Jump to content

Oilyspanner

Members
  • Posts

    801
  • Joined

  • Last visited

Everything posted by Oilyspanner

  1. The guys have already said it, sounds like you want it too, price on older bikes is so open to the individual - to me £4k ish if it's a lovely bike, but if you're keeping it as has been said, then does it really matter so much ? I just hate seeing those 'great investment' ads, selling good old machines for ornaments - motorcycles mean nothing if not being run and ridden - hell you might as well have a mock up on a stand ! - err sorry about the semi rant about people taking bikes out of circulation As many have done, if you've got a keeper, you end up spending shed loads of money on them anyway - much more spent on it than it cost to buy in the first place - is it worth it - hell yes !!
  2. Thanks G1460 - that's as I understand cam phasing too, advanced/smaller numbers = more torque below peak. I'll probably keep what I've dialled in, the 40mm CVs might not be as nice with more std numbers- but it would be good to have a play sometime. I did feel like I'd thrown away £60 when I bought the cam sprockets, especially as I bought two rotary grinders to do various jobs - hell. I've just bought a bandsaw on a whim ! - will be good for making spacers and stuff - online shopping is too easy. Sorry Solcambs for butting in Bud...... sort of on subject though
  3. Was 110/110 on std cams G1460 ? - just asking as I've used 105/105 and seemed to give good all round power with my std cams - but if there's better to be had....... Think my cams were something like 103/104 originally, I pussied out from slotting my cam sprockets and paid for some adjustable ones, they're inching up in price now, £70 or so, I think I paid £60ish a little while back.
  4. The Pilot Power tyres suit Slingshots with standard suspension or with better stuff BB, great road rubber at a price we like I started doing track days in 1994, those Pilot Powers would have beaten anything back then - real race stuff, but with far better manners - maybe bog stock now, but they're good. If you have the standard shock still fitted, it'll have very little damping left, which can cause instability/lack of control/lack of feel/filled pants etc
  5. You'll get lots of ideas Harry from us board/bored members for your 'bandit project' ! - all have merits. The first big bang for pound will be : race can, higher flowing air filter (or dual pod filters) and a jet kit to suit - a trip to a good dyno operator for carb set-up will get the best from this and be quicker than fiddling with jetting options. An ignition advancer helps with pick up a bit and the lower the gearing is a good shout (the cheapest way to gain extra thrust, drop a tooth from the front sprocket is easiest/cheapest). Stage 2 will be a bunch of the ideas above - cams,big bore, head flowing and full system being good value for big grins - the carburation will need to be adjusted after this. The 36mm cv carbs can still flow enough air for 150hp at best, but do help to make a smooth and torquey power delivery - better flowing carbs will make bigger numbers more likely, but won't match the first half of power delivery of the 36's. It depends what you want/expect ..... the options are as big as your wallet !
  6. Hi Portaz - the standard tacho is as accurate as an MP's promises at election time ! - they over read badly as the revs increase (eg. over 12000 at close to 11k). If the previous owner has set the rev limiter at a true 14k revs, then hopefully the top-end isn't damaged - I think the 1990 and 1991 750 had 12.5 or 13k rev limits. The power tails off before that anyway, so it's pointless rev too much beyond peak. If the bike is new to you, give it a good service - oil/filter, plugs, valve clearances, carb balance - then hopefully your top-end running probs can be sorted with a main jet swap. A 750L should rev good and true from an indicated 9 - 12k + revs. Giving it a good service will give a good base to work from- good luck !
  7. Sounds like a win : win MacD - fatter spark or failing that an ignitech, a good result either way ! I rechecked my coil connectors when I found one of the wires coming adrift, no issues since .
  8. Not many options Robbie, because of the individual lobes and shim adjustment - just GSXR1100m/n and GSXR750m really, with the 1100 cams being the better, I think the early gsx600f had the same set-up, but wouldn't be very suitable. Whole heads and cams do pop up regularly.
