Mileage/Reliability for an iron barrelled 225

[Eden]

Adam, what you calling too high on the transfers then? If the transfer heights in the barrel are what has been quoted, running a zero deck wouldn't make them too high imo to loose grunt, they wouldn't be as high as the transfers on my cast 240 and that's got plenty of grunt

fully agree though that he should make the barrel his own by doing what ever he sees fit.

[Dimitrios_231]

Thank you for the input guys.
I'll wait for the crank first to come.
If anyone is bored and wants to play with the calculator

The distance from top of the barrel:

Trans 47.83mm
Ex 40.75mm
In 94.88mm

Piston compression height 32mm
Piston height 68mm

Crank 62/116mm

Using the same barrel with standard 58/107mm crank and a standard piston with 71mm height and 39mm compression height plus a 0.55mm standard base gasket:

- At BDC the piston was level with the bottom of exhaust port.



- At TDC it was 0.5mm bellow the top of the barrel.

[Adam_Winstone]

Adam, what you calling too high on the transfers then? If the transfer heights in the barrel are what has been quoted, running a zero deck wouldn't make them too high imo to lose grunt, they wouldn't be as high as the transfers on my cast 240 and that's got plenty of grunt

fully agree though that he should make the barrel his own by doing whatever he sees fit.

All depends where you want that grunt to be and how you intend the porting to relate to the rev range at which the pipe makes power and the gearing that you are hoping to run. What people overlook all too commonly is that in today's dyno era, where so many people can only see BHP figures, the JL4 / Fran Race pipe is quite accepted for road use, whereas it should be remembered that it is a Group IV winning 'race' pipe design. Sure, it is a great pipe as far as BHP is concerned (actually a very good pipe for grunt as far as race pipes are concerned!) but my iron motor with 185 degrees exhaust port timing will happily rev over 10K rpm through the gears and return very high BHP figures... BUT it doesn't ride as well as when it is fitted with a JL3, even though it loses 5 BHP!

If you return to the feature that Scootering ran on the RS250, calling it one of the most memorable and fasted bikes that they had ever had the joy to test ride, the BHP figures are not anything like as the high BHP figures that many of today's 'fashion' bikes are putting out... yet these don't get a look in when it comes to their list of memorable bikes.

The fitment of 110mm rods and/or the base machining of MB and Taff's popular TS1tunes, to widen the spread of power, is designed to lower the standard TS1 transfers to bring them under 130 duration. These tunes did not become the UK's most popular road tunes by chance, the reduced transfer timing (combined with some raising and widening of the exhaust, along with the increased lead) returned a much better spread of power for road use. SURE, multi-transfer reed motors are not the same as 2 transfer iron barrels but I've had vast improvements in gear pulling ability and lower rev touring torque from reducing the 130 transfer duration of Rapido Race barrels, again playing with exhaust ports at the same time. Keeping transfer durations to 130 or less on a long-stroke motor is not that easy, hence why a JL4/Fran Race suits your iron motor so well... but fit a low RPM pipe to your iron motor and I'm pretty sure that you would lose the match of porting and pipe rev range and the bike would not run anything like it does on the 4. Your iron motor is basically running along similar lines to an 80s/90s race motor, which will not suit the riding style of many other road riders.

Don't get me wrong, high RPM revvy motors can be used on the road (providing you don't mind having the best of clutches and cranks, and replacing them every so often) and be lots of fun (if that's how you ride) but I'm more interested in looking at a dyno graph between 5 and 8K than I am between 7 and 9K. The RS250 was last seen running a JL3/Fran Road and that suggests that it does not need, or want, to run a JL4 at higher revs to make power. As they say about the JL4 in Scooter Centre's informative catalogue, the JL4 can transform any mundane motor into a high BHP motor This is more the result of the pipe than the motor

Adam

PS - I still love you though, even if you do abuse Innocenti's finest!

[Steve J]

On the subject of reliability.... I bought an Avanti 70mm piston last year, with the intention of doing a 225 conversion on my otherwise standard 'Stage 4' 200 - all very straightforward. I also have an unused barrel for an Indian Lambro 200 (courtesy of MB a few years back), which has the strange small block spacing on the inlet port, which I believe I can sort out/remachine to fit a sensible inlet manifold. The one possible advantage is that the Lambro barrel has fully enclosed cylinder stud holes (just like on alloy barrels), which may give better rigidity and more even heat transfer with larger bores. Before I start carving out ports, making adaptor plates for the inlet, etc. - has anyone attempted to use this type of barrel for a 225 (or larger), or is the whole thing just a crazy idea on my part?

[Adam_Winstone]

You need to see what the port timings are like as the Italian Lambro 200 barrels that I've played with (2 x imports fitted with Lambro 200 barrels with spigot machined down and stud holes reworked for 150 casing use) have had inlet durations over a standard TV200 barrel. This duration will change a little when bored out to 225, however, you'll want to consider your options and what port timings you wan to end up with.

