tigris
|
| posted on 18/5/06 at 04:28 PM |
|
|
weight of blackbird vs r1
I know of the oil issues, it's going in transverse. thanks.
|
|
|
|
|
progers
|
| posted on 18/5/06 at 05:31 PM |
|
|
Blackbird is about 20-25kgs heavier. 65kgs Vs 85-90kg istr
- Paul
|
|
|
ChrisGamlin
|
| posted on 18/5/06 at 09:02 PM |
|
|
Yep thats what I thought too.
|
|
|
tigris
|
| posted on 18/5/06 at 10:25 PM |
|
|
thanks
hmmm , almost not worth it consdering the weight gain. thanks
|
|
|
jimgiblett
|
| posted on 19/5/06 at 09:18 AM |
|
|
But in transverse format its as tough as old boots. IMHO stronger than the R1. This probably down to its roots as a high power sports tourer rather
than a screeming hyperbike. Particularly in the clutch and gearbox departments.
- Jim
|
|
|
Jon Ison
|
| posted on 19/5/06 at 02:52 PM |
|
|
I ran a Blackbird mid mounted for a full season with zero sump mods and had no problems, I then went on too fit an accusump again no problems, defo
pulls stronger from lower down than an R1 and is much more forgiving if you find yourself in the wrong gear out of a corner as it will pull from lower
down, touch wood never had a gearbox or clutch problem, if your running too a weight limit the weight difference makes little difference provided you
can get down too the minimum weight with the Bird engine fitted other than maybe with an R1 you could ballast where you want too rather than having a
bit of extra weight in the engine.
there are some mods you can do if allowed (presuming you may be racing it) that lighten the engine, make it rev up quicker and solve some of the
oiling problems around #3 rod.
|
|
|
gttman
|
| posted on 19/5/06 at 08:14 PM |
|
|
I weighed my R1 engine acuratelly and it was 85kgs with oil.
|
|
|
kb58
|
| posted on 19/5/06 at 09:27 PM |
|
|
quote:
Originally posted by gttman
I weighed my R1 engine acuratelly and it was 85kgs with oil.
So it weighs as much as a 'Busa? That's odd.
Mid-engine Locost - http://www.midlana.com
And the book - http://www.lulu.com/shop/kurt-bilinski/midlana/paperback/product-21330662.html
Kimini - a tube-frame, carbon shell, Honda Prelude VTEC mid-engine Mini: http://www.kimini.com
And its book -
http://www.lulu.com/shop/kurt-bilinski/kimini-how-to-design-and-build-a-mid-engine-sports-car-from-scratch/paperback/product-4858803.html
|
|
|
ChrisGamlin
|
| posted on 19/5/06 at 09:37 PM |
|
|
Thats faulty scales or someone's put some lead in the sump 
Seriously though, what did that include, exhausts, all the wiring loom / ecu / the EXUP etc as well? Any of these probably make it an unfair
comparison because weights seem to be generally quoted "dry" with the throttle bodies intact but no exhaust etc, so all the other engines
would also weigh more again.
If it didnt include any of those bits then I can only suggest faulty scales. The DSR racers in the USA are fairly anal about the weight of the engines
that go into their cars and whenever an R1 weight has been checked its been between ~55-60kgs, and having both side by side if anything my R1 felt
lighter than the blade it replaced, another engine that is always quoted in the 55-60kg region. Ive also helped lift a busa engine into place and that
was far heavier than either.
[Edited on 19/5/06 by ChrisGamlin]
|
|
|
russbost
|
| posted on 20/5/06 at 01:03 PM |
|
|
Surely if you want an accurate weight comparison you need to have the weight of both units fully dressed, oiled, watered & ready to go, including
any exhaust up to a common point for both, any differences in water/oil rads, wiring looms etc., comparing dry weights of undressed engines
doesn't really have any significance as each unit needs all the requisite bits to complete it. Makes it a very difficult comparison I would have
thought
|
NOTE:This user is registered as a LocostBuilders trader and may offer commercial services to other users
|
ChrisGamlin
|
| posted on 20/5/06 at 01:41 PM |
|
|
Yeh I agree if wanting a totally accurate weight to the nearest kilo for building your actual car then thats ultimately what you need, but because
everyone else seems to use dry weight I don't think the 85kg R1 weight if correct is that useful unless you have all the other engines weighed
in the same way too.
I guess to be fair to those measuring dry weight, there's so much variation in the rest of the dressed parts because some will use the bike
manifold, some wont, some will use the full loom, some will strip it down or use a custom ECU, some will fit a dry / chopped sump and change the oil
capacity etc. Therefore for the purposes of rough comparison I think dry weight is a reasonable way of doing it, if there's a 25kg difference in
dry weight then there's still going to be roughly the same once its wet, plus or minus a couple of kgs to account for different oil capacity
etc, even if the actual weight no longer equals the quoted figure.
cheers
Chris
[Edited on 20/5/06 by ChrisGamlin]
|
|
|
gttman
|
| posted on 24/5/06 at 07:13 AM |
|
|
it was the complete engine ready to be lifted into possition and things boled up. It had airbox, cradle, engine loom (not ecu etc tho) and
didn't have exhaust.
Would have contained 5kgs of oil tho.
the scales are definatelly acurate as it weighs me the same and I am definatelly not 55kilo's I'm afraid.
I have another R1 engine here that is bear, I will weigh this and let you know.
|
|
|
gttman
|
| posted on 24/5/06 at 07:40 AM |
|
|
The bear engine with no throttle bodies etc weighed 63.2kgs.
|
|
|
ChrisGamlin
|
| posted on 24/5/06 at 04:24 PM |
|
|
That sounds more like it 
What have you used as an engine cradle though, a couple of RSJ's?
|
|
|
gttman
|
| posted on 24/5/06 at 06:15 PM |
|
|
Well it looks like all the gubbins add up to 20kgs.... but that is all the throttle body assembly, air box, cradle (std MK one) and other items such
as the prop stub adapter etc.
Surprising how much it adds..... but goes to show about weight claims as I'd not consider an engine complete without the throttle assembly and
thats gona add quite a bit.
Of cause they may be quoting the weight without the gearbox
|
|
|
