WINDYCITYJOHN400

Give them a try first, they should have a firm MX feel.

I'm guessing you have an older "Cascade" overide clutch cover. (I'm going off the picture of your bike.0 We had problems with two of them about 2 years ago. The casting didn't have enough material to properly align and support the shift shaft. So it would do what you are descibing...pull away from the bosses on the shift segment. We ended up putting a small welded bead on the inside of the cover, then clearancing it down to the proper thickness. Till we could do that, we ran a few spacer washers on the outside of the stator cover to space the shifter arm and hold it out away fron the motor to keep the shift shaft from pulling in towards the clutch side cover. It's only a temporary fix because the washers, shift arm, and side cover will wear and the spacing will open up again. Plus the friction added doesn't help the shift smoothness....but it go them through the weekend. Hope that helps you.

Just recovering from the HQ ride at "The Badlands" yesterday. It's 80+ degrees today.......summer is calling. Anyone ready to start talking dunes again? It's 80+ degrees today

Order a basic arm from Stellar Mchine and Performance. That "Swingarm Shop" arm has a chronic issue of breaking, Not the way you would think either....the pipe that the shock mounts to ends up twisting like a twist throttle towards the front and it is then worthless. Mine did it 2 years ago, and a buddies bike (who bought his arm the same month as I did) found his was cracked in the same way just last month. Go with a full chromoly unit that has the shock pipe pass ALL THE WAY THROUGH THE ARM and be welded on both sides. Check with Tim at Stellar. He does fantastic work, and his pricing is great. I'd shy away from the swingarm shop stuff......

I've done what you did and had similar results. The deal is....you can't run the extentions without it causing a bog. And if your using POD style filters (I had the K&N's) Your motor is getting starved. (I saw a 2 HP drop on the dyno from them.) Hope that helps you make your next decision....to get some 3" angle boot filters.

Since you state that the jugs are ported....then No the jets may not be the same. One side may flow better than the other. I've had a few motors that needed one cylinder to have a jet one or even two sizes bigger or smaller than the other. On the other hand, you could have an O-ring leak that's wetting the plugs. If your not loosing water and not smelling fuel/oil in your water...than it might just need a smaller jet or even a different airscrew setting than the other cylinder.

Jon, you got a PM on getting this fixed.

You could just do that too. I've tried both my own mod as well as buying it done. I'd also get the "Shift Pro" and use that along with the shift star. But don't use the lighter spring that comes with it. Just the roller bearing. I'd also do the water pump cover vent eliminator because you don't need it and it cleans up the motor a little.

It's detonation.....It's almost always detonation. (I know, I've owned a Trinity motor...I'm an expert at Detonation issues. ) Everything you listed above other than crank bearings...comes back to a detonation issue. Why check timing?.....because if the timings wrong, it leads to detonation. Motors don't get crazy hot without a detonation issue. Guess what crazy lean leads to?....Yep, Detonation. Air leak?.....Detonation. O-ring blew....from Detonation. A piston firing creates hundereds of pounds of force...detonation jumps into the thousands. If Detonation can cause a tight plug to back itself out of a motor....why can't you except that it will crack the porcelain? Coolant can hyper cool the plug and cause it to break. But the coolant wouldn't get into the cylinder without Detonation blowing the O-ring first. So airleak, or carb issue is your starting point. (NOTE: If it's a trinity build....Blame the Detonation on the domes.)

They aren't bad....(They were the best back in the Old School Days).....but they aren't as good as the V-Force 3's.

Check the Product Reviews section here. Look at the post titled "Trinity Blows" Read through the pages and you'll get the full update. It's a must read for anyone in the 2-stroke world.

I never said the HEAD was bad....only Trinity's Dome designs are an issue. You can buy domes from Trinity....but Why? If you take a couple of simple, basic, engine building measurements and call a site sponser, they can cut a custom dome for your motor to give you the exact compression and squish you need to make max HP with the best reliability you can get. Just picking a CC size doesn't guaranty you won't have issues due to the dome shape. Why get "A DOME" when for about @ $60 bucks more, you could get "THE RIGHT DOME"?

Easier to just assume it's an O-ring or head gasket and change it. A leak anywhere else would show up on the outside of the motor, but if your leaking a small amount into the motor..it will just end up going out the tailpipe as a vapor.

They are open 9am to 5pm Indiana time.....So I'll be there at 8:50.

Everyone got their bikes back together for the Big Ride? It's coming up quick. Next weekend! Looking forward to seeing a big turnout of crazy banshees.