Also, whilst the Italian Lambro 200 inlet has very long timing, the port is very thin (bottom edge to top edge) and you may need to remove a lot of metal from the top edge to give the port a decent area.

In standard port configuration these Lambro 200 barrels really pull (carry as many bags of spuds as you like... at 30mph) but do not rev, and I really mean do not rev! Even with a free revving pipe, the porting of the Italian barrel just doesn't allow the motor to rev and you get so far up the rev range, totally 'hit a wall', and must change up. The ride of these, unless the porting is modified is really nasty.

I've not seen the SIL Lambro barrels but, if the SIL 200 barrels (150 and 200) are anything to go by, don't expect ports to be cast too well or for them to be symetrical through their length, which really shows up when they are bored out beyond their intended cc. Note that working transfers throughout their entire length is not very easy.

Who knows, these SIL Lambro barrels might be a decent starting point for a 225 conversion but you'll need to examine the barrel once over-bored and then have to do a fair bit of porting to give a decent end result.

Let us know how you get on

Adam

[Eden]

Don't get me wrong, high RPM revvy motors can be used on the road (providing you don't mind having the best of clutches and cranks, and replacing them every so often) and be lots of fun (if that's how you ride) but I'm more interested in looking at a dyno graph between 5 and 8K than I am between 7 and 9K. The RS250 was last seen running a JL3/Fran Road and that suggests that it does not need, or want, to run a JL4 at higher revs to make power. As they say about the JL4 in Scooter Centre's informative catalogue, the JL4 can transform any mundane motor into a high BHP motor This is more the result of the pipe than the motor

Adam

PS - I still love you though, even if you do abuse Innocenti's finest!

So Adam my friend, your saying that the JL4 can only be used in your eyes for making power at high rpm?
How then do you explain my cast 240 making max power of 27bhp at only a tad over 6600 rpm when using a JL4 before the changes I made to the barrel last year?
I used to run a JL3 on that motor too at that time, the only difference between the two pipes on the barrel at that time was that the JL3 prevented it from revving on, it made max power at around the same rpm. The max power only moved up the rpm later after I had to raise the exhaust port a little, and even then at 6600 rpm it lost just point five a horse power but held on to the power for much much longer.
I too set the transfers on that barrel first and went for 135 degrees intentionally.
I have also gone for the same transfer duration on my GT 230, that does make max power at high rpm but the max power is only 3 or 4 HP higher at 8300 than it is at 6700 and the latest dyno from last weekend the max power is even less of a difference between those rev ranges due to a small change in components.

If a certain exhaust works across the rev range and produces more power at 6k rpm than another exhaust that prevents the motor revving out I see little point in using the exhaust that doesn't let the motor rev out.

I don't see it in terms of one port has to be a certain duration to make an engine behave a certain way, as you know its how the ports all work in relation to each other.

PS: I still love you too

[Adam_Winstone]

Did you miss...?

"Sure, it is a great pipe as far as BHP is concerned (actually a very good pipe for grunt as far as race pipes are concerned!)"


The JL4 is a very good pipe but it does let motors rev into what should be considered the 'red line' range for Lambretta motors/cranks.

I totally agree about the balance of port durations, rather than looking at durations individually, however, that doesn't mean that you shouldn't look at them ALL together. Typically, certain port durations work best at certain RPM ranges, and pipes work best at certain RPM ranges too. What is nasty is when tuning and pipes (and gearing combo) are out of synch and one strangles t'other. There is nothing like just getting into the power and finding that your pipe limits the barrel or vice versa


"How then do you explain my cast 240 making max power of 27bhp at only a tad over 6600 rpm "... a dyno can tell you anything that you want it to... and let's face it, your bike is pretty much a 'dyno pony' and never does any serious miles!

Adam

PS: Yeah Baby, but that's because I treat you right!

[Dimitrios_231]

Crank arrived,
I'll need to machine the crankcase a little more closer to the cylinder base.
I'm also waiting for a wider Wiseco little end needle bearing.



One standard gasket


BDC


TDC


One gasket plus a 2mm packer


BDC


TDC



I'll set the squish first.
Then decide between base and head gaskets to set the transfer timing.I intend to use a head gasket.
Then I'll lower the bottom of transfers and exhaust.
Then I'll raise the exhaust.

I'll be off my place for two weeks,I'll report later.

[Adam_Winstone]

Looking good

[Eden]

your bike is pretty much a 'dyno pony' and never does any serious miles!

Adam

bikeS ARE





Dimitrios,


Do you intend to cut the skirt on the piston so it clears the transfers?

Doesn't make that much difference if you do or don't tbh, Ive done the mod to all but one of my pistons, the one I didn't do it on was the one I put in on the way to Avignon, just because I took a new piston not thinking I would need to use it so I hadn't cut it at all, it went ok so I have never bothered to change it, its still in the engine! Mind you, I haven't had that engine on a dyno with it like that so who knows........ yes Adam you fanny... its not been on a dyno for over 18 months

[Dimitrios_231]

I had used this crankcase with a Rapido 225,5-6 years ago.
I had opened the transfers to match it.
I'll open/match the cylinder transfer entries with the cranckcase.
I'll round the thin cylinder walls,and cut them even.
Then I'll check if the piston skirt clears or not the transfers.
If the skirt covers any port,I'll cut the skirt.
I've already checked that at BDC the skirt stays clear from the crankcase.
Another positive is that the piston rings are not exposed on the inlet at BDC.
I have a felling that I'll end up somewhere close to 1.5mm head gasket and a 2mm or 1.5mm base packer, sandwiched with two base gaskets.