  9. Welcome to the site Vmax - the dot head chamber shape is smaller and the 1216 pistons are designed for the larger 1052/1127/1157 combustion chamber - low compression pistons are less of a problem. It's likely that the edge of the squish on the head is very close to the crown of the 1216 pistons, not just the valve pockets. Measure the clearance around the piston, chances are you'll need to have the pistons milled for clearance. You could fit a thicker base/head gasket for clearance, but the squish will grow accordingly, losing a little power - depends what you want/expect Bud.
  10. Mark 2 still called a teapot, but had a ladies 'lovebud' as a rear light ! - the Japanese have odd ideas sometimes....... calling the utilitarian gsx600/750f 'katana' was like calling rabbit droppings caviar, you can sell lesser items because of the association with something very respected - in this case the mighty GSX1100 and 1000 Katana helping the very different 'F' series and of course rabbit droppings could be called vegetarian caviar . People who adore the originals aren't going to like the tenuous link to the lesser items, kind of disrespectful even. Mind you, Kawasaki call almost all their range 'ninja' now (not so much in Europe) - started off as a class leading sports bike - gpz900r- now a commuter, pretend sports etc. Can't help on rocker ratios - I knew the early 600f used individual arms and shims on top of valve retainers - like the last of the oil cooled 1100/750 GSXR's and that the B6 and later 600F used screw and lock nut adjusters, plus same rockers. The 750f actually rode surprisingly well, the 600f not so, busy little motor with underwhelming performance. A larger engine with more low end torque can be better on fuel than a smaller engine - dial the cams in for less top end, raise the compression ratio and raise the gearing - this will improve the mpg (make the bike lighter will help too). The engine was designed as a 750, has the internal friction of a 750 and isn't the lightest bike to start off with, reducing the capacity/power isn't going to achieve your goals.... just saying !
  11. Think the 1100K had that type of shock mount, pretty sure the 1990 L had it too - the 1100 M and N didn't though. Have just looked at this site - looks like the 1100L did have this set-up - the welds look non factory, not normally that bad, https://www.cmsnl.com/suzuki-gsxr1100-1990-l-usa-e03_model34313/partslist/BLCK0024.html#results
  12. I'm with modern rubber and suspension calming the F down. A mate of mine bought an F when they came out (I was very envious !), he was so concerned about the bike's handling when pushed - he traded it in for an RG500 ! which he loved, apart from the shocking fuel consumption.. If you have any problems it'll probably be due to s.arm flex, which was noticed with the tyres when racing, even back then, some fitted 1100 s.arms, which are 1.6 times stiffer (from a P.Bikes article by John Robinson ).
  13. Would make a good write up chaps - what's needed for T675R (I think the street triple use the same wheels) wheel fitment.
  14. I kept to lbs as I had the weight of a standard GSXR1100M/N in lbs with a full and empty tank and used that as the basis to work out the bike's weight as I fitted lighter parts - just didn't convert to metric. Does Brexit mean we can sell fuel in gallons again ? ! Metric makes sense as we count in base ten, but many years of dealing with lbs and oz still makes me convert kgs to lbs - although who in the first place thought using units broken into 16 parts and others of 14 made any sense at all !!!!! - did they have 16 fingers ? - knew a chap with 12 once.........
  15. Here's the weights for some of the wheels mentioned, I weighed a number myself on the same scales, a few are from other people's findings. Twisted spoke 3.5 x 17 with bearing and spacer - 11lb 10oz 5.5 x 17 complete - 16lb 14oz Straight spoke 3.5 x 17 " - 10lb 5oz 5.5 x 17 " - 14lb 8oz 600/750 K8 - L0 3.5 x 17 " - 9lb 2oz L1- on - 5.5 x 17 " - 11lb 3oz 1000 K5 - 8 3.5 x 17 " - 9lb 4oz 6.0 x 17 " - 12lb 1.5oz Above - same front as 600/750 K6 - K7 T675R 3.5 x 17 with bearings ? - 8lb 4oz 5.5 x 17 " ? - 11lb 2oz - not my figures cbr600rr 07-12 3.5 x 17 with bearings and spacer - 8lb 9oz 5.5 x 17 " - 11lb 7.5oz - not my figures Sprocket carriers twisted spoke 2lb 12oz - straight spoke carrier 2lb 3oz - the L1 on carrier with integral sprocket bolts, spacer and cush rubbers is 1lb lighter than the straight spoke carrier with the same included. When I was looking at fitting newer/lighter wheels, I did notice that loads of T675R front wheels weren't straight - delicate ? - not like the old Slingshot wheels which are very tough.
  16. The straight spoke 3.5/5.5 inch wheels are the better part of 5lb lighter when fitted with aluminium bearing spacers - gsxr1100 ws/wt, gsxr750wr/ws, rf900. Front wheels fit straight in. The rear needs the caliper hanger from the straight spoke bike , I can't remember if the outer sprocket carrier spacer had to be altered - easy to do though. I used an Armstrong rear disc, this saved 1lb 5oz , a Talon rear sprocket saved better part of 2lb over std - I'm sure you've got that stuff anyway, but the straight spoke wheels are worth fitting. I've fitted late 750 forks/wheel/calipers now, saved loads of weight. The rear wheel I fitted is from a 2013 600/750, it was trickier to fit, but just needs bearings changed to suit our 20mm axle - I press fitted bushes to the spacers and cut them to length. I had to use a caliper hanger from a gsx600f (had to drill out to 20mm from it's original size) to get alignment sorted on that side. I did look at the 675r (R6 and cbr600rr too) that Dunc said, they are slightly lighter than the gsxr late stuff, but I went with the Suzuki stuff for loyalty issues !
  17. The 40mm cv carbs work well - with the airbox still fitted. I fitted a Pipercross filter, which is large and very free flowing - I had to use a FactoryPro config 3.0 jet kit to get the needle rich enough to run properly in that area - it gave a big boost over the k and n fitted before the piperx. The 40mm cv carbs take more time and effort to set-up compared to most other carbs, I like them cos - they can give smooth bottom end, strong mid and upper power, plus fairly decent mpg - many times I didn't like them though ! You might be able to get them to work with velocity stacks and socks, but they might take a while to dial in. I found that the carb bowl vent hose length/size has a big effect on the big cvs too. The GSXR750Rk used 40mm cvs. The GSXR750WR SP used 40mm TMR carbs, which I had on a 907cc special - they were the best flat slide carbs I've ever used
  18. What else have you done Foz ? You could get better torque with decent flowing, adding bell mouths with foam filters, getting jetting spot-on with some dyno work. You might've done all of those , it's just the areas I've had some good results with in the past. I've always found that cv carbs give the nicest first half of power curve and then the f.slides do their stuff. Haven't swapped between 36/38mm flatties to directly compare - just tried to make the most of what I've got normally. FBOB has done loads of o.c. combinations - engines/ carbs - hopefully he'll spot your post Foz.
  19. Is the problem just that it's not charging - very low figure on the multimeter ? The normal problem is over charging, like 15.6 v - you might just need to fit new carbon brushes so it'll charge again - much cheaper
  20. I've looked at the block thinking about coated aluminium liners, better for heat loss and weight - not sure there's enough strength without liners - I haven't got past the thought process ! Would be very interested to hear from someone who's fitted Al liners......
  21. I think the 129700 - 4*** is the important part - the ones I've checked with those numbers have all been close in spec. I couldn't find a definitive manufactures spec. list.
  22. Early GSXR1000/750/600 K series coils all work on Slingshots (GSR600 coils are the same as 600/750k4/5 too - so are fine) , they give correct resistance when wired in series - actually there's many others, like Triumph TT600 etc., but I like keeping to the early/mid K coils - SRAD coils have too low a resistance and I think the redesigned GSXR600/750 K6 onwards engine used different rated coils too. Always check how many ohms you have at the new loom terminals before you fit everything - should be in within spec : 2.4 - 3.2 ohms
  23. I wonder if anyone has a piston to hand they could weigh - I weighed the Wiseco pistons (for balanced pairs), but not the std pistons - just out of interest really.... The Wiseco 1186 pistons weigh 237.8g average. Ta very much Oily
  24. Either would work. If you keep the feeds correct for each pair of coils, which you've done and they're linked in series properly as you show - both would work - the coils aren't pole sensitive. I think I connected mine like the second diagram. Putting labels on the feeds from the ecu/cdi and corresponding 2 wires on the new sub-loom makes it easier once you've covered the new loom with loom tape - it avoids connecting the pairs the wrong way round and getting a loud backfire when you're tired and putting things back together - like I did - I was wide awake very quickly ! It wasn't helped by the fact I used the same wire coding for both pairs of coils, if you use the same coding as the bike's, you wouldn't need to label the loom ends. I love the conversion, it works really well and is so much neater.
  25. Don't do it ! - weighs a ton, has no advantage over dual swinger, hard to get the suspension to work as well as std linkage setup and it's from a H**da........
×
×
  • Create New...