You got all the opinion you need. V-Force 3 reeds! The Boysens were the top dog in the early years, (Back when I was still in school. LOL) But unless your running nitros.....Go with the V-Force.

V-3's

Go to the product reviews section and read the post titled "Trinity Blows" before you buy any dome from Trinity. You'll want to get some from ANYONE else other than them.

Did you try swapping carbs side to side. If problem moves, it's in the carbs...otherwise sounds like a clutch side air leak. Is your basket sealed at the shaft?

Or you could skip the cost of porting (since your on a budget) and follow the build listed in this post in the dyno section here. http://bansheehq.com/forums/index.php?showtopic=130851&st=0 We've got a bike built like this and if you follow the mods in the listed dyno runs, you will see great results for lower prices than paying for porting. Our motor however has a 4mill crank so it's a 385 instead of the 350 in the dyno example. We have ported the motor since last year and expect to see even better results this season. (He'll be at the Banshee HQ ride an the Badlands April 9th) The Vito's Super Stock pistons make the motor think it's been ported by making the motor act like it's had the exhaust raised 1.5 mm. We ran the motor with everything in the parts list except the V-force reeds and the 28mm carbs last year and it ripped. This year it was fully ported (Except the exhaust port roof was left alone because we stuck with the Vito's Super Stock pistons and the stock exhaust port shape on the top of the port is real safe for rings) Plus we're running the V-Force reeds in it now. We'll dyno that combo before switching from the stock carbs to the 28's.

well, I guess the blacked out look is really in.

NO because once again the 38's are too big. Andy's bike had the 34's. So like I was saying.....34-35's and SB Shearers.

Comparing your motors "unloaded pulls" to this post you put up of bigger Shearers and bigger carbs. It looks like your curves are stronger from 5500 to 7000, then the shearer/big carb curve kicks in and is top dog from 7000 all the way up to at least 10750. So your right that your making alot more low end power than the big pipe & carb combo. But it's for a grand total of 1500 total RPM. (5500 to 7000) It looks like the bigger carb and pipe make their power for a total of 3750 total rpm. (7000 to 10750) Wouldn't that be more than twice the useable powerband of your motor? (I'd really prefer to aslo see the torque numbers) I understand your trying to get the power in the lower rpm, and congrats, you designed it to do that and it does. But understand that many people would prefer to get the full 3750 RPM of useable powerband over the 1500 RPM useable powerband. So your carb choice might favor the RPM your shooting for, but the bigger carb and pipe would seem to favor anyone who wants "Cub like" peak power with a boatload of added lower RPM torque. Of course it's all irrelevant , because (as you insist) those two dyno curves were done on different dynos at different times with different motors....so it's not even worth the debate. But so far I'm seeing 28's or 38's tried or even stock carbs......maybe 28's are too small and 38's are too big? 34's 35's? Since the stock carb and reed combo is claimed to work so well....why not try stock carbs and stock pipes? If they made a sleeper serval cylinder, we could all ride bone stock looking bashees that make MAD HP. PS, I would never suggest the T-5's. I'd say SB shearers and 35's for my guess. But not for the RPM's your shooting for.

