McCoy's Performance

Ziggy is a excellent mechanic. And any negative comments about Ziggy in this thread are unfounded.

Hello everyone. Nate McCoy here. I am very sorry to read this whole discource, seems like this thread got out of sorts early on. We regret that anything that cast a negative light on the 7mm parts was said. Tripledsracing has presented the true facts concerning this motor. It is true that I built a 7mm cub for Ziggy. And tripleds owns it now, and has it for sale. It is true that it has run 3.8s at Sand Rat Drags in Oklahoma. I believe it did this in it's present configuration, although the setup has been altererd, from what I understand. We do, however, face this scenario often: we build/test/sell to one customer, it changes hands, setup or location, and we are called on to vouch for the original setup. But if any of the owners have altered the setup at all, power and reliablilty is always at stake. We spend countless hours trying to break records, not just break. And we put great effort in our customers motors to see that they have every advantage to beat the competition. Extensive hours of field testing and dyno reasearch goes into our setups. But after all our efforts, we constantly recieve a motor that is "tuned" by someone else, and sometimes "corrected" our setup that are down as much as 30% in power. And we are blamed. A change as simple as incorrect base gasket, and changed piston style, a "new" dome, someone elses carbs, changed ignition timing, and you have either a dog or time bomb. Anyone that purchases one of "our" motors used, would do well to send it to us and have us go over the setup, and verify that it is correctly configured, and not altered. We will provide that service very quickly and the inspection is FREE if components are unassembled. Dyno tuning a motor that we origiannly built is very affordable too. We can also recomend any update on that particular setup if we have changed anything. Thanks in advance for understanding. Nate McCoy-

Absolutely worth sharing, even hilarious. You made me laugh. Nothing like bringing up the foolishness of gambling to make a point. LOL I understand that the Dynojet is the "poor boy" Dyno. However, my experience is that the repeatability is still rather amazing. Of course there is huge room for human error which I believe accounts for huge inconsistencies. But using the SAE correction factors, it is possible to produce back-up data on different days/ times of day/ temperatures/ atmospheric pressures, and so on. A decent motor will back up it's #s within 1% on a Dynojet once the air/fuel is matched, even when the environment is changed significantly. The only thing that seems to be a real problem with repeatability is atmospheric moisture (humidity variations). Our #s are slightly less on a rainy day: usually we see about a 2+% loss from a "dry" day baseline. We can also, in most cases, get sufficient load to find clutch slip. On motors 150hp and less, when we cure clutch slip on the Dyno, it will hold in the field. If it slips on the Dyno, it will slip in the field. So the Data, though inferior to a comparable Superflow's, has some relevance. The challenges of inertia-only testing is "loading the motor" to a level that has any relevance in to real-world application that it will run in. Gearing becomes crucial. And back up testing must be made at the same load rates (gearing), of course, to obtain meaningful data (which must include repeatability). The higher the HP, the greater the challenge. This is not a Dynojet commercial, by any means. They might be some of the worst dynos on the market. But with all of their inabilities and limitations, they are still a tool with enough repeatability to generate data that is useful. IMHO

The Dyno jet has very good repeatability. But the inertia dynos have some limitations for sure. You can purchase an eddy current "load cell" for the inertia Dynojets. :biggrin: And it is then much easier to do some testing. But most do not have them. And so the tuner is forced to alter gear ratios to change the load.

What about adjustability? All we are looking for in lockout adjustability, is this: How can we make this thing hold the torque we are making? Either the clutch is slipping and not transferring the power out that is coming in, or the clutch is failing prematurely because it's barley able to hold the power when the components are all new, but starts slipping as soon as there is some wear. So yes, we want adjustment; if the current setup slips, then we want to add weight to the pivot arms to force to clutch springs. And hopefully gain enough to make the clutch hold. The bottom line is this, "Will the clutch system hold the torque the motor produces?." With the GP lockout we are holding more torque. So you don't adjust it...lol The effectiveness can be reduced by removing the # of balls that are in it. I don't have the numbers in front of me, but just from memory here's a sample: A new stock Banshee clutch will hold about 32ft lbs of torque on our dyno. A stk banshee clutch with Barnett springs will hold about 36ft lbs of torque. A Barnett complete clutch kit holds about 40ft lbs of torque. A Toomey complete clutch kit holds about 52ft lbs of torque. A Toomey w/ Direct Drive lockout holds about 60 ft lbs of torque at 7000rpm Then we can increase the holding power by more spring pressure, and adding weight to the lockout arms. With a 7 disc clutch, it is very difficult, even utilizing every trick we know of, to get it to hold over 70 lbs of torque. Unless we go to overdrive primary gears. Then we have had to go to an 8 disc system, and we have held torque in the mid 80s at 7000rpm. Where do we go next? We have to get either more clutch surface area (add more discs), or more pressure (stronger spring and/or more powerful lockout). The GP lockout has already held well over 100ft lbs of torque @ 7000rpm, and we haven't found the slip-point yet.... :biggrin:

