Super Fireball kits may benefit, but there are only 4 of them, and of course B.W.'s racer. The other high lift Big Heads are out of touch with me, and I have no idea about their whereabouts or status.
-
Dyno run scheduled for Aug 3.
8)
-
Got the dyno results this morning.
This was a different dyno than before, so it is hard to comment about exact comparison numbers, but here it is in the attachment.
Not quite as high peak number as we had hoped, but still very solid results over the curve. And an improvement over the previous test.
Things I like are that by 3500 rpm it surpasses the maximum peak rwhp output of the stock GT. And then it proceeds to nearly double the rwhp of the stock GT.
It has about 1000 rpm at the top where it stays over 36 rwhp. You could shift at 6500 and stay on the peak power band, which is great for acceleration.
Power curve is very progressive, without much dips or peaks.
The bike is a true 6500 rpm bike now, pulling max hp all the way to the 6500 rpm rev limiter. Even if you keep to the stock 5500 rpm rev limiter, you still get 36 rwhp.
Torque curve is a little bit less flat than before, but still okay, and we did get more at the top rpms.
Okay, so we didn't hit 40 rwhp, but we do well with the standard 535 displacemet, and didn't have to stroke the motor to 612 to get near 40. We are still a 535 GT.
With a good aero fairing, this bike should hit 115 mph with stock gears.
Anyway, it is what it is, and we will see if we can pull out any more stops in the future for road use. There is plenty more room in this head for race use.
Thanks for watching.
-
I'm new around here so forgive my ignorance :-[
Are you using the stock camshaft and EFI set-up to achieve these impressive results? :D
-
I'm new around here so forgive my ignorance :-[
Are you using the stock camshaft and EFI set-up to achieve these impressive results? :D
Not for this test. This test includes performance cams and throttle body bored to 36mm.
A previous test with stock cams and stock throttle body yielded 32.5 peak hp at the rear wheel.
With performance cams and stock throttle body, we got about 36 rwhp peak.
With the same performance cams and also the 36mm TB mod boosted the numbers to what is shown on this test. Close to 38 rwhp.
This is all on pump gas with a totally streetable bike that has very manageable road manners around town.
-
It goes well. 8)
It sure is on pair with the upcoming twin in regards to rwhp, acceleration and top speed in this stage of development already. Also it has such a wide rpm range that for normal riding a 4 speed gearbox would be no handicap.
It has torque precisely where needed and horses at the right place of the rpm range too.
-
Hello oTTo. New here, are you? ;) How you been?
-
Hello oTTo. New here, are you? ;) How you been?
Hi gizzo, ya new here. ;)
-
Just a reminder to everyone that we are trying to get some new production of these heads going. These tests and mods are ongoing with heads that we have on the road.
-
...
-
Lmfao.....new member discounts??
-
...
Well gizzo I had to take a forum break for private reasons. Meanwhile ACE motors was forming which I've signed in for, hope that explains it. As a member I hope to be able to contribute in securing the production and use my creativity to come up with new products. It's of course purely motor passion driven at this point.
-
Lmfao.....new member discounts??
We have to see what they cost us to make.
To be perfectly clear, even though the product is generally perceived as expensive, both of these first 2 heads out there cost me more to produce than I sold them for. I lost money. We will try to do better with this bunch.
:)
-
Well gizzo I had to take a forum break for private reasons. Meanwhile ACE motors was forming which I've signed in for, hope that explains it. As a member I hope to be able to contribute in securing the production and use my creativity to come up with new products. It's of course purely motor passion driven at this point.
Welcome back mate. I hope you sorted everything out while you were away.
-
Ditto on the personal sorting out mate. Only shit stiring on the member discount. Fully understand and appreciate the extra hours of RnD involved. Absolute legend in my books.
-
Update:
Things are still moving along.
The head has been scanned and a new program written to replace the previous one that was lost by the previous shop.
Some 3d screen shots of the new CAD program below.
Still some things remaining to do, but progress is being made.
-
I'm sure this has been addressed somewhere along the way, does the stock rocker valve covers fit the new heads that you're making?
-
The stock rocker covers need to be modified on the right side bolt hole location. Typically a short section of aluminum rod is welded on the rocker cover bolt hole location, and drilled to take a longer bolt. Then some clearance grinding is done inside the cover, so that the rocker doesn't hit the inside of the cover at high lift.
This is shown on Otto's photos of the right side of his engine. It looks almost the same as factory.
We may make some custom rocker covers once we get the heads back into production.
See photo below.
-
Some update. Programming done, cosmetic deviations found during testing period have been taken care of, production next I guess...
-
Hey oTTo glad to see you back.
Just Pm'd you.
-
Still moving forward.
:)
Now looking at possible production of compatible rocker covers which eliminate need to mod the stock covers.
A few of the latest pics below.
(Note- * The colors shown do NOT necessarily indicate the actual color of the parts. They are colored for illustration purposes.)
-
Next week starts a test billet machining which we expect to be okay. Want to be sure it comes out as expected, and sort out any issues, if any arise. They say they can complete it in a month or thereabouts. We already have cleaned up a few spots that needed to be addressed from the earlier versions, and included those in the program.
After that happens and some on-bike tests for fit and stuff again, we will go to production.
:)
Hopefully, the 3rd time will be the charm.
-
Good luck! :)
-
Cutting metal!
;D
-
Oh no, someone is getting a lot of trouble, expensive & lot of work christmas present again? ;D
Can't believe it.... ;)
-
Cutting metal!
;D
I'll be receiving a tracking number when it ships.
-
8)
3rd Gen done and ready for assembly.
-
WOW motorcycle art,plus more HP :)
-
The Fireball 3 has arrived.
