Mk2 Bandit Turbo Build

[ColinH]

After all the help here with some decisions, I thought time to start the build thread.

2002 Bandit 1200 in pretty much stock form. I only stripped it to sort valves following leak down test due to lack of power  Now it's a project bike!

Plan so far:

- Hyabusa pistons on bandit rods to drop CR to around 8.5:1 (That's only from reading so need to confirm that)

- Rebore cylinders to accept pistons

- Rebuild of head as valves were cruddy and causing leak of compressions so clean and lap valves

- Standard head gasket but not sure if it's suitable at higher boost

- Boost upto 1 bar but that's guess and will be set to deliver max power without blowing standard bottom end and long lasting. I think this may be around 200 - 230bhp??

- Turbo is undecided yet but something commonly available like TD05, TD04 etc. I have changed from plan of low boost so need to look at what's suitable.

- Looking at EFI using GSXR600 throttle bottles K1 - K3 with middle gap modified to suit rubbers

- ECU to control ignition timing, EFI etc and possibly for dash readout 

- Fabricate tubular swingarm later in project once running, homemade

- Fabricate new seat subframe and rear panels. rear panels to be aluminium so can make them myself.

The main reason of builds for the challenge. I have lathe, mill, welding plant etc so will make everything I can myself. Only outsource at moment will be cylinder bore as it will cost me 10 times the cost of job to get suitable boring and honing head to do the job.

Looking forward to the challenge. Just sorting clutch on VFR to sell and help make space and fund the fun 

 

 

[stockcar]

TD04 will see high 280's on its original home on a 2.0ltr Subaru so should easily achieve 200+ on your build I would think?? TD05 is larger and hence will induce more lag / less response 

[ColinH]

14 minutes ago, stockcar said:

TD04 will see high 280's on its original home on a 2.0ltr Subaru so should easily achieve 200+ on your build I would think?? TD05 is larger and hence will induce more lag / less response 

Thanks for reply, yes I need to look at compressor maps (with help of a book I have) to see what suits.

I think the TD04 does have the flow rate needed as you say.

[peter1127]

I had a TD04-16T with internal wastegate that coughed up >300rwhp with a proper head and 1277cc. That was with the wastegate clamped shut, in hindsight not a brilliant plan but it was FAST. Engine took that beating quite well although intake temps were extreme. Waterinjection saved it I guess. With a larger turbo I would have grenaded the engine. At some point the turbo spit up the turbine wheel and with the fresh turbo I settled for 250rwhp. Low rpm performance was pretty ok and lag not too bad.

I now have the proboost TD05-16G with  external wastegate which is larger. Lag is not great and it start generating its first psi of boost at 4500rpm. But I also have 8:1 compressio ratio on a stock engine. Now rebuilding the engine with 1216cc and 9:1 CR so that should be a bit more responsive. Also getting the AFR crisp at low rpm helps spooling up. 

Personally I think 200HP is not enough. If you encounter a proper literbike, hayabusa or panigale  you wont really stay in front of those.  50hp more solves that. Then there are the H2R  or Superbusa but never saw one of those in the wild. 

Edited November 1 by peter1127

[ColinH]

3 hours ago, peter1127 said:

I had a TD04-16T with internal wastegate that coughed up >300rwhp with a proper head and 1277cc. That was with the wastegate clamped shut, in hindsight not a brilliant plan but it was FAST. Engine took that beating quite well although intake temps were extreme. Waterinjection saved it I guess. With a larger turbo I would have grenaded the engine. At some point the turbo coughed up the turbine wheel and with the fresh turbo I settled for 250rwhp. Low rpm performance was pretty ok and lag not too bad.

I now have the proboost TD05-16G with  external wastegate which is larger. Lag is not great and it start generating its first psi of boost at 4500rpm. But I also have 8:1 compressio ratio on a stock engine. Now rebuilding the engine with 1216cc and 9:1 CR so that should be a bit more responsive. Also getting the AFR crisp at low rpm helps spooling up. 

Personally I think 200HP is not enough. If you encounter a proper literbike, hayabusa or panigale  you wont really stay in front of those.  50hp more solves that. Then there are the H2R  or Superbusa but never saw one of those in the wild. 

