HarleyTechTalk

 I'm just think out loud here guys as nothing is set in stone yet and this is only in the planning stages.
I've been thinking about getting some pieces together so I can get ready to build me a 4 3/8" bore X 4 3/8" stroke square engine I've always wanted. It will have either the B2/B3 heads on it with the 70mm T/Hog. I will have the heads loved on a little more than the stock castings. I don't know if they will need it...but I know a pretty damn good head porter that I will send them to and turn him loose on them.  :wink:
I'm thinking of setting it up at some where between 10.5- 10.7 compression with maybe looking into having a custom ground cam made for it...something similar to the Tman 660SM...but they will have to be in a gear drive version. I'm not looking for anything radical...I just want instant super smooth power off idle to 5800 rpm's.
What ever I decide to build...it will have the S&S 4 3/8" bore cases...so I'm going to go ahead and buy the T2 cases probably here in the next few weeks and send them out to be machined so it can use the factory oiling system thru the tranny and I won't have to mess with running the external oil lines. That way I'll at least have the cases ready to go for when I'm able to buy more parts along the way.
I was thinking of going with different color combo this time. I'm leaning towards black cases, with silver polished cylinders, and all black heads with no highlighted fins...and just the S&S logo highlighted on each head.
I do plan on making me another stainless pipe for this engine too...I just haven't made my mind up on where I want the exhaust to end at. I told Randy today it was going to be stepped drag pipes   :hyst:
I hope to have it all together sitting on the engine stand by mid summer.

Ray

sounds great Ray!!! i have always wanted a all Square motor as well  :up:

cant wait to see what comes about  :bike:

Travis  :beer:

Do you know what bike you are going to install it into, or is that yet to be decided?  :pop:

Sounds good. I originally wanted to do something close to square but, well you know how that goes.

I knew it.  :doh: I would have bet money on it. When Randy made that "Blah Blah Blah" comment (reply 2740) in your "cat out of the bag" thread, I knew that the game was on. You 2 are instigators.  :slap:

Quote from: kd on November 20, 2014, 06:27:59 PM
I knew it.  :doh: I would have bet money on it. When Randy made that "Blah Blah Blah" comment (reply 2740) in your "cat out of the bag" thread, I knew that the game was on. You 2 are instigators.  :slap:

it's been in the works...way before that.   :wink:

Ray

Sounds great Ray, you should get great results from that combo. Vic is in the processes of building that exact engine right now. I will try to post the results when it gets on the dyno if the owner of the bike is OK with it, might just give you some ideas on cam grinds.

Mid summer :hyst: somebody probably has dibs on the 124 already :potstir:

Quote from: groundhog144 on November 20, 2014, 06:53:49 PM
Mid summer :hyst: somebody probably has dibs on the 124 already :potstir:

I bet this new baby is going in the new retirement bike

Hmmmmm,   :soda:   a 131 RGU,   :potstir:  touring in style,   :up:  >:D

  Go bigger bore....along with the 4.375 stroke....and the B3 heads

  Just don't tell everyone  :kick:

Nothing wrong with being a square....

Put a turbo on it. Forget that big d--k contest. There's no need for high compression,
fancy heads, fancy cams or none of that crap. Kill em with boost, works every time.

Make sure you got a stout crank, good pistons, free flowing exhaust and you're golden.
You could take care of business with a well prepped 88ci. The plumbing looks totally cool too!

It will be a NA engine for sure.
I never cared for the looks of all that plumbing hanging off the side of the bike.
I'm still crunching numbers on the Big Boys calculator to get the combo I'm looking for.

Ray

Quote from: MCE on November 20, 2014, 08:17:42 PM
Put a turbo on it. Forget that big d--k contest. There's no need for high compression,
fancy heads, fancy cams or none of that crap. Kill em with boost, works every time.

Make sure you got a stout crank, good pistons, free flowing exhaust and you're golden.
You could take care of business with a well prepped 88ci. The plumbing looks totally cool too!

Took me a while to clue into that also. If I do anything to the v rod it will be turbo. Nice quiet stock engine fed 8 psi develops a real attitude fast being over square. Bone stock components still reliable to 160 hp, plus in conditions of no boost it's still a bone stock engine and not stressing itself. I personally like the look of all that mechanical "Potty mouth". Best part is it's removable, slap in the previous calibration and it's back to stock again and the kit can be sold or reused on the next model.
Ron

Will you have to use S&S heads with those cases?

Nothin too radical just some B3 heads and a 70mm Throttle Hog.. :smiled:

Quote from: rbabos on November 21, 2014, 05:46:13 AM

Took me a while to clue into that also. If I do anything to the v rod it will be turbo. Nice quiet stock engine fed 8 psi develops a real attitude fast being over square. Bone stock components still reliable to 160 hp, plus in conditions of no boost it's still a bone stock engine and not stressing itself. I personally like the look of all that mechanical "Potty mouth".
Ron

I love the look and the sound. Those stainless "stack of dimes" TIG welds are a thing
of beauty.

We built a turbo Kawasaki 900 Z1 back in the old days. There wasn't anything around
that could even keep it in sight (much less keep up with it).

Ahhh, the young and crazy days.

Quote from: MCE on November 21, 2014, 07:37:37 AM

Quote from: rbabos on November 21, 2014, 05:46:13 AM

Took me a while to clue into that also. If I do anything to the v rod it will be turbo. Nice quiet stock engine fed 8 psi develops a real attitude fast being over square. Bone stock components still reliable to 160 hp, plus in conditions of no boost it's still a bone stock engine and not stressing itself. I personally like the look of all that mechanical "Potty mouth".
Ron

I love the look and the sound. Those stainless "stack of dimes" TIG welds are a thing
of beauty.

We built a turbo Kawasaki 900 Z1 back in the old days. There wasn't anything around
that could even keep it in sight (much less keep up with it).

Ahhh, the young and crazy days.

That bike was no slow poke out of the box. Yup, I lived the 70s too. 52 pan chopper back then.
Ron

Quote from: rbabos on November 21, 2014, 07:45:08 AM

That bike was no slow poke out of the box. Yup, I lived the 70s too. 52 pan chopper back then.
Ron

Me too! 52FL1226

'57 straight leg frame, late model dual disc front end, Pan lower, Shovel upper, Andrews A, S&S B, 11:1 pistons, real gasoline for the 11:1....         :koolaid:

Quote from: torqueinc on November 20, 2014, 07:31:49 PM
  Go bigger bore....along with the 4.375 stroke....and the B3 heads

  Just don't tell everyone  :kick:

How big of a bore could you go with a 4.375" stroke?

With that TB it'll be a task to get smooth power.  That'll prolly have some crazy instant outta the hole responsiveness.  I would downsize the TB a bit for drivability reasons.

IIRC the bike is TBW and the progressivity should help with this, but maxing out the table can kill response also.   

Love it, I have a 120 inch 4 3/8th stroke in the works right now, always love another combination. Let me know if I can help with a custom cam

Quote from: rbabos on November 21, 2014, 07:45:08 AM
That bike was no slow poke out of the box. Yup, I lived the 70s too. 52 pan chopper back then.
Ron

My older brother had a pan chopper. He always wanted to ride my Z1 so I rode that pan. It
was way cool, wish I had either one of those now.

Quote from: BVHOG on November 21, 2014, 10:40:55 AM
Love it, I have a 120 inch 4 3/8th stroke in the works right now, always love another combination. Let me know if I can help with a custom cam

when I get that far...I might take you up on that Bob!  :up:
Thanks for the offer to help.

Rob...yes I'm pretty much stuck with the B2/B3 heads if I want to go with the S&S 4 3/8" bore T2 cases...they have a bigger bolt pattern for that bore. The heads require the 70mm T/Hog.

Ray

   The most fun I've had with my 01' Dyna involved a 95" kit, some J&E 8.5/1 forged pistons, SE204 cams and a Magnacharger running thru a air to air intercooler drawing thru a 42mm Mikuni.
Boost was set at 12lbs, revlimit set at 6500rpm. Stock gearing at 3.15/1.
I surprised a lot of other brands on the road including 1200 BMW's and an 1100 Turbo'd Honda.
Nothing quite like the rush of that engine pulling towards redline. It got faster and accelerated harder as boost climbed, could easily 270klms/hr ( would run into rev limiter in high gear).
Its only drawback was gas mileage, which hovered around 30mpg at 110klm/hr. It would burn close to a gallon in a mile at wot.
At the time I liked to make 30 day trips, so fuel costs finally convinced me to swap out this for a S&S T124. It runs 47mpg at 130kl/hr with 2.88/1 gears. The little 95'I still think was faster and mine was 100% reliable. I had thoughts of doing fuel injection, but after being told costs would run 5-6K, I went for the 124. 3 years of umlimited fun tho! (//)

Quote from: No Cents on November 21, 2014, 12:01:00 PM

Quote from: BVHOG on November 21, 2014, 10:40:55 AM
Love it, I have a 120 inch 4 3/8th stroke in the works right now, always love another combination. Let me know if I can help with a custom cam

when I get that far...I might take you up on that Bob!  :up:
Thanks for the offer to help.

Rob...yes I'm pretty much stuck with the B2/B3 heads if I want to go with the S&S 4 3/8" bore T2 cases...they have a bigger bolt pattern for that bore. The heads require the 70mm T/Hog.

Ray

Ray are you planning on an S&S crank?
The color combination sounds awesome, any thoughts on what air cleaner set up for the 70mm Hog?

 yes Eric...I'm leaning towards the S&S flywheels...but I'm going to call John @ Darkhorse to see what he has to offer me as an option too.
Up to bat first is to get the cases and then have them machined for the internal oiling system.
I'm wanting to get the rotating assembly balanced as close to perfect as I can. I want it smooth as silk for some long distance touring.
I haven't given the air cleaner much thought to tell you the truth. My main focus after getting the cases back from being done will be just deciding on exactly where I want the compression set at and what are my piston options going to be with the flywheels I decide on. I think John uses a little taller H-Beam rod in his wheels and the S&S rods are 7.659" long. So pistons will be a major discussion between myself with S&S and John with what my options are going to be if I decide to go with the H-Beam Darkhorse flywheel.
Once I have the pistons in hand I'll send the entire bottom end out for balancing and assembly. By the time I get all that back I think the spring flowers will be blooming and it will be riding season again.

Ray

Successful projects start with a good plan and it sound like your on your way with this one. It will be great to go on the voyage with you again, looking forward to your up dates.

I know this is the wrong thread but looking forward to the up coming dyno trip for the other two bikes as well. :up: :up:

if you don't mind Eric...let me know what Vic is using for pistons and cylinders in the one he is building. I want to look at all my options before choosing.
Is Vic using the 4 3/8" bore T2 cases?

Ray

Time for a new thread Ray called "going square".

I'd look hard into all ductile iron cylinders.

Quote from: 06roadglide on November 22, 2014, 12:56:31 AM
I'd look hard into all ductile iron cylinders.

I have and am looking hard...just don't know if I want to run external oil lines yet.

Ray

Quote from: No Cents on November 21, 2014, 03:30:22 PM
I'm wanting to get the rotating assembly balanced as close to perfect as I can. I want it smooth as silk for some long distance touring.