The GT is already light: wheels, spokes, frame and suspension. Increasing the power is magnified on this bike with an excellent power to weight ratio. Power to weight is the Ace card. Putting the power of a 500 - 600 lb bike on a 400 lb bike, changes everything. You can't buy this experience at any dealership. [Of course you could if RE would adopt a factory version of the Fireball!]
Next step will be finishing and final set up. That means valve seats, guides, valves, springs, tappets, rocker arms and oiling spigots. The factory job is alright, unless you want to wipe out the reviewers mantra, 'needs power'. ACE fixed everything the factory didn't, so we can say, "POWER".
Later this week our set up mechanic/tech will start on his shift of the Fireball job.
A few years ago, when I was at his shop he helped me a lot. That is, the velocity stack was on the hook in the retail area. He told me the stock coil is a 'usual suspect'. ACE Motors will sell you and anyone, the same DynaTek coil set up as used on the Fireball GTs. Simply, "There's a sound to power. And it's LOUD!"
The Fireball is coming.
Guaire
-
And the approximate cost will be in the region of. . . . . . . ? ? ? ? A new 650? ? ? ?
-
And the approximate cost will be in the region of. . . . . . . ? ? ? ? A new 650? ? ? ?
Should be about the same as before. Roughly $3k neighborhood, or maybe a bit less.
-
After we've received the order of 100 heads, the price will drop.
EDIT: Don't want to speculate how much.
-
After we've received the order of 100 heads, the price will sharply drop below 1k$.
The latest version, called Fireball 3, will soon be in the finishing stage. Next, comes installation. Finally, then, the X1 prototype will hit the road.
After this process, the cost will be more clear. And, as Otto points out about manufacturing; as quantity goes up, the unit price goes down. Just like the Air Kit 3, as we find out how the Fireball 3 performs, you will know here. Of course you will get to see the photos and videos. If you don't have a decent sound system, get one ready.
There's the fine sound of a big thumper. This will be something else.
Bill
-
Here is something we have been experimenting with.
8)
New hardened cam spindles, roller cam bearings, and hardened cam races. Now a full roller valve train from cams to valves.
It drastically reduces the hated valve train noise. Quieter than a KTM or modern Triumph now.
Also helps with the valve train strength which is very helpful with the high lift and valve spring force with our high performance head kit.
We will have some dyno data on all the developments forthcoming when we can.
Oooohhhhhh, that sounds like something :)
-
Oooohhhhhh, that sounds like something :)
We can get you fixed up with that.
:)
-
Any progress with the head project?
-
Any progress with the head project?
Yes, we are waiting for valves to arrive. Then it goes on Guaire's GT.
At that point, we will have our costs on this new version, and can take orders. I am pretty sure that it will be special order only.
On another front, it looks like we will have some intetesting bolt on vibration control devices for the GT and UCE. Maybe in a month.
-
Yes, we are waiting for valves to arrive. Then it goes on Guaire's GT.
At that point, we will have our costs on this new version, and can take orders. I am pretty sure that it will be special order only.
On another front, it looks like we will have some intetesting bolt on vibration control devices for the GT and UCE. Maybe in a month.
That's good news.
-
Latest pics of Gen 3 billet head.
Finishing up now, and will be road tested on Guaire's 535 GT.
We also have a new cam grind coming out soon.
-
I still wonder if Hitchcocks' are barking up the wrong tree with their 4 valve head. The probability of seeing bikes with both types of head going er... head to head on the same dyno must be on the very far side of remote, but I suspect at lot of us would want to see THAT video.
Bonneville salt flats next?
A.
-
Latest pics of Gen 3 billet head.
Finishing up now, and will be road tested on Guaire's 535 GT.
We also have a new cam grind coming out soon.
That's nice :P
-
I still wonder if Hitchcocks' are barking up the wrong tree with their 4 valve head. The probability of seeing bikes with both types of head going er... head to head on the same dyno must be on the very far side of remote, but I suspect at lot of us would want to see THAT video.
Bonneville salt flats next?
A.
Are Hitchcocks still continuing with the 4-valve head? I hadn't heard anything about it for a long time.
Anyway, as I have said before on this topic, there are some very good reasons for 4-valve design, but I don't really think that a street Bullet falls into the best application category for it.
The strongest argument for a 4-valve Bullet is the larger valve curtain area at lower lifts giving very good low lift flow. Also, there is the benefit of reaching 25% of valve lift/diameter ratio earlier with the smaller valves in the 4-valve layout. Other typically hyped benefits of lighter valves and overall flow increase from greater valve curtain area are much less critical on a low revving long stroke Bullet.
Not that I am against any of that, but it needs to be argued versus the increased cost of double the valve train parts and more porting labor, which is substantial.
In my production situation, which is basically one or two at a time, I cannot benefit from any mass production economies of scale. Our billet head is expensive to produce, but if Hitchcocks could use higher volume casting methods, then they could probably save enough on the castings to cover the added valve train parts. They seem to have enough cash to do production runs of 100 cast heads, but unfortunately I do not.
From my experience with street and racing Bullets, including BW's 500 racer, the engine can only utilize a certain amount of air flow, and providing more flow capacity just reduces midrange torque unnecessarily. Our billet head with a 2-valve layout and 34mm inlet port can flow as much as this engine can use up to the 6500rpm maximum rev limit of the Power Commander equipped GT535. You can see on Otto's latest dyno chart that horsepower was increasing all the way to the 6500rpm rev limiter. I see no crying need for more flow. Our design criteria includes attaching to the factory ancillaries such as throttle body and exhaust, etc, for installation without a massive amount of changes to the bike. If somebody wants to race, then we can make adjustments on a custom basis.
-
Latest pics of Gen 3 billet head.
Finishing up now, and will be road tested on Guaire's 535 GT.
We also have a new cam grind coming out soon.
Wow! Is that gorgeous or what? 8) :) :) You are indeed a credit to your art. And yes it is part art along with experience, machining, math and excellent after-market vendors.