I'd like to add a further statement. (Let me set the tone of my comments, because I don't want this to sound like a bash fest or an argument.) I'm just as interested in the SERVAL concept as anyone. So what I'm saying is just part of an open discussion where we are all trying to find information. The statement that you can't compare one dyno to another is incorrect. You can compare ANY DynoJet inertia dyno to another. They will be within one HP of each other if they were side by side. (I'm not saying you can do this with a different brand, just Dynojet) We put a MX motorcycle on a DynoJet 188 in NY, Michigan, Chicago and Dallas. Same bike, much different days, wildly different weather and elevations. Numbers were never off by more than 3 HP. (No tuning was done, just 4 pulls per dyno) So unless your up in the high elevations, they are going to be close enough for a good comparison. An eddy current style DynoJet (When NOT using the eddy current brake) will also match other DynoJet inertia dyno's. So yes, you can compare an M+M number with Snop's... as long as they are both DynoJet brand inertia models run in the inertia mode. Also the premise that a CPI/Shearer pipe along with a bigger carb will only benefit the upper RPM HP at the sacrifice of low end power and rideablitiy has not been established in any way. It's completely possible that a bigger carb and pipe could help both ends of the RPM band. I find it strange that out of all the dyno curves for both HP and torque....the curves almost match each other. What I'm trying to highlight, is that if one pipe was vastly different than the other you might expect to see the curve of at least one of the pipes climb at a faster rate than the others at some point in the run. We only see a change in the final peak RPM areas. The fact that your not using an A/F ratio meter to monitor the A/F balance shows that you have large holes in your research. For example...what if the reason the CPI's are down on power vs. the others...is because the motor is lacking airflow or fuel. Your curves are so similar that it begs to ask, what is the common limiting factor that is causing this to occur? Carb size? Snop, you said it yourself when you said ....... "Shane had me got on, I rode for 5 minutes and told him to change the pilo. He did that and it got even faster off the bottom and rips." Why would you need to change your jetting if you ran the bike in "Real world load conditions" on an Eddy Current Dyno? You just clearly proved that the jetting was off for that combo. Also you attempted to explain that if the CPI's wanted more fuel and weren't getting if from the 28's, then they would be lean and make even more power. That dosen't make sense to me. LEAN doesn't mean more power. Leaner than rich does. But too lean equals loss of power. Your changing of the pilot and seeing more power shows that you were too lean for the PC's doesn't it? So why wouldn't that make the CPI's fall on their face? The ONLY WAY to do a proper test of parts on a dyno, is to use an A/F sensor to monitor the mixture. You set a goal ratio...let's say 14.7 to 1 Air fuel ratio. (widely thought to be the ideal ratio for max power) then you jet each combo till the A/F readings match! Now you have tested each part to the same tune. NOTE: For sand we set our motors closer to 13.0 to 1 because sand will put a heavy load on a motor and cause heat to become a big factor in the jetting. This is the same as some dyno guys saying...."Find your max HP, then go up 2 jet sizes and you'll be safe." Again, I don't claim to have all the answers, nor do I consider myself to be as experienced as many members here. I'm just offering a perspective and openly asking for others to share there opinions so that I, as well as others, might learn a little more or fill in holes in our understanding of things. After all, you all were kind enough to post some research you did, and we're just trying to see how it fits in with our understanding of things.

Relax. For starters you showing everyone oranges when they are use to seeing apples. Second, your doing what you have a history of doing... putting 28's on litteraly every motor I've ever seen you comment on. You tell people to pull thier 2 into 1 intakes and get 28's for their 350's now you think 28's are best for a 421? I'm not saying jump to a 35PWK...but why not try a 30 or a 33 or 34? All you have shown is when a motor only has 28's to breath through , it likes the Pro circits. (another thing you have a rep for is thinking the PC pipes are best on everything) If M+M and everyone selling these motors claims they make 80HP and 50 ft lb of torque stock....why don't you post dyno runs WITHOUT the eddy current readings so people can compare apples to apples. Your doing 2 things MOST people who are waiting to see independent dyno resluts would never do.....your starting with 28's and PC's. I understand the point of your build goals. But by posting them with the eddy current runs, your only making your info look like it is in another language. How in the world are the same pipes and carbs that work best an a 4mill ported stock sylinder with @ 385 cc's, the best chioce for a 421cc motor. Shit the whole world says to the 421 cub owners to ditch the 35's and get 39's. Is there ever going to be a build that you would run a 35 carb on? Ditch the SB CPI's and try a set of SB Shearers. They made 14 more HP on my motor and all the same low end power of my CPI's. Show us some different carb choices next, because 28's aren't the "Do all, Be all" carb. If 2 - 28's can feed a 421 ...why can't a single 35 feed a mostly stock 350? I know it sounds like a rant...but I understand the dyno issues (We have a DynoJet 188) and even I find the results to be a little misleading. What are your A/F readings? A pipe can look good vs. another pipe if the A/F readings are lean. The smaller pipe might favor the lean condition. Dynojet dyno's AREN'T different from one to the next. (using the eddy current brake will show different results from a non eddy current run) but in the inertia mode it will read the same as mine. (That's why the DynoJet is the industry standard) I was expecting to see improved results from the previous posted advertized results. All you have shown is that your motor (which thanks to your eddy current run style looks low anyway) seems to like the PC's. Nowhere is there anything that says the carbs are even close to the right size. (You didn't try a bigger carb?) The eddy current mode is used for diaing in your jetting at different RPM stages. Final dyno numbers are more often done without the eddy current in use. (80% of chassis dyno's don't have the eddy current feature) So why not just list runs that compare with others, so we can compare results. (Yes I know runs made in one area of the country under different weather conditions will very the results) But they will be ALOT closer than the eddy current results and cause less confusion.