If you are going this far.  I would look into having something made for ya.  I would look into what Tman offers.  He recently did a rotating assy for a 131 (different stoke) I put together and it was a work of art.

http://rrcycles.com/cart/index.php?main_page=product_info&cPath=26_31&products_id=155

Quote from: joe_lyons on November 22, 2014, 07:17:28 AM
http://rrcycles.com/cart/index.php?main_page=product_info&cPath=26_31&products_id=155 (http://rrcycles.com/cart/index.php?main_page=product_info&cPath=26_31&products_id=155)

  I wonder if those are billet (aluminum) cylinders

  Pretty lookin sumbitch tho   :up:

 I've talked to a couple people today and they said the ductile cylinder wouldn't be the smartest way to go for a touring bike. It was suggested to me to go with the S&S cylinders again...which I think it would be a smart move beings it will be for their larger bolt pattern cases and will be a perfect match...so no custom cylinder would be needed.
I will get the natural (silver) finished cylinders and find someone that can polish them up for me.
Any of you guys know someone that polishes cylinders to give a finish like these on the finned S&S cylinders?

[attach=0]

Ray

I'm sure there's someone willing to spend days on them. However you will spend the rest of your life keep them looking good. Other thing is, cyls will cool better with a rougher textured coating then bare aluminum.
Ron

Any plating shop can polish them like that. Plan on spending allot of money too.

And - chrome don't get you home.

What about the silver PC like the twincams cases?

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=LB5YkmjalDg (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=LB5YkmjalDg)

I agree that aluminum cylinders will run cooler and that s&s are a good cylinder but just can't agree that an all iron cylinder couldn't handle touring duty. They're so much more stable and let's face it...they were used for many decades prior to the evo. 
Most of the heat is in the heads and blasting down the hiway all day would give plenty of air cooling. Now sitting in traffic at rallies or parade duty is where an aluminum cylinder would benefit the better cooling but then again the iron cylinder could handle the heat better.  Pros and cons to both.

Max...it's hip to be square.
nice one!   :up:

Ray

What's the cost of the ductile iron cyls?

 not cheap Joe.
The S&S finned ductile cylinders I posted a picture of are a little over $2800.00...at dealer cost.   :doh:
but replacement sleeves are only $150.00

Ray

I wonder how much Randy at hyperformance would make them for?

Last I check around $1200.  I have a set on my build and they are outstanding.  Have to go with natural case, heads and coated cylinders.

Quote from: hrdtail78 on November 22, 2014, 06:29:59 PM
Last I check around $1200.  I have a set on my build and they are outstanding.  Have to go with natural case, heads and coated cylinders.

were those the finned ductile cylinders for $1200.00 from Randy?
I'm going to have to call him and see if he has anything for the T2 cases yet.

Ray

Quote from: TorQueInc on November 22, 2014, 09:56:26 AM

Quote from: joe_lyons on November 22, 2014, 07:17:28 AM
http://rrcycles.com/cart/index.php?main_page=product_info&cPath=26_31&products_id=155 (http://rrcycles.com/cart/index.php?main_page=product_info&cPath=26_31&products_id=155)

  I wonder if those are billet (aluminum) cylinders

  Pretty lookin sumbitch tho   :up:

Yes they are as well as the cylinder heads. 

Quote from: Buffalo on November 21, 2014, 12:15:25 PM
   The most fun I've had with my 01' Dyna involved a 95" kit, some J&E 8.5/1 forged pistons, SE204 cams and a Magnacharger

I ran a Magnacharger on a 101" motor and absolutely loved the thing.

Unfortunately, I sold the blower to fund another project & have regretted it ever since.  If I could find another setup like that at a reasonable price point I would buy it immediately.

When I bought my Magna setup, a buddy of mine bought two of them.  The SOB still have one of them brand new in the box but absolutely refuses to sell it to me!!

~John

 here is a 131"er that Wes Brown of Cycle-rama built and tuned for a customer.
Impressive...to say the least...even if it is a STD graph.

[attach=0]

Ray

Quote from: No Cents on November 21, 2014, 03:52:13 PM
if you don't mind Eric...let me know what Vic is using for pistons and cylinders in the one he is building. I want to look at all my options before choosing.
Is Vic using the 4 3/8" bore T2 cases?

Ray

Stopped to see Vic Saturday and got you some info on the 131, turns out to be a rebuild not a build. It started as a Jim's motor, cases are repaired and printed, crank lightened, balanced and welded. They are reusing the Jim's cylinders. Wiseco or CP pistons, he has both on the shelf but has not settled on which will be used and did not elaborate as to what the deciding factor would be. CCP will be under 200psi. Heads are based off B2 castings and the throttle body started as a 70mm Throttle hog. Air cleaner was machined for this set up and K&N supplied the element. No word on the final cams, he will be starting with three test cams that he has and possibly a forth custom grind based on the testing. The first test pipe is a D&D with modified head pipes that the customer had on the original engine, and then some runs with the shop test pipes before the final exhaust is tuned to the final cam.

That run stops at 5800 RPM. Nice power without having to reach for it.  :up: Wes knows how to get the power out.

Quote from: No Cents on November 23, 2014, 06:18:45 AM
here is a 131"er that Wes Brown of Cycle-rama built and tuned for a customer.
Impressive...to say the least...even if it is a STD graph.


Ray

Stout run. Did you get the specs on that one?

no spec's given besides it's a 131...all's I know is Wes did the heads and built and tuned the engine. He said there was more left in it and to note where he only pulled it to.
I'm pretty sure it has the same cams in it that I currently have in my 124 right now...with the addition of the 1.725 stilts I have on the intake sides.

Ray

Yes, they are finned and painted black.  They are pretty simple.  Four holes in bottom and four threaded holes in top.  Straight, stable bore down the middle.  External oil returns.

have you noticed any addition heat build up using the ductile cylinders...over say cylinders like the new style S&S?
is it a bar hopper...or something you have put some long distance mile days on before?
some pic's of your oil lines would be appreciated.

Ray

Quote from: No Cents on November 23, 2014, 10:51:29 AM
have you noticed any addition heat build up using the ductile cylinders...over say cylinders like the new style S&S?
is it a bar hopper...or something you have put some long distance mile days on before?
some pic's of your oil lines would be appreciated.

Ray

Ray, here is a picture of one of my engines with external oil return lines and Axtell base stud style ductile cylinders. While not a touring bike, my FXR does see some very long, cross country, group rides. These rides are often times in a large group where break downs and excuses are not an option. Has also done considerable traffic duty in places like Daytona, Laughlin, etc. Heat from the ductile cylinders has never been an issue. YMMV.

(http://i1107.photobucket.com/albums/h392/econnor2/Taj-Mah-Motor/IMG_3164.jpg)

(http://i1107.photobucket.com/albums/h392/econnor2/Taj-Mah-Motor/IMG_3148.jpg)

 thanks Ed!  :up:
nice pictures. Does Axtell make them in a silver polished finish like the S&S cylinders?
I still haven't ruled out using a finned ductile cylinder. I do like that they make for a more stable top end. Heat build up is my main concern.
The extra weight of them isn't an issue because it will be in a land barge and not a racer. I just don't want any issues happening if I ran 400- 500 miles one day and then all the sudden hit bumper to bumper traffic and I can't get off on an exit ramp for miles. I've been looking at the Jim's cooling fan that replaces the horn. This might be a good option to go along with ductile cylinders to help cool down the cylinders and heads if you run into a bad situation.

Ray

Ray, Axtell makes them in ductile irion. Standard finish is black paint, but Ron will put whatever finish on them you want. I have seen guys have them ceracoated, but not sure how that dissipates heat.

Instead of comments from the Cheers crowd here, I recommend you call Ron directly.

 :pop:

Well, there you go.  Make a phone call.  Because any other input besides from one of the guys making these would be worthless.

Holy freaking cow! those iron cylinders are beautiful! I have been dreaming about some... This just makes me want some more!

Quote from: turboprop on November 23, 2014, 11:07:32 AM

Quote from: No Cents on November 23, 2014, 10:51:29 AM
have you noticed any addition heat build up using the ductile cylinders...over say cylinders like the new style S&S?
is it a bar hopper...or something you have put some long distance mile days on before?
some pic's of your oil lines would be appreciated.

Ray

Ray, here is a picture of one of my engines with external oil return lines and Axtell base stud style ductile cylinders. While not a touring bike, my FXR does see some very long, cross country, group rides. These rides are often times in a large group where break downs and excuses are not an option. Has also done considerable traffic duty in places like Daytona, Laughlin, etc. Heat from the ductile cylinders has never been an issue. YMMV.

(http://i1107.photobucket.com/albums/h392/econnor2/Taj-Mah-Motor/IMG_3164.jpg)

(http://i1107.photobucket.com/albums/h392/econnor2/Taj-Mah-Motor/IMG_3148.jpg)

Do your oil returns feed back into the original case feeds to the cam chest? I was planning to go into the tappet covers or the bottom of the cam cover on my build but your setup looks much cleaner.

Quote from: gordonr on November 24, 2014, 06:10:14 PM

Quote from: turboprop on November 23, 2014, 11:07:32 AM

Quote from: No Cents on November 23, 2014, 10:51:29 AM
have you noticed any addition heat build up using the ductile cylinders...over say cylinders like the new style S&S?
is it a bar hopper...or something you have put some long distance mile days on before?
some pic's of your oil lines would be appreciated.

Ray

The oil returns return through the oem holes in the cases. A consciousness decision was made to do it this way. Had nothing to do with appearances and everything to do with wanting the return oil inside the crank case. If this were a track only bike, I would have returned them into the cam chest, but being a street engine, and an Evo, this puts more oil onto the piston skirts and has to improve longevity. A TC with piston oilers, would be different. Ron Dickey at Axtell can set them up however the builder wants them.

Ray, here is a picture of one of my engines with external oil return lines and Axtell base stud style ductile cylinders. While not a touring bike, my FXR does see some very long, cross country, group rides. These rides are often times in a large group where break downs and excuses are not an option. Has also done considerable traffic duty in places like Daytona, Laughlin, etc. Heat from the ductile cylinders has never been an issue. YMMV.

(http://i1107.photobucket.com/albums/h392/econnor2/Taj-Mah-Motor/IMG_3164.jpg)

(http://i1107.photobucket.com/albums/h392/econnor2/Taj-Mah-Motor/IMG_3148.jpg)

Do your oil returns feed back into the original case feeds to the cam chest? I was planning to go into the tappet covers or the bottom of the cam cover on my build but your setup looks much cleaner.

I like what Ed did with his oil return lines.
I was thinking of doing them this way returning the oil back into the lifter blocks...but now I'll have to do more research on which way would be best if I decided to use a ductile cylinder.

[attach=0]

[attach=1]

Ray

The oil returns return through the oem holes in the cases. A consciousness decision was made to do it this way. Had nothing to do with appearances and everything to do with wanting the return oil inside the crank case. If this were a track only bike, I would have returned them into the cam chest, but being a street engine, and an Evo, this puts more oil onto the piston skirts and has to improve longevity. A TC with piston oilers, would be different. Ron Dickey at Axtell can set them up however the builder wants them.