We Royal Enfield loonies are indeed lucky to have your and the late Joe Mondello's expertise around at the right time. I'll always feel just a little guilty that I got such a deal on my '08 AVL head in 2014.
-
Our billet head with a 2-valve layout and 34mm inlet port can flow as much as this engine can use up to the 6500rpm maximum rev limit of the Power Commander equipped GT535
I should mention at this point that I do happen to have an un-used (think it might be new) Dell'Orto PHF34 pumper CARBURETOR and suitable 60mm stud-center alloy flange which don't seem to have a home on any of the current projects. ??? ??? ??? The flange is for a smaller bore PHF32, but there's plenty of metal on there for boring out to 34mm.
If you or Otto think this could be a fun diversion for the project let me know.
A.
-
DAMN! That's nice!!!!!!! 8)
-
I should mention at this point that I do happen to have an un-used (think it might be new) Dell'Orto PHF34 pumper CARBURETOR and suitable 60mm stud-center alloy flange which don't seem to have a home on any of the current projects. ??? ??? ??? The flange is for a smaller bore PHF32, but there's plenty of metal on there for boring out to 34mm.
If you or Otto think this could be a fun diversion for the project let me know.
A.
I don't think anything, i live in a place where people are returning slowly back to sign language. ::)
-
Fair enough, but social commentary aside, the carb is available if you wish to give it a try. :)
A.
-
Fair enough, but social commentary aside, the carb is available if you wish to give it a try. :)
A.
No carb at this time, besides of that fair amount of good reasons to turn to sign language in those high tech times, the sign language hasn't been perfected yet, but we are working on it. ;)
-
Out of idle curiosity, where is Ace's online presence these days? Like for updates on the head project, fireball stuff, UCE cams and things? I think I remember something about some cams in the works that will work with the stock head and are less lawnmower-like than the factory ones?
-
Out of idle curiosity, where is Ace's online presence these days? Like for updates on the head project, fireball stuff, UCE cams and things? I think I remember something about some cams in the works that will work with the stock head and are less lawnmower-like than the factory ones?
Guaire is making a website, and from what I understand, it is partially running now but I don't know the url.
Maybe Guaire will see this and post it.
We have some pretty hot cams for the UCE, but we haven't road tested them yet, so we can't give a performance description yet.
We are in process of making replacement valves of high quality, with slightly larger inlet valve, to address the UCE valve breakage issue. Probably a month out.
We will also have a low cost (Clubman) head mod with those valves and better springs that will handle the new cam profile.
Thanks,
Tom
-
Cheers Tom.
-
Out of idle curiosity, where is Ace's online presence these days? Like for updates on the head project, fireball stuff, UCE cams and things? I think I remember something about some cams in the works that will work with the stock head and are less lawnmower-like than the factory ones?
Hi Gizzo - Here's the cams ready to install with the Fireball. They are quite lumpy! Eventually, test rides will tell us how Tom's profile will be working out.
Bill G
-
Here's the Fireball ready for installation. Note the oil jets under the rockers. Only one of the two spark plug holes is pictured.
-
Nice. how about cams for engines without fireball, is that going to be a thing?
-
Nice. how about cams for engines without fireball, is that going to be a thing?
The same cams should work on non-Fireball UCE too. But, it will need the better valve springs added. No decent cams will be able to run on those stock UCE valve springs anyway, so better springs are a given with any performance cams on the UCE.
Lobe lift of the new Ace cams is about .345", if I remember correctly, so the stock 1.2:1 UCE rockers should give about .414" lift at the valve with these cams.
Fireball will get about .510" lift at the valve with them.
We will soon have a high quality valve upgrade with slightly bigger inlet valve and normal size exhaust valve, and otherwise primarily a reliability measure. You know, the dreaded UCE valve head separations...
The new inlet valve can use the same seat, but re-cut to seal at the outer edge of the bigger valve, and a slightly larger throat cut to match. Just a little extra flow from that, but worthwhile at the stock end of the performance spectrum.
So, the idea is to put in the new valves, cams, and springs, for a Clubman type kit like we had for the iron barrel models. Bang for the buck kind of option, with reliability improvement to match.
-
Here's the Fireball ready for installation. Note the oil jets under the rockers. Only one of the two spark plug holes is pictured.
Just a detail note about those brass jets shown on that head photo.
Although we provide pressurized oiling to the rockers via the pushrods like a V8 does, we also use the regular UCE oiling passages too, as auxiliary oil sprayers. We top them off with brass Holley carburetor jets that screw in on the tops of those oil passages. This allows the user to adjust the intensity of the oil spray into the rocker areas by using different jets, if he wants to. It has adjustment capability in that way.
-
The same cams should work on non-Fireball UCE too. But, it will need the better valve springs added. No decent cams will be able to run on those stock UCE valve springs anyway, so better springs are a given with any performance cams on the UCE.
Lobe lift of the new Ace cams is about .345", if I remember correctly, so the stock 1.2:1 UCE rockers should give about .414" lift at the valve with these cams.
Fireball will get about .510" lift at the valve with them.
We will soon have a high quality valve upgrade with slightly bigger inlet valve and normal size exhaust valve, and otherwise primarily a reliability measure. You know, the dreaded UCE valve head separations...
The new inlet valve can use the same seat, but re-cut to seal at the outer edge of the bigger valve, and a slightly larger throat cut to match. Just a little extra flow from that, but worthwhile at the stock end of the performance spectrum.
So, the idea is to put in the new valves, cams, and springs, for a Clubman type kit like we had for the iron barrel models. Bang for the buck kind of option, with reliability improvement to match.
Thanks Tom. That sounds like the kind of thing I'd be interested in: Not having to spend a ton of money but still getting a performance and reliability improvement. Lemme know when it happens. The valve thing, I've been thinking about that. I'd hate for it to happen to me but I'm close to 40,000km now, a lot of them not so gentle and I'm thinking that if they were going to drop they might have by now. Touch wood. But I'd still be interested in upgrading them as part of a package.