I am sure that the initial test was on the Dyno with a significant load. Likely 5000 to 10,000rpm in 6 sec. (That would be a load like testing with a dynojet with gearing to do about 250mph at the top of the run...lol) Then "skinny" Boston took it to the sand, and that was a load test...hehehe Actually he's not that big, maybe 220lbs? And 14p extremes running in the sand geared to do 100mph, and using it all in 300ft.

You guys are just too nice.

Wait a minute! You're too big for that. LOL Great job on the setup guys. That is more than a good motor setup, you guys are hooking it up. I guess they will be calling it a 10mm soon.

$325 for what we run. Best we have found, and I can get a selection of ratios. We have 2.86, and 2.68 in stock most of the time. We have tested them to 200hp...

Thanks Rob. You guys are trying to make me feel welcome... :biggrin:

Thanks for the kind words.

65mm and 66mm bore are where we find the smallest gains. We did a 397cc 4mm that was almost 90hp clean-up ported on our dyno, and went to 101hp best run drag ported, on gas. We are still shy of 110hp/alky on our dyno with the 397s. That motor made the fastest under 400cc pass at the PS drags of 3.92@82, and that was even on gas. On alky at an ASDA certified track it has run 3.79@84, and runs consistant low 3.80s with the skinney rider. Our dyno is quite conservative, imho. :cool:

Inland was a joke, sorry. But we face constant pressure to match their prices. LOL Cascade does polish components beautifully. As a matter of fact, we reduced the price of our polishing in light of theirs. They are nice people, but not a great source for someone who is serious about power. Cp products have minimum prices that no dealer is suppose to go bellow, otherwise they jeopardize their dealership. To answer the question about "clean-up" ported vrs. Drag ported we typically see 15hp, depending on the size of the cylinder. The small bores are the hardest to find gains on for sure. It is true that they work well out-of-the-box. But also true that there are relatively large gains to be found by the builder.

Actually, new cylinders make my job a lot more fun. :biggrin: And he is slackin', It's been way over a year since he has made a new one for the Banshee. lol :biggrin:

The choice of builder should be a serious consideration. We have seen over 20hp variation on the same size cubs from different builders. It does matter. If you buy a ported cub from a builder and it is not 10+ hp better than out-of-the-box, they have not done their job. That is all I'll say here since we are not a sponsor here yet. If you're only concerned with looks and price, many go to Inland ATV, or Cascade Innovations. Inland is the cheapest, Cascade is also cheap, and has the most beautiful polished components on the market (for what it's worth..lol)

Consider that the "Mini Twister" is far from "mini". lol They have the displacement of of the larger CP cylinders. We have seen the Twister shop bike with the 14MM " Mini, and it was very comparable to an average small bore 7mm cub. We had given them the benefit of the doubt since they were new then, but now they are far from new, and they just aren't doing what everyone had hoped. Some had thought that going back to yesterday's technology was better. Instead of Nikosil bore, the Mini is sleeved. The thought was that the time/$ of getting a sleeved cylinder bored was a better choice than Nikosil. But several problems seem to have not been considered. For example, it is easier to damaged the bore on a sleeve than the Nikosil. Also, many bore/stroke combos have very limited oversize piston availability, so re-sleeving is often required. And that is more costly than re-Nik'ing. Also the bore life is less on a sleeve than a Nikosil bore, so you have to do something sooner when all goes well. Cp Industries components have been good to us (ya, all the "cats"). And that is what we are building. I think the Twister folks are nice people, and understand why some people have chosen there products. But the new "little" DM cylinders are the next boom that is coming. We have done several 4mms and 10mm, and they are in a class of their own. We will have some Dyno Data from our 540cc 4mm and our 553cc 4mm very soon...

