engine casting repair
07-29-2010, 03:11 PM
#31
Banned
MotoGP
Join Date: Aug 2007
Location: Lake View Terrace, CA
Posts: 5,942
07-29-2010, 03:29 PM
#33
Banned
MotoGP
Join Date: Aug 2007
Location: Lake View Terrace, CA
Posts: 5,942
Carb icing.... really uumm that is not what they are there for. By using a bit of logic you can see that if the purpose was carb icing, why then wouldn't you run the lines to the throat of the carb where the ice would form? Also why would you shut off the flow when the thermostat opens??
The purpose of the lines is to warm the fuel so it atomizes easier. Once the engine warms up, there is enough radiant heat between the cylinders to keep the fuel warm enough to atomize properly.
The only thing you do by removing the lines is degrade the performance of the bike.
But if you want to believe they are there for carb icing, then go right ahead.
If you really want to discuss this, then start another thread as this is just hijacking the current thread.
The purpose of the lines is to warm the fuel so it atomizes easier. Once the engine warms up, there is enough radiant heat between the cylinders to keep the fuel warm enough to atomize properly.
The only thing you do by removing the lines is degrade the performance of the bike.
But if you want to believe they are there for carb icing, then go right ahead.
If you really want to discuss this, then start another thread as this is just hijacking the current thread.
07-29-2010, 04:02 PM
#34
Senior Member
Superstock
Superstock
Join Date: Apr 2007
Posts: 293
Nah, I'd just steer him towards this other discussion of it in the past where there were plenty of people who fail to hold the same opinion as you.
https://www.superhawkforum.com/forum...+coolant+hoses
To also be perfectly transparent, I have never had them connected, it was the original owner who removed the system, but, I can attest that it certainly starts and runs fine without them. I cannot comment on the difference between both setups. The carb icing thing was more of a sarcastic remark, but then, I can't seem to find the sarcasm emoticon, so I'll supply the winky instead
It's there for emissions, plain and simple. I suppose improving cold start emmisions [I]COULD[I] improve runablilty, but I suspect Honda's motive was more about needing to run on the choke for less time, hence less emissions. I try not to make a habit of hammering on any bike I own until it's warm enough not to need choke (on the hawk, here in mild Seattle, even in the winter, that's less than a mile)
As far as jacking up the thread, it's a progressive discussion, 100% totally related to what the original poster is dealing with. He has a non-running bike, due to a self admitted f-up. He's looking at creative solutions, such as an electric water pump, so my "ditch the coolant lines" comment, was related to the fact that he was talking about said coolant lines.
Chill out man, it's all good
-R
https://www.superhawkforum.com/forum...+coolant+hoses
To also be perfectly transparent, I have never had them connected, it was the original owner who removed the system, but, I can attest that it certainly starts and runs fine without them. I cannot comment on the difference between both setups. The carb icing thing was more of a sarcastic remark, but then, I can't seem to find the sarcasm emoticon, so I'll supply the winky instead
It's there for emissions, plain and simple. I suppose improving cold start emmisions [I]COULD[I] improve runablilty, but I suspect Honda's motive was more about needing to run on the choke for less time, hence less emissions. I try not to make a habit of hammering on any bike I own until it's warm enough not to need choke (on the hawk, here in mild Seattle, even in the winter, that's less than a mile)
As far as jacking up the thread, it's a progressive discussion, 100% totally related to what the original poster is dealing with. He has a non-running bike, due to a self admitted f-up. He's looking at creative solutions, such as an electric water pump, so my "ditch the coolant lines" comment, was related to the fact that he was talking about said coolant lines.
Chill out man, it's all good
-R
07-29-2010, 04:29 PM
#35
Banned
MotoGP
Join Date: Aug 2007
Location: Lake View Terrace, CA
Posts: 5,942
Nah, I'd just steer him towards this other discussion of it in the past where there were plenty of people who fail to hold the same opinion as you.
https://www.superhawkforum.com/forum...+coolant+hoses
https://www.superhawkforum.com/forum...+coolant+hoses
To also be perfectly transparent, I have never had them connected, it was the original owner who removed the system, but, I can attest that it certainly starts and runs fine without them. I cannot comment on the difference between both setups. The carb icing thing was more of a sarcastic remark, but then, I can't seem to find the sarcasm emoticon, so I'll supply the winky instead
It's there for emissions, plain and simple. I suppose improving cold start emmisions [i]COULD[i] improve runablilty, but I suspect Honda's motive was more about needing to run on the choke for less time, hence less emissions. I try not to make a habit of hammering on any bike I own until it's warm enough not to need choke (on the hawk, here in mild Seattle, even in the winter, that's less than a mile)
As far as jacking up the thread, it's a progressive discussion, 100% totally related to what the original poster is dealing with. He has a non-running bike, due to a self admitted f-up. He's looking at creative solutions, such as an electric water pump, so my "ditch the coolant lines" comment, was related to the fact that he was talking about said coolant lines.
Chill out man, it's all good
-R
Chill out man, it's all good
-R
07-29-2010, 05:34 PM
#36
Senior Member
SuperSport
Thread Starter
Join Date: Sep 2008
Location: Delmar NY
Posts: 805
I appreciate the carb heat debate - I'll take it under advisement
I've ordered the the Davies EBP. The drawing shows its about the size of an oil filter. I pulled the airbox and it looks like the pump may fit where the pair valve used to be, just to the right of the carbs.
I have studied the coolant flow path diagram - page 6-0 of the shop manual (I'd attach it here but the PDF in the knowledge base is password protected - I can't just print to PDF that page) I've come to the conclusion that the safest place to cut into the loop is between the outlet of the right radiator and the main inlet of the mechanical pump housing. I will need to cap off the bypass inlet and the carb heat inlet on the mech pump housing and route these to the inlet of the EBP - probably a couple Y fittings will accomplish that.
I won't have much new to put on here until the pump shows up. Interestingly I ordered it directly from Davies. Almost $25 in shipping but still cheaper by a bunch from anywhere in the states.
While I'm waiting for the pump to show I need to put the driven gear and the advancer on. As I split that gear and the springs came loose (what started all this) it looks like I need to pull the clutch to slip that sprung gear back on. I also need to pull that driven gear out so I can remove the water pump chain.
Is that correct? Any suprises pulling the clutch that the manual doesn't show? Once its off will the driven gear slip off for chain removal and then go back on? Will those 3 springs slip right back on easily with that second gear?
Finally does the impeller separate from the shaft? if it does I'll remove it but the shaft needs to stay to keep the seal.
Thanks for any input
I've ordered the the Davies EBP. The drawing shows its about the size of an oil filter. I pulled the airbox and it looks like the pump may fit where the pair valve used to be, just to the right of the carbs.
I have studied the coolant flow path diagram - page 6-0 of the shop manual (I'd attach it here but the PDF in the knowledge base is password protected - I can't just print to PDF that page) I've come to the conclusion that the safest place to cut into the loop is between the outlet of the right radiator and the main inlet of the mechanical pump housing. I will need to cap off the bypass inlet and the carb heat inlet on the mech pump housing and route these to the inlet of the EBP - probably a couple Y fittings will accomplish that.
I won't have much new to put on here until the pump shows up. Interestingly I ordered it directly from Davies. Almost $25 in shipping but still cheaper by a bunch from anywhere in the states.
While I'm waiting for the pump to show I need to put the driven gear and the advancer on. As I split that gear and the springs came loose (what started all this) it looks like I need to pull the clutch to slip that sprung gear back on. I also need to pull that driven gear out so I can remove the water pump chain.
Is that correct? Any suprises pulling the clutch that the manual doesn't show? Once its off will the driven gear slip off for chain removal and then go back on? Will those 3 springs slip right back on easily with that second gear?
Finally does the impeller separate from the shaft? if it does I'll remove it but the shaft needs to stay to keep the seal.
Thanks for any input
07-29-2010, 05:40 PM
#37
Senior Member
Superstock
Superstock
Join Date: Apr 2007
Posts: 293
Again, not having had them connected, I can't speak to the difference. I know that it matters little enough to me that I'll probably forgo hooking them back up, as I know he didn't leave the rest of the hoses there when he bypassed it. As far as runability, this was at the tail end of carb'd bikes, with emissions being a primary concern. Having worked on Honda cars for years, I know that honda puts emissions first and then works on drivability after they achieve the emissions need. The two overlap and affect each other, and I don't argue that you may be able to feel a difference.
I guess we can agree to disagree on their reasons for doing it, but the fact remains, it does nothing for the bike at normal operating temperature, but does present another opportunity for coolant leaks and (again IMO) un-needed complexity underneath the tank, especially in light of OP's electric water pump idea.
So, not having it, I'll freely admit that I don't know how much better that it would run but I do know that it runs well without it.
And yes, I agree with you now, and at the time that you posted it, that the cams are likely somewhat different, and that the earlier bikes perform better (but what would you expect? I ride a '98 )
Cheers,
-R
I guess we can agree to disagree on their reasons for doing it, but the fact remains, it does nothing for the bike at normal operating temperature, but does present another opportunity for coolant leaks and (again IMO) un-needed complexity underneath the tank, especially in light of OP's electric water pump idea.
So, not having it, I'll freely admit that I don't know how much better that it would run but I do know that it runs well without it.
And yes, I agree with you now, and at the time that you posted it, that the cams are likely somewhat different, and that the earlier bikes perform better (but what would you expect? I ride a '98
)Cheers,
-R
07-29-2010, 06:06 PM
#38
Banned
MotoGP
Join Date: Aug 2007
Location: Lake View Terrace, CA
Posts: 5,942
Well you are free to believe whatever you would like. I know what the difference was on my bike. The only one I know that has done back to back dyno comparisons was Greg N. and his runs showed the bike made more power with them hooked up.
07-29-2010, 07:08 PM
#39
Senior Member
SuperBike
Join Date: Mar 2007
Location: Belgium, WI
Posts: 1,611
Not to thread jack this, but the chain and driven gear would be just fine to remove. I would suggest that if you would like to remove the impeller, that you pull the shaft out as well and tap with a pipe thread and plug the shaft hole. I guess that is what I would do.
As for the carb heater lines, if they do not function at full temp, the dyno testing needs to be done with the bike at full temp. This means that it should be verified that there is a consistent temp across the radiators, and that the temp is 180 or more. This as well for the non carb heat set up. I imagine that if this was done, and there was no residual extra temperature in the carbs of the functioning heater, that the HP would be the same. this is merely a hypothesisisisisis that will be defeated by someone who believes otherwise. But, if it is non functioning at full temp then it will not affect the running or performance past the time that the residual temperature has left the carbs.
As for the carb heater lines, if they do not function at full temp, the dyno testing needs to be done with the bike at full temp. This means that it should be verified that there is a consistent temp across the radiators, and that the temp is 180 or more. This as well for the non carb heat set up. I imagine that if this was done, and there was no residual extra temperature in the carbs of the functioning heater, that the HP would be the same. this is merely a hypothesisisisisis that will be defeated by someone who believes otherwise. But, if it is non functioning at full temp then it will not affect the running or performance past the time that the residual temperature has left the carbs.
07-29-2010, 08:06 PM
#40
Banned
MotoGP
Join Date: Aug 2007
Location: Lake View Terrace, CA
Posts: 5,942
As for the carb heater lines, if they do not function at full temp, the dyno testing needs to be done with the bike at full temp. This means that it should be verified that there is a consistent temp across the radiators, and that the temp is 180 or more. This as well for the non carb heat set up. I imagine that if this was done, and there was no residual extra temperature in the carbs of the functioning heater, that the HP would be the same. this is merely a hypothesisisisisis that will be defeated by someone who believes otherwise. But, if it is non functioning at full temp then it will not affect the running or performance past the time that the residual temperature has left the carbs.
The only thing I can say is I have run the bike with both set ups and in my experience the throttle response is smoother with the lines hooked up.
07-29-2010, 08:13 PM
#41
Senior Member
Superstock
Superstock
Join Date: Apr 2007
Posts: 293
Who dyno tests at anything other than operating temp? That seems ridiculous to me. Anyway, just had beers with my buddy, who, before I dragged him into the auto business 11 years ago, was a factory trained Honda/Kawi tech, right at about the time the SH was new. He said the carb heat is because the powers that be in the UK and Europe demanded it (he thought by law), and Honda didn't want to have various differences in manufacturing (which equals more $ spent). I fail to see how you could make an argument for more power once the bike is up to operating temperature, as it supposedly cuts off coolant flow to the carbs. In any case, I would bet that it takes a bit before that coolant cools enough to have no effect on the carb temp once it is heated, which would mean that it raises the carb temp and therefore the intake temp, which equals less power. In any case, I imagine it's hairs that we're splitting right now, which could well be within the manufacturing tolerances between various bikes. I'll state again, that at operating temperatures I don't think it gives you any advantage, and may well be a detriment.
But then again, I've had a few and am feeling frisky!
In any case, I am curious to see how the electric water pump turns out.
Cheers,
-R
But then again, I've had a few and am feeling frisky!
In any case, I am curious to see how the electric water pump turns out.
Cheers,
-R
07-29-2010, 08:14 PM
#42
Senior Member
SuperBike
Join Date: Mar 2007
Location: Belgium, WI
Posts: 1,611
I believe you, but I imagine that your beta testing of this wasn't a long term event. If you were to let your bike idle to full temp, I think your view of this would be different. As for me, I am leaving them as is because I can't imagine that heating your fuel would hurt mpg (something that I am in search of always).
07-29-2010, 08:39 PM
#43
Banned
MotoGP
Join Date: Aug 2007
Location: Lake View Terrace, CA
Posts: 5,942
Anyway, just had beers with my buddy, who, before I dragged him into the auto business 11 years ago, was a factory trained Honda/Kawi tech, right at about the time the SH was new. He said the carb heat is because the powers that be in the UK and Europe demanded it (he thought by law), and Honda didn't want to have various differences in manufacturing (which equals more $ spent).
I fail to see how you could make an argument for more power once the bike is up to operating temperature, as it supposedly cuts off coolant flow to the carbs. In any case, I would bet that it takes a bit before that coolant cools enough to have no effect on the carb temp once it is heated, which would mean that it raises the carb temp and therefore the intake temp, which equals less power.
In any case, I imagine it's hairs that we're splitting right now, which could well be within the manufacturing tolerances between various bikes. I'll state again, that at operating temperatures I don't think it gives you any advantage, and may well be a detriment.
But then again, I've had a few and am feeling frisky!
But then again, I've had a few and am feeling frisky!
07-29-2010, 08:42 PM
#44
Banned
MotoGP
Join Date: Aug 2007
Location: Lake View Terrace, CA
Posts: 5,942
I believe you, but I imagine that your beta testing of this wasn't a long term event. If you were to let your bike idle to full temp, I think your view of this would be different. As for me, I am leaving them as is because I can't imagine that heating your fuel would hurt mpg (something that I am in search of always).
07-29-2010, 09:08 PM
#45
Senior Member
SuperBike
Join Date: Mar 2007
Location: Belgium, WI
Posts: 1,611
I was referring to you, but I guess I was *** u me-ing that you were taking conclusions after startup and not doing a side by side comparison between two equally heated bikes that have been running long enough that there carbs are the same temp.
07-30-2010, 10:40 AM
#46
Senior Member
Superstock
Superstock
Join Date: Apr 2007
Posts: 293
One thing I am not ASSUMING or THINKING is that my bike runs well. That is fact. Could it run better if I hooked it up? Maybe I'll never know, but it certainly isn't lacking now. You have your opinions, I have mine. There is no assumption in that it simplifies the space under the tank/airbox and eliminates a number of leak points, which is why I suggested it to the OP. Honda (and all OEMs) jetted bikes lean from the factory to make the EPA happy. That is fact as well. This works well with overly restrictive exhaust, also an EPA mandate for both emissions and sound. Consequently drivability usually suffers. I assert that this is what this system is designed to combat. I've ridden plenty of stock bikes (other than the VTR) that have HORRIBLE fueling until completely warm, and even then are a total compromise to keep the EPA happy. The problem is, nobody keeps their bike that way (very few, at least). Once you go messing around with jetting and exhaust, either slip-ons, or worse yet, full exhaust, like mine is running, all bets are off; you have deviated heavily from honda's design intent. Did the teams that raced this bike in it's infancy leave it hooked up? I'd be curious to find out.
Most carbs are cast aluminum or magnesium depending on the brand. As such they all conduct heat easily, so it really doesn't matter where you put the heat source, you are going to heat the entire carb in doing so, including the throat, and therefore the venturi. I argue that it takes much less than a [I]couple hours[I] of riding to get the carbs up to temp, and once everything is heatsoaked, its going to stay that way, so no, the carbs don't magically cool off once you stop preheat them. But they also don't need the residual coolant in the lines that is no longer in circuit.
Your initial assertion was that I was "totally wrong" and I would argue that you haven't proven that. It's not like I suggested he cut open the airbox top or some other mod that has been proven NOT to work on the SH. You haven't addressed my points that it cleans up all the hoses running under the tank/airbox or the fact that you eliminate multiple coolant leak points. So by virtue of the fact that my and other's bikes run very well without it (you yourself never said that it ran poorly without it) I'd say the case for "necessary" hasn't really been made. The bike runs great without it. I am curious enough now that I may well plumb it in, and am also grown up enough to report any major differences I find. I'm also not eager to be pulling the airbox any time soon though, so it may be a while before I get around to it.
It's obvious that we aren't likely to change each other's minds and I'm ok with that, as this was, again, originally intended to help the O.P. come up with a creative solution to the lack of a water pump.
Cheers,
R
Most carbs are cast aluminum or magnesium depending on the brand. As such they all conduct heat easily, so it really doesn't matter where you put the heat source, you are going to heat the entire carb in doing so, including the throat, and therefore the venturi. I argue that it takes much less than a [I]couple hours[I] of riding to get the carbs up to temp, and once everything is heatsoaked, its going to stay that way, so no, the carbs don't magically cool off once you stop preheat them. But they also don't need the residual coolant in the lines that is no longer in circuit.
Your initial assertion was that I was "totally wrong" and I would argue that you haven't proven that. It's not like I suggested he cut open the airbox top or some other mod that has been proven NOT to work on the SH. You haven't addressed my points that it cleans up all the hoses running under the tank/airbox or the fact that you eliminate multiple coolant leak points. So by virtue of the fact that my and other's bikes run very well without it (you yourself never said that it ran poorly without it) I'd say the case for "necessary" hasn't really been made. The bike runs great without it. I am curious enough now that I may well plumb it in, and am also grown up enough to report any major differences I find. I'm also not eager to be pulling the airbox any time soon though, so it may be a while before I get around to it.
It's obvious that we aren't likely to change each other's minds and I'm ok with that, as this was, again, originally intended to help the O.P. come up with a creative solution to the lack of a water pump.
Cheers,
R
07-30-2010, 08:25 PM
#47
Banned
MotoGP
Join Date: Aug 2007
Location: Lake View Terrace, CA
Posts: 5,942
Well you can think whatever you like. What is funny is your are arguing about something that you have absolutely no first hand knowledge of. By your own admission, the bike you have came with them removed, so how do you know how it would run if they were installed?
I said your advice was wrong for a number of reasons. First, I spent a good 6 months running the bike in both configurations. I spent the time to make sure my impressions were not a fluke. Then again maybe I'm just making things up as I have nothing better to do..... Second, I stated that some dyno runs were done that show more power with them hooked up. As you have a hard time figuring out how that could be done, it is rather easy. Run the bike without the coolant lines, take a reading. Shut it down, hook them up, bring the bike back up to temp and take another reading.....simple.
You go on about possible coolant leaks, well there is the possibility of leaks all over the place if you want to think that way. I will say that in 13 yrs and 80k miles I have never had a leak anywhere.
So do whatever you want, I will say to anyone here that if you are running with the lines removed, hook them back up for one day, you just might be surprised with the outcome.
I could go through your whole post one again and address each of your points but I just really don't care anymore at this point. I've done the leg work. I have done the testing. I know how it runs with and without them. Hell you could go out and set them either way on my bike and within a couple miles I could tell you if they were hooked up or not without looking.
Have a nice day......
I said your advice was wrong for a number of reasons. First, I spent a good 6 months running the bike in both configurations. I spent the time to make sure my impressions were not a fluke. Then again maybe I'm just making things up as I have nothing better to do..... Second, I stated that some dyno runs were done that show more power with them hooked up. As you have a hard time figuring out how that could be done, it is rather easy. Run the bike without the coolant lines, take a reading. Shut it down, hook them up, bring the bike back up to temp and take another reading.....simple.
You go on about possible coolant leaks, well there is the possibility of leaks all over the place if you want to think that way. I will say that in 13 yrs and 80k miles I have never had a leak anywhere.
So do whatever you want, I will say to anyone here that if you are running with the lines removed, hook them back up for one day, you just might be surprised with the outcome.
I could go through your whole post one again and address each of your points but I just really don't care anymore at this point. I've done the leg work. I have done the testing. I know how it runs with and without them. Hell you could go out and set them either way on my bike and within a couple miles I could tell you if they were hooked up or not without looking.
Have a nice day......
Thread
Thread Starter
Forum
Replies
Last Post
mootsmadness
Technical Discussion
11
09-11-2011 10:51 AM
REDVTR1000
General Discussion
8
04-25-2008 12:14 PM