-
On December 10 my GT will be going to Rush Branson's lift at Cycles of Silver Spring (MD). Rush has experience with setting up the previous generation of the Fireball on Mevocgt's GT. This set up will include cams and the 'squish mod'. This mod takes material of the top of the barrel to get a proper squish of the piston and the combustion. The stock setup leaves about a quarter inch of extra space, not good for power.
If there are any unforeseen needs at installation, we get to sort it out, before another Fireball is sold and built.
We have some OEM parts on order at CSS, to make stock compatible, Clubman kit parts. Reality is, RENA, doesn't move parts as quickly as the Big 4.
As far as a comparison between the single and the INT Twin, power to weight and handling are elements we will be looking for. There's more to this than a horse power number.
Bill
-
On December 10 my GT will be going to Rush Branson's lift at Cycles of Silver Spring (MD).
That might be worth the short drive over to see...!
-
That might be worth the short drive over to see...!
How short is it?
Bill
-
These are the cams that will be installed.
-
I put the Conti GT on the 'lift' today to get things prepped for pulling the stock head. I couldn't help but note the difference between the stock rockers and the design of the Fireball rockers.
A short video on getting started...
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=pkaHQlS6Pjw&feature=youtu.be
-
These are the cams that will be installed.
Lobe specs are .345" lift and 254 duration @.050" .
Rocker ratio changes things.
With stock RE rockers, estimating ~1.2 ratio, max lift would be about .414".
With the Ace head that has about 1.45 effective ratio, max lift would be about .500".
Rocker ratio will also extend the duration @.050" for more area under the lift curve, but the actual seat-to-seat timing will still be the same.
Stronger valve springs required with these cams.
-
Those rocker arms make the stock setup look like a pathetic lash up. Nice.
-
Those rocker arms make the stock setup look like a pathetic lash up. Nice.
Thanks!
;)
The rest of the head is also just as far above the factory product.
8)
-
Just looking at your cams they have a lot more duration than the Hitchcock set, quite apart from the rocker ratio enhancing the lift. Hitchcock cams are not so much 'performance' cams. Rather they are what should have been fitted by the factory to match their own head.
I suspect the original cams came about as a longevity feature to compensate for the variable build quality. Something that seems to have been addressed with the twins. The twin was a British clean sheet of paper project. The unit single is just an evolutionary tweak of the old Bullet
Oddly enough Triumph produced a similar cam for the 900, seemingly using the restriction to differentiate that engine's output from the 1200.
-
Just looking at your cams they have a lot more duration than the Hitchcock set, quite apart from the rocker ratio enhancing the lift. Hitchcock cams are not so much 'performance' cams. Rather they are what should have been fitted by the factory to match their own head.
I suspect the original cams came about as a longevity feature to compensate for the variable build quality. Something that seems to have been addressed with the twins. The twin was a British clean sheet of paper project. The unit single is just an evolutionary tweak of the old Bullet
Oddly enough Triumph produced a similar cam for the 900, seemingly using the restriction to differentiate that engine's output from the 1200.
Yes, we aim to put the hp peak right at the 6500 maximum rpm limit that Dynojet will permit on the Power Commander. This shifts the torque curve up a bit higher, so we aren't putting as much emphasis on the very low rpms as the factory cams do. Our inlet valve closes much later than factory cams. We make up the low rpm torque with a compression increase gained by our smaller 50cc combustion chamber, and bringing the piston up to zero deck height with the "squish mod". That brings the low rpm torque back to reasonable levels, even without a piston change. We use the factory piston and still achieved about 185 psi cold cranking compression test with no perceptible pinking during full load operation.
I got the impression that the factory cams were designed to produce a lot of low rpm torque for the India riding style of low rpm "thumping". Probably also for emission control. They run out of breath very early in the rpm range.
Factory cams are like what we in the States call a "towing" cam profile for heavy pulling. Short duration and very small overlap period.
-
The same cams should work on non-Fireball UCE too. But, it will need the better valve springs added. No decent cams will be able to run on those stock UCE valve springs anyway, so better springs are a given with any performance cams on the UCE.
Sounds good.
My Problem is, I installed the HMC Performance-Kit, and I thought at the time when installing, that the supplied valve springs are too strong, but there was no alternative, HMC or stock, so I installed them. The pressure of the springs was enough to rotate the engine even in gear.
And after 2000 miles it turned out that the cam wheels and bearing shafts are trashed because of the brutal forces in the valve train, resulting in extreme wear.
I don't need that brutal spring force for the HMC-Cams and a set maximum of 6000 revs. But what do I need and where to get?
By the way: Does anyone know the spring strength of these HMC springs?
Regards,
Jerry
-
Sounds good.
My Problem is, I installed the HMC Performance-Kit, and I thought at the time when installing, that the supplied valve springs are too strong, but there was no alternative, HMC or stock, so I installed them. The pressure of the springs was enough to rotate the engine even in gear.
And after 2000 miles it turned out that the cam wheels and bearing shafts are trashed because of the brutal forces in the valve train, resulting in extreme wear.
I don't need that brutal spring force for the HMC-Cams and a set maximum of 6000 revs. But what do I need and where to get?
By the way: Does anyone know the spring strength of these HMC springs?
Regards,
Jerry
I don't know the spring force of the HMC valve spring set.
However, the force can be adjusted by changing the installed height of the springs. Depending on the hardware involved, the upper or lower retainers might be changed or modified, and/or the valve collets(keepers) can be changed with (typically) +/- up to .050" effect on spring installed height.