It sounds like these engines can take a proper beating! I was only planning to drop compression ratio as I thought that was the way to increase boost without detonation. 
 

is it more a case of the standard piston crowns not taking the boosts and with  forged positions at standard compression it could be run at higher boost and over 200bhp?

Some more reading for me to do 

[ColinH]

Got the clutch done on the other bike whose name shall not be mentioned on here! Now I can finally crack on with the build.

gave the head a bubble bath in TFR watered down and got most of carbon removed.

 

Then over to the lathe to clean up the valves.

 

looking much cleaner now.

a load left to do then onto checking valve stem bushes are in spec etc.

 

[ColinH]

Got some time on the bike today. Finishing cleaning up all the valves. I then checked them for concentricity on some V blocks.

 

They are all very straight so good start. Then moved onto checking wear in valve guide bushes.

 

 

Intake all within tolerance but Exhaust all out of spec by good amount so new bushes needed.

Are aftermarket bushes OK or not recommended?

Valves all shiny in the head now.

 

I lapped one valve to check valve face width and well within tolerance so no need to recut valve seats, assuming the rest will come out same later.

I then whipped out the studs in crankcase for head and cylinders. One is very tight so soaking in oil and will heat before removal.

Removed one piston and small end looks good.

Now to find some 81mm Busa pistons and get cylinders bored out. I notice this will only leave around 2.5mm sleeve thickness. 

[ColinH]

OK I nearly sh*t the bed seeing prices of valve guides. I can’t justify that so have ordered one original and will be getting some manganese bronze and turning them myself. 
 

its never usually more cost effective to make your own but I’m guessing they don’t sell many so crazy prices.

If I need more will get a batch done by somebody I know with sliding head machine.

[peter1127]

APE valve guides are 260pound a set  on suzukiperformancespares. Not cheap but not crazy.

[ColinH]

31 minutes ago, peter1127 said:

APE valve guides are 260pound a set  on suzukiperformancespares. Not cheap but not crazy.

I suppose it’s value if you haven’t got the kit to make them but as I have a lathe and material cost is tiny I can’t justify it. The inlets are barely worn as well so half the set would be wasted.

I’m probably factoring in blowing this engine as first build as well so don’t want to go crazy on spend 

Edited October 28 by ColinH

[peter1127]

On 10/25/2024 at 8:21 PM, ColinH said:

It sounds like these engines can take a proper beating! I was only planning to drop compression ratio as I thought that was the way to increase boost without detonation. 
 

is it more a case of the standard piston crowns not taking the boosts and with  forged positions at standard compression it could be run at higher boost and over 200bhp?

Some more reading for me to do 

Detonation is the main engine killer on high performance forced induction engines.   Following items will influence this:

engine design

• Compression ratio. Stock is 10:1. You could use boost, but I think anything above 7psi is tricky and boost creep needs to be avoided at all cost.  8:1 is considered low and safe (if there is such a thing) so 15psi on 98 octane pump fuel should be fine.  Low rpm performance and spoolup time suffers. 
• Shape of the combustion chamber  and stuff like sharp edges. Rounding those sharp edges in the head helps, also removing carbon deposit.
• Squish. Disadvantage of spacers and hayabusa pistons is that squish is too large to have the perfect mixing effect you are looking for. Then again, countless bikes exactly like this, so it seems more or less fine. Theoretically with a good squish band detonation is less likely 
• How much mixture actually enters the engine: intake restrictions, valve size, cam shape & timing, exhaust backpressure

Settings

• Boost level
• AFR: too lean at WOT  burns pistons very quickly and promotes detonation. 12:1 is a good number to aim for, a bit richer on very high power
• Mixture temperature: the cooler the better. intercooler, chargecooler or water/methanol injection helps.  A small turbo way outside its efficiency zone will heat up the air more then a large turbo which is nicely in the zone: same boost, different results.
• Assuming petrol: octane nr.
• ignition timing. not too advanced. I'm using 35 degrees at zero boost up to 30 degrees at 15psi
• Duration of runs = heat buildup. Dyno runs are more forgiving but when doing extended and repeated topend runs,  that's a different story

 

Since there are countless configurations, settings and situations possible, its difficult to give hard numbers especially if you want to know where the limit is. You will know when you go over it   Best to look what others are doing and relate your plans to that. 

