Motorcycle Chassis Design Digest #781-790
MC-Chassis-Dgst Thursday, October 1 1998 Volume 01 : Number 781
1. jmark.vanscoter@amd.com Subj: RE: MC-Chassis rake, trail and wheelbase stuff
2. "Tony Foale" Subj: MC-Chassis Re: Casting
3. "Tony Foale" Subj: MC-Chassis Re: Braking loads
4. Bob & Jean Subj: Re: MC-Chassis Re: Braking loads
5. Mark Mason Subj: Re: MC-Chassis metal casting question
6. Lauren Subj: Re: MC-Chassis Re: Braking loads
7. jmark.vanscoter@amd.com Subj: RE: MC-Chassis Re: Braking loads
8. Mark Mason Subj: Re: MC-Chassis rake,trail and wheelbase stuff
9. Johnayleng@aol.com Subj: Re: MC-Chassis rake,trail and wheelbase stuff
10. Johnayleng@aol.com Subj: Re: MC-Chassis metal casting question
11. jmark.vanscoter@amd.com Subj: RE: MC-Chassis rake, trail and wheelbase stuff
12. Johnayleng@aol.com Subj: Re: MC-Chassis rake, trail and wheelbase stuff
13. Bob & Jean Subj: Re: MC-Chassis metal casting question
14. "Ray or Emily Brooks" Subj: Re: MC-Chassis Another list? FS Spam
15. "Ray or Emily Brooks" Subj: Re: MC-Chassis rake,trail and wheelbase stuff
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Date: Thu, 1 Oct 1998 14:08:09 -0500
From: jmark.vanscoter@amd.com
Subject: RE: MC-Chassis rake, trail and wheelbase stuff
Michael wrote "the forks might have more leverage on the steering head
the steeper the rake as the braking force would be fed in at something
more closely approaching a right angle"
Bob wrote- "In my personal limited RAM I'm thinking that if the
vertical height is the same in both cases, ie, center of wheel to
reaction center between 2 steering head bearings, then the horizontal
vector will be the same."
Tony Foale wrote about this extensively in his book. And, the way I
understood what he wrote was that one of the reasons for the "magical"
27 degree fork angle in bikes of yore was so the forces of braking were
transferred more directly into the frame, without major bending and
distortion of the fork tubes. Of course, today's monster forks and super
rigid frames are so much stronger than their predecessors that it is no
longer a major factor. However, if the fork angle is different, then the
angular forces transferred would still change.
Did I get that right Tony?
Mark
------------------------------
Date: Thu, 1 Oct 1998 22:50:26 +0200
From: "Tony Foale"
Subject: MC-Chassis Re: Casting
Ray mentioned:
<<
Eastwood has a book about sand casting. It is a very involved process.
>>
It doesn't have to be.
Way back in my teens I cast crankcases, barrels and heads for my racing two
strokes in the backyard with quite primitive facilities. When I eventually
got to see a "real" foundry I realise that mine was not as primitive as I
thought.
I would buy ingot material of an appropriate alloy, but I was quite
meticulous about degassing the melt and that made all the difference as far
as avoiding porosity.
There's some pictures of said engines on my site under the engine catagory
in the photos section.
<<
Billet would be much easier.
>>
Not always easier but usually better, I used that for the Aernacchi four
valve head. The magnesium piston was also machined from bar stock.
I've still got all that old junk, I'll guess Michael will want to rummage
through it all when he comes over in a couple of weeks.
Tony Foale
España / Spain
http://www.ctv.es/USERS/Softtech/motos
------------------------------
Date: Thu, 1 Oct 1998 23:03:16 +0200
From: "Tony Foale"
Subject: MC-Chassis Re: Braking loads
Bob said about rake angle effects:
<<
Hmmmmm,Is this true? In my personal limited RAM I'm thinking that if the
vertical height is the same in both cases, ie, center of wheel to
reaction center between 2 steering head bearings, then the horizonal
vector will be the same.
>>
That's quite true so you'd better copy your RAM to a WORM.
However, with steep rake the forks are more likely to suffer "juddering"
etc. The degree of this will depend on the quality of the forks of course.
For the range of rake angle in practical current use with headstock mounted
forks there is unlikely to be any noticable difference between what is
regarded as steep and "not-steep". It would only be as you approach upright
head stocks that this would become a problem, and I see no signs that
anybody will be approaching those angles with such forks.
Tony Foale
España / Spain
http://www.ctv.es/USERS/Softtech/motos
------------------------------
Date: Thu, 01 Oct 1998 14:51:53 -0700
From: Bob & Jean
Subject: Re: MC-Chassis Re: Braking loads
Worm? Bob
------------------------------
Date: Thu, 1 Oct 1998 18:08:13 -0400
From: Mark Mason
Subject: Re: MC-Chassis metal casting question
> Can anyone recommend a web site with good general reference
> information on Casting (especially sand casting aluminum alloy)
> and Pattern-Making?
Check out Lindsay Publications. They're on the net, I don't remember
where though. They have at least a few books on casting, one good one
that covers building your own furnace and getting started with pattern
making and green sand casting is by Dave Gingery. I built a furnace
with that book for about $100, it runs on plain grill charcoal and is
really easy to use. I've never tried anything other than aluminium in
it, fortunately it's one of the easiest metals to work with. I found
some books on casting and pattern making at Powells Technical, a
couple of them were originals from the turn of the century and are
still relevent. Lindsay does have some books on building hotter
furnaces for bronze and iron casting.
I get my casting supplies from Malcolm Stevens in or around Arlington,
Ma. I'm told that they're one of the better casting supply shops on
the east coast. They have everything you could want for casting
anything from jewelry size to human size. I've never done anything
that was really critical, so I've never paid much attention to what
alloy I was using. I've gotten a lot of good metal from big old disk
drives, but Malcolm Stevens sells ingots too.
------------------------------
Date: Thu, 01 Oct 1998 15:13:31 -0700
From: Lauren
Subject: Re: MC-Chassis Re: Braking loads
At 02:51 PM 10/1/98 , Bob & Jean wrote:
>Worm? Bob
>
Write Once Read Mostly - an old acronym for a recordable CD-ROM.
FWIW,
LCB
'91 BMW R100GS - Geist der Freiheit
'94 Suzuki DR350ES
------------------------------
Date: Thu, 1 Oct 1998 17:12:57 -0500
From: jmark.vanscoter@amd.com
Subject: RE: MC-Chassis Re: Braking loads
Worm? Bob
Write-Once, Read-Many
Mark
------------------------------
Date: Thu, 1 Oct 1998 18:14:52 -0400
From: Mark Mason
Subject: Re: MC-Chassis rake,trail and wheelbase stuff
> I just read an interesting article in Superbike magazine (Sept. 98)
> which of course agreed with you on the importance (or lack of) rake
> has to steering "quickness." So would I be correct in my train of
> thought that the reduced rake angles of newer bikes is to shorten the
> wheelbase and transfer the weight bias forward?
I'd actually bet on it being largely marketing. The manufacturers have
to make a certain number of changes from one model to the next to make
it obvious that the new model is better than the old one, and "everybody
knows" that a steeper head angle makes for quicker steering, so the
new model "must" steer quicker than the old one.
There are probably genuine technical reasons too, your explanation
sounds like a good one, but I'd bet that the marketing reasons appeal
to buyers more than the technical reasons do.
------------------------------
Date: Thu, 1 Oct 1998 19:01:07 EDT
From: Johnayleng@aol.com
Subject: Re: MC-Chassis rake,trail and wheelbase stuff
In a message dated 10/1/98 4:15:49 PM Mountain Daylight Time,
mason@apocalypse.org writes:
> "everybody
> knows" that a steeper head angle makes for quicker steering, so the
> new model "must" steer quicker than the old one.
My interest is spured by a roadrace track being built here in Albuquerque
NM.
I am in the process of building a 1975 H1 500 Kaw 2 stroke triple for vintage
racing. I have installed a 2.15 x 18" front rim (from 1.85 x 19"), and 1 1/4"
longer rear shocks.
The bike handles much better than it did, but the fast left/right
transitions are a handfull. The stock 500 comes with 27 degree rake and 4.3"s
of trail. With the changes I have made, I believe the rake is down to 26/25.5
degrees and 4.1"s of trail. I have a friend that is willing to build new
triple clamps for the bike. I would like about 3.6"s of trail.
My question is: In order to shorten the trail I will have to increase the
distance from the steering pivot centerline to the centerline of the forks. Is
this correct? This means that I would be increasing the wheelbase by 1/2", (
55"s now) and shifting the weight bias rearward (not good on a H1). Is there a
better way to decrease the trail?
Thanks in advance,
John Aylor NM
------------------------------
Date: Thu, 1 Oct 1998 19:05:37 EDT
From: Johnayleng@aol.com
Subject: Re: MC-Chassis metal casting question
In a message dated 10/1/98 4:08:46 PM Mountain Daylight Time,
mason@apocalypse.org writes:
>
> I get my casting supplies from Malcolm Stevens in or around Arlington,
> Ma. I'm told that they're one of the better casting supply shops on
> the east coast.
Do you have a Address,phone no. or web site for them?
I do jewelry and aluminum cast parts using the lost wax method. this is
great for one off parts. (as long as the caster doesn't blow the cast... :-())
John Aylor NM
------------------------------
Date: Thu, 1 Oct 1998 18:09:07 -0500
From: jmark.vanscoter@amd.com
Subject: RE: MC-Chassis rake, trail and wheelbase stuff
John said: "The stock 500 comes with 27 degree rake and 4.3" of trail.
With the changes I have made, I believe the rake is down to 26/25.5
degrees and 4.1"s of trail. I have a friend that is willing to build new
triple clamps for the bike. I would like about 3.6"s of trail."
You can also reduce trail also by lowering the bike by shortening the
forks, installing longer shocks, or by cutting the frame. With 27
degrees fork angle, are you sure you have 4+ inches trail? That sounds
like a lot.
Mark
------------------------------
Date: Thu, 1 Oct 1998 19:16:21 EDT
From: Johnayleng@aol.com
Subject: Re: MC-Chassis rake, trail and wheelbase stuff
In a message dated 10/1/98 5:09:28 PM Mountain Daylight Time,
jmark.vanscoter@amd.com writes:
>
> You can also reduce trail also by lowering the bike by shortening the
> forks, installing longer shocks, or by cutting the frame. With 27
> degrees fork angle, are you sure you have 4+ inches trail? That sounds
> like a lot.