You would need to take the valve and collets to a qualified automotive technician(or ask HMC) what the specs for the collets are, I.e. the valve groove type, width, and degree of taper. Then you can search the web for a source of suitable collets. For example, if you just want to increase the installed height by .050", you order the collet type in +.050" configuration. This will decrease your spring pressure all across the entire range. I would caution to not go less than about 95 pounds pressure on the seat. If you don't know the current setting, you can take the head to a qualified automotive machinist and ask him to measure it using his gauge.
Since I don't ever use the stock hardware in my typical Fireball applications, I don't have the answers for the above unknown s on the factory valve spring stack parts.
On the other situation of the cam bushing wear, we have seen it before, and you can install harder bushings or install custom made spindles and roller bearings instead(expensive).
Regarding using the Ace cams with your stock rockers, the max lift would be about .414" with a presumed stock rocker ratio of 1.2:1.
Hope that helps.
-
Do the cams need stronger springs to accommodate higher rpm or are the to keep the valve train following the new more aggressive profile? If it's only for rpm and you're content to keep the stock rev limit, you could keep the original soft springs? Just thinking aloud, here. I got no cams.
-
Sounds good.
My Problem is, I installed the HMC Performance-Kit, and I thought at the time when installing, that the supplied valve springs are too strong, but there was no alternative, HMC or stock, so I installed them. The pressure of the springs was enough to rotate the engine even in gear.
And after 2000 miles it turned out that the cam wheels and bearing shafts are trashed because of the brutal forces in the valve train, resulting in extreme wear.
I don't need that brutal spring force for the HMC-Cams and a set maximum of 6000 revs. But what do I need and where to get?
By the way: Does anyone know the spring strength of these HMC springs?
Regards,
Jerry
Compare those new cams you got , to the stock cams. Look at the bushings pressed into the center the cams gears .... the bushing that rides on the Cam spindles. I believe you will find the stock cam gear bushing will have holes in it, to retain oil as it goes round the spindle . And those new ones you have, do not. This plays a roll in what happened to yours I believe.....
I was sent a set of those cams to check out from a friend. Stock valve gear and springs, good up to at least 6200 rpms with a .030 " spring shim.... This is on a 500 UCE . Coil bind not an issue. You may find something different in a GT head though...
Just looking at your cams they have a lot more duration than the Hitchcock set, quite apart from the rocker ratio enhancing the lift. Hitchcock cams are not so much 'performance' cams. Rather they are what should have been fitted by the factory to match their own head.
I suspect the original cams came about as a longevity feature to compensate for the variable build quality. Something that seems to have been addressed with the twins. The twin was a British clean sheet of paper project. The unit single is just an evolutionary tweak of the old Bullet
Oddly enough Triumph produced a similar cam for the 900, seemingly using the restriction to differentiate that engine's output from the 1200.
Odd longer duration on the intake then on the exhaust with those HC Cams ? Decent bottom end power... good mid range ... hits a brick wall in the top end I've found with the shorter exhaust duration. WIDE lobe separation as well.
The stock cams , with the wide lobe separation are good for emissions and they play nicer with the Stock ECU as far a tuning.... a more steady vacuum signal in that intake. Short duration , NO lift ... for modest bottom end power.
-
Do the cams need stronger springs to accommodate higher rpm or are the to keep the valve train following the new more aggressive profile? If it's only for rpm and you're content to keep the stock rev limit, you could keep the original soft springs? Just thinking aloud, here. I got no cams.
Technically, it would be for both.
For a higher lift to occur in a similar duration, the acceleration is greater, and needs more spring pressure to keep the valve under control. Even with a longer duration, the profile is often ground with steeper flanks to get as much time at higher lifts as possible. Add to that, the fact that most performance cams aim to get more hp, and hp is a product of tq and rpm, the generally aim to increase the peaks of both tq and hp rpms.
So yes, in many/most cases with performance cams, new stronger springs are a necessary part of the program. Pretty much any cam maker will tell you that.
The amount of spring pressure needed depends on the cam profile, the moving masses, and the rpms targeted. Beehive type springs can control the valve at lower pressures than conventional springs, due to their inherent design benefits, but there are limits.
If accelerations and mass and rpms are not changed, but the cam timing is different, then the same springs should be able to be used. For example, if you re-phased the factory cams in either direction, you could keep the factory springs because the cam lobes are still the same as before even though the timing is changed.
-
JerryGT
I have over 23,000 km's on my Hitchcock cams and valve kit now, (500cc engine) and everything seems fine, I inspected the cams after 10k km's with no signs of wear. Still no unusual sounds coming from that area after 23k. Did yours get noisy ?
-
From what I've gleaned, setting up the backlash on these cams is critical. I suspect that's the main cause of wear/breakage when fitting aftermarket cams.
-
Thank you all for your Thoughts and Replies.
Yes, the "ticking" could be heard louder after the installation and I think that's normal because of the higher forces in the valve train. But it didn't get louder or changed in any other way over time.
It was absolutely inconspicuous during the season, the engine ran great, I figured it out because when the oil was due to be replaced, the magnets and the old oil was full of tiny shavings.
So I removed the right engine cover and everything still looked great.
The cam wheels had sufficient play, but the bearings of the cam wheels and the inner ring of the "Carberry vibration reduction plate" showed excessive wear.
You know, I usually drive on small roads in remote mountain regions, not looking for top speed, but I love the agility of this narrow and light motorcycle and I like to drive the engine at high revs, between 4-6000 rpm with a secondary gear ratio of 17/38, this configuration with the performance kit fits perfect to my riding style here in the mountains.
Anyway, I will replace the defective parts now and have a look what it shows after another 2000 miles.
Regards,
Jerry
-
If the bearings had worn surely the meshed gears couldn't be tight. However with new bearings and without adjustment of the eccentric spindles they could be. I've heard of the whole engine being seized and destroyed due to mechanics getting this wrong.
It's not something you generally have to do on pushrod singles, but the unit engine has the timing gears cut into the crank itself, not as as normal a larger timing gear with more meshing teeth slotted over the crank.
