Andy B.L.C. wrote:Mornin'
As a reply to the above & to qualify my post some more...
I would imagine that any manufacturers claimed power output would, as Warkton C states, be on their 'own' dyno (the shiny dyno, as has been pointed out to me by fellow Bristol L.C. member & B.S.S.O. racer Tom Russell is a low reading dyno & thus realistic, not a bad thing in my books) on a motor that has been meticulously blueprinted in perfect conditions with the best run being quoted. I don't recall any 200's that I've owned in the past ever having seen much over 65mph, & that was one up. All I know is that fully laden the RT pulls like a train even from low down in every gear & without screaming the nuts off it, with the resultant increased component wear, sits happily all day at a good mile munching speed with enough left over. I'm not an advertising executive, far from it, but my set up makes me smile - a change to a 30 mil carb not strangled by an air box would in all likelyhood up the BHP some but I'm happy with things as they are
Spending money always hurts but IMHO the increased acceleration, rideability, cooling etc etc made for a justifiable investment...
Andy
I finished my last comment by saying that I must be “missing the point” but your response, though, no doubt, well intentioned has done nothing to change that.
In a way I admire the loyal following that there might be for the kits (or is it perhaps loyalty toward the originator?)
However, as peejay has shown, the love for the kit is not universal.
As Andy BLT has remarked that the power readings:
(“Power out put vary depending on set up and who’s dyno is used, we’ve seen from 9 – 22bhp from a standard cylinder”)quoted on the MRB site may have been:
“on a motor that has been meticulously blueprinted in perfect conditions with the best run being quoted”that rather conflicts with the “standard cylinder” & other statements on the MRB site which infer that it is a ‘bolt on kit’
There are other ‘bolt on kits’ that I would say deliver more. The Gran Turismo, for instance, although that’s only comparable based on price, having been designed to incorporate a reed valve. Or how about the RB20 which, within the BSSO rules, CANNOT be modified yet is running in the Production Class giving some Group Four runners a battle to contend with?
Dig a little deeper & it appears that within the small print of the glossy BGM short form catalogue there appears some further evidence as to how that “22bhp” may have been attained.
“BGM2225 RT KIT – BGM2105 BIGBOX CBMAN – BGM11065 60MM CRANK – 28MM CAR”So, now the:
“Power out put vary depending on set up and who’s dyno is used, we’ve seen from 9 – 22bhp from a standard cylinder”was probably obtained with the following:
Kit £452.35
Crank £242.55
Base Packer £12.56
Which is a basic cost of £707.46 excluding the small end bearing. I haven’t factored in the cost of carburettor, manifold & exhaust.
This isn’t ‘my’ argument as all I’m doing is expressing some empathy with the original Poster that has stated dissatisfaction for the failure to deliver of a kit that has been developed by somebody that certainly had a lot to say about the Rapido when it came out!
To an extent, we are 'singing from the same hymn sheet' in that, like others have, I too would advocate that peejay persevere with the kit, not least because of all the money inevitably spent!
In fact, I said I would Post an image of the filter/elbow combination that I believe contributed hugely to allowing my own set-up to breathe so much better, but my camera won't upload to this PC @ the moment
However, I would hope that we have common ground in wishing peejay some fresh luck in achieving a better result than his current experience, but evidentaly it will not be achieved by simply visiting yet another dyno operator....
). So, back in the garage and review pickup alignment again on the questionable stator, with only a change for the worse being achievable. So, pinch a donor pickup off an old P-range stator and, hey presto, back to full revs and full performance. Whether the pickup itself was faulty (remembering that it was new and 'top brand') or whether it was slightly longer and sat it further away from the flywheel's trigger ('air gap' measurements are something that I've read about in 2-stroke circles but we seem to pay little attention to in scootering circles), I don't know, but replacing it transformed the performance.