Maybe this thread will turn into helpful info after all. :cool: As many of you might imagine, all lockouts are not created equal. And a comparison between the different brands of the traditional style is enlightening. I will have my own California test results compiled, and I will even share some my test methods in the near future. We have done extensive clutch tests over the last few years out of necessity. We have an 18mm setup that produced 100ft lbs of torque at only 7500rpm, the last time on the Dyno. So clutch testing never ends... :biggrin:

Thanks dajogejr. You are right. And I will take that to heart. I didn't come on here with anything to gain. I just came to defend a good company, and designer behind it, that have been completely, misrepresented. Even though Kevin could easily defend himself, he shouldn't have to. And for his accomplishments and efforts for the ATV industry, he needs thanked, not scoffed. I would expect other decent people to do the same as I have done in this thread. And I hope that if it was I that was being attacked, someone would know the facts well enough to do the same for me. If Mr. Firehead dislikes me for that, so be it. But all those who do know me, know that truth matters very much to me. And although I have had no intention in any of these posts to alienate anyone, pointing out that someone is clearly wrong does not tent to endure one's self to the "mistaken." And I always regret that. I am sure Mr. Firehead would agree if the roles were reversed, and he was the one with the new product, and he made his living in the industry, and he and his products were maligned by someone who didn't know the facts. Speculation is helful, even neccessary, when in the concept stage of a thing. But we're past that now. Now, some of the pertinent questions are like these: #1 Does it work? #2 How does it compare to the existing designs? #3 Is it safe(er)? #4 Is it cost effective? #5 Does it look cool? #6 Does my buddy have one already? :biggrin: Not necessarily in that order...lol And there are likely other questions of the same character. Our opinions are as follows: #1. Yes it works. We have been needing a lockout that could hold our big motor's torque with clutch springs light enough that normal people could pull the clutch in. The GP lockout is a solution. #2. a.) It has more force than the traditional design. b.) It has better wear properties. (traditional lockouts wear into the pressure plate very rapidly on high torque applications) c.) It is less likely to fail. It has only a "single link" of moving components that apply the lockout force to the clutches. Whereas the traditional lockouts have a nut connected to a bolt, connected to a steel pivot arm, connected to a pivot pin, that all move to make the lockout function. And all of these components are connected to the assembly by two small screws. When any part comes loose, things get ugly. Which leads us to... #3. We are confident, after real-world testing, that the GP design is safer than the traditional lockout. The inertia of the single ball is about the same as the nut on the arm of a traditional lockout. Consider the inertia of a complete arm coming lose on a traditional lockout, by comparison. And we have seen the devastation of the tradition lockout failure on several occasions. A steel ball does have some potential for damage it is obviously mitigated somewhat by their being smooth. #4. Yes. #5-6 are variables that are subject to change...lol The only disadvantage that we can find is that assembly is more tedious. The traditional lockout is as simple to assemble as could be desired. It is my understanding that it was a failure of a traditional lockout that inspired the GP design, in part. But please do not think that I am bashing the traditional lockout design either. They are what they are. Even they are consider safe, and a viable option in today's performance ATV circles. And we all know of there benefits. And we have run them. And now we are turning to the GP lockouts. And I trust the safety of the design over the traditional ones, because we have tested them both, abused them both, and see the potential damage. We have considered the advantages and disadvantages of both, and we have concluded that the GP lockout is the best we know of to date. Thanks for reading.

I still have no idea who you are firehead. And If I was once impressed with you, you must have not been talking about people and things you didn't know. Because you not very impressive on this thread. If you did talk to Superflow you found out more and more of your assertions were wrong. And if you want to know the truth. (Somehow it seems that you won't accept it anyway, but I'll try nicely again.) Facts that you are wrong about in this thread: The fact of the # of people that work @GP Eng. The fact of Kevin's Education, The fact of his Saber Being one of the first, The fact that the Saber has a Motec, The fact that their Dyno is Superflow, The fact that their Shop is inferior, The fact that you have seen me impressed, The fact that the GP lockout is more dangerous than the other leading designs. The fact that I haven't tested and compared it to other brands. The fact that GP is a manufacturing and engine building "Hack" The fact that I would say anything on this thread for any other reason that to defend the truth about GP Eng. I am tired of thinking about how nearly every post you add, you bring in more false data to try to substantiate that the limb you've put yourself on is solid. And your just wrong. And to the rest of you good people that would want to welcome me to Banshee HQ, I must admit that this thread seems unwelcome. It also seems unprofitable for me to try to help on a forum, where the facts are rejected in favor of someone opinion-- that is wrong. No matter how much you guys have been impressed by this Firehead guy, he is leading you astray on this thread. As far as safety, we have seen the leading other brands lockouts come apart during operation. And they have ruined many components. And whoever thinks that the danger and destruction of the GP lockout is more needs to recalculate. The force of each ball is substantially less that a DD lockout arm, and they are small and round. We have simulated the "Explosion" of a GP lockout and the balls did no significant damage to the cover or clutch components. Whereas we have several motors that have had many clutch components destroyed by traditional lockout failures (basket,primary gears,covers,waterpumps,even cranks). An engineer should understand why.