On the top pic (with one 0.55mm gasket only),without tightening the cylinder as I didn't have time for accurate measurements,I had 2.85mm negative deck.

[Adam_Winstone]

"........ yes Adam you fanny... its not been on a dyno for over 18 months...", that's done it, now I'm in trouble

I'm in trouble because my wife asked me to do the washing up of the dinner pots and pans, then I start laughing at your comment, which she mistakes for me laughing at her suggestion, barks something at me, storms off and slams the door! Eden, that is so your fault!

Dimitrios,

Sounds like your plan is coming together.

Adam

[Adam_Winstone]

Is that the PM Tuning 62mm crank (HPC) with 116mm rod? I've got a similar motor on the bench with this crank and the Mugello 70mm Meteor piston for 116mm rod, which I was thinking of using in a Rapido barrel that I'd run at 200cc. This barrel was machined down by 1.5mm to get back some grunt from the Race porting spec, however, the ports have come down so far at 225 that I'm now in the position to be able to do some additional packing/port positioning top or bottom.

Unfortunately, the casing that I was going to use this on is obviously warped from welding and trench machining for a 64mm stroke crank, which leaves me thinking that I might start with another casing and not having it welded. The PM crank seems to need very little trench work for the big end.

Food for thought... thanks.

Adam

[Dimitrios_231]

My problem Adam is when I'll find spare time to do it.
Don't expect to hear news soon,I'll probably finish it next year.
Thank you and Eden and everyone else for sharing your knowledge and experience.
I really enjoy reading all your posts,especially the long ones

[Dimitrios_231]

Is that the PM Tuning 62mm crank (HPC) with 116mm rod?

No, I went as cheap as possible
it is the 62mm MEC RB spec from AF,they have also machined the conrod but I found out that I also need to machine some tiny parts from the crankcase.

http://www.afrayspeed.co.uk/index.php?p ... tributeID=

I've never read any bad review about this crank, yet
The guys at Scooterotica garage were also using them (machined) without problems in RB25 and other engines producing around 20-25 Hp.
I don't think that my engine will produce power higher than 20 Hp,you know that I like Clubmans and Amals MK1
If I had the money,I would have gone for a second Supercorsa 62mm from JB Tuning like the one on the Rapido.

P.S. After reading Eden's amazing blog,I decided to reject the 62mm from Tino

[mainstand]

Well I've bitten the bullet & work on my 225 starts in earnest this week...hopefully it'll be sorted for Brid.

[Steve J]

You need to see what the port timings are like as the Italian Lambro 200 barrels that I've played with (2 x imports fitted with Lambro 200 barrels with spigot machined down and stud holes reworked for 150 casing use) have had inlet durations over a standard TV200 barrel. This duration will change a little when bored out to 225, however, you'll want to consider your options and what port timings you wan to end up with.

Also, whilst the Italian Lambro 200 inlet has very long timing, the port is very thin (bottom edge to top edge) and you may need to remove a lot of metal from the top edge to give the port a decent area.

In standard port configuration these Lambro 200 barrels really pull (carry as many bags of spuds as you like... at 30mph) but do not rev, and I really mean do not rev! Even with a free revving pipe, the porting of the Italian barrel just doesn't allow the motor to rev and you get so far up the rev range, totally 'hit a wall', and must change up. The ride of these, unless the porting is modified is really nasty.

I've not seen the SIL Lambro barrels but, if the SIL 200 barrels (150 and 200) are anything to go by, don't expect ports to be cast too well or for them to be symetrical through their length, which really shows up when they are bored out beyond their intended cc. Note that working transfers throughout their entire length is not very easy.

Who knows, these SIL Lambro barrels might be a decent starting point for a 225 conversion but you'll need to examine the barrel once over-bored and then have to do a fair bit of porting to give a decent end result.

Let us know how you get on

Adam

Adam - thanks for the input - as you suspected, the inlet port is extremely low. The overall height of the cylinder is 101.7mm, and the lower edge of the inlet port is around 100mm from the top! Looks like the only way to use the cylinder would be to enlarge the inlet port and fit a reed valve. Exhaust is already fairly large, and transfers are approx. 12mm in height. Time for a rethink.......

[Adam_Winstone]

Well done for checking before spending the money on additional work.

Adam

[Eden]

Some iron barrel 230 footage ;p

tree attacks me 1:57 in to this video to say it made me jump is an understatement.

[Toddy]

Some iron barrel 230 footage ;p

tree attacks me 1:57 in to this video to say it made me jump is an understatement.

Twiglet!!!!!!