>
I need all the ground clearance I can get, so shorter forks are out. And
the stock rake/trail figures came out of the factory manual. And as of now the
rake is 25.5/26 degrees, I reall don't want to go steeper with the whimpy
frame and forks.
John Aylor NM
------------------------------
Date: Thu, 01 Oct 1998 16:48:16 -0700
From: Bob & Jean
Subject: Re: MC-Chassis metal casting question
>
> > Can anyone recommend a web site with good general reference
> > information on Casting (especially sand casting aluminum alloy)
> > and Pattern-Making?
I have a few of Lindseys books that I won't be needing, I'll make you a
fair price if you are enterested. Cheers Bob>
------------------------------
Date: Thu, 1 Oct 1998 21:00:40 -0400
From: "Ray or Emily Brooks"
Subject: Re: MC-Chassis Another list? FS Spam
If someone is dying to be on the Benelli list but is currently without a
Benelli I can help! {?} I have a Dynamo that $500.00 would convince me to
part with. I have a new set of street tires for this bike. It has a new
topend and everything works. I was riding it in the pits at the Road
Atlanta AHRMA race if any interested people were there.
Thanks
Ray
Atlanta GA
- ----------
> From: Michael Moore
> To: mc-chassis-design@list.sirius.com
> Subject: MC-Chassis Another list?????
> Date: Wednesday, September 30, 1998 11:38 PM
>
> Is there anyone interested in a Benelli/MotoBi list?
>
> I've got about 14 people on my very informal distribution list
> devoted to the Benelli/MotoBi horizontal singles, but I've had
> inquiries from people with Seis, Quattros, and Tornados, as well as
> the vertical cylinder singles (and even a 65cc Dynamo minibike).
>
> I didn't think there was much chance of the Suzuki GS-twin and
> Laverda lists getting beyond 15 or 20 listees, yet they are both up to
> about 85 people each.
>
> If I can get about 25 people interested in a Benelli/MotoBi list I'll
> see about starting one up at the beginning of November when I get back
> from my trip to Spain.
>
> Please drop me a line off list if you would be interested.
>
> Cheers,
> Michael
------------------------------
Date: Thu, 1 Oct 1998 21:11:17 -0400
From: "Ray or Emily Brooks"
Subject: Re: MC-Chassis rake,trail and wheelbase stuff
According to the local GMD guy the Goldberg has 26 degrees of rake and 100
mm's - 3.94 inches-of trail. I assure you it is awesome in switchbacks. Of
course it only weighs 240 or so with 2 gals of fuel.
Describe in greater detail the problem your bike is giving you.
Ray
- ----------
> From: Johnayleng@aol.com
> To: mc-chassis-design@list.sirius.com
> Subject: Re: MC-Chassis rake,trail and wheelbase stuff
> Date: Thursday, October 01, 1998 7:01 PM
>
> In a message dated 10/1/98 4:15:49 PM Mountain Daylight Time,
> mason@apocalypse.org writes:
>
> > "everybody
> > knows" that a steeper head angle makes for quicker steering, so the
> > new model "must" steer quicker than the old one.
>
> My interest is spured by a roadrace track being built here in
Albuquerque
> NM.
> I am in the process of building a 1975 H1 500 Kaw 2 stroke triple for
vintage
> racing. I have installed a 2.15 x 18" front rim (from 1.85 x 19"), and 1
1/4"
> longer rear shocks.
>
> The bike handles much better than it did, but the fast left/right
> transitions are a handfull. The stock 500 comes with 27 degree rake and
4.3"s
> of trail. With the changes I have made, I believe the rake is down to
26/25.5
> degrees and 4.1"s of trail. I have a friend that is willing to build new
> triple clamps for the bike. I would like about 3.6"s of trail.
>
> My question is: In order to shorten the trail I will have to increase
the
> distance from the steering pivot centerline to the centerline of the
forks. Is
> this correct? This means that I would be increasing the wheelbase by
1/2", (
> 55"s now) and shifting the weight bias rearward (not good on a H1). Is
there a
> better way to decrease the trail?
>
> Thanks in advance,
> John Aylor NM
------------------------------
End of MC-Chassis-Dgst V1 #781
******************************
MC-Chassis-Dgst Friday, October 2 1998 Volume 01 : Number 782
1. Henrik Bo Pedersen Subj: MC-Chassis Suspension Modifications ?
2. Johnayleng@aol.com Subj: Re: MC-Chassis rake,trail and wheelbase stuff
3. yhakim@m5.sprynet.com Subj: MC-Chassis Bearings vs Bushings
4. "Calvin Grandy" Subj: Re: MC-Chassis Bearings vs Bushings
5. "Michael Moore" Subj: Re: MC-Chassis Bearings vs Bushings
6. "Jon Hose" Subj: MC-Chassis new list, Eurspares logo
7. "Michael Moore" Subj: Re: MC-Chassis new list, Eurspares logo
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Date: Thu, 1 Oct 1998 23:09:01 -0400 (EDT)
From: Henrik Bo Pedersen
Subject: MC-Chassis Suspension Modifications ?
HI All - Just a brief introduction
I have been lurking on the list for awhile. I'm not terribly technically
inclined but enjoy learning and wrenching my own bikes. I've been riding
street bikes for about 20 years (BSA, Triumph, Honda, Suzuki, HD Lowrider x
2), but after buying a '98 Buell S3 and taking Pridmoore's CLASS I got
bitten by the "track bug" (strictly amateur training though), and I'm
looking to improve the handling a bit. So here goes the questions:
1. can anyone recommend a company for shock and fork rebuild/revalve? I
have spoken to Lindeman and Race Tech, and they vary greatly in approach
and price. Any preferrences? Any other companies out there?
2. Would I be able to feel the benefit from an aftermarket swingarm like
Spondon or Metmachex, or is it all lost in the rear rubber mounts ?
3. Any recommendations for a steering damper ? I doubt if there is room for
a rotary damper.
Thanks
Henrik
Henrik Bo Pedersen
------------------------------
Date: Thu, 1 Oct 1998 23:11:18 EDT
From: Johnayleng@aol.com
Subject: Re: MC-Chassis rake,trail and wheelbase stuff
In a message dated 10/1/98 7:14:55 PM Mountain Daylight Time,
ray.emily.brooks@worldnet.att.net writes:
> According to the local GMD guy the Goldberg has 26 degrees of rake and 100
> mm's - 3.94 inches-of trail. I assure you it is awesome in switchbacks. Of
> course it only weighs 240 or so with 2 gals of fuel.
>
> Describe in greater detail the problem your bike is giving you.
>
Ray,
I know I'm trying to turn a pigs ear into a winners purse, but I love them
triples. From what I have read, even a few mm change in trail can make a
difference in turn-in. as of now it takes a lot of muscle for turn-in and a
bunch of muscle for left/right switch backs. As of yet I have only been able
to test on the mountain road we have here. Speeds are at maximum of about
75mph. It takes a bunch of work to get up the mountain (though less than the
stock set-up). I know once on the track this will be a bigger factor at higher
rates of speed. Also I am working with a 55" wheelbase. I can shorten the
swingarm, but then I'm back to the weight bias thing.
John Aylor NM
PS: I haven't done the weight loss program yet (on the bike..LOL, I'm at 160
lbs.), so I'm working with a bike weight of about 380 lbs.
------------------------------
Date: Fri, 02 Oct 1998 14:49:05 -0700
From: yhakim@m5.sprynet.com
Subject: MC-Chassis Bearings vs Bushings
A recent list thread suggested that bronze bushings were better for SA,
'cause it doesn't constantly rotate, but rather along a limited arc.
Does the same hold true for a SH bearings?
And with a hosasck/fior front end, should all the rotating joints be
bushings?
______________________________________________________
Yousuf
------------------------------
Date: Fri, 2 Oct 1998 17:57:46 -0400
From: "Calvin Grandy"
Subject: Re: MC-Chassis Bearings vs Bushings
This is a multi-part message in MIME format.
- ------=_NextPart_000_01BDEE2E.298AA3E0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
I have strongly considered composite bearings at the steering head (DU
trade name)
Pivots, as in FFE's would be best served by "plain" bearings vs. rolling
element.
Regards
Calvin Grandy
- ----------
> From: yhakim@m5.sprynet.com
> To: mc-chassis-design@list.sirius.com
> Subject: MC-Chassis Bearings vs Bushings
> Date: Friday, October 02, 1998 5:49 PM
>
> A recent list thread suggested that bronze bushings were better for SA,
> 'cause it doesn't constantly rotate, but rather along a limited arc.
> Does the same hold true for a SH bearings?
> And with a hosasck/fior front end, should all the rotating joints be
> bushings?
>
> ______________________________________________________
> Yousuf
> WMMRA 935
------------------------------
Date: Fri, 2 Oct 1998 16:57:48 -0800
From: "Michael Moore"
Subject: Re: MC-Chassis Bearings vs Bushings
> A recent list thread suggested that bronze bushings were better for SA,
> 'cause it doesn't constantly rotate, but rather along a limited arc.
> Does the same hold true for a SH bearings?
> And with a hosasck/fior front end, should all the rotating joints be
> bushings?
Hello Yousuf,
Taper roller bearings also work well on swing arm as well as steering
head - they don't seem to wear as quick as the needle bearings and
you don't have trouble with slop in them.
Some of the FFE use spherical bearings/rod ends in the links. If you
use a good quality one (race car quality) they have an OK life, but
tend to be tight at the start, and once they get sloppy you'll have
to toss them. Tony mentioned to me that he used to "run in" the
spherical bearings by spinning the balls for a bit with a hand drill.
It is more trouble to make the links to take rolling element
bearings, but as Hoyt has told us the work seems to be worth the
extra time/effort.
Cheers,
Michael
------------------------------
Date: Fri, 2 Oct 1998 18:01:27 -0700
From: "Jon Hose"
Subject: MC-Chassis new list, Eurspares logo
Since Michael hasn't announced his choice of artwork
for tee-shirts yet, let me say...
After I submitted my idea for a Eurospares logo
(based on a cast motorcycle wheel motif)
there was a thread going (here) about how cast
motorcycle wheels should have an odd number of
spokes, i.e. 7 spokes rather than 6.
