1973 T500 Cafe Project

[titan performance]

Thanks for posting up some more pictures Gene........that really is a great basis for a special, most of ours start as festering hulks. I agree the welding around the rearset mounts is crap, and the rearsets themselves are what we in the UK call an eyesore, but other than that....very nice indeed. I dont know of anyone else that makes a purpose built rearset for the 500 apart from us, but I guess someone will correct me if I'm wrong.......
I shall be watching your progress with great interest.

Paul.

[Gene]

That's some nice work Titan.

I've been tracking down whatever I can find on converting this to reed valves but have yet to find a picture of a completed engine. I read that Ja-Moo does conversions for Kawi triples and sold some components to a few Titan owners. I'd like to know more about that.

My search took me to http://richstaylordporting.com" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false; and subsequently talked to Rich Gagnon about his work. He makes reed manifolds that might interest people on this board and a few pictures are posted below. The reed manifolds can be made with offsets to clear injection pump housings, etc., if needed. The smaller reed housing has an adaptor that I think will go to 32 mm carb and the larger ones start at 36 mm carb. A smaller boot (from honda?) might be available to install 34 mm carbs.

Other modifications on his site that are interesting include the venturi dividers and a link to a product called the Ultimate Flow Optimizer which apparently makes a regular Mikuni outperform a flat side carb.

Comments?

Rich2.jpg

photo_VintageV-ForceReedBlock.jpg

photo_IntakeMain.jpg

[Gene]

more . . .

photo_Hodaka100ccReedBlck_3.jpg

photo_Hodaka100ccReedBlck_2.jpg

[tz375]

UFO's and flow dividers have been around forever. I think Moo is a fan of the UFO. I'm a skeptic, Missourian (show me state), doubting Thomas.

Until I see dyno results from someone I trust like say David Vizard, they don't work. It's the old philosophical question. If a flow divider works in the forest , but no one sees it on a dyno, then did it really work?

[ja-moo]

UFO's and flow dividers have been around forever. I think Moo is a fan of the UFO. I'm a skeptic, Missourian (show me state), doubting Thomas.

Until I see dyno results from someone I trust like say David Vizard, they don't work. It's the old philosophical question. If a flow divider works in the forest , but no one sees it on a dyno, then did it really work?

Very nice work, not sure if you would have any crankcse compression left, that is a long intake now.

The UFO's just make sense, you have theses to horrid edges right in the air flow, the UFO's fill in the slide bottom and make for a smooth transition and mucho less turbulance........

Come on Juggs get in gear! OOPS, you are waiting on me now......

[tz375]

I agree that they can be rationalized but I didn't hear any trees falling yet..

No dyno charts?

I'm sure someone has actually tested them.

[ja-moo]

I agree that they can be rationalized but I didn't hear any trees falling yet..

No dyno charts?

I'm sure someone has actually tested them.

I don't think it would show on the dyno. They just make the throttle "crisper", 34 round with UFO's are comparable to 36 flats in flow. And the jetting usually goes really rich, so you know something is happening.

[Jughead]

I'm trying to get me a Place Cleaned out on the Work Bench in the Garage.I'm still looking for a Cheap Foredom.I'll get to it soon.

[Gene]

Very nice work, not sure if you would have any crankcse compression left, that is a long intake now.

Regarding crankcase compression is this an example where stuffing the crank would offset the added intake volume?

The reed manifold for the 250 Hodaka shown above is 8 petals and he uses a 36mm carb. Any comments about that?

[tz375]

I don't remember saying that. I think maybe it was Ja-Moo. The answer is that crankcase volume has to be matched to pipe design and ports etc to work as a complete system.

For a T500 I would expect that smaller flywheels without stuffers plus a short intake would work best.

8 petals are fine - it means that they will not open very far, but there is an issue of large carb, huge petals and small intake ports that disrupt flow.

[two-stroke-brit]

that cafe seat looks great.
mark

[Gene]

My Banshee tuner has a flow bench. I admit to not knowing if a carb could be fitted to it so it is easy to suggest a UFO test.

Logically turbulence reduces flow. If it is measured it is real.

EDIT:

My tuners comments about the reed stuff above:

"I just looked at the intake system, lets make our own. They are way to long, to much case volume, he is using 250r reed cages."

Seems board members would like my neighbor.

[ja-moo]

My Banshee tuner has a flow bench. I admit to not knowing if a carb could be fitted to it so it is easy to suggest a UFO test.

Logically turbulence reduces flow. If it is measured it is real.

EDIT:

My tuners comments about the reed stuff above:

"I just looked at the intake system, lets make our own. They are way to long, to much case volume, he is using 250r reed cages."

Seems board members would like my neighbor.

Back in the 70's G.E.M. came out with reed conversions for the Kaw triples. And J C Whitney sold the kits for years after that. It "stumped me" that not every triple out there hadn't been converted, as with my experiance with my kits, they made a very perceptible positive difference.

A good friend was given a G.E.M. reed conversion to try, and found very little difference in performance, and actually converted back to piston port.

When I started studing the more technical aspects of reed valves, (when I started designing my kits) I found how important the actual distance from reed tip to piston was. As the farthere away, the weaker the "opening" signal" delaying the reed opening, plus the larger the area between the piston and the front of the reeds, has more "area" in the vacuum reducing again the opening signal.

Plus the "standard" "V" reed block shape, is rather "dirty" with turbulance. Air flow does not like interuptions, and the center cross bar and usual side bars between the petals slow, deflect, and cause turbulance. But are easy to manufacture, and can be design with lots of area to compensate for the compromise.

The G.E.M. kit had small reed area, the V bars and were set back from the piston, and that is why they didn't make much of a change.

And that's what I have been trying to get across about huge reed block conversion, the compromises can out weigh the advantages.

[tz375]

Ja-Moo is right. There are a always compromises in any aspect of engine design. Removing the dividers was a favorite trick for years on RD's but tests didn't show much or any improvement in performance - probably because the reed area was already sufficient for the air demands of the motor, so more wasn't any better -or worse..

[Jughead]

And Also even with Piston port Intake tracts....It is One Instance Where "Shorter is Better". I'm not sure what Cylinders your 500 has but you have it down as a 73 K Model.From your Pictures it looks to have the long Carb Adapters for the 72 and later Models.that means that you have a Detuned model with the Longer Intakes and the Squeezed down Intake port with the Stupid Divider in the Center.All of that can be carved out.With My Moo Reed Conversion that is the cylinders that I will be using to keep from butchering a set of Early model Barrels.

I'm no tuner by any means (Part time Mad Man Tinkerer more like it)but the only way that I see some of the Big V block Reed set ups working would be like some guys are doing with the Kawasaki H2's where they do the Conversion straight into the Crank Case.If your not Familiar you'll have to go over to the Kawasaki board and look some of those bikes up.