RZBansheeMan

[topic= reed spacers, 3/4 inch ]Click here ![/topic] This should answer your ? Also did you ever put those massive ported RZ jugs on ?

You have 1 2004 and 2 2007's according to this site : http://www.sullivanx.com/servlet/the-template/vincodes/Page Hope this helps for future reference. Mike

http://cgi.ebay.com/ebaymotors/2004-Factor...tem270161672476

Imagine if he threw some DG's on there he could go 130 - 140 maybe.......... :woot:

Check into the 2:1 carb set up.

It appears in the pic there, that the CPI's have more belly length in the expansion chamber. If I'm not mistaken the longer the belly area the less peaky / less rpm the pipe.

WOW, that doesn't sound all that bad. Their site had so many different options and prices it was kinda hard to follow. After I get some current debt taken care of and get back on track of things This is something I would consider along with having the flywheel lightened and balanced. Do you know apprx. how much weight was shaved from the crank or did Falicon say ?

Here's your sign. :thumbsup:

:yelrotflmao: :yelrotflmao: :yelrotflmao:

I would recommend some stockers......... :biggrin: On a more serious note, it really depends on how you want your power delivery and or are you a person that likes looks of the pipes better or functionality ? If Ihad to make a honest suggetion , I would say either T-5's or CPI's, and that is because it sounds like you like to go fast in more open areas.

If you don't mind me asking, how much did you have into lightening and balancing the crank ? I would be interested in doing such to a 4 mil if wasn't going to take a small loan to do it.

I appreciate your wealth of knowledge and you sharing it, but it also seems that if the 4 mil long rod setup is well within tolerence of piston loads, then there wouldn't be any nescessity to use a stock stroke crank with the "long rods", considering when the 4 mil "long rod" has greater rod angularity and less rod / stroke ratio than a stock stroke crank with stock length rods. On another note I'm kinda interested in the old RD 400 bore x stroke specs, but that would require 8 mm stroker crank for the Banshee, which I am guessing is an oddball vs. the more common 7 mm stroker, which in my opinion is an oddball number. Mike

No, filler isn't nescesary for every TIG weld that's done. On these cranks the pins are tight enough that it can be fused all the way around the pins, which basically the arc from the tip of your TIG torch, will basically melt the two metals together (fusing). As stated no material gained.

These are hard to come by here in the states, but are plentiful in Canada. Check into the WR 200 / DT 200, if I am not mistaken they are a dual sport bike with a liquid cooled / powervalved (YPVS) version of the Blaster engine. I think you can get upwards of 250cc out of those or you probably could stuff a Banshee / RZ 350 engine in it.

I think you could get away with between 8 mm for 120 mm rod, and 13 mm spacer plate for a 125 mm rod. I say this because on a 4 mill stroker the piston does travel 2 mm above the deck height. I would imagine that a "795" piston still could be used. I have also thought about this adding too much volume to the crank case, but just out of curiosity couldn't the transfers be left a little narrow to keep the transfer velocity up ? I really don't have any reason or want to go over to PS, nothing against anybody over there, but I get all my Banshee info here and all my TRX info over at E2S. I'm not really into Dragging either, I just like to think up some out of the norm engine combinations, more or less to see if it's possible or an improvement.

What is the optimal rod to stroke ratio for two stroke engines ?. Mainly the Banshee I'm in question of, because that's mostly all I care about in 2 strokes. I've done the math several times and this is what I have came up with: 110 mm rod = stock length 54 mm stroke = stock stroke 2.037 : 1 = rod ratio so when you have long rod stock stroke crank obviously the rod ratio increases : 115 mm "long" rod 54 mm stroke 2.129 : 1 = new rod ratio Seeing that when a crank is replaced, it is always reccomended that a "long rod" crank be used for the added rod ratio, for the reduced piston skirt loading. Well now I'm kinda wondering what gave the 4 mil stroker 115 mm "long rod" crank the term "long rod" when all actuality it has less rod to stroke ratio than a stock stroke / stock rod crank ? 115 mm rod = "long rod" 58 mm stroke = 4 mil stroker 1.982 : 1 = less than stock rod ratio 120 mm rod = 10 mm longer rod than stock 58 mm stroke 2.068 : 1 = slightly more rod ratio than stock 125 mm rod = 15 mm longer rod than stock 58 mm stroke 2.155 : 1 = slightly more rod ratio than "long rod" stock stroke crank I know that this isn't the most feesible way of building a engine, but I do know that there are 125mm rods for a Banshee. I also know that this wouldn't be possible to build without using a spacer plate. What's everyone's thoughts ? RZ