Thanks for the reply. I spent a good part of a week drilling and tapping making fixtures to determine with a vacuum gauge the best spot for the oil returns from the heads to exit to. I was using S&S's TC oil pump assembly at the time and inputting the returns directly under the return pump gear as it was the best @ 2-3". Now in my current build I'm using the Thayer pump (couldn't get cam blanks for a custom grind on the S&S pump platform) and have been revisiting ideas not knowing if I can get the same outcome as the S&S pump gave.

Ray, I'm going the block the head vents and possibly vent from the lifter covers with a check valve. Also running externals limits the bake time the oil goes through, returning back to the came chest. Which is a good thing!

Good info Gordonr.  Looks like the cheers crowd has better info than the swingers.  I made the same choice based on same factors of where my lines went.

See turboprop.  These things have been around for quite some time.  There is no new info about them.  It's not a big secrete.  And I am sure. Randy has and can give the same info, if not more.

Quote from: gordonr on November 25, 2014, 04:04:17 AM
The oil returns return through the oem holes in the cases. A consciousness decision was made to do it this way. Had nothing to do with appearances and everything to do with wanting the return oil inside the crank case. If this were a track only bike, I would have returned them into the cam chest, but being a street engine, and an Evo, this puts more oil onto the piston skirts and has to improve longevity. A TC with piston oilers, would be different. Ron Dickey at Axtell can set them up however the builder wants them.


Thanks for the reply. I spent a good part of a week drilling and tapping making fixtures to determine with a vacuum gauge the best spot for the oil returns from the heads to exit to. I was using S&S's TC oil pump assembly at the time and inputting the returns directly under the return pump gear as it was the best @ 2-3". Now in my current build I'm using the Thayer pump (couldn't get cam blanks for a custom grind on the S&S pump platform) and have been revisiting ideas not knowing if I can get the same outcome as the S&S pump gave.

Ray, I'm going the block the head vents and possibly vent from the lifter covers with a check valve. Also running externals limits the bake time the oil goes through, returning back to the came chest. Which is a good thing!

I like the idea of venting through the lifter covers. Saw several TC based bikes at Bonneville that were plumbed like that but they also vented through the heads (Also w/check valves).

The return lines on my engine are 6AN, but I started out with 3AN lines. As part of a science experiment, I replaced the black hose with clear and could see oil pulsing up and down in the return lines. I did the same thing with clear 6AN hose and did not witness the same pulsing. The oil just simply drained down the line. The TC handles internal vacume and pressure differently, but I suspect the oil in the return lines would behave similarly. 

Quote from: turboprop on November 24, 2014, 06:24:10 PM

Quote from: gordonr on November 24, 2014, 06:10:14 PM

Quote from: turboprop on November 23, 2014, 11:07:32 AM

Quote from: No Cents on November 23, 2014, 10:51:29 AM
have you noticed any addition heat build up using the ductile cylinders...over say cylinders like the new style S&S?
is it a bar hopper...or something you have put some long distance mile days on before?
some pic's of your oil lines would be appreciated.

Ray

The oil returns return through the oem holes in the cases. A consciousness decision was made to do it this way. Had nothing to do with appearances and everything to do with wanting the return oil inside the crank case. If this were a track only bike, I would have returned them into the cam chest, but being a street engine, and an Evo, this puts more oil onto the piston skirts and has to improve longevity. A TC with piston oilers, would be different. Ron Dickey at Axtell can set them up however the builder wants them.

Ray, here is a picture of one of my engines with external oil return lines and Axtell base stud style ductile cylinders. While not a touring bike, my FXR does see some very long, cross country, group rides. These rides are often times in a large group where break downs and excuses are not an option. Has also done considerable traffic duty in places like Daytona, Laughlin, etc. Heat from the ductile cylinders has never been an issue. YMMV.

(http://i1107.photobucket.com/albums/h392/econnor2/Taj-Mah-Motor/IMG_3164.jpg)

(http://i1107.photobucket.com/albums/h392/econnor2/Taj-Mah-Motor/IMG_3148.jpg)

Do your oil returns feed back into the original case feeds to the cam chest? I was planning to go into the tappet covers or the bottom of the cam cover on my build but your setup looks much cleaner.

Now I got an itch to put a similar one in my FXR!

Quote from: turboprop on November 25, 2014, 10:09:28 AM

Quote from: gordonr on November 25, 2014, 04:04:17 AM
The oil returns return through the oem holes in the cases. A consciousness decision was made to do it this way. Had nothing to do with appearances and everything to do with wanting the return oil inside the crank case. If this were a track only bike, I would have returned them into the cam chest, but being a street engine, and an Evo, this puts more oil onto the piston skirts and has to improve longevity. A TC with piston oilers, would be different. Ron Dickey at Axtell can set them up however the builder wants them.


Thanks for the reply. I spent a good part of a week drilling and tapping making fixtures to determine with a vacuum gauge the best spot for the oil returns from the heads to exit to. I was using S&S's TC oil pump assembly at the time and inputting the returns directly under the return pump gear as it was the best @ 2-3". Now in my current build I'm using the Thayer pump (couldn't get cam blanks for a custom grind on the S&S pump platform) and have been revisiting ideas not knowing if I can get the same outcome as the S&S pump gave.

Ray, I'm going the block the head vents and possibly vent from the lifter covers with a check valve. Also running externals limits the bake time the oil goes through, returning back to the came chest. Which is a good thing!

I like the idea of venting through the lifter covers. Saw several TC based bikes at Bonneville that were plumbed like that but they also vented through the heads (Also w/check valves).

The return lines on my engine are 6AN, but I started out with 3AN lines. As part of a science experiment, I replaced the black hose with clear and could see oil pulsing up and down in the return lines. I did the same thing with clear 6AN hose and did not witness the same pulsing. The oil just simply drained down the line. The TC handles internal vacume and pressure differently, but I suspect the oil in the return lines would behave similarly.

With the TC I found if there isn't any crank case volume flowing up to the rocker boxes to find an exit the oil returns wont have any issues in draining. The idea of an "oversized" oil return is a good idea to. Also had thoughts about making a simple cooler for the external returns to pass thru as well.

Are you or anybody else doing anything to help pressure and venting in the crank to cam chest?

Quote from: hrdtail78 on November 25, 2014, 10:38:38 AM
Are you or anybody else doing anything to help pressure and venting in the crank to cam chest?

Using the reed valve on INA of course. But I thought about adding on vents thru reeds between the two cavities in ann effort to make the avail space for the crank case a little larger. Probably hobbie crap though.

Quote from: No Cents on November 23, 2014, 11:52:39 AM
thanks Ed!  :up:
nice pictures. Does Axtell make them in a silver polished finish like the S&S cylinders?
I still haven't ruled out using a finned ductile cylinder. I do like that they make for a more stable top end. Heat build up is my main concern.
The extra weight of them isn't an issue because it will be in a land barge and not a racer.

I just don't want any issues happening if I ran 400- 500 miles one day and then all the sudden hit bumper to bumper traffic and I can't get off on an exit ramp for miles.

I've been looking at the Jim's cooling fan that replaces the horn. This might be a good option to go along with ductile cylinders to help cool down the cylinders and heads if you run into a bad situation.

Ray

The Ward's PartsWorks Fans for the cylinder heads, The Big Sky Fans on the oil cooler, and keeping the Compression around 10.5-1 should be enough

Quote from: gordonr on November 25, 2014, 11:59:04 AM

Quote from: hrdtail78 on November 25, 2014, 10:38:38 AM
Are you or anybody else doing anything to help pressure and venting in the crank to cam chest?

Using the reed valve on INA of course. But I thought about adding on vents thru reeds between the two cavities in ann effort to make the avail space for the crank case a little larger. Probably hobbie crap though.

If your talking a "B" without balancers that could be another matter. Racing of course.

Quote from: turboprop on November 25, 2014, 10:09:28 AM

I like the idea of venting through the lifter covers. Saw several TC based bikes at Bonneville that were plumbed like that but they also vented through the heads (Also w/check valves).

The return lines on my engine are 6AN, but I started out with 3AN lines. As part of a science experiment, I replaced the black hose with clear and could see oil pulsing up and down in the return lines. I did the same thing with clear 6AN hose and did not witness the same pulsing. The oil just simply drained down the line. The TC handles internal vacume and pressure differently, but I suspect the oil in the return lines would behave similarly.

:up: :up: Goods stuff.. Give the oil a chance to loose velocity and it will condense on the sides.. Large tube acts as a oil trap..

Max

The Evo's will pull some vacuum on those return lines.

what would you guys do for pistons in a square 131 motor because I'm not so sure S&S has a cylinder/piston kit sitting on the shelf for the 4 3/8" bore T2 cases?
  I was thinking when I get far enough along that I should send my heads to wfolarry and have him make a clay impression of the chamber and along with the cam spec's I decide to use taking into account their TDC lift...and send the mold to a piston manufacturer to make me two sets of pistons...one for the standard 4 3/8" bore and one set .010 over for later on when the motor needs a freshening up. That way with the known cylinder height and rod length and pin height...they should be able to make me pistons for my desired compression with the valve relief angles and pockets cut in perfectly.
I've talked to Ron @ Axtell about his ductile cylinders and I e-mailed Randy @ Hyperformance about his ductile cylinders last week and never got a reply from Randy.  :nix:
Ron has been gracious enough to have taken the time to talk to me twice about his cylinders and he seems to be willing to work with me on them. He even is checking into having them finished in the polished bright silver look I'm after. So...if I do decide to go with a ductile cylinder...Axtell has earned my business already.
I was looking at AN fittings last night.
So Ed...are you saying the 6AN oil return line is the size to run on a twin cam engine...vs 3 or 8AN ? What size AN fittings do you think were used on the pictured engine...because I don't have a clue as to the size?
I sent Ron a few pictures of the oil return lines of the engine I will post a pic of. He said he likes the way the front cylinder dumped back into the tappet block...but didn't agree with the rear cylinder going back into the rear tappet block. He said there are better options for the rear cylinder to be draining back into and he would go more indepth about it later on. He said it had something to do with the oil pump and dumping twice the amount of oil back into the cam chest than what was needed.

[attach=0]

Ray

A flat top piston should be all you need if this is going to be a cruiser. No need for a dome.

 that's what I was thinking Larry...but Ron at Axtell mentioned something to me about possibly looking into a reversed dome piston for a better burn. All's I know is I don't need a +cc dome for what I'm wanting this engine for.
I'm going to trust the experts like you guys on what would be my best options for getting the correct parts that I'll need when it comes to finding the right cylinders and pistons for this engine. I want it built for reliability and be able to cruise with it for miles on end.

Ray

I've always had better luck with calling Randy 515-266-6381

If a reverse dome is needed I just read some testing on the subject and it said that matching the dish to the chamber had no positive effects at all. Mostly negative.

 It sounds like a flat top piston with valve relief pockets big enough for the B3 valves will be the way to go then.
:up:  thanks Larry.

Ray

Quote from: No Cents on November 27, 2014, 09:06:05 AM
So Ed...are you saying the 6AN oil return line is the size to run on a twin cam engine...vs 3 or 8AN ? What size AN fittings do you think were used on the pictured engine...because I don't have a clue as to the size?

I dont think the TC has unique requirements vs the EVO for oil retrun lines. My guess is the valves and rocker arms for both engines have the same requirements for oil volume, and therefore the same amount of oil to return to wherever.