If you aim for 160-180rwph, you could use a fully stock unopened engine with something like 5-6psi. But what is the point 

If you are aiming for 200rwhp, that could be something like 10psi on a stock engine with 9:1 CR and 98 octane. Clutch might cope. Still hardly enough. (I have around 200RWHP on stock engine with spacerplate 8:1 CR and 10psi, and in process of upgrading the engine to allow for more power)

250rwhp: could be like 15-18 psi on an engine with 9:1CR and waterinjection/intercooler or 8:1 CR without. Stock pistons and rods might let go at some point, lockup needed. Imo a good number for the street. I'm aiming for this, or a tad more,  with 9:1  1216 MTC, proper squish, maxpeed rods, ape studs, EFI, TD05-16G turbo, MTC lockup, stock head/cams, 98octane, possible waterinjection (still thinking intercooler somewhere)

300rwhp: could be something like 22-25 psi on 8:1 CR with waterinjection/intercooler and definitely proper pistons, rods, studs, lockup. Bit much for the road I think

>350RWHP:  dont know. Other people here have experience, even sombody here aiming for 1000hp.........

Larger valves, flowed head and/or larger capacity will give a bit more power, or less boost for the same power. 

 

(just my 5 cents, results may vary)

Edited October 28 by peter1127

[peter1127]

33 minutes ago, ColinH said:

I suppose it’s value if you haven’t got the kit to make them but as I have a lathe and material cost is tiny I can’t justify it. The inlets are barely worn as well so half the set would be wasted.

I’m probably factoring in blowing this engine as first build as well so don’t want to go crazy on spend 

Still better then 60pounds a piece on CMS......... But yeah everything is more expensive then diy

[ColinH]

1 hour ago, peter1127 said:

Detonation is the main engine killer on high performance forced induction engines.   Following items will influence this:

engine design

• Compression ratio. Stock is 10:1. You could use boost, but I think anything above 7psi is tricky and boost creep needs to be avoided at all cost.  8:1 is considered low and safe, so 15-18psi on 98 octane pump fuel should be fine.  Low rpm performance and spoolup time suffers. 
• Shape of the combustion chamber  and stuff like sharp edges. Rounding those sharp edges in the head helps, also removing carbon deposit.
• Squish. Disadvantage of spacers and hayabusa pistons is that squish is too large to have the perfect mixing effect you are looking for. Then again, countless bikes exactly like this, so it seems more or less fine. Theoretically with a good squish band detonation is less likely 
• How much mixture actually enters the engine: intake restrictions, valve size, cam shape & timing, exhaust backpressure

Settings

• Boost level
• AFR: too lean at WOT  burns pistons very quickly. 12:1 is a good number to aim for, a bit richer on very high power
• Mixture temperature: the cooler the better. intercooler, chargecooler or water/methanol injection helps.  A small turbo way outside its efficiency zone will heat up the air more then a large turbo which is nicely in the zone: same boost, different results.
• Assuming petrol: octane nr.
• ignition timing. not too advanced. I'm using 35 degrees at zero boost up to 30 degrees at 15psi
• Duration of runs = heat buildup. Dyno runs are more forgiving but when doing extended and repeated topend runs,  that's a different story

 

Since there are countless configurations, settings and situations possible, its difficult to give hard numbers especially if you want to know where the limit is. You will know when you go over it   Best to look what others are doing and relate your plans to that. 

If you aim for 160-180rwph, you could use a fully stock unopened engine with something like 5-6psi. But what is the point 

If you are aiming for 200rwhp, that could be something like 10psi on a stock engine with 9:1 CR and 98 octane. Clutch might cope. Still hardly enough. (I have around 200RWHP on stock engine with spacerplate 8:1 CR and 10psi, and in process of upgrading the engine to allow for more power)

250rwhp: could be like 15-18 psi on an engine with 9:1CR and waterinjection/intercooler or 8:1 CR without. Stock pistons and rods might let go at some point, lockup needed. Imo a good number for the street. I'm aiming for this, or a tad more,  with 9:1  1216 MTC, proper squish, maxpeed rods, ape studs, EFI, TD05-16G turbo, MTC lockup, stock head/cams, 98octane, possible waterinjection (still thinking intercooler somewhere)

300rwhp: could be something like 22-25 psi on 8:1 CR with waterinjection/intercooler and definitely proper pistons, rods, studs, lockup. Bit much for the road I think

>350RWHP:  dont know. Other people here have experience, even sombody here aiming for 1000hp.........

