trickedcarbine Posted June 17, 2014 Report Share Posted June 17, 2014 (edited) Nobody bringing up the bogus machine work on the withrow? Fact, it needed additional work before it even went in. And still probably isn't quite what it should be. Couple that with the fact that there is zero machining done to get oil moving through the basket. Heat, and tolerance issues anybody.... I'm for the weight in that kind of riding. But setting up a bike to ride that stuff, I use a sling shot so that's enough weight. It's not a ton, but it is enough to use inertia to your advantage. Plus you can ditch heavy springs and keep the ol left dick beater fresh for more laps. < that translates to faster lap times to. I'm not against steel baskets entirely, but most of what is available is crudely machined or lacking in simple features. Making them obsolete. Plus the steel will glaze and or shatter clutches in engine braking. < GNCC guys engine brake all the time. It was a nice thought, but it's not quite a totally sorted out concept. Hot ticket for you if you seriously want steel to keep from grooving, that Barnett with inserts. Edited June 17, 2014 by trickedcarbine 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
locogato11283 Posted June 17, 2014 Report Share Posted June 17, 2014 Where's the picture of this pile? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TIM LUTZ Posted June 17, 2014 Author Report Share Posted June 17, 2014 (edited) Its added weight regardless of the ratio. It wont affect overall rpm.. it affects the rate of acceleration. If you noticed increased crank inertia and tractability... the rate of acceleration is 100% affected. you can't have your cake and eat it too. Its physics. Dont get me wrong. I understand what your point is and if your happy with it thats great. I just dont agree with trying to say that this is pure gains with no side affects. Any time rotational mass is added it takes torque away. This has been proven on the dyno for years and is fact based on laws of physics. Also, if your theory of "2.86 times easier to turn" is true.. then its also 2.86 times less affective at increasing crank inertia and tractability. So why even bother with the added wear and tear on the primary transhaft and bearing? Exactly, 2.86 times less effective at increasing crank inertia. That is why it has little effect on revving. It is fact that the extra weight is going to store inertia and in this case this inertia effects the transmission more than the crank. That is the beauty of it. Edited June 17, 2014 by TIM LUTZ Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
sheerider11 Posted June 17, 2014 Report Share Posted June 17, 2014 So does anyone have info on bushings for these things? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
shanYE west Posted June 17, 2014 Report Share Posted June 17, 2014 Its added weight regardless of the ratio. It wont affect overall rpm.. it affects the rate of acceleration. If you noticed increased crank inertia and tractability... the rate of acceleration is 100% affected. you can't have your cake and eat it too. Its physics. Dont get me wrong. I understand what your point is and if your happy with it thats great. I just dont agree with trying to say that this is pure gains with no side affects. Any time rotational mass is added it takes torque away. This has been proven on the dyno for years and is fact based on laws of physics. Also, if your theory of "2.86 times easier to turn" is true.. then its also 2.86 times less affective at increasing crank inertia and tractability. So why even bother with the added wear and tear on the primary transhaft and bearing? Exactly, 2.86 times less effective at increasing crank inertia. That is why it has little effect on revving. It is fact that the extra weight is going to store inertia and in this case this inertia effects the transmission more than the crank. That is the beauty of it. I disagree since the crank is directly driving the basket via gears. You can't slow down one without slowing down the other and vice versa. keep in mind that the basket is spinning slower then the crank. since its spinning slower it will store less energy. In short.. just for numbers sake.. if you add 1oz of flywheel weight.. its the same as adding 2lb on the basket.. they BOTH will affect the transmission and the crank.. the only difference is since the basket is spinning slower.. the increments in change affect it less. It has little effect on the "revving" or rate of acceleration because its not that big of a change even though the basket has 2-3 times more rotational mass. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TIM LUTZ Posted June 17, 2014 Author Report Share Posted June 17, 2014 Nobody bringing up the bogus machine work on the withrow? Fact, it needed additional work before it even went in. Yes it did. And still probably isn't quite what it should be. Couple that with the fact that there is zero machining done to get oil moving through the basket. Just like the Mattoon. My 2 cent on this is do we need additional oil holes. About 40% of the basket is already open to oil. Heat, and tolerance issues anybody.... I'm for the weight in that kind of riding. But setting up a bike to ride that stuff, I use a sling shot so that's enough weight. It's not a ton, but it is enough to use inertia to your advantage. Did you notice any change in power delivery with the added rotating weight? Plus you can ditch heavy springs and keep the ol left dick beater fresh for more laps. < that translates to faster lap times to. I'm not against steel baskets entirely, but most of what is available is crudely machined or lacking in simple features. Making them obsolete. Plus the steel will glaze and or shatter clutches in engine braking. < GNCC guys engine brake all the time. It was a nice thought, but it's not quite a totally sorted out concept. Hot ticket for you if you seriously want steel to keep from grooving, that Barnett with inserts. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TIM LUTZ Posted June 17, 2014 Author Report Share Posted June 17, 2014 Oh another question, how can it work with 7 or 8 plate clutch without machine work to the other parts? It can't . But Mattoon doesn't tell you that either. This is basically a Mattoon made out of steel. and the finger cuts do have a radius. http://www.ebay.com/itm/yamaha-banshee-clutch-basket-8-plate-BILLET-STEEL-BASKET-/150995427948?pt=Motors_ATV_Parts_Accessories&hash=item232807626c&vxp=mtr Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TIM LUTZ Posted June 17, 2014 Author Report Share Posted June 17, 2014 I disagree since the crank is directly driving the basket via gears. You can't slow down one without slowing down the other and vice versa. Correct. keep in mind that the basket is spinning slower then the crank. since its spinning slower it will store less energy. But it has more weight and weight is the other factor energy. In short.. just for numbers sake.. if you add 1oz of flywheel weight.. its the same as adding 1lb on the basket.. No. there is a mechanical advantage of the different size gears to factor in. they BOTH will affect the transmission and the crank. At different rates Via the primary gear ratio.. the only difference is since the basket is spinning slower..But it has more mass the increments in change affect it less.. We can't leave out mass when thinking of the final effect. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
shanYE west Posted June 17, 2014 Report Share Posted June 17, 2014 I disagree since the crank is directly driving the basket via gears. You can't slow down one without slowing down the other and vice versa. Correct. keep in mind that the basket is spinning slower then the crank. since its spinning slower it will store less energy. But it has more weight and weight is the other factor energy. In short.. just for numbers sake.. if you add 1oz of flywheel weight.. its the same as adding 1lb on the basket.. No. there is a mechanical advantage of the different size gears to factor in. they BOTH will affect the transmission and the crank. At different rates Via the primary gear ratio.. the only difference is since the basket is spinning slower..But it has more mass the increments in change affect it less.. We can't leave out mass when thinking of the final effect. I think at this point your only wanting to hear what you want to hear. You can spin a little bit of weight faster or spin a lot of weight slower.. either way. .your getting the same effect at the end. your trying to sell this as there is no trade offs to adding weight to the basket.. which simply isn't true. its exactly the same as adding weight to the fly wheel. only difference is you have to add a lot more weight on the basket to get the same effect. plain and simple. I agree adding weight has its place but it also has a cost. I'm done now. 2 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TIM LUTZ Posted June 17, 2014 Author Report Share Posted June 17, 2014 (edited) Dude can ride. I got 45 minutes in. Lol at thirty he yells wooooooooo hey girl He's 3rd in points GNCC XC1 Pro. Fun to watch him ride and you're always wondering when he's gona be coming up on you.. Edited June 17, 2014 by TIM LUTZ Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TIM LUTZ Posted June 17, 2014 Author Report Share Posted June 17, 2014 (edited) I think at this point your only wanting to hear what you want to hear. You can spin a little bit of weight faster or spin a lot of weight slower.. either way. .your getting the same effect at the end. your trying to sell this as there is no trade offs to adding weight to the basket.. which simply isn't true. its exactly the same as adding weight to the fly wheel. only difference is you have to add a lot more weight on the basket to get the same effect. plain and simple. I agree adding weight has its place but it also has a cost. I'm done now. I'm with you. The advantages out weight the dis advantaged FOR ME. I don't need break neck acceleration. I have that now and the only thing it will get you is a bent tie rod. I need smooth, controlled predictable power to the ground. THIS IS THE REASON 4 STROKES ARE REPLACING 2 STROKES IN EVERYTHING. Well, maybe except hot saw. Edited June 17, 2014 by TIM LUTZ Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
WINDYCITYJOHN400 Posted June 17, 2014 Report Share Posted June 17, 2014 Obsolete technology? ........but running 3rd in Pro class? Evinrude outboard Large ocean freighter diesels My Banshees 2-Strokes FTMFW 4 LIFE! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TIM LUTZ Posted June 17, 2014 Author Report Share Posted June 17, 2014 (edited) Obsolete technology? ........but running 3rd in Pro class? Adam rides a TRX450R in GNCC Evinrude outboard Large ocean freighter diesels My Banshees 2-Strokes FTMFW 4 LIFE! Edited June 17, 2014 by TIM LUTZ Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
WINDYCITYJOHN400 Posted June 17, 2014 Report Share Posted June 17, 2014 I need smooth, controlled predictable power to the ground. THIS IS THE REASON 4 STROKES ARE REPLACING 2 STROKES IN EVERYTHING. Then maybe you should just buy a YFZ450R. It even comes with a slipper clutch so you won't ruin it with engine braking. I got mine to make 44HP with a stock pipe, programmer and a full tune. (Stock is 39) Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TIM LUTZ Posted June 17, 2014 Author Report Share Posted June 17, 2014 Ummmm what about snowmobiles? Unfortunately probably next in line. Was sad to see personal water craft go 4 stroke. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.