Not sure how the pressure inside the TC crankcase 'pulses'. I suspect it also pulses in a similar fashion as the EVO, but thats probably going to require another ten page discussion with everyone weighing in and hypothesizing in abstract.

On Ron's TC race bike, with ductile cylinders he used 3/8" rubber hose and screw clamps.

Just for kicks, you should contact Paul Morris and ask him how he does it in his 131"  race engine with Axtell ductile cylinders. Keep in mind Paul's race engine is a four-cam engine, so there will be differences, but allot of synergy as well.

PM me for Paul's phone and email.

Ray, does a square motor operate better mechanically by running higher RPM's versus an over square motor? With less stroke on the same cubic inches, it would seem more suited to a lighter bike.
I'm thinking about going along the same route as you but don't need the torque as much in my Dyna.

 Jay...a square motor is just something I've always wanted to build. I guess for more out of curiosty than anything else. I think it would be a great combo for smooth power and longevity...but I'm saying this with no experience with one ever. It will be interesting...to say the least.
My engine when it's done will go into a land barge bagger...the full tour pak version.
wfolarry said he would run some dynomation combo's for me...and I look forward to seeing what he comes up with.
I do plan on making some phone calls this week to some people that have built 131's before and see what they have to say about them...like R&R Cycle, Hyperformance, and I'm going to call Ron @ Axtell again and see what he has to say too.
For some reason my guy @ S&S has not got back in touch with me.  :nix:  I sent him a wish list of the parts I need to start with over a week ago...with no reply. Maybe he's on vacation.

Ray

I want to use some carry-over parts from what I already have to save some cash but will be traveling down a similar road. I see the T2 cases are not an option for me but will be in touch with John at Darkhorse to hear what he has to say about using the H beams that I have among other things.

You can't put a square peg in a round hole. But you can put a round peg in a square hole!

Something to think about....

Quote from: MCE on November 30, 2014, 06:21:08 PM
You can't put a square peg in a round hole. But you can put a round peg in a square hole!

Something to think about....

Sorry, I'm kind of thick minded some times. Can you laymen me a little better.

Quote from: MCE on November 30, 2014, 06:21:08 PM
You can't put a square peg in a round hole. But you can put a round peg in a square hole!

Something to think about....

me too...I don't understand what he is trying to say there either.

Ray

I think it would depend upon the diameter of the hole.

 :oops:

Quote from: MCE on November 30, 2014, 06:21:08 PM
You can't put a square peg in a round hole. But you can put a round peg in a square hole!

Something to think about....

Spit on it, it'll fit.

I was just thinking out loud, Sunday is my day off to just ponder stuff and be silly. Keeps ya young,
joking around ya know. I don't take a whole lot seriously these days. Life is too short, yuk it up and
enjoy yourself s.

So it's safe to say that I won't be sending any money towards your shop since you don't sweat things too much these days.

Quote from: jam65 on November 30, 2014, 07:38:55 PM
So it's safe to say that I won't be sending any money towards your shop since you don't sweat things too much these days.

Oh lighten up, it's Sunday night. I don't work on Sundays! Guess I'll just have to close the doors then... :hyst:

Quote from: ThumperDeuce on November 30, 2014, 06:54:51 PM
I think it would depend upon the diameter of the hole.

Pick any diameter as long as the square is the same size, 2"square,2"round

Quote from: 1FSTRK on November 30, 2014, 08:09:21 PM

Quote from: ThumperDeuce on November 30, 2014, 06:54:51 PM
I think it would depend upon the diameter of the hole.

Pick any diameter as long as the square is the same size, 2"square,2"round

Very true! Even if it's a little bigger, you can use a hammer and force it in! lol

Quote from: 1FSTRK on November 30, 2014, 08:09:21 PM

Quote from: ThumperDeuce on November 30, 2014, 06:54:51 PM
I think it would depend upon the diameter of the hole.

Pick any diameter as long as the square is the same size, 2"square,2"round

The stupid aspect of my comment is that the diameter of the hole will exceed the width of the peg enough to insure that the peg will pass through.

I'm wanting to stay at or below .625 lift cams in this engine...nothing crazy with lift.
I looked at some cams on the Big Boys calculator last night.
The RS577, Tman625 & 590, Feuling 574 & 594's. All these look like good options.
I think the leader of the pack might be the RS577.
Anyone ever run this cam and how did it perform?

Ray

B2 heads with < .625 lift? What's the point?

  There is no other head option currently that I know of for the S&S T2 4 3/8" bore cases.
If I want the extra displacement...I'm limited on options.

Ray

Quote from: No Cents on December 01, 2014, 07:12:07 AM
  There is no other head option currently that I know of for the S&S T2 4 3/8" bore cases.
If I want the extra displacement...I'm limited on options.

Ray

Ray the B-2 style head is a great choice and considering the flow charts on the cnc version have it reaching 98.6% of its peak flow by .600 lift you will be right on the money with touring cams from .575-.615 lift.

   :up:
thanks Eric.
I was looking at some old B2 head flow charts the other day and that's why I figured a .625" lift cam would be plenty for me for an engine that might see 5800 rpm's at tops just a few times.
I'm so far thinking an intake closing of 50 or less...might be a good target.
A lower lift cam should also make for a nice quiet valve train too.
I'm still spinning my wheels for finding cylinders. I called R&R Cycle today and talked to Reggie Jr. Their 131 has a 4 3/8" bore using a 4 3/8" flywheel...but theirs has a different cylinder stud pattern from the S&S T2 cases he said. He did say he would make me a great deal on one of their 131's...but I told him it would take all my enjoyment out of me building my own engine by buying a crate motor. He said he fully understood...and then said he would sell me one of his 131's...unassembled.

Ray

I remember someone having a R&R 131 tuned on 87 octane and it was impressive to say the least.  That was several years ago, now with their HP stage V heads could be even better.

Ray, why not use S&S cylinders?

Perfect huh? Without having had them on a flow bench you conclude "perfect", 1fst?

They flow noisey off the shell, so, not perfect whatsoever. Torqueinc flowed them, as did 4 other shops, same "conclusion" across th board, although, they did have hands on experience.  :wink:

Quote from: build it on December 01, 2014, 12:42:10 PM
Perfect huh? Without having had them on a flow bench you conclude "perfect", 1fst?

They flow noisey off the shell, so, not perfect whatsoever. Torqueinc flowed them, as did 4 other shops, same "conclusion" across th board, although, they did have hands on experience.  :wink:

Is it that you can't figure out how to use the quote button or do you just avoid it so that you can misquote people by inserting your own words.
Nobody said anything about perfect except you.

Quote from: build it on December 01, 2014, 06:55:58 AM
B2 heads with < .625 lift? What's the point?

So should we assume from this quote that you are implying they will flow better and get quieter with a higher lift cam?

How does knit picking me help with Ray's build anyway?

Quote from: 1FSTRK on December 01, 2014, 12:06:49 PM
Ray, why not use S&S cylinders?

Eric...they don't have a cylinder/piston kit released for the 4 3/8" flywheels in the 4 3/8" T2 cases...yet to my knowledge. They do as you know, made cylinders for the 4 5/8" flywheels for their 143/144 crate motor...so I'm hoping they will have more cylinder options for their other flywheel sizes they have very soon.
  I did put a call in to S&S's racing development department today to talk to the guy that runs it. It went straight to his voice mail...so I guess I'll try again tomorrow and see if I have better luck. Maybe he will have some good news for me.
I would use S&S's aluminum finned iron lined cylinders again in a heart beat...but I don't think they have anything on the shelf at this time for the combo I'm after.
I'll just have to be patient and find something else this winter it looks like...to keep me busy.

Ray

I'm not nit picking, right on the money implies just right or perfect, not close.  If you had said they are close, I might not have said anything. FWIW, I like you, you sound like a cantankerous  old man, what's not to like? I don't however, appreciate your incessant personal attacks when you don't know jack about me.

The noise didn't decrease much with higher lift, although I suspect it's possible with a different head, they will still need work out of the box. For ease of process, Ray should get a cnc b2 and have them touched; at least based on his cylinder choice.

All that said, the b2 doesnt flow anywhere near a worked over 103 or 110 at low lift. This is a touring build right? Maybe the "swingers" we're onto something when they suggested those worthless ductile cylinders with the fancy fasteners.

Quote from: No Cents on December 01, 2014, 01:26:24 PM

Quote from: 1FSTRK on December 01, 2014, 12:06:49 PM
Ray, why not use S&S cylinders?

Eric...they don't have a cylinder/piston kit released for the 4 3/8" flywheels in the 4 3/8" T2 cases...yet to my knowledge. They do as you know, made cylinders for the 4 5/8" flywheels for their 143/144 crate motor...so I'm hoping they will have more cylinder options for their other flywheel sizes they have very soon.
  I did put a call in to S&S's racing development department today to talk to the guy that runs it. It went straight to his voice mail...so I guess I'll try again tomorrow and see if I have better luck. Maybe he will have some good news for me.
I would use S&S's aluminum finned iron lined cylinders again in a heart beat...but I don't think they have anything on the shelf at this time for the combo I'm after.
I'll just have to be patient and find something else this winter it looks like...to keep me busy.

Ray

Sns doesnt think square?

 I'm waiting to see flow charts on this new B3 head to see what changes S&S made. Apparently they must have done something different with these heads for them to choose to run them with the unorthodox lower lift 635HO cam's that nobody on the forum here liked. Maybe S&S had a master plan all along and just kept us all in the dark...until just recently. It just seemed awfully funny to me that they released the 4 3/8" bore T2 cases almost two years ago...and they never offered up a cylinder/piston kit for them. Then all the sudden...here is the release of a new B3 head on top of a 143/144" crate motor.
There should be a dyno sheet released here sometime in the next week or so to put this new B3 head with the lower lift 635HO cams to rest.
I do plan on sending the B3 heads I will buy out (which is the only option for a head so far with this newer 4 3/8" bore T2 cases) to have them looked at and see if they can be improved upon if need be. I think the B3's will flow plenty on the lower lift side with a cam that makes good early torque...and we all know traditionally how they do on the top end.
Remember...this is an engine that I will be building that is designed for smooth dependable touring in mind...not a drag race motor by any means of the stretch. Right now it is all planning and guess work on my end...but I was told the B3 heads will work excellent straight out of the box for what I'm after.

Ray

Interesting.

 here is an old flow chart on the older style B2 heads vs the CNC B2 heads for comparison of them two.

[attach=0]

Ray

Not to throw too much hate twards the B2 heads but...

I have the CNC version and they did not flow what is posted. I had Torquince put some light loving into them and they drastically improved, but still not a WHOLY COW flow chart...like above.

I prefere the B3's hand over fist due to the combustion chamber. It comes in a user friendly, un shrouded form. It has a nice shape and the intake valve isn't covered up by the Rockie Mountains like the B2's

Quote from: Burch753 on December 01, 2014, 03:05:52 PM
Not to throw too much hate twards the B2 heads but...

I have the CNC version and they did not flow what is posted. I had Torquince put some light loving into them and they drastically improved, but still not a WHOLY COW flow chart...like above.

