Big bang R1

If everything goes to plan, and the job I've been promised at the local suzuki/yam dealer comes through, I may be able to get a sneaky test ride once it's in showrooms. Yeeha!

The only bad thing I see is that I've started browsing ebay for a cheap IL4 engine to fiddle with.......

Originally Posted by thor

It sounds awful!

You dont like the sound of a twin (big bang) or a M1 (rossi's bike - a long bang). Id presume it will be a long bang like the M1, but I cant be sure. People often get the two mixed up, though I can see why, it does a similar job.

Originally Posted by gettin2dizzy

You can rev it like a IL4 and you can optimise the burn better. It's all to do with surface area and accelerating mass.

I think you have some of it. It also has to do with air flow, more smaller cylinders are better than less bigger ones for high revs because the valves can occupy a bigger proportion of the area so allow more air into the cylinder.

Originally Posted by Dangerous Dave

Yes, it should do but it all depends how the motor is set to run. I would think that this particular type of engine would rev high, after all it is the flagship sports bike.

- is this the design inspiration?

It will rev like a standard IL4 yes, it will make pretty much the same power, it should give greater traction and will sound better.

Hmmmm...

270º - 180º - 90º - 180º are the firing intervals. I'm only just learning about this, so please correct me as I'm sure you will need to.

A proper big bang engine would have ALL the cylinders firing close together, would it not? In which case.. what exactly is this?

[yorkie_chris]

Originally Posted by gettin2dizzy

You can rev it like a Il4 and you can optimise the burn better. It's all to do with surface area and accelerating mass.

Doesn't matter what order you fire them in you still have exactly same combustion chamber surface area and accelerating mass.

Surely to rev it, and to optimise burn you need short stroke and a hemi head. In whatever firing order.

Also, having all cylinders inducting at same time means far higher max flow through induction system and resulting increased reynolds numbers... more turbulence, more inlet vacuum. Also greater induction pulses, but that won't make much difference. The same arguement means the exhaust system will have to be far bigger in the collector to avoid back pressure which reduces top-end power.

I reckon in motoGP this makes a difference in terms of controlling a sliding tyre right on the limit of controllability. On the road I reckon it's a gimmick that will make sod all difference, oh except for massively increasing stress on crank, gearbox and driveline.

Originally Posted by Sean_C

Hmmmm...

270º - 180º - 90º - 180º are the firing intervals. I'm only just learning about this, so please correct me as I'm sure you will need to.

A proper big bang engine would have ALL the cylinders firing close together, would it not? In which case.. what exactly is this?

There are different types, (all the angles are crank shaft angles, not degree's between firing...)

V2 (90º SV) 90º/270º

V2 (60º Aprilia V990 engine - RSV etc) 60º/300º

Screamer = 180º/360º/540º/720º

Big Bang 2 = 180º x (2 pistons) / 720º x (2 pistons) http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3gFhiQx9OmY

Big Bang 3 = 180º/360º (x 2 pistons)/720º (the one in my sig)

Suzuki V4 motogp bike = 0º/75º/360º/435º

Long bang (m1 - guess) = 0º/90º/180º/360º

All worked out by Performance bikes.

Hope this shed's some light on it all.

Thanks- I wish I knew more. I will know more

Originally Posted by yorkie_chris

I reckon in motoGP this makes a difference in terms of controlling a sliding tyre right on the limit of controllability. On the road I reckon it's a gimmick that will make sod all difference, oh except for massively increasing stress on crank, gearbox and driveline.

And like I already said making it sound a hell of a lot more interesting.

Originally Posted by neio79

hmmmmmm marginally, i bet this R1 is a fraction of a second faster to 60 and 100. Thats it. They are getting too small for normal sized people to ride.
Infact it could be argued its eaiser to increase the CC to acieve the same speed. My 6R is a lot lighter and smaller than the old 636 which his far more substantial in dimensions but only had 36cc more .Yet the older 636 is quicker where it counts. In some respects its a far beter road going bike than mine.

The weight thing isn't about straight line speed. It's all about corner speed and handling.

Originally Posted by neio79

better ... bike than mine.

Originally Posted by neio79

better ... bike than mine.

Originally Posted by neio79

better ... bike than mine.

Originally Posted by neio79

better ... bike than mine.

Originally Posted by neio79

better ... bike than mine.

Originally Posted by neio79

better ... bike than mine.

Just wanted to make sure that was well and truly captured, same as when ol' greeky says it!

[STRAMASHER]

...........another manky Jap litre bike. What a surprise! Best of a bad lot.Emissions&catalyzer ******** ****ing up the designing of a nice exhaust system.

If I was a midget weekend warrior it would be:

New R1

GSX-R

CBR

ZX-10R