-
Thank you all for your Thoughts and Replies.
Yes, the "ticking" could be heard louder after the installation and I think that's normal because of the higher forces in the valve train. But it didn't get louder or changed in any other way over time.
It was absolutely inconspicuous during the season, the engine ran great, I figured it out because when the oil was due to be replaced, the magnets and the old oil was full of tiny shavings.
So I removed the right engine cover and everything still looked great.
The cam wheels had sufficient play, but the bearings of the cam wheels and the inner ring of the "Carberry vibration reduction plate" showed excessive wear.
You know, I usually drive on small roads in remote mountain regions, not looking for top speed, but I love the agility of this narrow and light motorcycle and I like to drive the engine at high revs, between 4-6000 rpm with a secondary gear ratio of 17/38, this configuration with the performance kit fits perfect to my riding style here in the mountains.
Anyway, I will replace the defective parts now and have a look what it shows after another 2000 miles.
Regards,
Jerry
Just MY own personal observations....
If you noticed on those Cams you installed... there is an extra layer of case Harding applied to them. Over the already VERY hard stock gear teeth. I believe those cams are regrinds , which is fine . And if they are, they certainly do not need any extra layers of case hardening. Particularly on the gear teeth. . A champagne colored Nitriding I believe it is. This takes up extra mils of space between the gear teeth, and makes them fit and mesh together tighter then the stocks ones I have found. So it becomes a bit more difficult to fit the gears together with the proper gear lash... they fit TIGHT. And this creates more noise. And add to that a bush that does not hold as much oil as the stock ones do... and it adds to the noise.
As far as the anti vibration plate goes. I would not use it with any kind of performance mod. The bearing in there .... the one I had at least... WAS only rated up to 4000 rpm's. And the custom made inner race for it, had a hardening treatment put on it that wore through . Quickly ! I heard bearing whine at around a thousand miles , and got rid of the thing. It may be OK for a stock bike at lower rpm's, and puttering around ? And I think that is what it was designed for. But if your going to rev it ? I wouldn't .. personally !... use it.
-
If you noticed on those Cams you installed... there is an extra layer of case Harding applied to them.......This takes up extra mils of space between the gear teeth, and makes them fit and mesh together tighter then the stocks ones I have found. So it becomes a bit more difficult to fit the gears together with the proper gear lash... they fit TIGHT. And this creates more noise. And add to that a bush that does not hold as much oil as the stock ones do... and it adds to the noise.
That does make sense to me.
The noise, I talked about wasn`t a whine, more that "ticking" an "chirping" of the gears backlash and from the push rods, the rockers and their tolerances. Just louder than stock.
As far as the anti vibration plate goes. I would not use it with any kind of performance mod. The bearing in there .... the one I had at least... WAS only rated up to 4000 rpm's. And the custom made inner race for it, had a hardening treatment put on it that wore through . Quickly ! I heard bearing whine at around a thousand miles , and got rid of the thing. It may be OK for a stock bike at lower rpm's, and puttering around ? And I think that is what it was designed for. But if your going to rev it ? I wouldn't .. personally !... use it.
Absolutely right.
When I saw that the thin hardened layer had chipped off, it was clear to me that it would not be replaced.
Greets,
Jerry
-
Cams are installed.
I need to wire in the second DynaTek coil. The Fireball head is a twin spark.
While switching to 520 sprockets and chain, I pulled the rear wheel and disengaged the rear brake line from the caliper. Gotta do a brake fluid change.
I'm going to change the sprag gear as well.
The right side crankcase cover is back on. I did some grinding on the oil filler screw in filter. The stator wires are in the way.
The two wire sets, one is the stator are very difficult to unplug and plug. To unplug them, I disconnected the rear/left motor mount plate. Looks like I'll stick to that. I don't want to add wire length and extra connectors, especially to the stator output wires. It's too easy to lose or melt a connection with that power. I know it sounds silly to talk about output from our little stators!
Cheers,
Bill G.
-
The next step was to take GT to Cycles of Silver Spring and a visit to a machinist. That's on hold until CSS can go back to work.
There will a volume measure of the Fireball combustion chamber and the space above the piston to the deck of the barrel. That will give us the compression ratio. The barrel will take a skimming if the measurements indicate it's the thing to do.
There's a little bit of custom work on a replacement lifters cover.
Hang in there!
Bill
-
Looking good, Bill!
-
Thanks, Tom.
Because of this gap, we can't test the cams either.
Our valve guys are in limbo too. Eventually our guys will come up with valves for the "Clubman Kit" for UCE engines. They will be stainless steel and the intake will be 1mm larger. When I get them I will set up a modified UCE head, using the improved valves.
Also, our finishing machinist will be working on the mounting system for the 'shot ball' bar end/vibration dampers. We will have mounts for 7/8" and 1" bars, so intensely vibe shaking HD guys can get in on the fun too!
AND.... my GT has 520 sprockets and chain for weight saving.
The future is so bright... I hope we get there!!!!
Bill
-
How short is it?
Bill
Sorry I missed this; I'm in Falls Church, but slated to be on my way elsewhere in late May, with the bikes being packed up for a few years of storage ( :-[ ) in the middle of the month.
Naturally everything's been thrown into uncertainty, but the pack-out is still slated to happen despite all the restrictions on life. When/whether I can travel on is the other half of a developing story.
-
Sorry I missed this; I'm in Falls Church, but slated to be on my way elsewhere in late May, with the bikes being packed up for a few years of storage ( :-[ ) in the middle of the month.
Naturally everything's been thrown into uncertainty, but the pack-out is still slated to happen despite all the restrictions on life. When/whether I can travel on is the other half of a developing story.
I’m next door in the middle of Arlington. Gimme a honk if you want to see the Connie G and the Fireball in progress. Mostly, I’m waiting.