I prefere the B3's hand over fist due to the combustion chamber. It comes in a user friendly, un shrouded form. It has a nice shape and the intake valve isn't covered up by the Rockie Mountains like the B2's

Weird. My heads flowed very very close to as advertised (4.375" bore tbough)

Is the combustion chamber face opening 4-3/8" in diameter on the 2 and 3 heads?

Quote from: build it on December 01, 2014, 01:44:18 PM
I'm not nit picking, right on the money implies just right or perfect, not close.  If you had said they are close, I might not have said anything. FWIW, I like you, you sound like a cantankerous  old man, what's not to like? I don't however, appreciate your incessant personal attacks when you don't know jack about me.

The noise didn't decrease much with higher lift, although I suspect it's possible with a different head, they will still need work out of the box. For ease of process, Ray should get a cnc b2 and have them touched; at least based on his cylinder choice.

All that said, the b2 doesnt flow anywhere near a worked over 103 or 110 at low lift. This is a touring build right? Maybe the "swingers" we're onto something when they suggested those worthless ductile cylinders with the fancy fasteners.

I am always willing to listen. Please post the flow numbers and head specs for the 103 and 110 heads you are comparing too above so that we may all see and learn.

 :up:

Quote from: No Cents on December 01, 2014, 02:52:24 PM
here is an old flow chart on the older style B2 heads vs the CNC B2 heads for comparison of them two.

[attach=0]

Ray

I got 335 out of a set of those this summer.

 I believe they actually offer the B2 head in a couple of configurations.
One for the older S&S cases bolt pattern and a set for the stock HD bolt pattern. I don't know if the chamber size was the same for both.

built it...what size and brand of engine do you have with the 4.375" bore?

Ray

Quote from: MCE on December 01, 2014, 04:20:22 PM

Quote from: No Cents on December 01, 2014, 02:52:24 PM
here is an old flow chart on the older style B2 heads vs the CNC B2 heads for comparison of them two.

[attach=0]

Ray

I got 335 out of a set of those this summer.

which set...the older style B2 or the newer CNC version?

Ray

Ditto Ray.  Lets just stick to the facts and let the data speak for itself.  Trying to be a good forumite here.  My track record not so great but trying.  Regards   -Tutt 

Quote from: No Cents on December 01, 2014, 04:26:28 PM
I believe they actually offer the B2 head in a couple of configurations.
One for the older S&S cases bolt pattern and a set for the stock HD bolt pattern. I don't know if the chamber size was the same for both.

built it...what size and brand of engine do you have with the 4.375" bore?

Ray

Hi Ray, burch had a completely different chamber than what I have. Mine cced at 93.8, but I don't know what Burch 124 CNCed b2s cced out to. Btw, i have the SA exhaust bolt pattern. The heads go on a 126" S&S engine, that's been waiting longer than it should have as I had other stuff done.

 wow...93.8cc chambers on B2 heads.
Did you have a bunch milled off them or the chambers welded up some?
I was under the impression the B2 heads were well north of 100cc's.

Ray

Here are the flow rates of my stock 96 heads used in my 103-107 builds cut by hand by my head porter.  I once promised him I would never post his information that he sends out with EVERY set of heads he cuts.  Few people do that in the industry.  Because of my promise, I therefore covered up his information although there is nothing wrong with how his heads flow for the valve and port size at all.  Good man, no BS. 1.9 intake, 1.625 exhaust, 1.75 intake port. 

(http://i44.photobucket.com/albums/f39/Cowboytutt/Flowchart1900heads_zpsd655e90a.jpg)

If those CNC B2 heads flow close to what S&S sent, they are good to go when compared to a stock modified 96 head.  I don't know about the 103 or 110 head at low lift.  I am not sure the 103 head is any different from the 96 head.  Please advise.  A 110 head with bigger valves would certainly do A LOT better then what I have posted here, but this was for a smaller engine.  Regards  -Tutt

 

Quote from: No Cents on December 01, 2014, 05:34:27 PM
wow...93.8cc chambers on B2 heads.
Did you have a bunch milled off them or the chambers welded up some?
I was under the impression the B2 heads were well north of 100cc's.

Ray

No Sir, CC as they came out of the box

What is the S&S SA exhaust bolt pattern?  2 or 4 bolt flanges?  I'm guessing 4 bolt?  All the information I have directly from S&S is that the B2 chambers are 106 cc's as cast and the intake is .42 or .45 taller than stock heads.  Our information is not adding up at all.  This is not good.   -Tutt   

Quote from: CowboyTutt on December 01, 2014, 05:43:11 PM
What is the S&S SA exhaust bolt pattern?  2 or 4 bolt flanges?  I'm guessing 4 bolt?  All the information I have directly from S&S is that the B2 chambers are 106 cc's as cast and the intake is .42 or .45 taller than stock heads.  Our information is not adding up at all.  This is not good.   -Tutt

4 bolt.

different chambers for 4.125" bore.

OK, human error.  On post 114 you said it was with a 4.375 bore.  That is not 4 and 1/8th bore.  Regards  -Tutt 

Quote from: build it on December 01, 2014, 05:46:25 PM

Quote from: CowboyTutt on December 01, 2014, 05:43:11 PM
What is the S&S SA exhaust bolt pattern?  2 or 4 bolt flanges?  I'm guessing 4 bolt?  All the information I have directly from S&S is that the B2 chambers are 106 cc's as cast and the intake is .42 or .45 taller than stock heads.  Our information is not adding up at all.  This is not good.   -Tutt

4 bolt.

different chambers for 4.125" bore.

so you are saying your older style B2 heads with the 4 bolt exhaust port for the 4.375" bore...was cc'd @ 93.8cc's?
I'm being told something totally different from my guy @ S&S about the size chambers on the newer style 2 bolt exhaust port B2 heads they have. I haven't been able to get any technical info on the latest release of the B3 heads yet.
I'll call him tomorrow and see if he will give me the cc's and flow chart numbers of the B3's. This is very interesting with what your B2 heads cc'd out to be. I've never heard of the B2's in stock casting forum cc that low.
I have been running numbers on the compression calculators trying to find a good cam option to use with the figures I've entered with a lot more head chamber cc's than you have. If the heads are as what you say...I'll have to totally re-think the cam options I've been looking at.

Ray

Ray, the kid doesnt know what he doesnt know. Reads allot, but not allot of depth. He claims to have a G2 126, whatever. G2 mills their B2 heads down a considerable amount. Call G2 if you want facts. Nobody on this forum has them.

That would explain the difference in chamber design.  I have heard it said that S&S deliberately made the chamber size very generous so they could be milled down to fit.  This is not so surprising I think.  Regards  -Tutt 

Mine were 105cc ish. They have been milled to less than that. I also have SA exhaust port with four bolt exhaust.

I can also provide before and after flow numbers. I don't care too much about what the head in itself does it's more about it's flow through the tb and ac.

Quote from: turboprop on December 01, 2014, 06:22:01 PM
Ray, the kid doesnt know what he doesnt know. Reads allot, but not allot of depth. He claims to have a G2 126, whatever. G2 mills their B2 heads down a considerable amount. Call G2 if you want facts. Nobody on this forum has them.

Or it could be you are wrong (I take no pleasure in the fact).. S&S advertises the smaller chamber for the 4.375" bore, and  the 106cc chamber for the stock bolt pattern, and now the 4.375" bore as well, the earlier catalogue showed the 93cc chamber (at the time I ordered). Here is a link:

http://www.sscycle.com/product/Products-20-3E-20Race-20Components-20-3E-20Top-20End-20/Special-Order-Cylinder-Heads-For-4-3-8-Bore-Engines-p24937.html (http://www.sscycle.com/product/Products-20-3E-20Race-20Components-20-3E-20Top-20End-20/Special-Order-Cylinder-Heads-For-4-3-8-Bore-Engines-p24937.html)

My kit came direct from S&S, g2 wasn't part of the equation.

I've posted s link to a public photobucket for your viewing pleasure.

QuoteS&S advertises the smaller chamber for the 4.375" bore (that's 4 38ths folks), and  the 106cc chamber for the stock bolt pattern (what bore?), and now the 4.375" bore as well (what?), the earlier catalogue showed the 93cc chamber (at the time I ordered). Here is a link:

Please clarify, this makes no sense to me at all.  -Tutt   

Quote from: CowboyTutt on December 01, 2014, 07:31:46 PM

QuoteS&S advertises the smaller chamber for the 4.375" bore (that's 4 38ths folks), and  the 106cc chamber for the stock bolt pattern (what bore?), and now the 4.375" bore as well (what?), the earlier catalogue showed the 93cc chamber (at the time I ordered). Here is a link:

Please clarify, this makes no sense to me at all.  -Tutt   

http://www.sscycle.com/product/Race-Components/Top-End-c684/ (http://www.sscycle.com/product/Race-Components/Top-End-c684/)

Now go to the current catalogue, the stock bolt pattern and my 4.375" bore are advertised as 105cc.

The old catalogue advertised 93cc for the 4.375" bore.

Quote from: No Cents on December 01, 2014, 01:26:24 PM

Quote from: 1FSTRK on December 01, 2014, 12:06:49 PM
Ray, why not use S&S cylinders?

Eric...they don't have a cylinder/piston kit released for the 4 3/8" flywheels in the 4 3/8" T2 cases...yet to my knowledge. They do as you know, made cylinders for the 4 5/8" flywheels for their 143/144 crate motor...so I'm hoping they will have more cylinder options for their other flywheel sizes they have very soon.
  I did put a call in to S&S's racing development department today to talk to the guy that runs it. It went straight to his voice mail...so I guess I'll try again tomorrow and see if I have better luck. Maybe he will have some good news for me.
I would use S&S's aluminum finned iron lined cylinders again in a heart beat...but I don't think they have anything on the shelf at this time for the combo I'm after.
I'll just have to be patient and find something else this winter it looks like...to keep me busy.

Ray

You could use the 143 cylinder length and a longer rod (even better rod to stroke ratio) or have the pistons made with  the proper pin height. The question is could you get them with a 4.375 bore?

Quote from: 1FSTRK on December 01, 2014, 08:07:57 PM

Quote from: No Cents on December 01, 2014, 01:26:24 PM

Quote from: 1FSTRK on December 01, 2014, 12:06:49 PM
Ray, why not use S&S cylinders?

Eric...they don't have a cylinder/piston kit released for the 4 3/8" flywheels in the 4 3/8" T2 cases...yet to my knowledge. They do as you know, made cylinders for the 4 5/8" flywheels for their 143/144 crate motor...so I'm hoping they will have more cylinder options for their other flywheel sizes they have very soon.
  I did put a call in to S&S's racing development department today to talk to the guy that runs it. It went straight to his voice mail...so I guess I'll try again tomorrow and see if I have better luck. Maybe he will have some good news for me.
I would use S&S's aluminum finned iron lined cylinders again in a heart beat...but I don't think they have anything on the shelf at this time for the combo I'm after.
I'll just have to be patient and find something else this winter it looks like...to keep me busy.

Ray

You could use the 143 cylinder length and a longer rod (even better rod to stroke ratio) or have the pistons made with  the proper pin height. The question is could you get them with a 4.375 bore?

