Scooterotica

What's the update on the "special " [low crankcase compression?] crank you built a few years ago. Last I heard it was in a customers scoot and going strong.
Have you got a link to the original postings? I thought it was on the scooterotica website tuning pages but it was probably later than that.

the one that you refer to martin was used in an RB20 ,the chap has now sold it on but only after a few years of running it ..he always remarked about how smooth running it was and how his motor was so responsive ..cant remember his dyno figures exactly but it sure was a healthy thing .
I have done quite a few of these for various folk ,and as far as i know Foxhat still use one in one of their scooters and last i heard from them they said the same things .

The better and easier way now ,when rebuilding a whole engine with lower primary comp is to use longer rods and a packing plate together with std comp height pistons ,this creates more volumne where its needed .although this can be a whole lot more expensive .
we follow this route now on most engine builds we do if we can,but if your going to retain the 107/110 rod
then these crank mods will do pretty much the same thing .

sean brady scooters wrote:The better and easier way now to lower primary comp is to use longer rods and a packing plate together with std comp height pistons ,this creates more volumne where its needed

that's always been the better and easier way

eden wrote:

sean brady scooters wrote:The better and easier way now to lower primary comp is to use longer rods and a packing plate together with std comp height pistons ,this creates more volumne where its needed. we follow this route now on most engine builds we do if we can,but if your going to retain the 107/110 rod
then these crank mods will do pretty much the same thing .

that's always been the better and easier way

So 115/116mm rod with 39mm ch piston = +9mm. +11mm, + 13mm packer (dependent on stroke) : does that not present a whole s**t storm of problems with frame clearance: fannymould/plug/stand/cowl height/exhaust fitment? (only asking )

easier than grinding crank webs imo, Yanker you forgot to mention rear foot boards

Yanker wrote:

eden wrote:

sean brady scooters wrote:The better and easier way now to lower primary comp is to use longer rods and a packing plate together with std comp height pistons ,this creates more volumne where its needed. we follow this route now on most engine builds we do if we can,but if your going to retain the 107/110 rod
then these crank mods will do pretty much the same thing .

that's always been the better and easier way

So 115/116mm rod with 39mm ch piston = +9mm. +11mm, + 13mm packer (dependent on stroke) : does that not present a whole s**t storm of problems with frame clearance: fannymould/plug/stand/cowl height/exhaust fitment? (only asking )

it sure does lol

eden wrote:easier than grinding crank webs imo, Yanker you forgot to mention rear foot boards

And maybe even a longer HT lead? But surely You would not have to do that grinding buisiness? R Taylor/GT crank, hold the 'Paxo' please?

not long now Yanker