It is RPM activated weights that lock the inner clutch hub to the outer clutch basket leaving it impossible for slippage. I would have to say that it is mostly for dune / drag use, I'm guessing from 75hp + .

What is the probability that these 2 fools "chevroletbanshee" and "FMF - fag mother fucker" are either " KIN " or are siamese twins ? You 2 juveniles need to GROW THE FUCK UP ! Until then, turn the computer off and go back to the potatoe fields where you were conceived at.

Do you still have all the TORS shit on it ?

Awesome, I am kinda curious to hear how it runs. I'm kinda curious to know how mine would run with a single carb, but with it being a stroked, Passion ported, RZ motor, I think it's gonna want more than a single carb could supply up to 11,000+ rpm's. But I will always run dual pipes.

Don't fuck around with those " GAY " spacer plates. They are not needed ! you can either cut your stock head's domes 2mm in depth if you have the tools and know how, or have it done. You could also buy a cool head or noss head and get stroker domes that are already cut for the stroker. As for your pipes, Yeah your T-5's will work really well for a 4 mill motor, but if you are looking for a bottom end trailengine the FMFs or 2 into 1's are better. The T-5's are a top end pipe. Now on the porting subject, what kind of knowledge or experience do you have ? When it comes to porting for a stroker motor the port windows need to be both raised and lowered for the added stroke ( changing the port timings significantly ) so unless you have that kind of experience, I would farm that out. Yes porting the reed cages is a good idea and yes for right now your stock carbs will work. And yes you probably will have to spend a little more that a grand to do this properly. If it makes you feel any better, mine is still not finished and when all is said and done ther will be upwards of 3,000.00 dollars in to it. It's not a cubbed drag motor either, it's a stroked RZ powervalved all round engine.

I would guess that with a " New " 4 mil crank, pistons, and port job to compliment the stroker, that you would spend a $ 1,000.00. I am sure somebody could probabaly set you up with a used set of FMF pipes to try and keep your costs down, hell, maybe even a used crank. I would just put some boyesen pro series reeds on your stock cages and just run your stock carbs until you can afford better reeds, intake, and better carb(s) combo. As for your stock carbs, if I'm not mistaken, I think they can produce in excess of 60 hp. I would probably aim your biggest expense at a 4 mil stroker crank, ( Longer stroke = more leverage = more torque ) Woods / Trail port job, and a good clutch probably from F.A.S.T. racing. The reeds aren't that expensive on E-Gay, and I would probably look for a adjustable timing plate or you can just lengthen the holes on your stock one and bump your timing +4. You can always do more, better, or different upgrades later. Going to a 4 mil isn't going to reduce reliability. I think that most reliability issues are a lack of attention to the fine details. Just pay close attention to what you are doing when working on your engine, keep things clean, and routine maintenece. In all actuality you "might" increase reliabilty by building your engine for torque, you can keep the revs lower and have more power at a lower rpm than stock, therefore not revving it as hard to do the same thing as an top end built engine.

Not to discredit anybody else, but it sounds to me like " Snop " knows what he's talkin about for what a good " grunty / trail " engine would consist of. I do believe however, that with a set up like his and 4mm stroker you could have a real torquey machine that would surprize a lot of people.

Well, if you took the 2 caliper bolts out, then you should be able to get the whole hub assembly to come out just a little bit ( enough to clear the rock shield )then get your caliper off. Now the hub should come off.

If you removed the caliper bolts, you should be able to wiggle the caliper off from the rotor, and then I would "lightly" tap the hub with a small hammer and pull on it by hand. It should come off from there.