Progress pics.....

Originally Posted by Saint aka ML

Zak why only od why not turbo and nos?

Just curious but how long a bottle of nos you will fit will last, how much to refill and finally how much for a nos setup.

Turbo is indeed part of the next stage, I'm not finished yet but want to ride it this summer, so it's been made road legal and safe, will ride it until sept ish and then back to work it will go.

[Saint aka ML]

For turbo you are planning to use alloy airbox to pressurise or some other setup?

I looked a lot in to that and found plenty of hypermotards with turbo where most bits and pieces were in place of catalytic converter but none mentioned how they pressurised airbox to minimise loss.

Alloy airbox I seen on US monster and there even was a kit available but it was very heavy with all steel pipes and alloy airbox.

Then I seen a airbox for Honda pressurised for turbo but CF unit.

After that I seen a turbo driven of crank on 999 with no airbox as such just direct feed from turbo to injectors, seemed best setup as weight added by piping was reclaimed a bit by lack of airbox.

Will be looking with interest however for figures a 1993 m900 went up from 78bhp (he had some engine work done as well) to just under 130bhp at pick compression.

Originally Posted by Saint aka ML

For turbo you are planning to use alloy airbox to pressurise or some other setup?

I looked a lot in to that and found plenty of hypermotards with turbo where most bits and pieces were in place of catalytic converter but none mentioned how they pressurised airbox to minimise loss.

Alloy airbox I seen on US monster and there even was a kit available but it was very heavy with all steel pipes and alloy airbox.

Then I seen a airbox for Honda pressurised for turbo but CF unit.

After that I seen a turbo driven of crank on 999 with no airbox as such just direct feed from turbo to injectors, seemed best setup as weight added by piping was reclaimed a bit by lack of airbox.

Will be looking with interest however for figures a 1993 m900 went up from 78bhp (he had some engine work done as well) to just under 130bhp at pick compression.

Easy tiger I haven't even begun that stage yet, I have seen it done on a m900 by an engineering company that was based in Gloucester called Polygon, and they had some incredible results, so im confident i can do it, once I start investigating into it I'll post details on here, I've only just overcome the problems of fitting a car NOS kit to a bike and the vacuum switch was an even bigger headache. So the turbo and it's headaches can wait for now.

[Dukedesmo]

Mmmm Nitous oxide, turbo...

Nice one Zak...

Originally Posted by Dukedesmo

Mmmm Nitous oxide, turbo...

Nice one Zak...

My thoughts exactly, I'm not sure yet if it's actually even worth doing both, I'm tempted but mainly for willy measuring competitions, I'm def going to start the prework investigation and if it adds up i'll do it, if not then there are many other things I can do to get the naturally aspirated engine giving me more ponies.

Z.

Originally Posted by Zak

I'm tempted but mainly for willy measuring competitions.

Hahahahahahahahahaha

Wouldn't supercharged be better for a twin?

[Saint aka ML]

In what way? You would still run it of a crank where two belts meet and you still have a problem of compressed air delivery. Or am I confusing something?

I don't know I just read it somewhere

[Capo]

Originally Posted by bex

Hahahahahahahahahaha

Another use for Nos

I'm not surprised either I saw it in the flesh
if your going bug eyed it has to be twin bates lights !

[utopia]

Originally Posted by rac3r

Wouldn't supercharged be better for a twin?

I'm on very dodgy ground here, knowing little on the subject and having even less experience, but...
Yes, I think supercharging might be better.
Possibly because, being a low revving engine which delivers lots of torque at low revs, there would be a greater issue with turbo lag, giving you a less controllable sudden burst of torque when the turbo kicked in.....??
Also, because of the low engine speeds maybe a turbo with its internal slippage (?) would never run fast enough to be in its efficient zone, whereas the positive displacement of a supercharger would be efficient over the full range....??
Also, I think the supercharger wins in the "cool" stakes, though I couldn't exactly say why.

I remember a few years back seeing an article in MCN about a ducati motor (a 2-valve, 900, I think), being converted to run as a single, where the "spare" cylinder became the supercharger. ....interesting.

What I read was that it had something to with the pulse of a twin making it difficult to set up a turbo correctly. I have no idea myself though

Here is a Turbo S2R 800

http://www.duccutters.com/WaynePatterson-S2Rturbo.tpl

I'd love to Turbo/Supercharge just for the sound alone

[Saint aka ML]

Originally Posted by rac3r

What I read was that it had something to with the pulse of a twin making it difficult to set up a turbo correctly. I have no idea myself though

Here is a Turbo S2R 800

http://www.duccutters.com/WaynePatterson-S2Rturbo.tpl

I'd love to Turbo/Supercharge just for the sound alone

Sounds normal.. also power gain is not that big check the SS that was done for drag racing from 62 to 209.5 bhp

Man you are as crazy as a coconut, but you got balls and a deep wallet i'll give you that!