I finally heard from our valve guy. More stainless steel valves will be on the way.
My guys in Silver Spring and the machine shop in Maryland are keeping their heads down during this war on making a living. When they start up, there will be a volume measurement of the combustion chamber to determine if or how much to lower the deck of the barrel for compression.
-
Strange that the USA is the only place where this attitude is rife. Elsewhere Societies pay more respect to their old folk and others; and are desperately trying to protect them and prevent their medical services from being utterly swamped with the sick and dying..
-
Strange that the USA is the only place where this attitude is rife. Elsewhere Societies pay more respect to their old folk and others; and are desperately trying to protect them and prevent their medical services from being utterly swamped with the sick and dying..
Most countries don't seem to be doing much else
while waiting until Mr. Gates finally comes up with the vaccine against Corona. ::)
-
Most countries don't seem to be doing much else
while waiting until Mr. Gates finally comes up with the vaccine against Corona. ::)
That true, but only if you exclude the food work being done by other countries. FX Australia, working on vaccines without Bill Gates help, show spread and few deaths. My home, South Australia : 4 deaths so far. No new infections for a week. No lock down, just restrictions on gathering sizes and social distancing. We're still riding, surfing, skiing. Cafes and restaurants are still shut tho.
But, If it didn't happen in 'Murcia, it didn't happen, as usual. ???
In other news, Aussie dollar still sucks so I still can't afford a new cylinder head.
-
I've been told I got no rights what so ever, so why bother doing anything anyway. Heading south...
May take a while until the EU fixes itself. ;)
-
I and quite a few of my friends have had it. If you're in good health and not overweight the prognosis is pretty good, which doesn't help a nation with appalling levels of morbidity. Still locked down [sort off] due to bugger all testing. Supposed to be taking my bike to Paul Henshaw but.... Two UK trials of a vaccine going on now, funded by our government. A lot of the USA has just lost patience, rather than come through it. Actually I think it's yet to hit most rural States in a really big way, but, off topic......
-
In other news, Aussie dollar still sucks so I still can't afford a new cylinder head.
Why care about the currency when the bank account sucks anyway? ;D
US$ is probaly the strongest, I don't know why is that but I think It's got to do with the productivity and the capability to enforce property rights.
-
Why care about the currency when the bank account sucks anyway? ;D
.
Haha ;D Bank account's OK so long as I only shop locally. So happy days to local manufacturers!
-
Haha ;D Bank account's OK so long as I only shop locally. So happy days to local manufacturers!
I agree, international trade is compleatly useless. ;D
-
Well I don't trust the banks here in Australia, not after the grubs were stealing from their customers and the govt decided to initiate the 'Bail in' legislation (google it) so I took all my money out and stashed it in a vegemite jar ;D ;D :D
-
Well I don't trust the banks here in Australia, not after the grubs were stealing from their customers and the govt decided to initiate the 'Bail in' legislation (google it) so I took all my money out and stashed it in a vegemite jar ;D ;D :D
Vegemite jar. :o ...definitly better than investing in some kind of development. ;D
-
Vegemite jars aren't very big are they?
-
Vegemite jars aren't very big are they?
[/equote]Haha! No they aren't, not even the large version - that's the size of the cash stash (coverted most of it to tangible assets)
-
Haha ;D Bank account's OK so long as I only shop locally. So happy days to local manufacturers!
Does anyone make tires in Australia? I don't know anyone who would make them at home here around. ;D
-
Strange that the USA is the only place where this attitude is rife. Elsewhere Societies pay more respect to their old folk and others; and are desperately trying to protect them and prevent their medical services from being utterly swamped with the sick and dying..
Jez - What’s your problem?
Bill G
-
Does anyone make tires in Australia? I don't know anyone who would make them at home here around. ;D
Of course they don't.
-
Vegemite jars aren't very big are they?
WildBill could even stash his money in this one 💰💰
-
Just don't make the mistake to move to Nothing Hill, or you will be elevated by a trustworthy elevator in red&black. ;D
I think beer shares could do well. It's yellow too.
-
Please don't spam my thread.
Ironic how a person advertising help for class exhibits no class himself.
-
They are an equal opportunity spammer. They got the "am I tall enough" thread too - twice. >:(
-
So was there ever a website put up? I wouldn't mind having another site bookmarked on my phone to scroll through and drool over.
-
Bill has been working on it.
It might be up.
I'll find out.
-
My older sister died recently. I’m dealing with financial, legal and funeral biz for right now.
My original GT kept locking up and got the engine to turn over after opening the primary case. I did this twice, and it still wouldn’t kick through. It’s sitting with a mechanic. It’s more or less out of the picture.
I picked up a 2014 GT from Jeremy at Cycles of Silver Spring (MD). This bike will get the Fireball. Two days ago I installed the Power Commander. I installed the Air Kit. It came with a ‘sports’ muffler. I installed a Carpy header. I’m getting some miles on this GT when I can. It has 269 miles now.
I wish things were rosier, but this coming week should be a bit better.
Cheers,
Bill
-
...and having to see the loss of a person and sibling. "Life is a trial, and it will eventually be done". Condolences: motorcycles may be interesting or a way of earning a living, but mean nothing in that time.
-
...and having to see the loss of a person and sibling. "Life is a trial, and it will eventually be done". Condolences: motorcycles may be interesting or a way of earning a living, but mean nothing in that time.
Welcome to the Forum, monkey?
-
Sorry for your loss, Bill. Lots of good memories though, I hope.
-
Sorry for your loss, Bill. Lots of good memories though, I hope.
Thanks, Gizzo. I’ll be back!
I heard from the busy mechanic who will be healing ConnieGT’s ailing primary. I will be adding the Clubman Kit head to this GT #1. Head work will be done soon.