  Ray if you are going to actually do a build....built for long distance warp speed cruising with Mrs Ray in tow

  What has been mentioned is probably a good idea

  They have the 144/142 ? WTF ever size the thing is done....have made cylinder length changes and changed something to make it fit into a stock chassis...instead of getting in a hurry why don't you find out if you can get a 144 with a smaller bore....I am certain they don't cast them at the finished length nor the finished bore size.

  Making the whole process simple   :oil:

Why not "Think over square" Take the 4.425 bore cylinders and put them on the 4.375  stroke long rod crank, T2 cases, B2 or B3 heads, lots of room for big valves with no shrouding, 134.56CI of mild compression touring monster.

:idea: Wow I have talked myself into it now all I need to do is rob a bank to pay for it.

Honestly Ray this maybe a good combination.

you may be on to something there Eric  :scratch:
At this point I'm not ruling out anything. That could be an option beings we know those cylinders and pistons should be available.

Ray

I am still in awe about the touring motor and B2 or B3 heads and a 70 mm..  :nix:   .. none of it adds up for touring Ray.. But good luck nothing wrong with going your own direction. ,... I would suggest you Pick the phone up and talk to Randy about the 131 that we did and now his buddy has. It will be a much better build  VS the big head massive t/b when it comes to touring. right at 150/150( BVBOBS drum we where high 140 with a 2-1 pipe) with only 175 CCP runs on 89 octane fuel.. Now that is a touring engine :up:  I would take that little R&R 131 in a heart beat.  Smooth does not even cover how well it runs.

(http://i1290.photobucket.com/albums/b537/Gmr-Performance/DSCF2986_zps5411b42f.jpg) (http://s1290.photobucket.com/user/Gmr-Performance/media/DSCF2986_zps5411b42f.jpg.html)


Why not "Think over square" Take the 4.425 bore cylinders and put them on the 4.375  stroke long rod crank, T2 cases, B2 or B3 heads, lots of room for big valves with no shrouding, 134.56CI of mild compression touring monster.


That sounds good but but it would have to be measured up and I think the piston will be somewhat of an issue for touring. The piston stability may be an issue with that large of a bore short stroke. 

Buzz killer Steve.
Got to decide the bore, stroke, rod length first not what cam then backward design from there. There is likely no "kit".  Custom pistons become appropriate.

Quote from: HD Street Performance on December 02, 2014, 05:36:11 AM
Buzz killer Steve.
Got to decide the bore, stroke, rod length first not what cam then backward design from there. There is likely no "kit".  Custom pistons become appropriate.

:teeth:  I know some times it too simple.. But having built a 131 with ductile. and having used the b2 heads as well R&R billet oval port heads I have a very good idea on how they run and what the pros and cons are.

The R&R 131 crate engine is a simple set up with warranty cases that at 131 is just a starting point, aluminum cylinders on and on.  Not trying to kill the buzz,, just stating what I know works and it fits the bill for a killer touring engine that really is no slouch when it comes to power either.

But its winter  so  :nix: it will be what it will be.. 

BTW Don  The 117 is tuning great.. ANGRY .. HAH its pissed off  if an engine has feelings..  :scratch:.. I do think that 140 Tq is within reach 135/138 thus far. and I am not done..

Steve...I talked to Reggie Jr. yesterday on the phone for an hour.
He told me he would sell me one of his 131's at a discounted price.

Ray

Ray

I can tell you that the engine is a outstanding item. I feel that its not being built to run at 100% what so ever. With that being said it makes a killer bagger engine that bolts in. Nothing wrong with a detuned engine in that size. Super cool running and power that starts at what seems to be idle.

Steve , do you know if the R&R 131" will fit in a 2006 and up dyna frame ?

I do not see why not. R&R does have a oiling line system that you must use , like the S&S but different. Other than that I cannot see why it would not. I have not done them in anything but a bagger. though

I wish I had gone the R&R 131 route from day one! They are only twenty five miles north of me.

Rob Did you finally get the 124 deal sorted out?

Which deal? There have been a few. :emoGroan:  Been running good for a couple years now though. :teeth:

Well then its fixed HA HA Glad to hear it..

Quote from: No Cents on December 02, 2014, 05:07:56 AM
you may be on to something there Eric  :scratch:
At this point I'm not ruling out anything. That could be an option beings we know those cylinders and pistons should be available.

Ray

If you start with the basic 143 and build it with 4.375 flywheels and a longer rod, the only one off part would be the connecting rods.
You stay with the standard pistons and cylinders that are off the shelf then the engine height and all the mounting points and manifold stuff will be the same as the 143. Carrillo or Darkhorse should be able to set you up but there are others that make custom rods.
This is how Buell made the XB9 and kept the cost down.

never mind.

What would custom rods cost?

With the longer rods comes an improved rod/stroke ratio and the possibility of longer piston skirts and the accompanying improved ring stability, seal, consistent tune, etc, etc.  Good stuff.

For reference, I had Carrillo make me a set of 8" connecting rods for my TC project. I think total price through Hobans for just the rods was in the neighborhood of $750.

I'd take a step back.  Figure out what you want the build to do.  What kind of power is going to make you happy, and then go from there.  Seems you are trying to run the cart but the horse is still in the barn.

Now longer rods are being talked about.  Ratio is brought up with the other beni's but there are downfalls as well.  Before I put Carrillo rods in my 128.  I had a good understanding of rod ratio.  Maybe a raised deck case is in order. :kick:

As others will tell you.  Putting all the best parts together isn't what makes great builds.  It is putting the best match parts together.  I'd hate to see someone dump money hand over fist to put together an engine that doesn't play well together.

The point would be to not have to raise the deck and require moving farther from the design work S&S has already done on the 143, include the fact in fits in the frame and has available motor mounts.

I agree, do the math and everything else that should be done when designing a new build. I am just saying with factory R/S numbers already going from 1.638:1 to 1.917:1 that this motor combo should not be outside of reasonable.

S&S can make the T2 cases with a raised deck.  I don't know too many people capable of designing the long rod 135 engine with the 4 3/8th stroke and pistons but it sure looks interesting.  Don Dorfman at HD Street Performance with Terry Stewart at Shaker Products could do it.  The question is, would S&S even build you the custom parts for it? 

Also, I think Ray is looking to use off the shelf parts and not have to pay for custom parts but I'm not 100% certain of that.  S&S cylinders are available for a 4 3/8th bore but they are custom machined and not off the shelf.  Probably not so cheap either.   

-Tutt 

There are many shops that could easily build this engine.

On this forum Kirby, WFO Larry, John Sachs and Diamond Bar come to mind. There are many others that are not on this forum that could also do it. As has already been stated, this could be done easily with all off-the-shelf parts with the exception being the connecting rods. The good thing about custom rods is they can be purchased in a single set and the NRE for them is relatively easy.

Additionally, this or at least something very similar has already been done. Probably many times. Of the two that I have seen, both of them were complete failures. Sort of like circus side shows. They looked neat, whoo'd the crowd, and made what seemed like big numbers, but in actuality they were pigs. Couldnt breath right. Power to cube was weak. Only so much room between the cylinders

 well men...this is all in the planning stages as you all well know. I haven't got anything in stone yet.
I "WILL" not build a turd Ed...you can take that one to the bank.  :wink:  I will attempt to build me a lower compression bigger inch motor that will cruise all day long and be able to run on junk fuel if it has to.
I hope nobody has taken offense of me posting this thread. Looking back...I should not of said a thing and just did the build after doing my research.
The only reason I posted this thread was to hopefully get some good ideas from people that might have tried to do something like this...or possibly knew someone that had.
I didn't want to start a debate or have members going back and forth at each other over differences in opinions. This was not my goal.
:up:  Thanks for all the input I received from everybody and I'll keep researching for my best options to fulfill my goals.

Ray

Well said Ray!  I still think your 135 inch build using a 4.5 inch stroke and 4 3/8th's bore is the best way to go for your rpm range.  It should work fine.  But that will still require some custom parts.  -Tutt 

Well, as Ray has stated, this thread has gone around a few corners. As I see it, I think we need to remember .....

      1. - Ray wants to be the builder not the buyer
      2. - He wants it to be high quality and smooth
      3. - It has to be able to tour 2 up and loaded all day every day dependably
      4. - It won't have to do burnouts and wheelies  :teeth: but it has to pull stumps when asked to
      5. - He trusts the people here to give good suggestions and advice so he can make good decisions.

Kept on track, this thread could help a lot of other folks that are thinking the along the same lines (but are keeping it to themselves). I see some value in the cautions about using one off parts. Hard to fix on the road but no big deal if it's your bar hopper. If you break something at home you can ride "the other bike" while you wait for parts. Not so when you're in East Pumphandle Saskatchewan with your wife on a holiday.  For example, if it was me, and because s--t happens sometimes when you are travelling, I'm sticking to Harley parts (cylinders, pistons etc) for the touring 120R I'm putting together now. Paranoid? Probably. (Dan Baisley and Ron Dickey said so when I decided to not go with 20* cut pistons  :nix:)

There's lots of recipes out there that will do the job Ray. You know enough and how to make the right choices and you know who to trust for advice. It's going to be real interesting to see where you settle out. Take your time and breath deep when it gets confusing.  :wink:

Quote from: CowboyTutt on December 02, 2014, 04:41:09 PM
S&S can make the T2 cases with a raised deck.  I don't know too many people capable of designing the long rod 135 engine with the 4 3/8th stroke and pistons but it sure looks interesting.  Don Dorfman at HD Street Performance with Terry Stewart at Shaker Products could do it.  The question is, would S&S even build you the custom parts for it? 

Also, I think Ray is looking to use off the shelf parts and not have to pay for custom parts but I'm not 100% certain of that.  S&S cylinders are available for a 4 3/8th bore but they are custom machined and not off the shelf.  Probably not so cheap either.   

-Tutt

As I said the entire motor would be off the shelf 143 except for the crank That would be standard 103 stroke flywheels and custom rods. Very seldom do you have a rod problem if you use a quality one to begin with, So the only custom one off part is the rods. As for how it would work I hear lots of opinions and very little facts.

Does anyone know the rod length for the S&S 143?

7.659" rods for the 4 5/8" flywheels in the 143.
They also use the same 7.659" rods in the 4 3/8" flywheels.

Ray

Quote from: No Cents on December 02, 2014, 06:26:54 PM
7.659" rods for the 4 5/8" flywheels in the 143.
They also use the same 7.659" rods in the 4 3/8" flywheels.

Ray

Are you sure the 143 uses 7.659" rods?
In the specs GMR posted He said they are 7.88" in the 143 motor.

Added

95" twin cam has a R/S of 1.917

103" Twin cam has a R/S of 1.752

120R has a R/S of 1.638

S&S 143 has a R/S of 1.703 if it has a 7.88" rod

New 135 R/S will be 1.830 with a .125 longer rod than the S&S143

If the S&S143 rod is 7.659 then it has a R/S of 1.656

The new 135 would then have a R/S of 1.75 with the longer custom rod.

7.800 Rod.

I brought up rod ratio and raised decks as an example.

Quote from: gordonr on November 25, 2014, 11:59:04 AM

Quote from: hrdtail78 on November 25, 2014, 10:38:38 AM
Are you or anybody else doing anything to help pressure and venting in the crank to cam chest?

Using the reed valve on INA of course. But I thought about adding on vents thru reeds between the two cavities in ann effort to make the avail space for the crank case a little larger. Probably hobbie crap though.