Larger valves, flowed head and/or larger capacity will give a bit more power, or less boost for the same power. 

 

(just my 5 cents, results may vary)

Thank you for such an in depth reply, it’s much appreciated.

some food for thought there. I did start with 7-8psi in mind but as you say, what’s the point.

i am going for EFI and Ignition control in a hope to reduce risk of detonation and fuelling issues.

I am considering intercooler to reduce risk of hot charge but also, will look bloody great as well.

So much to learn which is what I love with any new project.

[ColinH]

1 hour ago, peter1127 said:

Still better then 60pounds a piece on CMS......... But yeah everything is more expensive then diy

I usually weigh the time against money and buy parts that are too much hassle but I can make these no problem with a pattern (famous last words haha).

[ColinH]

I have now ordered the MTC 10:1 pistons so rebore to 81mm is next on the cards. I had considered doing this myself on mill which boring is no problem as I have to hold tighter tolerance on lots of other work, it's the honing knowledge that makes or breaks it so better to put them out than wreck new rings or worse.

I did consider removing the cylinder sleeves, boring them in lathe etc but they won't be same shape once reassembled (Been there with lose tolerance bearing bores in past).

Suzuki Performance Spares were really helpful and also split a pack of APE valve guides for me so buying 8 seemed like better value than making them.

I will measure volumes once all done and see if I end up machining some extra space onto of pistons for compression ratio. SPS did say they often turn out closer to 9:1 on most installs he has done so will see. I don't mind 9:1 as I will be running intercooler and also EFI / Ignition control which should lower risk of detonation, if done correctly.

Hopefully get head built this weekend. I have done a little work on ports, nothing more than blending the huge step between valve seat and port on inlets. Check cams, journals and other bits before assembly.

[ColinH]

Pistons and guides arrived today, dropping cylinder block off to machine shop tomorrow.

 

valve guides are supposed to be finished to size but 0.1mm under size. I know they will probably need reaming once installed but that amount needs a bit more alignment that taking out deformation.

The genuine Suzuki guide is correct but these are well under.

Shop reckons a couple of weeks to bore cylinders so gives me time to build head and start ripping other bits off bike.

 

 

[Gixer1460]

Whilst most of us don't give a toss about undersized guides as it's the head or engine builders responsibility to re-size! Plus Suzuki San only has to fit his valves whilst APE have to allow for any OEM & aftermarket offerings! I trust you have seat cutting gear as new guides need seats recutting - just saying!

[ColinH]

29 minutes ago, Gixer1460 said:

Whilst most of us don't give a toss about undersized guides as it's the head or engine builders responsibility to re-size! Plus Suzuki San only has to fit his valves whilst APE have to allow for any OEM & aftermarket offerings! I trust you have seat cutting gear as new guides need seats recutting - just saying!

It’s more the fact that APE say they are finished to size, which these aren’t. I’m not saying they are no good, just that different to description. 

I like to do as much as I can myself, maybe that’s frowned upon? 

Maybe I’m coming across as know it all but that’s far from the case. I do machine parts to tight tolerance but engine machining is new so trying to understand norms.

If I do ream them myself I will blue up and take a print to see if alignment maintained. The other option is to machine a reamer guide engaged with seat taper.
 

[ColinH]

Suzuki performance spares have confirmed they are finished to size and have been super helpful. Hopefully another set on the way soon so I can crack on 

[Gixer1460]

12 hours ago, ColinH said:

Maybe I’m coming across as know it all but that’s far from the case. I do machine parts to tight tolerance but engine machining is new so trying to understand norms.

If I do ream them myself I will blue up and take a print to see if alignment maintained. The other option is to machine a reamer guide engaged with seat taper.
 

Trust me, the fact that a guide has been removed and a new one fitted WILL mean the valve seat is not concentric nor perpendicular to the guide - no matter how careful you are. Commercial valve seat cutters use air bearings to ensure the cutters are perfectly aligned with the guides - I assume you don't have one, the average mill will have run-out and backlash in its quill, spindle and table - all these tolerances build up such that every guide could be mis-aligned fractions of degrees. If you are VERY lucky valve refacing and lapping in may work but generally it won't and for exhaust valves it is particularly necessary due to the heat transfer aspect especially with turbo applications!

There are lots of very bright and clever machinists on this site and even they will trust their engine rebuilding engineering to other professionals, as 'nearly right' is not good enough! Not knocking ambition but has to be weighed against ability!

[ColinH]

47 minutes ago, Gixer1460 said:

Trust me, the fact that a guide has been removed and a new one fitted WILL mean the valve seat is not concentric nor perpendicular to the guide - no matter how careful you are. Commercial valve seat cutters use air bearings to ensure the cutters are perfectly aligned with the guides - I assume you don't have one, the average mill will have run-out and backlash in its quill, spindle and table - all these tolerances build up such that every guide could be mis-aligned fractions of degrees. If you are VERY lucky valve refacing and lapping in may work but generally it won't and for exhaust valves it is particularly necessary due to the heat transfer aspect especially with turbo applications!

There are lots of very bright and clever machinists on this site and even they will trust their engine rebuilding engineering to other professionals, as 'nearly right' is not good enough! Not knocking ambition but has to be weighed against ability!

Thanks for the advice, it is much appreciated. Like you say, there are many factors to understand outside of purely machining the parts to tolerance. End use is very harsh on engines compared to my usual machine components. I would use a floating reamer for this work but need to try and fight myself and hand it to somebody else

[Gixer1460]

This is a YT video from what i'd call an excellent engine reconditioning company - its a diesel engine but the principles are exactly the same. If you don't want to see the whole procedure, go to 29.30 for the valve work, but the rest is quite informative. Bear in mind that a dealer was quoting $20k for a new engine, I'm pretty sure this level of detail work would have resulted in a $8-10k bill - but based on what they did and found with parts for the rods at the end - which would you prefer to have (cost excluded)?

 

[ColinH]

4 hours ago, Gixer1460 said:

This is a YT video from what i'd call an excellent engine reconditioning company - its a diesel engine but the principles are exactly the same. If you don't want to see the whole procedure, go to 29.30 for the valve work, but the rest is quite informative. Bear in mind that a dealer was quoting $20k for a new engine, I'm pretty sure this level of detail work would have resulted in a $8-10k bill - but based on what they did and found with parts for the rods at the end - which would you prefer to have (cost excluded)?

 

That's  a really detailed video thanks. I really like using air hammer for guides as they fly out and causes less damage and its super fast lighter blows, rather than really heavy and slow ones.

I'm in the process of getting a seat cutting setup at the moment. I have reamed the guides and the valves will seat fine with a little pressure but that is side loading guides which will lead to faster wear when running. Also in the process of setting up cylindrical grinding on my surface grinder so I can make guides when needed.

[ColinH]

Hoping to get more done this weekend on other parts while I wait for my cylinders back from engine shop and valve seat cutting gear to arrive.

In true form I am looking to do something different on the fueling / inlet side of things. I am considering going single throttle body and 4 injectors in homemade intakes.

Bein that many high performance boosted cars are running this way I'm playing with the idea. From my basic understanding ITBs have advantages and disadvantages so it's an interesting task having a look. This is all for the challenge of machining the parts and doing something a little different. I very much doubt at my riding ability with 200hp plus I will notice any need for quicker throttle response.

It would be plenum fed with single throttle body which is mounted into 4 inlet chambers with injector port. I can feel the eyes rolling already and thinking why the hell can't he just build something normaI. In my defence I'm not normal and unsupervised 

I have decided to go with MS ECU which is at least one sensible decision

[Breadman]

1 hour ago, ColinH said:

 

I have decided to go with MS ECU which is at least one sensible decision

Yes