Bill
-
Hope I am not necroing this thread :) and also hope all are well
Any news on the head? Is it going to be a go, or has it been scrapped?
cheers
enzan
-
Hope I am not necroing this thread :) and also hope all are well
Any news on the head? Is it going to be a go, or has it been scrapped?
cheers
enzan
The Fireball will be installed on my CGT 535 this summer. Ace and I have concentrated on the Clubman Kit 1 and 2. It is a modified stock head. But, we are using stainless steel one piece valves. The intake valve is 1mm oversize. The 2 uses ‘beehive’ valve springs that can work reliably with our cams. My Bullet B5 has the Clubman Kit 2…. Head and cams. It also has a Power Commander V, set up with Dynojet’s AutoTune. The silencer is a free flowing modified HD Sportster muffler. The ‘midrange’ runs from idle to the rev limiter. It’s one big mid-range! The power is always there.
We like performance that retains a solid street performance.
Cheers,
Bill G
-
A year and a half has now relapsed. Did this new head reach production status and if so, can it be ordered?
-
A year and a half has now relapsed. Did this new head reach production status and if so, can it be ordered?
Production ceased after 3 units completed. Cannot currently be ordered.
Project succeeded on all 3 units with all still on the road.
Cost and difficulty to manufacture sank the project.
-
Greetings from Johnson City, TN. I'm glad the Ace company still keeps tabs on this forum. Your posts going through the lifetime of the Continental gt 535 ( and other models ) helped a late arrival like myself picture what I'd do with my 2015 model, bought new in March 2020. "The world's more interesting with you in it". Someday I'm going to make an airbox with a foreward facing air intake, but back to this thread.
For clarity sake I think you're stating that the aluminum billet head you designed ( the original subject of this thread ) is out of production, and that you're not commenting on the Clubman Kits ( reworked stock heads ) numbers 1 and 2 that have been offered more recently. A person dropping in late might be confused, but please correct me if need be.
P.S. an overwrought airbox from the rear right.
-
A year and a half has now relapsed. Did this new head reach production status and if so, can it be ordered?
Easiest and quickest thing for you to do would be to take your head down to your local performance shop and have them clean up your existing head. Tidy up the ports, match them to the inlet and exhaust, get the insulating spacer fitting properly and pop in a stainless exhaust valve.
It won't make it into a Ace head but you'll notice an improvement.
-
Easiest and quickest thing for you to do would be to take your head down to your local performance shop and have them clean up your existing head. Tidy up the ports, match them to the inlet and exhaust, get the insulating spacer fitting properly and pop in a stainless exhaust valve.
Gizzo, is that what you did to your one; I haven't tracked down a thread on your bike, is there one? I'm assuming a machinist would need from the EFI adapter to head connection to match them up. My nearest machine shop is 1.5hrs away in Coffs Harbour, so I'd better get a 2nd bike while this one's off the road; I saw a cheap Monster 600 recently...
-
Production ceased after 3 units completed. Cannot currently be ordered.
Project succeeded on all 3 units with all still on the road.
Cost and difficulty to manufacture sank the project.
Thanks Tom for all your work. Even though I wasn't one of the lucky few to score the CNC head, I have appreciated and enjoyed being able to 'ride along' following the development steps which you have taken time to post.
-
Gizzo, is that what you did to your one; I haven't tracked down a thread on your bike, is there one? I'm assuming a machinist would need from the EFI adapter to head connection to match them up. My nearest machine shop is 1.5hrs away in Coffs Harbour, so I'd better get a 2nd bike while this one's off the road; I saw a cheap Monster 600 recently...
Yep, that's what I did to mine. I don't have a build thread. I think it's documented somewhere in the "what did you do to your CGT" thread, along with Taurim's and Ben's ones.
I did mine at home with a dremel, burrs and sanding drums. Did I use a borrowed die grinder? I can't remember. Just matched the ports, opened up the inlet tract and lowered the floor a little bit. I got lazy and didn't unshroud the exhaust port like Ben and T did with theirs but I'll do it next time. It's not rocket therapy on a bike like this. There's easy improvements. Some UCE engine have pretty bad core shift by all accounts and they'd see solid improvements with the treatment mine has had.
Good luck with the Monster. My Mrs has one. It's a laugh.
-
Good luck with the Monster. My Mrs has one. It's a laugh.
What do you mean 'it's a laugh'; do you mean grin-enducing?
-
What do you mean 'it's a laugh'; do you mean grin-enducing?
Yes, it's tremendous fun. It's a Japanese grey import 400ie. It's pretty sleepy low in the rev range but it gets along well if it's kept on the boil. She's surprised more than one "fast boy" in the hills with it. I wouldn't recommend anyone else bought a 400 though. You can get a 600 for similar money so why not? Except me: If a 400 SS Junior came along at the right price I'd be tempted.
-
If a 400 SS Junior came along at the right price I'd be tempted.
You mean something like this one?
https://www.ebay.com.au/itm/145401084029?hash=item21da94787d:g:RjsAAOSwn-Nkd80g&amdata=enc%3AAQAIAAAA4BxpccxkriMcJS1zXSSCTBRTFRRRWNEEkyHCeAJUuAyoH7AGBdu71dQng3SDgHF2eaga3jgqtqpRh0BdyBoI1wAgqdk%2Fs7mk8h9uhfQ6Cay%2BbSwShH4uFCMZd9asG7EV4fj0Ea%2BUwyy04HsviIuuzwp%2F0PxBFA1XfCAS7TQXy5bF7doPGrTvJL6EAQUd1KhErFUL4L3atxO9%2BQRVb%2FdQsLCPd3KmRahaXwS6c9esBiy%2FU9%2FaGXnYJ4nHyRZ4q65M89WLIpQppouGHTJOdd2oJt0DNcOh6Mjlv2I47g5bit7G%7Ctkp%3ABk9SR4S496KFYw
-
Just like that...