Another plus for de-stroking the 143 to a 135 long rod would be 5.6% less swept volume being serviced by the same cases and cylinders.Should reduce crankcase pressure and pumping losses.
I may talk myself into this if Ray doesn't build it.

Just out of curiosity, and maybe I missed it, but whats the MSRP on this 143/144 crate engine?

Quotebut whats the MSRP on this 143/144 crate engine?

I bet it's less than a 142" billet shovel from SP.

That beast from Sorenson was $15k. Would like to see what it does on the dyno compared to the beast that Jim just tuned.

 :pop:

  Last I heard, the 144 was $9250US.
For the life of me I can't conceive why anyone would suggest buying a 144, and destroking it when the OP specified HE wants to BUILD a 131, 4 3/8 x 4 3/8 square bore.
  I'm sure it can be done thru S&S. They can make whatever is required for this combo if its not already available.
No cents, you might contact Star Racing as well, since they and S&S work hand in hand for parts, some of which only appear to be thru Star.
I'm quite interested in your 'SQUARE ENGINE", sounds like a beaut.  Buffalo

  :up:
thank you Buffalo!
I'm sticking to my original plan for a square motor...unless someone I know and trusts tells me something different and shows me a good reason why I shouldn't.
I know I can get the 4 3/8" bore T2 cases...check.
heads...check.
pistons/cylinders...unknown as to what to use and where to get them.

I'd like to do one stop shopping on pistons and cylinder if possible. I've not gave up hope on finding them...I just got to find someone that's willing to tell me they have or can get or make me what I need for that end of my project.  I've stepped back and I'm trying to do some more research on cylinders. I still go back looking at the aluminum finned ductile cylinder for some reason. I like the idea of the cylinders being bolted to the case with the shorter studs. It just seems like it would make for a stronger unit vs having the longer cylinder studs that will have some flex. My worries are heat dissipation with the ductile cylinder  vs the iron lined cylinder.
I'll keep looking at my options...so far I haven't ruled out anything.

Ray

Keep up the search Ray!  :up: Build it how you want it and have fun doing it  :beer:
i have always enjoyed reading your threads and look forward to this beast.  :scoot:

Travis

9 Grand is allot of $$. Why not get a turbo kit for half that and spend the rest on stupid stuff?

Any heat concerns in a bagger?

Well Ray, once more I am mesmerized by this thread and all the knowledgeable input and ideas being presented.  You will build another killer motor and I will soak it all in. Thanks for all your thought-provoking ideas.  Good on ya buddy!

Quote from: MCE on December 04, 2014, 04:50:59 PM
9 Grand is allot of $$. Why not get a turbo kit for half that and spend the rest on stupid stuff?

Well for 9gs you could get a good sport bike but where is the fun in that.

Quote from: joe_lyons on December 04, 2014, 06:36:45 PM

Quote from: MCE on December 04, 2014, 04:50:59 PM
9 Grand is allot of $$. Why not get a turbo kit for half that and spend the rest on stupid stuff?

Well for 9gs you could get a good sport bike but where is the fun in that.

  Exactly   :up:

Most everyone here likes that large "thump" "thump" "thump" of the "Bigger" "Twin".

It's too bad we have to get reemed for a 2 cylinder 2liter engine.

  Why exactly are WE getting reemed ?

Apology's, but I can't help but see what a HiPo v8 car engine costs compared to a HiPo v-twin bike motor. I know it is what it is but still looks like a reeming. Maybe justification in there somewhere but I can't  see it.

Supply and demand there's a lot more v8's out there

Have you priced the new vette engine? 

Quote from: clawdog60 on December 05, 2014, 06:14:52 PM
Apology's, but I can't help but see what a HiPo v8 car engine costs compared to a HiPo v-twin bike motor. I know it is what it is but still looks like a reeming. Maybe justification in there somewhere but I can't  see it.

  Ok

  Can you be more specific....and Nick pretty much said all there is to it but im curious what you think is over priced ?

  To be honest there are a lot of parts and services that are underpriced or priced wrong as far as wholesale/retails goes

The last V-8 I had done was about $20,000 (in 1998) I'm not following here...

Quote from: clawdog60 on December 04, 2014, 04:53:56 PM
Any heat concerns in a bagger?

Depends on your riding habits I suppose.

Quote from: TorQueInc on December 05, 2014, 07:17:53 PM

Quote from: clawdog60 on December 05, 2014, 06:14:52 PM
Apology's, but I can't help but see what a HiPo v8 car engine costs compared to a HiPo v-twin bike motor. I know it is what it is but still looks like a reeming. Maybe justification in there somewhere but I can't  see it.

  Ok

  Can you be more specific....and Nick pretty much said all there is to it but im curious what you think is over priced ?

  To be honest there are a lot of parts and services that are underpriced or priced wrong as far as wholesale/retails goes

Likely getting too far from topic here. Looking at HiPo crate engine cost comparison. Not saying a v-twin should be a 1/4th cost but half seems more in line for what your actually buying. Long way from apples to apples. 8cyl to 2cyl. All I can say is over valued. Again apology's for the rant.

 I think this is what claydog means.  Just one example of many available.     http://www.tristarengines.com/catalog/high-performance-crate-engines/gm/496/496-stroker-big-block-chevy-high-performance-street-strip-complete-dyno-tested-crate-engine-w-hp-aluminum-cylinder-heads.html (http://www.tristarengines.com/catalog/high-performance-crate-engines/gm/496/496-stroker-big-block-chevy-high-performance-street-strip-complete-dyno-tested-crate-engine-w-hp-aluminum-cylinder-heads.html)

Ray it looks like after seeing how well Randy's performed, doing a 4.380 * 4.380 @10.2 with the 635's and the B3's (may have do some welding) would look be a no-brainer for a good reliable build. I would like to see a set of Hypereutectic pistons with decent length skirts as well.

I would use S&S unfinished heads or Super Stocks with the sidewinder bolt pattern. 4032 pistons.

Quote from: gordonr on December 07, 2014, 08:13:15 AM
Ray it looks like after seeing how well Randy's performed, doing a 4.380 * 4.380 @10.2 with the 635's and the B3's (may have do some welding) would look be a no-brainer for a good reliable build. I would like to see a set of Hypereutectic pistons with decent length skirts as well.

If someone in the united states could make hypereutectic alloy  it would be nice..kolbenschmidt,Mahle and Gruhn all seem to make killer Hyper pistons....speed pro and KB are complete disasters for the most part.

  No way Ray should buy CNC'd castings if he has Larry ready to throw the tools to them  :up:

If someone in the united states could make hypereutectic alloy  it would be nice..kolbenschmidt,Mahle and Gruhn all seem to make killer Hyper pistons....speed pro and KB are complete disasters for the most part.

Sure but the investment could not not be justified by any manufacturer based on the quantities that would be sold.

Quote from: TorQueInc on December 07, 2014, 01:29:41 PM

Quote from: gordonr on December 07, 2014, 08:13:15 AM
Ray it looks like after seeing how well Randy's performed, doing a 4.380 * 4.380 @10.2 with the 635's and the B3's (may have do some welding) would look be a no-brainer for a good reliable build. I would like to see a set of Hypereutectic pistons with decent length skirts as well.

If someone in the united states could make hypereutectic alloy  it would be nice..kolbenschmidt,Mahle and Gruhn all seem to make killer Hyper pistons....speed pro and KB are complete disasters for the most part.

  No way Ray should buy CNC'd castings if he has Larry ready to throw the tools to them  :up:

I would possibly agree but until the B3's are spec'd out they may be ok. I was assuming the exhaust may be to large but who knows at this point. But stepping out the forged arena and into the "hypereutectic's" would definitely be well worth the homework involved to make a nice engine.

  Harley thru SE could absorb it and should do it.....but they wont

  Gruhn minimum order is 1000 pieces and they have a semi generic blank/ that would work for a 105/107 and a 104MM that MIGHT work for a 113 ...the drawing is kinda wonky

 so let's recap.
Take the 143ci crate motor and keep that bore they use and put a smaller flywheel in with longer rods and custom pistons to make an over square engine using the 143 as a good starting point.
Or...try to keep researching a square motor and see if I can find a cylinder/piston option that will work on the 4 3/8" bore T2 cases?

Ray

Why couldnt the standard 143 pistons and rods be used with a 4 38" crank? The standard 143 cylinders could be cut down from their base to the proper length.

This could be as simple as buying a 143 crate engine, a 4 3/8" stroke crank balanced for the weight of the 143 pistons/rings, a set of gaskets and cutting the cylinders to the proper length. The left over crank would offset the cost some. Chamber volume might need to be addressed for desired compression.

Seems easy, what am I missing?

How about adding rod length rather than cutting anything?

Quote from: HD Street Performance on December 11, 2014, 05:47:44 AM
How about adding rod length rather than cutting anything?

I agree. Or a piston with the pin location lowered. May not be in the budget just throwing it out there.

How close are we to prostock geometry...?

4.8" BORE
4.3" STROKE
8" RODS...

Not saying I havent already been contemplating super over square, big Plenum build.....

 :idea:
1 custom part, the rods
Why mess with cutting cylinders, special pistons, different pushrod length, special motor mounts, custom exhaust,trimming throttle body, etc when all the work for the 143  height motor has been done for you? Later on as more parts are available for the 143 those things will be a direct bolt on for this motor.

Quote from: 1FSTRK on December 02, 2014, 07:46:35 AM

Quote from: No Cents on December 02, 2014, 05:07:56 AM
you may be on to something there Eric  :scratch:
At this point I'm not ruling out anything. That could be an option beings we know those cylinders and pistons should be available.

Ray

If you start with the basic 143 and build it with 4.375 flywheels and a longer rod, the only one off part would be the connecting rods.
You stay with the standard pistons and cylinders that are off the shelf then the engine height and all the mounting points and manifold stuff will be the same as the 143. Carrillo or Darkhorse should be able to set you up but there are others that make custom rods.
This is how Buell made the XB9 and kept the cost down.

You will want the heads done to suit your needs no matter what motor you build so they are always custom, I would start with a B-2 blank and have it done right rather than trying to modify the 143 crate head.
I would not buy a crate motor, I would order all the crate components parts so they are off the shelf pieces and order 103 flywheels and the right length rods from someone like Darkhorse that way you can assemble in your garage your way.

S&S does fine building the crank in their shop with carrillo rods including balancing, as an alternative.

Yes and a few others, so there are choices and for the rods as well.

An excellent opportunity to have a proper custom piston made as well with longer skirts and valve reliefs the right geometry.

I have not seen any pictures or the 143 pistons or chambers, do you not like something about them?
Do the piston have to short a skirt?

From what I am told yes but consider the information not verified.

 :banghead: ....here we go  :emoGroan:

Easy Jim, he is aloud to have an opinion. I am sure it is just a matter of time before some pictures and dimensions on these motors show up and then we will all know.