Well, my art concept had six spokes which has
bothered me since... so...
I vote that Michael implement a Benelli/MotoBi list.
not that I'll read it, rather it will allow me
to re-work the logo concept to have 7 spokes:
1. vintage-roadrace
2. vintage-dirt
3. suzuki-gs-twin
4. lightweight-roadrace
5. mc-chassis-design
6. laverda
7. Benelli/MotoBi list
Also, if anyone could/would provide a .jpg or .bmp
picture of a cast wheel, I could create a superior
looking logo. (this is a casting call)
Righteous Rides...
Jon Hose
------------------------------
Date: Fri, 2 Oct 1998 20:54:51 -0800
From: "Michael Moore"
Subject: Re: MC-Chassis new list, Eurspares logo
> Also, if anyone could/would provide a .jpg or .bmp
> picture of a cast wheel, I could create a superior
> looking logo. (this is a casting call)
Hello Jon,
I've not yet found a good picture of a 7 spoke Morris mag - do you
want just any mag wheel (Campy, Dymag, etc) to steal a spoke from or
do you want something with seven spokes to start with?
I guess I should take the hint and tally those shirt votes before I
go on holiday.
Cheers,
Michael
------------------------------
End of MC-Chassis-Dgst V1 #782
******************************
MC-Chassis-Dgst Sunday, October 4 1998 Volume 01 : Number 783
1. Julian Bond Subj: MC-Chassis Saturday humour?
2. Julian Bond Subj: Re: MC-Chassis Bearings vs Bushings
3. "Tony Foale" Subj: MC-Chassis Re:Bearings FFE
4. "Tony Foale" Subj: MC-Chassis Re: T shirts
5. "Tony Foale" Subj: MC-Chassis Re: My web site.
6. batwings@i-plus.net Subj: Re: MC-Chassis Bearings vs Bushings
7. "Sam Stoney" Subj: MC-Chassis suspension stuff
8. "Michael Moore" Subj: Re: MC-Chassis Saturday humour?
9. authier@ibm.net Subj: Re: MC-Chassis Bearings vs Bushings
10. "Michael Moore" Subj: MC-Chassis IMPORTANT - temporary list administrators
11. Julian Bond Subj: Re: MC-Chassis Saturday humour?
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Date: Sat, 3 Oct 1998 09:05:29 +0100
From: Julian Bond
Subject: MC-Chassis Saturday humour?
There's one of *those* threads running on wreck.moto at the moment. It
doesn't yet involve waving at Harleys, the influence of cats or carrying
guns but I'm sure it will.
Somebody has suggested that balancing a stationary bike is easier if the
rear wheel is spinning, due to the gyroscopic forces generated.
Have they just discovered a new technique for Trials?? Anyone care to do
a full geometrical analysis??
- --
Julian Bond )+( mailto:julian_bond@voidstar.com
CN250/Helix/FF info & mailing list http://www.shockwav.demon.co.uk
>8600 Bike Suppliers, Contacts & Addresses http://www.bikeweb.com
> 10% Post Consumer Content <
------------------------------
Date: Sat, 3 Oct 1998 08:55:57 +0100
From: Julian Bond
Subject: Re: MC-Chassis Bearings vs Bushings
In article <199810022357.QAA18979@mail2.sirius.com>, Michael Moore
writes
>Some of the FFE use spherical bearings/rod ends in the links. If you
>use a good quality one (race car quality) they have an OK life, but
>tend to be tight at the start, and once they get sloppy you'll have
>to toss them. Tony mentioned to me that he used to "run in" the
>spherical bearings by spinning the balls for a bit with a hand drill.
>
>It is more trouble to make the links to take rolling element
>bearings, but as Hoyt has told us the work seems to be worth the
>extra time/effort.
On an FFE design, you need to consider the bearings on the support
structure separately from those in the steering path and use appropriate
bearings for each. IMHO it's important to use rolling element bearings
everywhere in the steering path because the alternative is too much
stiction like a badly adjusted friction steering damper. This can get
extremely unpleasant at low speeds as the bike won't self stabilize and
rolls from side to side. The closest long term experience I've had to
this was a completely conventional front end but with a drag link with
two "mini" ball joints. I hammered these and spun them up with a drill
to try and get rid of the stiction and just about succeeded but you
could still feel the difference. Several FFEs I've ridden for short
journeys have had many more spherical bearings in the steering path and
every one had unacceptable levels of stiction. In particular, the
Difazio had geometry that tended to wear these bearings and anyone who's
run one for any distance will tell you the bearings are a disposable
item that need changing every 5000 miles or so. This is made worse
because the bearings in the steering path also take braking loads.
You can just about get away with spherical bearings as long as they are
lightly loaded and have small movements.
Now of course, Tony's QL series and the Yamaha both had big spherical
bearings in primary parts of the design like the main bearing in the
centre of the wheel, and they seemed to work, so maybe I'm making too
much of this.
Anyway, this is why the Hoyt variant of the Hossack and the ASP variant
of the Difazio have the most appeal to me as the designers seem to have
gone to considerable lengths to avoid using sliding element bearings
anywhere in the steering.
- --
Julian Bond )+( mailto:julian_bond@voidstar.com
CN250/Helix/FF info & mailing list http://www.shockwav.demon.co.uk
>8600 Bike Suppliers, Contacts & Addresses http://www.bikeweb.com
> 10% Post Consumer Content <
------------------------------
Date: Sat, 3 Oct 1998 10:53:18 +0200
From: "Tony Foale"
Subject: MC-Chassis Re:Bearings FFE
Michael said:
<<
Some of the FFE use spherical bearings/rod ends in the links. If you
use a good quality one (race car quality) they have an OK life, but
tend to be tight at the start, and once they get sloppy you'll have
to toss them. Tony mentioned to me that he used to "run in" the
spherical bearings by spinning the balls for a bit with a hand drill.
>>
I only used to "run in" those on the steering drag lings, not those that
held the upright in place.
The only joint that was a problem for me was the one that took the
suspension load and rotated for steering, extra steering friction was
introduced due to the suspension load. This was only a small problem though
and was only apparent at low speeds, just like having an old fashion
friction steering damper.
For all the other joints the rod-end bearings were fine.
Tony Foale
España / Spain
http://www.ctv.es/USERS/Softtech/motos
------------------------------
Date: Sat, 3 Oct 1998 10:56:12 +0200
From: "Tony Foale"
Subject: MC-Chassis Re: T shirts
Jon requested:
<<
Also, if anyone could/would provide a .jpg or .bmp
picture of a cast wheel, I could create a superior
looking logo. (this is a casting call)
>>
I can let you have one but there'll only be 5 spokes, but a bit of work in a
graphics programme could soon make it into 7.
Let me know if you want it.
Tony Foale
España / Spain
http://www.ctv.es/USERS/Softtech/motos
------------------------------
Date: Sat, 3 Oct 1998 11:03:16 +0200
From: "Tony Foale"
Subject: MC-Chassis Re: My web site.
I've been made aware that some sections of my web site seem to be
unavailable at the moment and give a message saying that access is
prohibited (message in spanish).
I'm just guessing that my ISP has finally realised that I'd been using about
double my allowed space on the server and has finally taken some action,
although I wasn't informed first. Anyway as soon as it's sorted out I'll
post a message. It only seems to be a small portion of the site that's
affected.
Tony Foale
España / Spain
http://www.ctv.es/USERS/Softtech/motos
------------------------------
Date: Fri, 02 Oct 1998 19:49:51
From: batwings@i-plus.net
Subject: Re: MC-Chassis Bearings vs Bushings
At 02:49 PM 10/2/98 -0700, you wrote:
>A recent list thread suggested that bronze bushings were better for SA,
>'cause it doesn't constantly rotate, but rather along a limited arc.
>Does the same hold true for a SH bearings?
No, not precise enough at those ratios of overhang, and cannot be preloaded
to increase that even if tapered, which is the key to precision, without
excessive friction.
>And with a hosasck/fior front end, should all the rotating joints be
>bushings?
No, for similar reasons. At least I used all preloaded rolling elements in
mine and they handle very well.
For the same reasons as for bushings, one can't used nerdle bngs ib front
ends either; as they have no provision for radial preloading.
Hoyt
------------------------------
Date: Sat, 3 Oct 1998 12:14:39 -0700
From: "Sam Stoney"
Subject: MC-Chassis suspension stuff
> From: Henrik Bo Pedersen
> Subject: MC-Chassis Suspension Modifications ?
>
> HI All - Just a brief introduction
>
> I have been lurking on the list for awhile. I'm not terribly technically
> inclined but enjoy learning and wrenching my own bikes. I've been riding
> street bikes for about 20 years (BSA, Triumph, Honda, Suzuki, HD Lowrider
x
> 2), but after buying a '98 Buell S3 and taking Pridmoore's CLASS I got
> bitten by the "track bug" (strictly amateur training though), and I'm
> looking to improve the handling a bit. So here goes the questions:
> 1. can anyone recommend a company for shock and fork rebuild/revalve? I
> have spoken to Lindeman and Race Tech, and they vary greatly in approach
> and price. Any preferrences? Any other companies out there?
>
This is how I would compare the two: Lindeman takes what is in the forks
and uses his experience to make it work better. Race Tech replaces the
internal stuff with what thay know they can make work. Based on that, you
have to ask yourself whether you think your current internals are better or
worse than the internals designed by a pretty smart guy in the last few
years.(Race Tech)
I have heard many great stories and true horror stories about both
companies. (The bad stories were about suspensions that just came back
worse - I've heard nothing bad businesswise about either!) I guess that
just goes to prove that suspension tuning is a subtle business. The best
alternative, though, is to find someone local. Supension preference is
somewhat individual, and the best tuned suspensions usually come from a
close relationship between the tuner and the rider.
Sam
------------------------------
Date: Sat, 3 Oct 1998 09:29:30 -0800
From: "Michael Moore"
Subject: Re: MC-Chassis Saturday humour?
> Somebody has suggested that balancing a stationary bike is easier if the
> rear wheel is spinning, due to the gyroscopic forces generated.
>
> Have they just discovered a new technique for Trials?? Anyone care to do
> a full geometrical analysis??
Hello Julian,
I remember reading that some of the long-distance wheelie kings had
small motors to keep the front wheel spinning whilst it was hoisted
up in the air. I'd guess that provided a bit of stability or
something they could use a bit of body english against.