Firehead, there's no need to mitigate anything. You are entitled to your opinion. You've trash-talked Kevin and his stuff. I am acknowledging that your accusations and observations are simply wrong, even those you insist on repeating. Other than your incorrect assumptions, there is no bad info on this thread about the lockout to "mitigate". You might contact Superflow and ask them about their opinion about Kevin Gigot and the crew at GP Eng. . Until recently he was featured in an article on their website...lol Your still wrong about his Dyno too. I am sure that you would also be surprised at his engineering credentials. But I had hoped that we wouldn't have to crush your ego just to stop these foolish attacks based on these fallacious assumptions. I am Nate McCoy. When/where did you meet me? If you have met me, maybe you should start a new thread about my stuff, and talk trash about me instead of Kevin, whom you do not know. Oh ya, and his lockout works very well.

Well so here you go... What is clear about this thread is how much you don't know about the ATV drag race industry and it's innovators. You maybe whatever, wherever, but this "product review" isn't about you. It's about Kevins Lochout. Kevin isn't a Banshee guy, but he is one of the few true innovators in the industry, and he has products around the world. You have made some pretty bolt assertions, and sadly have declared your ignorance in several areas in this thread. You might in fact be very wise and have much helpful info to add to some topics, but you out on a limb here. Here's some facts. Fact #1 I don't have any idea who you are. Fact #2 Whoever you are has no bearing on who Kevin Gigot is. Fact #3 His dyno is a Superflow. Fact #4 His Saber is one of the very first, and one of the most powerful single twostrokes in the world. Fact #5 It has a Motec controlled EFI, and he has extensive experience in turbo/efi two-strokes. Fact #6 I have tested lockouts extensively Fact #7 His lockup is works great. I am nice guy from California, and have no axe to grind. And I know there is a commedy element to all that has firehead has said. But it's just wrong.

As I read this thread, I had to note that mr. firehead did say something smart: "...I may be wrong" And how right he was with that realization. LOL He admitted that he hadn't seen any of what he is talking about. We have had the lockout in our hands. We have run one on one of our Motors. We have been seen/handled GP engineering Chassis and suspension parts. We have seen and used his Superflow Cycledyne Dyno. We have seen inside his Motec/GP eng. EFI, Turbo Sabertooth motor. We have seen it run at Fallon Nevada. We have seen enough to know that this Firehead's hothead comments are baseless. And Firehead's lack of judgment is unbelievable in attacking Kevin and his company. It is understandable, however, to see why someone would be jealous of Kevin Gigot, and GP Eng. . There is but a very small # of ATV shops in the country that have the equipment that he has. (A full in-house CNC machine shop, and manual machines as well, a fab shop capable of supplying light weight chassis components made of exotic metals around the globe--and yes, he does LOL. A state-of-the-art Superflow Dyno, and Dyno facility, Not to mention one of the largest EFI parts inventories around. And so much more.) Then to be able to do it all by himself, from design, to manufacture, to testing... No wonder many are jealous... And consider the fact that he went to the largest hill gathering of USA 2-stroke engine builders in 2006, Fallon NV, and took that very same single cylinder EFI/Turbo Saber, and in front of the world he crushed the single cylinder speed record going as fast as the fast triples, and faster than any twin. There he validated his 150+hp claim in the field. And will likely hold that speed record until he chooses to return and break his own record. Some might be jealous of the fact that Kevin is an engineer, and innovator, instead of a copy-cat builder like our industry is so plagued with. The Direct Drive Lockout, and the JJ&A axle are perfect examples. Everyone and their brother that has a CNC connection has copied and produced knockoffs. This copy-cat stuff is not what make the industry great. Someone copies to make themselves $$, and to do nothing for the technology of the sport. They are the ones motivated to make cheap, and inferior components that cost "an arm and a leg" in the long run, if you know what I mean. Kevin has things of value and a family business at stake; he isn't going make something that puts it all in jeopardy. He didn't get to where he is being a dolt. And yes, the lockout is outstanding. They have more holding force than any other, less components to fail, and are a brilliant design. We already have a load of the new banshee ones on order for our big hp bikes.