Quote from: 1FSTRK on December 11, 2014, 03:33:49 PM
Easy Jim, he is aloud to have an opinion. I am sure it is just a matter of time before some pictures and dimensions on these motors show up and then we will all know.

at least the crank can stay in this one.

 you men all bring up interesting options.
Can someone tell me why going with a 4 3/8" square motor using a piston with the longest skirt I can get so it will have better piston stability wont work?
  I figure I will have to have custom pistons made no matter which way I go. I do not like the short slipper skirt pistons...never did...never will.
When I talked to Reggie Jr. @ R&R Cycle he said their square 131 motor was the smoothest engine he has ever ridden.  :nix:
I know they did their homework on that engine and it would be a very nice piece to own...but that's buying a crate engine and I think with the proper help from the right people...I can build myself one too.
I still keep looking at the 4 3/8" S&S flywheels with their 7.659" rod length. If my only option was to use the same S&S cylinders that comes in the 143 crate...I'd have to machine the cylinder bases to get the correct deck height...and then I'd be losing my square engine for an over square motor if I went that route. The other option of using the mentioned 103 flywheels with the longer rods is interesting...but how well would that longer rod hold up to long distance touring miles?
The old brain is in over load right now thinking about all of these options...so I need to tread lightly before proceeding.

Ray

Quote from: No Cents on December 11, 2014, 04:03:06 PM
you men all bring up interesting options.
Can someone tell me why going with a 4 3/8" square motor using a piston with the longest skirt I can get so it will have better piston stability wont work?
  I figure I will have to have custom pistons made no matter which way I go. I do not like the short slipper skirt pistons...never did...never will.
When I talked to Reggie Jr. @ R&R Cycle he said their square 131 motor was the smoothest engine he has ever ridden.  :nix:
I know they did their homework on that engine and it would be a very nice piece to own...but that's buying a crate engine and I think with the proper help from the right people...I can build myself one too.
I still keep looking at the 4 3/8" S&S flywheels with their 7.659" rod length. If my only option was to use the same S&S cylinders that comes in the 143 crate...I'd have to machine the cylinder bases to get the correct deck height...and then I'd be losing my square engine for an over square motor if I went that route. The other option of using the mentioned 103 flywheels with the longer rods is interesting...but how well would that longer rod hold up to long distance touring miles?
The old brain is in over load right now thinking about all of these options...so I need to tread lightly before proceeding.

Ray

" I figure I will have to have custom pistons made no matter which way I go. I do not like the short slipper skirt pistons...never did...never will."  :up:

"The other option of using the mentioned 103 flywheels with the longer rods is interesting...but how well would that longer rod hold up to long distance touring miles?"  :idea: 1.826 rod ratio= :bike:
     

Ray, I only say the longer rod because you could use the 143 pistons, they already have the valve pocket for the S&S head geometry and piston, ring, over bore sets as well as higher domes are sure to be available from S&S without special order if you need things later on. I have listened from months about how great the 143 motor is so why not use as much of that technology as you can?
Their is nothing wrong with having custom pistons made but personally I would put that money to use where it does the most good, the heads, intake, cam and exhaust.
The R/S will fall between the 1.917 of a TW 88 motor and the 1.752 of the TW 96 motor
Both proven to last for many miles touring.

Makes sense.
This thread is dangling between crate motor with a crank change or a custom motor. The price goes up when buying the pieces separately. In fact it gets well up there and in the neighborhood of the R&R motor if the B2 or B3 heads are used . So the plan needs to be tightened up first.

I have pistons custom made by CP with full skirts and if I am given added real estate I take it with the added skirt length. The motor will last longer and run quieter, simple as that.  I would be using Super Stock heads but that is just my preference and they are easier to package. No bragging rights on them other than they work and this is a touring motor, right? Don't worry the hp will still be there just not the same as the 143

I am open minded and that 635HO may be a winner based on the commentary in the other thread.

Come up with your wants and needs Ray. Just list the bullet points. Otherwise this thread will be another 1000 posts.

 I'm not going to lie and to be honest this is getting more confusing to me the more I try to find my best way to go.  :banghead:
I honestly have no plans of buying the 143ci crate motor...if I did I'd just run it and I'd be just like everybody else that's wanting one of them.
I just want the feeling of pride with building my own...not someone's crate motor that I can just slap into a bike and go. I would get no sense of accomplishment doing that. Is that the smart move...probably...but it wouldn't be me if I did it the easy way. I'd much rather get my hands dirty and bust a few knuckles along the way.

Ray

Exactly what I thought you would say.
:up: :up:

OK we are making headway, custom it is
So what must this motor do to meet your goals?

   I wanted it to be able to run on the junk fuel that I will run into traveling across this great nation.
I want smooth power from idle to lets say 5800 rpm's. I want it able to get out of it's own way...if the need arises.
I've always dreamed of building a square motor...do I have to have that...no...but it would be nice. If there is a better bore stroke option...I'm all ears and willing to listen.
When I seen the S&S 4 3/8" bore T2 cases introduced a few years ago I was elated. But after their introduction...the only thing I've seen come of those T2 cases was this 143ci monster. I've heard and seen this engine run in person and I've felt the wick on it...and I don't think this is a touring engine. It might be...but if so...it's also one badass bar hopper to boot.
My goal was to have it run cool and have total dependability and longevity built in mind. I was thinking a lower compression in the 10.2- 10-5 range would fit the needs.

Ray

Quote from: No Cents on December 11, 2014, 05:21:47 PM
I'm not going to lie and to be honest this is getting more confusing to me the more I try to find my best way to go.  :banghead:
I honestly have no plans of buying the 143ci crate motor...if I did I'd just run it and I'd be just like everybody else that's wanting one of them.
I just want the feeling of pride with building my own...not someone's crate motor that I can just slap into a bike and go. I would get no sense of accomplishment doing that. Is that the smart move...probably...but it wouldn't be me if I did it the easy way. I'd much rather get my hands dirty and bust a few knuckles along the way.

Ray

:agree: :agree:  The only way in my book Ray......

Ray the 131 square motor was your original plan, I say stay with it. You were having some trouble deciding on cylinders when I jumped in with the 135 using parts from the 143 motor but instead of helping you it has just side tracked you. Go back to your earlier posts on cylinders and pick up there. A nice square 131 with whatever cylinders you pick will be a great touring bike, keep the static under 10.5:1, keep the cam under .600, great heads and intake should do 150/150 by 5800 all day long and it will be Ray designed, Ray built, and Ray ridden, just the kind of project a retire guy needs to keep him out of the wife's way.

Have to agree
That zeros in the plan a little closer. You can stick to stock stack heights if you use the right parts too. If you copied the 124LC with a different cam and headwork at 4.375 X 4.375 with a balanced motor you would have a real sweet smooth running motor. CCP in the 185 range. Only thing different than your 124 will be the head bolt pattern which is easy to deal with.
Drawing not to scale

 I slept on it last night and I've decided to make some phone calls today and see if it is possible to get the S&S 4.425" bore cylinders that they used in their 143ci crate and the T2 cases already bored to accept these cylinders.
I'm going to call around and look into possibly using the suggested 103" flywheels with longer rods. I do like the idea of being able to run a longer skirted piston for better stability. I think a 135 would be a nice engine and fit right into my plans. It would be over square...but I might be able to get off the shelf cases and cylinders ready to go straight from S&S. I'll have to look at maybe having them make me a custom flywheel with the longer rod length that will be needed.
I'll see what I can find out today.
Thanks for all the help so far men...I do appreciate it!

Ray

Oh Ray now the plot thickens :pop:

Eager to see what you find out Ray.  You've got a good plan. :up:

 :idea:

I know you'll make the BEST out of it Ray.... You seem to always get there...

Nothing in building a Square up my alley but VERY interesting to follow like many here will...

You'll get Er done :up:

Keeping Tuned..... SMILE

signed....BUBBIE

  Since R&R Cycles already makes a 131, a general conversation with them might give you some benefits, rod lengths, piston/ skirts etc. Maybe even purchasing some of their components for the build would save time and $$ in the long run (pistons already made etc). fwiw  Buffalo

Sounds like a helluva stump puller.
I'm somewhat surprised more big bore builders didn't throw they're thoughts in.
I know I wouldn't attempt this without Dahmer consultation.

 After not hearing back from my guy @ S&S...I e-mailed him again today.
His reply to my e-mail was: "call me Ray...I got good news for you finally".
I called him and told him I was wanting to build me an engine using the 4 3/8" bore T2 cases and I was originally thinking of doing a square motor...but was not locked into it.
He said not a problem...we now have the cylinders ready to go for 4 3/8" bore cases and I could use many different size stroke flywheels for the application I want to build. We discussed both the 4.375" and 4.500" flywheels. I did ask him about the 103 flywheels with longer rods and he told me he would just go ahead and put together some different combinations and e-mail them so I could decide on which way I thought would be the best way to go for my build. He informed me that going with this bore size that the lifter blocks need machined off some on the back side for clearance to compensate for the larger bore...or they now have the clearanced lifter blocks in stock too.
I'm finally seeing the light at the end of the tunnel now.  [attach=0]

Ray

Planting seed for others.
Thanks!

 I think options are available now for their T2 cases...finally.  :up:
News like this makes a man like me smile...knowing the old barn will be getting some busy time in it very soon.
Now I just have to talk Durwood into loaning me my tool box keys back for a little while.  :wink:

Ray

Way to go Ray, I'm diggin' the square mill as well. All info to store for a future build and you're setting the lead on this. Kudos!

Ray I'm starting to go through withdrawal come on give me something what's the skinny on your project :fish:

 It's on hold until I find out more info.

Ray

 I talked to TR (T-man Performance) on the phone today and we had an in-depth discussion about using the S&S 4 3/8" bore cases to build a motor. I seen where he posted a picture on Facebook of his new street billet heads that he will be offering in different bore and stud patterns. So I wanted to find out if these heads would be available for the 4 3/8" bore T2 cases.
I was shocked when he told me what he has already done in this area. He filled my brain up with so much info that I was on over load.
He went into detail of what he has done and what he is also working on. All this was told to me in confidence...but I will say this much...watch out for what TR releases in the near future.
You big block guys are going to love it.   :wink:

Ray

Ray,

Are you getting one too?   :potstir:

 :pop:

 just window shopping kd   :embarrassed:

Ohhhhhhh,  :teeth:   I see    :smiled:  I understand   :wink:   :fish:

Quote from: No Cents on January 06, 2015, 01:47:05 PM
just window shopping kd   :embarrassed:

Ray are you still thinking square :hyst:

nope...a stock 103 will be just fine.

added later:
until I pull it out and sit it on the ground.  :wink:

Sweet The Plot Thickens ... :party:

  :hyst:
now Randy...you know I'm just wanting a low compression 131" barn built motor set up in touring mode.  :doh:
...don't I?   :slap:
Nope...no way am I falling for that. [attach=0]

Ray

Hey Ray that is one HELLVA plan Ray..........  :oops:

 I'm sticking with the plan Mike.
I was just window shopping today looking for the possibility of finding a smaller head and throttle body combo so I wouldn't have to run the B3 heads and the 70mm T/Hog on a low compression 131" touring motor.
Mission accomplished...I think.  :wink:
The plan is starting to come together.

Ray

Is TR gonna release it at the expo?

Quote from: 06roadglide on January 06, 2015, 05:11:40 PM
Is TR gonna release it at the expo?

pm sent

Where's my pm

Yeah..what he said... :hug:

Sham Rock , I bet Ray will spill the beans if you update your avatar pic  :hyst: