chain drive for the R1100S for the hp nuts?

RC51DRAG · 04-19-2002, 11:21 AM

I know that the new Moto Guzzi V11 has a chain conversion worth 10 hp at the wheel plus the weight savings over the shaft drive. Is there anything like that for the S and has anyone done it to full effect. I know the inherent qualities attributed to the shaft drive over chain or belt drive systems but admittedly there are weaknesses as well. Any thoughts?

roger albert · 04-19-2002, 11:38 AM

Interesting.

10 HP sounds a little optimistic, given the loss in the gearbox to convert rotation from one axis to another. If fact, even w/o the conversion, it sounds optimistic. The drivetrain shouldn't sap more than 10% anyway (maybe another 2-5 in the trans) so on a 80-90HP bike a 10HP/~12% improvement (remember, the chain's loss isn't zero, and there's the gearbox for the front sprocket too) differential sounds way too good to be true. I wouldn't buy more than half that. Still, that's better than most chip or pipe mods, and its across most of the rev range, so it's a true win-win solution.

I suppose it would also require an all new rear hub and swingarm. Keeping any of the old would negate most any weight advantage. Also, I'd have to sketch it out well to tell, but I doubt one could readily locate the swingarm pivot and countershaft sprocket ideally in relationship to one another, on such a retrofit. I'd predict bad squat/torque reactions.

Still, it would be fun. Tinkering always is.

roger

Romain · 12:32 PM

hmmm,

this looks to me like a new swingarm (the easiest part), obviously w/o paralever, as no more needed, new gear box with 90° outlet and a heavily modified frame. this sounds like a lot of development work and $. What I have seen up to now on Boxers being raced in open class races (where all modifs are allowed), nobody tried to swap the shaft-drive, so I guess it envolves too much work for too little benefit. Even the GS race bikes for Paris-Dakar keep the original setup. ok, that may also be for marketing reasons. we will have to wait for the new S with belt drive

on the power savings side, like Roger says, you will not see a lot of ponnies, as the shaft drive is quite efficient in power transmission. you loose way more ponnies on slip on the rear tire, than on the way from the engine to the rear wheel. the belt drive on the Scarver rides great in that context, no feedback from behind when downshifting fast - lesser risk of rear-end slides, one weak point of the shaft-drive.

bye

Eron Flory · 04-19-2002, 06:44 PM

I agree with everything that roger said and would like to add the in my opinion the biggest advantage to the conversion would be reduce unsprung weight. You would probably see an equal or greater advantage in unsprung weight (at both ends of the bike) from going to lighter wheels as well as increased acceleration due to the reduced rotating mass for a lot less money.

Eron

RC51DRAG · 04-20-2002, 12:33 PM

Thanks for the info. Have an of you run the shorter arm and is it really worth the conversion.

Eron Flory · 04-22-2002, 03:38 PM

I have the shorter GS paralever arm. I installed it mostly to gain some ground clearance and secondarily to quicken the steering. It does both, not as well as some other mods., but you can't beat the results per $.

Eron

1967 R50/2 · 04-22-2002, 04:26 PM

The question is...why go with a CHAIN at all. If you are looking to gain efficiencies, belts are definately more efficient than a chain.

...finding one to cope with the HP could be interesting.

...And while your at it why not gain MORE efficiencies and go with a CVT transmission. In addition to a significant gain in fuel economy you also get NO FOOT SHIFTER!!! .:

But wait there's more!...no LESS...NO CLUTCH either! Then you go with a full integral brake system and eliminate the brake pedal. So now your right and left foot and your left hand are doing nothing, your right hand controls the brakes and the throttle. MMmmmmm...relaxing and efficient!!!

If you put in a Signalminder you can get rid of the signal cancel switch. Likewise if you switch to F650 controls you can get rid of one of the directional signals and the "kill" toggle.

OK I really digressed here. Hope no one takes it the wrong way. I do seriously think we'll be seeing some of those things on bikes in the near future. Honda already has CVT transmissions on ATVs so it would seem a natural. Given the current European love of supercharged diesels and the Japanese facination of Hybrid electrics...I think we may also see those on bikes in the not too distant tomorrow. We can only benefit.

If anyone does discover a paralever chain drive....let me know. That would be the ultimate one off.

trublue · 04-23-2002, 04:41 AM

I agree with all the points you guys raise .

Is not the biggest issue how you convert the drive , given the current configeration . An inline 2,3or4 THAT can be either shaft or chain drive , sure there usually IS minimum 10 hp difference .

Unsprung rear end weight may become a dead issue coz this thing would require a lateral gearbox . The bike could be somewhat foreshortenened in the wheelbase .(like thats a bad thing ! ) The geartrain required would be more involved and elongated , would either poke out to one side or up your date . To allow for the required bevel .

Could liquid cool the motor and cross mount it spoze also .

Yahbo ! , .. . pass me another shroom .

This all making my brain hurt , dang it I'll keep tryin all the convential methods for HP gains and or talkin about it ! . Thanks anyway y'all .

Mick