Cheers,
Michael
------------------------------
Date: Sat, 03 Oct 1998 11:20:46 -0700
From: authier@ibm.net
Subject: Re: MC-Chassis Bearings vs Bushings
Calvin Grandy wrote:
>
> I have strongly considered composite bearings at the steering head
> (DU trade name)
>
> Pivots, as in FFE's would be best served by "plain" bearings vs.
> rolling element.
>
> Regards
>
> Calvin Grandy
> ----------
> > From: yhakim@m5.sprynet.com
> > To: mc-chassis-design@list.sirius.com
> > Subject: MC-Chassis Bearings vs Bushings
> > Date: Friday, October 02, 1998 5:49 PM
> >
> > A recent list thread suggested that bronze bushings were better for
> SA,
> > 'cause it doesn't constantly rotate, but rather along a limited arc.
>
> > Does the same hold true for a SH bearings?
> > And with a hosasck/fior front end, should all the rotating joints be
>
> > bushings?
> >
> > ______________________________________________________
> > Yousuf
HI Calvin,
I have used DU's on several of my little projects, I think they are THE
stuff.
Marc
------------------------------
Date: Sat, 3 Oct 1998 19:56:23 -0800
From: "Michael Moore"
Subject: MC-Chassis IMPORTANT - temporary list administrators
As I mentioned a couple of weeks ago I'll be on holiday in Spain later
this month (October 13-29). Six stalwart listees, brave and true,
have stepped forward in a display of unselfish volunteerism to take on
the duties of temporary list administrators while I'm incommunicado.
They are:
Stephen Wilcox (primary)
Marnix van der Schalk (backup)
laverda
Jason Watson
suzuki-gs-twin
Mark Mason
mc-chassis-design
lightweight-roadrace
Tom Davenport
vintage-dirt
Ellis Holman
vintage-roadrace
I've just switched things over tonight so they can have a week of
shakedown before I leave. If you send a message that bounces (using a
command word like s*bscribe in a message, posting from an address
other than the one you are s&bscribed under, sending a huge message to
the list (graphics files etc), or sending your uns&bscribe message to
the list instead of to majordomo@list.sirius.com) they should get the
error message and give you a hand.
If things go terribly wrong and you just can't get things sorted out
then please just grin and bear it until my return. Keep in mind that
I'm probably going to have in excess of 1500 messages to plow through
when I first come back so your patience will be appreciated.
Thanks,
Michael
------------------------------
Date: Sun, 4 Oct 1998 18:40:13 +0100
From: Julian Bond
Subject: Re: MC-Chassis Saturday humour?
In article <199810031629.JAA02842@mail1.sirius.com>, Michael Moore
writes
>> Somebody has suggested that balancing a stationary bike is easier if the
>> rear wheel is spinning, due to the gyroscopic forces generated.
>>
>> Have they just discovered a new technique for Trials?? Anyone care to do
>> a full geometrical analysis??
>
>Hello Julian,
>
>I remember reading that some of the long-distance wheelie kings had
>small motors to keep the front wheel spinning whilst it was hoisted
>up in the air. I'd guess that provided a bit of stability or
>something they could use a bit of body english against.
I think Dave Taylor used to have an electric motor on the front wheel
when he was trying to wheelie round the whole IoM TT course. Last year
at the NEC show, there was a bike for a guy aiming to break the longest
wheelie competition. He had a hydraulic pump on the back wheel to a
drive on the front wheel for the same reason. He was aiming to stay up
for several hours including refueling and eating which defies
imagination.
- --
Julian Bond )+( mailto:julian_bond@voidstar.com
CN250/Helix/FF info & mailing list http://www.shockwav.demon.co.uk
>8600 Bike Suppliers, Contacts & Addresses http://www.bikeweb.com
> Multigrain For A Unique Taste <
------------------------------
End of MC-Chassis-Dgst V1 #783
******************************
MC-Chassis-Dgst Monday, October 5 1998 Volume 01 : Number 784
1. "Tony Foale" Subj: MC-Chassis Re: Clever stuff
2. Johnayleng@aol.com Subj: Re: MC-Chassis Re: Clever stuff
3. "Matthew O'Conner" Subj: MC-Chassis non-bike question; need volvo list
4. "Adi" Subj: MC-Chassis Engineering School
5. yhakim@m5.sprynet.com Subj: Re: MC-Chassis Re:Bearings FFE
6. batwings@i-plus.net Subj: Re: MC-Chassis Re:Bearings FFE
7. RWa11@aol.com Subj: Re: MC-Chassis Re:Bearings FFE
8. "Calvin Grandy" Subj: Re: MC-Chassis Re:Bearings FFE
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Date: Sun, 4 Oct 1998 22:11:16 +0200
From: "Tony Foale"
Subject: MC-Chassis Re: Clever stuff
Michael said,
<<
I remember reading that some of the long-distance wheelie kings had
small motors to keep the front wheel spinning whilst it was hoisted
up in the air. I'd guess that provided a bit of stability or
something they could use a bit of body english against.
>>
And Julian added:
<<
I think Dave Taylor used to have an electric motor on the front wheel
when he was trying to wheelie round the whole IoM TT course.
>>
At one time Dave Taylor came to my workshop for various constructions to
assist his stunt displays, I'm pretty certain that at that time he didn't
use a front wheel motor.
However that was before the event that Julian mentioned and so he may have
at that time.
It would certainly make sense to do so, steering the spinning wheel would
give a good measure of control for little physical effort.
Little power would be required to spin the wheel, you'd only have bearing
friction and some windage to deal with, once up to speed.
Tony Foale
España / Spain
http://www.ctv.es/USERS/Softtech/motos
------------------------------
Date: Sun, 4 Oct 1998 16:29:56 EDT
From: Johnayleng@aol.com
Subject: Re: MC-Chassis Re: Clever stuff
In a message dated 10/4/98 2:12:32 PM Mountain Daylight Time, softtech@ctv.es
writes:
> <<
> I remember reading that some of the long-distance wheelie kings had
> small motors to keep the front wheel spinning whilst it was hoisted
> up in the air. I'd guess that provided a bit of stability or
> something they could use a bit of body english against.
> >>
I know Doug Damocus (SP) here in the states used a motor to keep the front
wheel turning back in the 80's. It was great to see him "vertical wheelie" his
KZ 1300.
John Aylor NM
------------------------------
Date: Sun, 4 Oct 1998 18:28:32 -0700 (PDT)
From: "Matthew O'Conner"
Subject: MC-Chassis non-bike question; need volvo list
This is a non-bike question but I am trying to help my father diagnose a
volvo problems and am looking for mailing lists relating to volvos.
Anyone drive a swede-mobile out there?
matt
sohc #14
wmrra #282
omrra #82
Matthew D. O'Conner
matt@seattleu.edu - Seattle, WA
_____________________________________
------------------------------
Date: Mon, 5 Oct 1998 15:18:45 +0700
From: "Adi"
Subject: MC-Chassis Engineering School
Hi everyone......
Ive got a friend that want to study outside my country,she want to study
Chemical or mechanical engineering.So she ask me to find her the information
about that.
Well can you all recomended a good university and also a little bit
ceaper.....well for information our country is in the midle of monetary
crisis....our money fall down.....
Thanks
Adi
Indonesia
------------------------------
Date: Mon, 05 Oct 1998 08:28:28 -0700
From: yhakim@m5.sprynet.com
Subject: Re: MC-Chassis Re:Bearings FFE
>
>I only used to "run in" those on the steering drag lings, not those that
>held the upright in place.
>The only joint that was a problem for me was the one that took the
>suspension load and rotated for steering, extra steering friction was
>introduced due to the suspension load. This was only a small problem though
>and was only apparent at low speeds, just like having an old fashion
>friction steering damper.
>For all the other joints the rod-end bearings were fine.
>
>Tony Foale
>
>España / Spain
>http://www.ctv.es/USERS/Softtech/motos
>
>No, for similar reasons. At least I used all preloaded rolling elements in
>mine and they handle very well.
>
>For the same reasons as for bushings, one can't used nerdle bngs ib front
>ends either; as they have no provision for radial preloading.
>
>Hoyt
>It is more trouble to make the links to take rolling element
>bearings, but as Hoyt has told us the work seems to be worth the
>extra time/effort.
>Cheers,
>Michael Moore
OK, I feel a little silly asking this, but here goes:
Are rod-end bearings "plain" ball bearings, like you would find in a wheel?
What exactly does preloaded rolling elements imply?
And finally are rolling element bearings, not bushings, that is anything that
has an outer race, an inner race and something rolling betwixt them?
thanks,
______________________________________________________
Yousuf
------------------------------
Date: Mon, 05 Oct 1998 11:23:41
From: batwings@i-plus.net
Subject: Re: MC-Chassis Re:Bearings FFE
At 08:28 AM 10/5/98 -0700, you wrote:
>OK, I feel a little silly asking this, but here goes:
>Are rod-end bearings "plain" ball bearings, like you would find in a wheel?
They are a single ball drilled for a bolt and a plain bng outer race
encapsulating the ball. Hence they have three degrees of freedom in
rotation and none in translation, though two of those will be constrained
by the bolt to a limited angle.
>What exactly does preloaded rolling elements imply?
You can tighten a big bolt somewhere and take up the slack in the pieces.
Thrust loads on tapered roller bngs can be said to preload them radially,
for example.
>And finally are rolling element bearings, not bushings, that is anything
that
>has an outer race, an inner race and something rolling betwixt them?
Right on!!
Best regards,
Hoyt
------------------------------
Date: Mon, 5 Oct 1998 15:17:44 EDT
From: RWa11@aol.com
Subject: Re: MC-Chassis Re:Bearings FFE
In a message dated 98-10-05 11:36:41 EDT, you write:
<< >Are rod-end bearings "plain" ball bearings, like you would find in a
wheel?
They are a single ball drilled for a bolt and a plain bng outer race
encapsulating the ball. Hence they have three degrees of freedom in
rotation and none in translation, though two of those will be constrained
by the bolt to a limited angle. >>
I heard it said that spherical bearings wear too quickly to be used in all
areas of the suspension. Is this because thery are under sized, or is it a
charcteristic of the design?
I was thinking that this type of bearing would be ideal for a swing arm if you
mounted the bearing in the frame and bolted through to a threaded insert in
the swing arm. Alignmet would be less critical, since the bearings self
align. Another advantage is you would reduce the moment on the two bearings
since they are moved outboard a few inches. A third advantage is that you
could mount a lager bearing in the frame without any chain clearance problems,
say something with a 20-25mm shaft.
Rex Wallace
------------------------------
Date: Mon, 5 Oct 1998 16:06:45 -0400
From: "Calvin Grandy"
Subject: Re: MC-Chassis Re:Bearings FFE
This is a multi-part message in MIME format.
- ------=_NextPart_000_01BDF07A.2643DD20
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
> What exactly does preloaded rolling elements imply?
> ______________________________________________________
> Yousuf
Yousuf
" Preload" as applied to bearing applications, describes the condition when
the bearing elements under go elastic deformation before any dynamic loads
are applied. That is, the races are "dimpled" and the rolling elements are
deformed as result of the "setup" loads applied. This allows a high level
of static rigidity () and compensation for load reversal. Service loads
would be added to (or subtracted from, depending on sign) these static
loads. With resulting change in deformation.
Preload conditions such as these would result in high friction if applied
to plain bearings. Equal to a press fit.
Regards
Calvin Grandy
------------------------------
End of MC-Chassis-Dgst V1 #784
******************************
MC-Chassis-Dgst Tuesday, October 6 1998 Volume 01 : Number 785
1. "Michael Moore" Subj: MC-Chassis Euro Spares website in Classic Bike
2. uranus Subj: MC-Chassis Re: Swedes
3. Bob & Jean Subj: Re: MC-Chassis non-bike question; need volvo list
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Date: Mon, 5 Oct 1998 18:33:35 -0800
From: "Michael Moore"
Subject: MC-Chassis Euro Spares website in Classic Bike
I just got my October 1998 issue of Classic Bike, and in their
"classic world" section they had a write up about the Brit Iron
mailing list and several websites. Included in that was a
recommendation to visit the graphics page on my site.
"Fans of classic European and Japanese racing bikes can feast their
eyes on the exotic, unusual and frankly obscure machines featured on
the Euro Spares web site. It's found at
www.eurospares.com/graphics.htm and is packed with photos, information
and specs on hundreds of machines There are some interesting unfaired
shots of the legendary Honda 250-6, details on how to develop a 250
Ducati race bike, adverts for desmo valve kits, and plenty more."
I just dropped them a note thanking them for the mention, and
plugging the fine email lists that I host.
Cheers,
Michael
------------------------------
Date: Tue, 06 Oct 1998 11:32:46
From: uranus
Subject: MC-Chassis Re: Swedes
At 13:06 05/10/98 -0700, you wrote:
>
>Anyone drive a swede-mobile out there?
Would I admit it if I did?
David T.
------------------------------
Date: Tue, 06 Oct 1998 19:17:41 -0700
From: Bob & Jean
Subject: Re: MC-Chassis non-bike question; need volvo list
Matt, take your dads Volvo to Oddvars Volvo Service, he took care of
ours and its a 300k now. Cheers Bob
PS He is in Ballard
------------------------------
End of MC-Chassis-Dgst V1 #785
******************************
MC-Chassis-Dgst Thursday, October 8 1998 Volume 01 : Number 786
1. Michael Andrusiewicz Subj: MC-Chassis Paint and rust stripping from steel
2. jdahl@dvicomm.com (John Dahl) Subj: Re: MC-Chassis Paint and rust stripping from steel
3. Johnayleng@aol.com Subj: Re: MC-Chassis Paint and rust stripping from steel
4. bill@vm3.com Subj: Re: MC-Chassis Paint and rust stripping from steel
5. "Tony Foale" Subj: MC-Chassis Re: My site
6. "Thomas Alberti" Subj: Re: MC-Chassis Paint and rust stripping from steel
7. Johnayleng@aol.com Subj: Re: MC-Chassis Paint and rust stripping from steel
8. Bill Heckel Subj: Re: MC-Chassis Paint and rust stripping from steel
9. "Tony Foale" Subj: MC-Chassis Re: My web site
10. batwings@i-plus.net Subj: Re: MC-Chassis Paint and rust stripping from steel
11. "Calvin Grandy" Subj: Re: MC-Chassis Paint and rust stripping from steel
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Date: Wed, 07 Oct 1998 09:50:27 -0400
From: Michael Andrusiewicz
Subject: MC-Chassis Paint and rust stripping from steel
I want to strip some paint as well as some small rust areas from a
frame. Paint stripper can take care of the paint, but the rust is in
confined areas, and is much more diff. to clean. the frame is too large
to fit in my blast cabinet (which doesn't help the confined areas,
anyway)
What solution can be mixed to dip a frame to completely strip it? What
are the health risks and safety concerns associated with each solution
(esp. for the home user?)
Muriatic acid? phosphoric acid? .....c'mon you periodic table
guys.....fill me in with some useable data!!
Mike A
------------------------------
Date: Wed, 07 Oct 1998 10:20:57 -0400
From: jdahl@dvicomm.com (John Dahl)
Subject: Re: MC-Chassis Paint and rust stripping from steel
Michael Andrusiewicz wrote:
> I want to strip some paint as well as some small rust areas
> from a
> frame. Paint stripper can take care of the paint, but the rust
> is in
> confined areas, and is much more diff. to clean. the frame is
> too large
> to fit in my blast cabinet (which doesn't help the confined
> areas,
> anyway)
>
> What solution can be mixed to dip a frame to completely strip
> it? What
> are the health risks and safety concerns associated with each
> solution
> (esp. for the home user?)
>
>
> Mike A
I've seen some write-ups on a product/company called Rusteco,
that uses a citrus based rust remover. They sell kits that would
probably do what you need. They claim that the process is
superior to acids, etc. because it only attacks rust, and will
not remove any base metal. I've seen photos of the workers in
the shop dipping pieces w/o even rubber gloves, and the article
said that the depleted solution was usable as fertilizer.
Sorry, but i don't have any contact info.
John
------------------------------
Date: Wed, 7 Oct 1998 10:21:26 EDT
From: Johnayleng@aol.com
Subject: Re: MC-Chassis Paint and rust stripping from steel
In a message dated 10/7/98 7:55:29 AM Mountain Daylight Time,
mandrusi@sbhs.sbps.k12.nj.us writes:
>
> Muriatic acid? phosphoric acid? .....c'mon you periodic table
> guys.....fill me in with some useable data!!
>
I'm no periodic table guy (is "gynecologist" the layman's term for that)?
But I have used muriatic acid (diluted hydrochloric acid) to remove heavy
rust from seatbases and tanks, with very good results. I have also used the
spray on rust converter (on lightly rusted parts), and those results were also
satisfactory.
As for protection when using any strong chemicals: cover it or it will fall
off!
John Aylor NM
------------------------------
Date: Wed, 07 Oct 1998 16:16:45 -0400
From: bill@vm3.com
Subject: Re: MC-Chassis Paint and rust stripping from steel
Naval jelly, ( phosphoric acid solution with some jelling agents ) works pretty
well. Old timers will tell you that coca-cola ( also phosphoric acid based )
will take rust off but I haven't tried that.
Naval jelly WILL give you a red mark and makes one hell of an itch when it gets
on your skin. Use GOOD gloves and wear eye protection ( full coverage
splashproof goggles ) while scraping or brushing. I use wood handled steel
bristled welding brushes to work it into the rust.
As for paint removing, I use aircraft stripper, ( methylene chloride based ),
same cautions as naval jelly apply here but even stronger. Don't get stripper
on you, wear long sleeves / pants and keep a hose handy to wash off drips and
excess.
I use this sequence of operations when working on restoration metal bits that
have rust and bad paint on them. It's a bit anal but it produces good results.
1. Wash parts very well to remove oil and grease and dirt. If you don't, the
stripper / remover won't reach the metal. Get all areas on the part including
inside of cavities and open tubes.
2. Use the naval jelly on rust, let it soak very well. Use manual agitation
with brushes etc, don't let it dry on the part.
3. Wash again.
4. Use aircraft stripper to remove paint.
5. Wash well and dry.
6. Inspect part, if rust persists, repeat steps 2&3&5
7. If rust won't go away, sand, wire wheel, grind, or use a chemical rust
convertor, or sandblast etc.
8. If you want a really good finish on the parts, wet sand them now.
9. Wash the parts well, rinse well.
9. If paint and rust are all gone, use a cold galvanizer or metal prep like
PPG's 'metal prep' Otherwise, repeat 4-6
10. Dry VERY well, use a heat gun or blow drier.
11. Dry them some more. ( water will ruin the primer coat )
12. Get a good coat of primer on the parts. ( if you used metal prep, you have
a bit of time here.
13. Drink beer, you are done with the crappy work.
Steps 1-10 should best be accomplished in a short time or rust will get the
part again.
Practice makes perfect,
Have fun,
Bill
Johnayleng@aol.com wrote:
>
> In a message dated 10/7/98 7:55:29 AM Mountain Daylight Time,
> mandrusi@sbhs.sbps.k12.nj.us writes:
>
> >
> > Muriatic acid? phosphoric acid? .....c'mon you periodic table
> > guys.....fill me in with some useable data!!
> >
>
> I'm no periodic table guy (is "gynecologist" the layman's term for that)?
>
> But I have used muriatic acid (diluted hydrochloric acid) to remove heavy
> rust from seatbases and tanks, with very good results. I have also used the
> spray on rust converter (on lightly rusted parts), and those results were also
> satisfactory.
>
> As for protection when using any strong chemicals: cover it or it will fall
> off!
>
> John Aylor NM
------------------------------
Date: Wed, 7 Oct 1998 23:42:49 +0200
From: "Tony Foale"
Subject: MC-Chassis Re: My site
A few days back I mentioned that some portions of my site were unavailable
for reasons unknown, well the reasons are still unknown but all parts of the
site seem to be back to normal.
Tony Foale
España / Spain
http://www.ctv.es/USERS/Softtech/motos
------------------------------
Date: Wed, 7 Oct 1998 17:12:40 -0500
From: "Thomas Alberti"
Subject: Re: MC-Chassis Paint and rust stripping from steel
> well. Old timers will tell you that coca-cola ( also phosphoric acid
based )
> will take rust off but I haven't tried that.
Yes, it is good for light rust removal, such as small bolts, etc. Takes
several hours, but actually works.
> As for paint removing, I use aircraft stripper, ( methylene chloride
based ),
Since I just quit drinking caffeine (2 weeks!), I have been looking into
"decaf". However, isn't methylene chloride the chemical that is used to
strip caffiene out of coffee beans?! (no, I'm not kidding, I'm really
asking??)
Thomas
------------------------------
Date: Wed, 7 Oct 1998 18:12:25 EDT
From: Johnayleng@aol.com
Subject: Re: MC-Chassis Paint and rust stripping from steel
In a message dated 10/7/98 4:03:06 PM Mountain Daylight Time,
talberti@execpc.com writes:
> However, isn't methylene chloride the chemical that is used to
> strip caffiene out of coffee beans?! (no, I'm not kidding, I'm really
> asking??)
>
I also heard of something like that, methylene chloride is very volatile and
evaporates very quickly, but does it leave a residue?
John Aylor NM
------------------------------
Date: Wed, 07 Oct 1998 23:08:19 -0400
From: Bill Heckel
Subject: Re: MC-Chassis Paint and rust stripping from steel
Thomas Alberti wrote:
>
> > well. Old timers will tell you that coca-cola ( also phosphoric acid
> > based ) will take rust off but I haven't tried that.
>
> Yes, it is good for light rust removal, such as small bolts, etc. Takes
> several hours, but actually works.
Good to know if I ever eat any rusty bolts.
> > As for paint removing, I use aircraft stripper, ( methylene chloride
> based ),
>
> However, isn't methylene chloride the chemical that is used to
> strip caffiene out of coffee beans?! (no, I'm not kidding, I'm really
> asking??)
I don't think so, it is pretty scary stuff.
"In addition,
methylene chloride is no longer used in coffee decaffeination because
manufacturers have determined it poses too great a risk to consumers."
Quote from OSHA http://www.osha.gov/media/oshnews/jan97/osha9706.html
As far as I know, they use high pressure liquid carbon dioxide at normal
temperatures ( non cryo ) as a solvent for the caffeine. It is cheap,
enviromentally safe, and leave no residue at all. It can also 'freeze dry' the
beans if they need that. ( just flash to atmospheric pressure )
Bill
------------------------------
Date: Thu, 8 Oct 1998 10:15:18 +0200
From: "Tony Foale"
Subject: MC-Chassis Re: My web site
I've just had a few messages saying that my site was unavailable still:
"Menú Principal
RECURSO INEXISTENTE
Ha intentado acceder a un recurso inexistente o que ha sido cambiado de
lugar"
This time it's not a problem with the site but somehow the address in my
signiture was wrong. There was a capital "S" in softtech it should be a
small "s".
The address below is now correct.
Tony Foale.
España / Spain
http://www.ctv.es/USERS/softtech/motos
------------------------------
Date: Thu, 08 Oct 1998 07:13:13
From: batwings@i-plus.net
Subject: Re: MC-Chassis Paint and rust stripping from steel
At 11:08 PM 10/7/98 -0400, you wrote:
>Thomas Alberti wrote:
>>
>> > well. Old timers will tell you that coca-cola ( also phosphoric acid
>> > based ) will take rust off but I haven't tried that.
>>
>> Yes, it is good for light rust removal, such as small bolts, etc. Takes
>> several hours, but actually works.
Have used Coca Cola on things for years. It does such a good job on even
severely rusted exhaust clamps (U-bolts) on autos that one can re-use them,
and it takes only a few minutes.
Makes one wonder, though, about putting in into one's goozle and drinking
it, yes?
Best regards,
Hoyt
------------------------------
Date: Thu, 8 Oct 1998 09:07:55 -0400
From: "Calvin Grandy"
Subject: Re: MC-Chassis Paint and rust stripping from steel
This is a multi-part message in MIME format.
- ------=_NextPart_000_01BDF29B.23049F00
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
A more "scientific" formulation that will un crust crusty bits and impress
your friends with your command of chemistry, is that of Vinegar and salt.
Less than saturated solution. Leave degreased parts immersed overnight,
wash thoroughly and enjoy.
'tworks for me!
I purchased the "derusto" stuff from Kano Labs, makers of Kroil. This
stuff works as advertised. It may be phosphoric acid, by the smell.
Regards
Calvin Grandy
- ----------
> >>
> >> > well. Old timers will tell you that coca-cola ( also phosphoric
acid
> >> > based ) will take rust off but I haven't tried that.
>
> Have used Coca Cola on things for years. It does such a good job on even
> severely rusted exhaust clamps (U-bolts) on autos that one can re-use
them,
> and it takes only a few minutes.
>
------------------------------
End of MC-Chassis-Dgst V1 #786
******************************
MC-Chassis-Dgst Friday, October 9 1998 Volume 01 : Number 787
1. "Griffiths, Duncan" Subj: Re: MC-Chassis Paint and rust stripping from steel
2. Johnayleng@aol.com Subj: Re: MC-Chassis Paint and rust stripping from steel
3. uranus Subj: MC-Chassis Re: Things go better with Coke
4. yhakim@m5.sprynet.com Subj: MC-Chassis Bodywork materials
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Date: Thu, 08 Oct 1998 8:16 -0800
From: "Griffiths, Duncan"
Subject: Re: MC-Chassis Paint and rust stripping from steel
Methylene chloride is a great solvent that evaporates and leaves no
residue. But remember to wash afterwards, otherwise you just re-deposit
the grime. It dissolves the grime, but doesn't carry it away when it
evaporates.
It's not that bad a chemical when compared to some of the other solvents
we use on a regular basis. OSHA gets scared by anything other than water
and air.
Duncan
=============
talberti@execpc.com writes:
> However, isn't methylene chloride the chemical that is used to
> strip caffiene out of coffee beans?! (no, I'm not kidding, I'm really
> asking??)
>
I also heard of something like that, methylene chloride is very
volatile and
evaporates very quickly, but does it leave a residue?
John Aylor NM
------------------------------
Date: Thu, 8 Oct 1998 12:46:45 EDT
From: Johnayleng@aol.com
Subject: Re: MC-Chassis Paint and rust stripping from steel
In a message dated 10/8/98 7:32:16 AM Mountain Daylight Time, batwings@i-
plus.net writes:
>
> Makes one wonder, though, about putting in into one's goozle and drinking
> it, yes?
>
> Best regards,
>
> Hoyt
>
Ever see a sward swallowers sward that was rusty?
John Aylor NM
------------------------------
Date: Fri, 09 Oct 1998 09:37:40
From: uranus
Subject: MC-Chassis Re: Things go better with Coke
>>> Yes, it is good for light rust removal, such as small bolts, etc. Takes
>>> several hours, but actually works.
>
>Have used Coca Cola on things for years. It does such a good job on even
>severely rusted exhaust clamps (U-bolts) on autos that one can re-use them,
>and it takes only a few minutes.
I came across a vintage car restorer who had a giant tank full of
Coca-Cola. His first step in dealing with a long-seized engine (vintage
Rolls-Royce found in farmer's field, etc.) was to immerse it in the Coke
tank overnight. Next morning the engine would be un-seized and could be
dismantled. However, you want to rinse the stuff off pretty quickly, if
you let it dry everything is covered in a sugary sticky residue.
>Makes one wonder, though, about putting in into one's goozle and drinking
>it, yes?
But an excellent medicine for those times when you have ill-advisedly eaten
a badly cooked kebab or whatever; a tin of Coke gives you a dose of
phosphoric acid, which is pretty good at killing bacteria in your stomach.
David T.
------------------------------
Date: Fri, 09 Oct 1998 14:54:54 -0700
From: yhakim@m5.sprynet.com
Subject: MC-Chassis Bodywork materials
I was thinking of spending some time to make some bodywork for my FZR.
I've done a little repair work with fiberglass and 2 hour epoxy from
the local hobby shop, but I wasn't sure what would be appropriate.
Assuming that I've constructed a suitable male mold then the female to
make the pieces from and all I've left to do is fill the female with a
fiberglass/epoxy mix, what weight of fiberglass and type of epoxy
should I use?
______________________________________________________
Yousuf
______________________________________________________
------------------------------
End of MC-Chassis-Dgst V1 #787
******************************
MC-Chassis-Dgst Saturday, October 10 1998 Volume 01 : Number 788
1. Ray Engelhardt Subj: RE: MC-Chassis Bodywork materials
2. wirewheels@juno.com (TIMOTHY C BOND) Subj: Re: Re: MC-Chassis Paint and rust stripping from steel
3. Fredric Martinson <2feetup@coffey.com> Subj: MC-Chassis bushing materials
4. jmark.vanscoter@amd.com Subj: RE: MC-Chassis bushing materials
5. "Michael Moore" Subj: Re: MC-Chassis bushing materials
6. batwings@i-plus.net Subj: Re: MC-Chassis bushing materials
7. Hnry@aol.com Subj: MC-Chassis Brazing book
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Date: Fri, 9 Oct 1998 18:07:33 -0700
From: Ray Engelhardt
Subject: RE: MC-Chassis Bodywork materials
- ------ =_NextPart_000_01BDF3B0.97F3E8A0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
I to have a fzr400 and I am in the process of making molds for the =
upper, mid-section, and lowers. I have been playing with composites for =
a few years, mostly wet vacuum bags. Maybe we can work something out. =
Please contact me off line.=20
Ray Engelhardt
WSMC 574=20
Fzr1000@thevine.net
805-250-9762
I live in LA
- -----Original Message-----
From: yhakim@m5.sprynet.com [SMTP:yhakim@m5.sprynet.com]
Sent: Friday, October 09, 1998 2:55 PM
To: mc-chassis-design@list.sirius.com
Subject: MC-Chassis Bodywork materials
I was thinking of spending some time to make some bodywork for my FZR.=20
I've done a little repair work with fiberglass and 2 hour epoxy from=20
the local hobby shop, but I wasn't sure what would be appropriate.
Assuming that I've constructed a suitable male mold then the female to=20
make the pieces from and all I've left to do is fill the female with a=20
fiberglass/epoxy mix, what weight of fiberglass and type of epoxy=20
should I use?
______________________________________________________
Yousuf
------------------------------
Date: Fri, 9 Oct 1998 21:42:21 -0400
From: wirewheels@juno.com (TIMOTHY C BOND)
Subject: Re: Re: MC-Chassis Paint and rust stripping from steel
Bill gives some great info on prep work. I can see that all
you racing geeks are in the down time and wanting to do
the rebuild...
As a painter, welder, restorer, etc, I've found that:
1:, Existing paint is the best primer. Many co's use
a prep wash prior to painting to stop oxidizing, so
don't break that up unless you go all the way down!
2:, Imron or any polyurethane paint only sticks to a
coarsely blasted surface and then only to THEIR
primer. Catylized (hardener) acrylic enamel (works
for me) is almost as strong and can be shot over
existing paint and BONDO after priming.
3:, ANY chemical paint stripper or rust remover needs to
be washed down with a negative Ph factor to make the
surface ready to accept paint. This will be on the can
but you'll inevitably have an oxidized surface as all
neutralizing agents leave a salt that oxidizes.
So! Either blast the whole thing at the graveyard stone
cutter place and shoot primer ASAP or use chemicals
to do the job, AND, as Bill said I think, use a grinder
get to the base metal and shoot the primer to prevent
oxidization.
Those chems will screw the paint job. Prep is the key.
Of course, if you're planning to crash next year forget
everything I said and get the rattle can out...
Tim(Bondo)Bond Wire Wheels MC Svc Versailles.KY.USA
http://ourworld.compuserve.com/homepages/WireWheels
WireWheels@compuserve.com WireWheels@aol.com
___________________________________________________________________
You don't need to buy Internet access to use free Internet e-mail.
Get completely free e-mail from Juno at http://www.juno.com
or call Juno at (800) 654-JUNO [654-5866]
------------------------------
Date: Sat, 10 Oct 1998 10:46:15 -0600
From: Fredric Martinson <2feetup@coffey.com>
Subject: MC-Chassis bushing materials
Just recently there was posting on what material to use for SA bushings.
Its not in the achive list yet. Does anyone know what they were, I believe
bronze and steel materials mentioned.
Has anyone tried using them in linkage's and how much clearance is used?
My Gas Gas uses needle bearings in the linkage, and maybe replace the
needle bearing with a bushing would work and last longer.
Fred
------------------------------
Date: Sat, 10 Oct 1998 11:58:52 -0500
From: jmark.vanscoter@amd.com
Subject: RE: MC-Chassis bushing materials
Frederic asked about bushing material---
The common solution discussed was bronze, but the superior solution was
leaded steel. Leaded steel is very free-machining, yet much stronger
than bronze.
Maybe someone can give you a "heads-up" on clearance for these bushings
in your linkage application, but I would think your needle bearings are
still the best in your linkage.
Mark
------------------------------
Date: Sat, 10 Oct 1998 10:14:12 -0800
From: "Michael Moore"
Subject: Re: MC-Chassis bushing materials
I use SAE 660 bearing bronze. Run a close-tolerance hardened/hard
chromed race in them with a bit of good grease and they should last a
long time. I go for the minimum clearance I can get with free
running.
cheers,
Michael
------------------------------
Date: Sat, 10 Oct 1998 12:57:27
From: batwings@i-plus.net
Subject: Re: MC-Chassis bushing materials
At 10:46 AM 10/10/98 -0600, you wrote:
> Just recently there was posting on what material to use for SA bushings.
>Its not in the achive list yet. Does anyone know what they were, I believe
>bronze and steel materials mentioned.
It's bronze on chromed steel inners. I'm glad the word is getting around.
> Has anyone tried using them in linkages and how much clearance is used?
I used them as replacement for a complete set of nerdle bngs in the linkage
of one of my CR250s and they worked fine. I installed grease fittings to
ease maintenance; this would be a necessary step for most bushing aps. You
would use the same clearances here as in SA, that being about .0005"/". In
my case I extended them and got more bearing area, because the original
setup used little shouldered pieces outside the bngs to give seals a
surface to ride on; I just made them one piece with the new bushings and
the seals rode them instead. Natch, I had to make new inners equally long.
Send me your bits and I'll do it for you too.
best wishes,
Hoyt
------------------------
Date: Sun, 11 Oct 1998 00:18:08 EDT
From: Hnry@aol.com
Subject: MC-Chassis Brazing book
Hello,
I enjoy this list. I gather information and find fodder for daydreams here.
One of the daydreams: I learn to braze. I want to share this on-line source of
brazing info I found today:
http://www.handyharmancanada.com/TheBrazingBook
Scott Jameson
Greenville, South Carolina
------------------------------
End of MC-Chassis-Dgst V1 #788
******************************
MC-Chassis-Dgst Monday, October 12 1998 Volume 01 : Number 789
1. "Michael Moore" Subj: MC-Chassis More photos
2. "Michael Moore" Subj: MC-Chassis Another URL
3. "Kelvin Blair" Subj: Re: MC-Chassis-Dgst Chain length & Sprocket Centre Distance
4. Ian Drysdale Subj: MC-Chassis Bull fighting and motorsport
5. briankk@aimnet.com (Brian Knowles) Subj: Re: MC-Chassis Bull fighting and motorsport
6. "Ray or Emily Brooks" Subj: MC-Chassis Chassis Project Debut {Long}
7. "Michael Moore" Subj: Re: MC-Chassis Chassis Project Debut {Long}
8. "Gary Beale" Subj: Re: MC-Chassis Chassis Project Debut {Long}
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Date: Sat, 10 Oct 1998 21:34:24 -0800
From: "Michael Moore"
Subject: MC-Chassis More photos
After a several month hiatus in scanning stuff for the website I've
just added a batch of photo links from the "new additions" section of
the graphics page.
Jim Redman and the Honda 500
Carlo Ubbialli and Count Agusta w/ 125 MV
A line of Honda GP bikes with 50cc on the end
Some photos of an English wheel that Craig Hanson and I built
Frank Camillieri's Ducati single and Triumph 500 race frames
The 1968 works Zundapp trials bike
A rigid rear end Aermacchi dirt track frame
A monoshock XR750 road racer
A Foale TZ250 spine frame
The L&R Racing Husaberg road racer
A two-stroke Husqvarna vintage road racer
Egli-style spine frame Laverda triple
Spondon Laverda triple
Duncan Harrington's Honda single with Hossack/Fior front end
Photos taken at a recent track outing for one of the "nuovo"
MotoBi 6 Tiranti road race singles being built by the Zanzanis
Enjoy,
Michael
------------------------------
Date: Sat, 10 Oct 1998 21:57:15 -0800
From: "Michael Moore"
Subject: MC-Chassis Another URL
Check out the Chassis Shop:
http://www.chassisshop.com/
a supplier of race car chassis construction supplies.
Cheers,
Michael
------------------------------
Date: Sun, 11 Oct 1998 20:55:04 +0800
From: "Kelvin Blair"
Subject: Re: MC-Chassis-Dgst Chain length & Sprocket Centre Distance
Today I made up a simple spreadsheet for calculating required chain length
for different sprockets and centre distances. It will also calculate
centre distance for known length chain. If any one would like a copy
e-mail me direct, its size is 14KB. Nothing fancy but could be handy.
Regards
Kelvin nwk@bigpond.com
------------------------------
Date: Sun, 11 Oct 1998 23:45:51 +1000
From: Ian Drysdale
Subject: MC-Chassis Bull fighting and motorsport
> The only true sports are bullfighting and=20
> motor racing. All the rest are games.=20
> -- Ernest Hemmingway
Didn't know this quote was attributed to someone as eminent as
E.H. - but I think it continued .........' because these are the only
sports in which you can be killed.......'
( Or words to that effect )
Anyone know the full quote ?
Cheers IAN
- --
Ian Drysdale
DRYSDALE MOTORCYCLE CO.
Melbourne. Australia
http://werple.net.au/~iwd
Ph. + 613 9562 4260
Fax.+ 613 9546 8938
------------------------------
Date: Sun, 11 Oct 1998 08:03:29 -0700
From: briankk@aimnet.com (Brian Knowles)
Subject: Re: MC-Chassis Bull fighting and motorsport
>> The only true sports are bullfighting and=20
>> motor racing. All the rest are games.=20
>> -- Ernest Hemmingway
>
>Didn't know this quote was attributed to someone as eminent as
>E.H. - but I think it continued .........' because these are the only
>sports in which you can be killed.......'
>( Or words to that effect )
>
>Anyone know the full quote ?
>
>Cheers IAN
>
>--
>Ian Drysdale
>
>DRYSDALE MOTORCYCLE CO.
>Melbourne. Australia
>http://werple.net.au/~iwd
>Ph. + 613 9562 4260
>Fax.+ 613 9546 8938
It was Hemmingway, quoted by Ken Purdy, I think in the context of an
interview with M.DePortago, in the early to mid '50s
The original (Hemmingway) quote included mountian climbing.
Brian
------------------------------
Date: Sun, 11 Oct 1998 12:51:14 -0400
From: "Ray or Emily Brooks"
Subject: MC-Chassis Chassis Project Debut {Long}
The Goldberg/Suzuki made it's race debut Saturday Oct 3 at the AHRMA
Talledaga National. The SOS 2 Stroke class only had three entries, all
250cc. One was a late 70's TZ with a late Rotax { ex-Tony Murphy}, the
second was powered by a Yamaha MX engine { air cooled } and the Goldberg is
a RZ frame, GSXR forks, 3X17 & 3.5X17 wheels, and an 83 Rm 250 engine.
Unfortunately there were no RS125's entered. The upcoming WERA GNF is
probably the reason.
I built the Goldberg as a quick { HA } and dirty "proof of concept" bike.
I had planned on building a frame similar to the Tulda, which of course
borrows much from several of the frames in Tony's book. The RZ frame was to
be a temporary home to get some development time on the engines. I can tell
you now that it would have been easier to build from scratch.
Now that the bike is rideable I will make some observations on the
practical points of the motorcycle that can only come to light after use.
First is the issue of maintainability. A double loop frame like the RZ has
great engine access. All normal maintenance can be performed without any
extra dismantling. The clutch cover is totally accessable. The topend comes
off without unbolting any unrelated bits. The kickstarter clears everything
allowing easy warmups. None of this would be true with a more "Modern"
frame like a Tulda.
Weight : With out a fairing { ran out of time } the bike weighs 225lbs
without fuel. This is with a steel gas tank and steel SA. The RZ frame with
engine mounts is about 30 lbs. A custom frame and SA could easily take off
20 to 30 lbs. That would be great but let me tell you something, a 235 lb
racebike is still very light when a person has been racing a 375 lb plus
GS500.
Geometry: The Goldberg has 26 degrees of rake. Way too much you say! A
"Modern" 250 has only 22 or 23. That is fine for someone with lots of
experience but for this rookie 26 degrees is plenty responsive and also
plenty stable. At Talledega GP there are lots of bumps that you hit while
leaned over. The Goldberg ignored them. If you want to take a quick look
back too see if a Supermono war is approaching you don't have to worry
about the bike doing something unexpected.
Powerplant: The RM engine family I chose { 82 to 85 } is the only short
stroke/big bore, liquid cooled, 250 MX engine from Japan. I also happen to
like RM's from past dealership mechanic experience. In stock form the
engines produce about 35 hp. It should be possible to up this to 45hp or
more. The rod side thrust is controlled by the piston pin bosses which
bodes well for high RPM reliability. The piston is a full skirt design. One
Ring. The trans ratios are plenty close.
Wheels: I am running a GS500 front wheel { 3.00 X 17 } with a Michelin
slick that is intended for the rear of a RS125 12/59 X 17. At the rear I
have a Hurricane 600 wheel { 3.50 X 17 } with a tire intended for a 250 or
superbike front wheel, 12/60 X 17. These tire sizes should be perfect for a
40 to 45 hp bike. The next size up for the rear is a 160, way more than is
needed.
Summary: I love my bike. I have basically built an early 80's TZ frame with
modern rising rate rear suspension, 43mm fully adjustable forks, wheels
that accept modern tires { Michelin!!!!!} , and a simple, robust engine
with lots of potential and cheap parts.
If you are going to build a frame you should not ignore the practical
aspects of the finished bike. Clutch access, topend access, etc, can be
the difference between making the grid or not.
Oh yeah, the race at Talledega------------- I won!!!!!!!! Too easily for
it to mean anything though.
Ray
------------------------------
Date: Sun, 11 Oct 1998 10:24:28 -0800
From: "Michael Moore"
Subject: Re: MC-Chassis Chassis Project Debut {Long}
Hello Ray,
Congrats on the win - take them whenever you can get them.
> be a temporary home to get some development time on the engines. I can tell
> you now that it would have been easier to build from scratch.
I had the same conclusion when I did the mods to the Alazzurra.
> Weight : With out a fairing { ran out of time } the bike weighs 225lbs
> without fuel. This is with a steel gas tank and steel SA. The RZ frame with
> engine mounts is about 30 lbs. A custom frame and SA could easily take off
> 20 to 30 lbs. That would be great but let me tell you something, a 235 lb
For light stuff figure about 12-16 pounds for a frame and 8-10
pounds for a swingarm.
Cheers,
Michael
Michael Moore
Euro Spares, SF CA
Distributor of Lucas RITA and Powerbase products
Sole North American distributor of "The Racing Motorcycle: a technical guide for constructors"
Host of 6 m/c email lists (details on the web site)
http://www.eurospares.com
AFM/AHRMA #364
------------------------------
Date: Mon, 12 Oct 1998 13:39:08 -0400
From: "Gary Beale"
Subject: Re: MC-Chassis Chassis Project Debut {Long}
Way to go man!
Gary Beale
gbeale@atlanta.dg.com
>The Goldberg/Suzuki made it's race debut Saturday Oct 3 at the AHRMA
>Talledaga National
------------------------------
End of MC-Chassis-Dgst V1 #789
******************************
MC-Chassis-Dgst Tuesday, October 13 1998 Volume 01 : Number 790
1. yhakim@m5.sprynet.com Subj: Re: MC-Chassis Chassis Project Debut {Long}
2. "Michael Moore" Subj: MC-Chassis last minute stuff
3. "Ray or Emily Brooks" Subj: Re: MC-Chassis Chassis Project Debut {Long}
4. "Michael Moore" Subj: MC-Chassis See ya
5. Bob Schnick Subj: MC-Chassis chassis design archive update temp URL
6. "Michael Moore" Subj: MC-Chassis archives
7. "Sam Stoney" Subj: MC-Chassis Steel frames
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Date: Mon, 12 Oct 1998 10:46:13 -0700
From: yhakim@m5.sprynet.com
Subject: Re: MC-Chassis Chassis Project Debut {Long}
>Now that the bike is rideable I will make some observations on the
>practical points of the motorcycle that can only come to light after use.
>First is the issue of maintainability. A double loop frame like the RZ has
>great engine access. All normal maintenance can be performed without any
>extra dismantling. The clutch cover is totally accessable. The topend comes
>off without unbolting any unrelated bits. The kickstarter clears everything
>allowing easy warmups. None of this would be true with a more "Modern"
>frame like a Tulda.
>
>Weight : With out a fairing { ran out of time } the bike weighs 225lbs
>without fuel. This is with a steel gas tank and steel SA. The RZ frame with
>engine mounts is about 30 lbs. A custom frame and SA could easily take off
>20 to 30 lbs. That would be great but let me tell you something, a 235 lb
>racebike is still very light when a person has been racing a 375 lb plus
>GS500.
>Summary: I love my bike. I have basically built an early 80's TZ frame with
>modern rising rate rear suspension, 43mm fully adjustable forks, wheels
>that accept modern tires { Michelin!!!!!} , and a simple, robust engine
>with lots of potential and cheap parts.
>
> If you are going to build a frame you should not ignore the practical
>aspects of the finished bike. Clutch access, topend access, etc, can be
>the difference between making the grid or not.
>
>
> Oh yeah, the race at Talledega------------- I won!!!!!!!! Too easily for
>it to mean anything though.
>
>Ray
Congrats on the win. Sounds fun, kinda what I (eventually) want to do: fast(-ish),
cheap and fun. Looking at a lot of SOS racers especially those big thumpers stuffed
in TZ frames really emphasize the ease of maintenance of your bike.
When/if I my vapor-bike becomes a reality It'll probably be thumper based, so I don't
have to deal with two stroke stuff and so I am legal for almost every class.
And after struggling with some really strange maintenance requirements on a few
FZR's: I want to be able to change the jetting with out disassembling 1/2 the bike, I
plan on designing maintenance in, instead as an afterthought
On a built Thumper (400-600 single) can you kick start (or should there be the
provision starter motor) or are rollers a necessity?
I really like the one finger, no effort start, one less thing to worry about.
______________________________________________________
Yousuf
______________________________________________________
------------------------------
Date: Mon, 12 Oct 1998 16:08:51 -0800
From: "Michael Moore"
Subject: MC-Chassis last minute stuff
Don't forget, there will be someone watching the list while I'm gone
to help you if you forget to how to us&bscribe or have some other
problem like that. If they can't resolve your problem please just
bear up with it until the end of the month when I get back.
If you need copies of digests that aren't archived on the web site,
you should be able to get them from the list you are s&bscribed to by
sending a message to :
majordomo@list.sirius.com
saying:
get laverda-digest v01.n037
s&bstituting the appropriate list name and volume number. To get the
listing of digests that are available use the message:
index laverda-digest
You can send multiple get commands in one message, but you do need a
different line for the get for each digest number.
You can also sent a "help" command to majordomo to get a list of
commands that are available.
I'll be checking mail until about 10PM PDT tonight, and after that
you'll be largely on your own.
Cheers,
Michael
------------------------------
Date: Mon, 12 Oct 1998 19:16:40 -0400
From: "Ray or Emily Brooks"
Subject: Re: MC-Chassis Chassis Project Debut {Long}
Yousuf wrote:
> On a built Thumper (400-600 single) can you kick start (or should there
be the
> provision starter motor) or are rollers a necessity?
________________________________________________
Some people will tell you that you don't need rollers for a 500cc thumper,
they are full of bs. Get the rollers. As for displacement I would not build
anything smaller than a 500cc engine. According to the AHRMA website there
is going to be some SOS and/or BOT classes dropped or consolidated. SOS F-3
{ 350cc 4 strokes } averaged less than 2 entries per event so I would
expect that class to disappear. SOS 2 stroke {my class } averaged 4 entries
per event and hopefully is safe. Bot Open averaged less than 4 per and may
also be chopped.
Ray
------------------------------
Date: Mon, 12 Oct 1998 22:08:11 -0800
From: "Michael Moore"
Subject: MC-Chassis See ya
in two weeks. Thanks for the "bon voyage" wishes many of you have
sent.
You may get an update during the trip as we'll be stopping about half way
through to visit with Tony for a few days.
Cheers,
Michael
------------------------------
Date: Tue, 13 Oct 1998 04:42:55 -0400
From: Bob Schnick
Subject: MC-Chassis chassis design archive update temp URL
The archives for the chassis design mailing list at Michael's
site at: contain
digests thru #740. There are archives of digests #741-#780, but they
didn't get placed on Michael's site before he left for Spain.
They are temporarily available at :
.
mcdd75.htm is digests #741-750
mcdd76.htm is digests #751-760
mcdd77.htm is digests #761-770
mcdd78.htm is digests #771-780
I did alittle archiving last night after Michael wrote asking me if
I was still doing them but he didn't get them placed on his site before
he flew off.
Bob
working on a brief history of the V-twin motorcycle engine, if anyone
has any info, or suggestions please let me know.
.
------------------------------
Date: Tue, 13 Oct 1998 05:05:03 -0800
From: "Michael Moore"
Subject: MC-Chassis archives
Bob laboured furiously through the night, and I just uploaded four
more batches of list digests to the email page.
Cheers,
Michael (really gone now)
------------------------------
Date: Tue, 13 Oct 1998 17:26:58 -0700
From: "Sam Stoney"
Subject: MC-Chassis Steel frames
One fact that keeps comming up on this list is that all steels are
basically of equal stiffness. The main difference between regular and high
tensile steels appears to be that the high tensile steels will bend further
without deforming.
How about using EMT conduit for chassis work? It's extremly cheap, of
consistant quality, and easy to work with. Yet there is something that
bothers me about doing this....is it my natural bias agsainst anything that
can be easily attained? What I'm thinking of specifically is building a
chassis out of EMT and with all suspension components built of CrMo. Is
this as sensible as it sounds?
Sam
------------------------------
End of MC-Chassis-Dgst V1 #790
******************************
Back to the home page
© 1997 Michael Moore, all rights reserved
Most recent update: 30 January 1998
For more information contact webmeister@eurospares.com