1007cc motor questions...

Status
Not open for further replies.
Not contesting squish can stave off detonation for mo power than w/o but there are examples that make similar power in hemi w/o much or any squish. My reason to mention this exception to the rule is I know what it takes to appreciate some hop up feature so squish should not be a worry for a big block street engine that can still short shift and catch rubber. If ya watch stunters ya see how fun ability to turn traction on and off at will can be. Another thing I found out about excess horsepower is it mainly comes into play by higher top speeds not so much the acceleration rate up to the ton or so comared to less hp. Especially on skinny tire and in public. So I ask my self how lucky to I feel Punk. I do not think I am mature enough to resist.
 
To really make a 1000 go, someone should look into the Narley ports (JSM specs of HD XR 750 port dimensions adapted to Norton heads).

See this link to the “Narley ports”:

new-high-flow-ports-for-norton-t22457.html?hilit=narley

The 1st Narley port head is now finishing up and photos will soon be available.

Hey Dances
You pretty much repeated what I heard about alum rods in a 1000. Smaller pumped up motors can have the same problem and you see it now and then. My alum rods held up back in the day but it was always a worry and a weak spot.

Earlier in this thread Fast Eddie mentions that Steve Maney recommends against dished pistons because of unburned gasses. Too much squish band has been known to extinguish the flame in the quench area. Steve recommends lowering the entire piston to lower the CR. This is an area of controversy and disagreement and I'm ambivalent. I'd like to see some proof of any HP gain in a Norton with squishband. For the squish to create turbulence it has to be .040" or less and that is when the pistons start hitting the head and that can crack your cases.
 
jseng1 said:
To really make a 1000 go, someone should look into the Narley ports (JSM specs of HD XR 750 port dimensions adapted to Norton heads).

See this link to the “Narley ports”:

new-high-flow-ports-for-norton-t22457.html?hilit=narley

The 1st Narley port head is now finishing up and photos will soon be available.

Hey Dances
You pretty much repeated what I heard about alum rods in a 1000. Smaller pumped up motors can have the same problem and you see it now and then. My alum rods held up back in the day but it was always a worry and a weak spot.

Earlier in this thread Fast Eddie mentions that Steve Maney recommends against dished pistons because of unburned gasses. Too much squish band has been known to extinguish the flame in the quench area. Steve recommends lowering the entire piston to lower the CR. This is an area of controversy and disagreement and I'm ambivalent. I'd like to see some proof of any HP gain in a Norton with squishband. For the squish to create turbulence it has to be .040" or less and that is when the pistons start hitting the head and that can crack your cases.

Jim, I didn't realise you were creating a Norton head with these Harley ideas, I had thought you were 'just' sharing the theory. Good on yer for doing this and DO please keep us all posted. ASAP please...!
 
Sorry to mislead

I am not creating a head and I am just sharing by making the specs and drawing available at my website. However someone I have been working with is very talented and has been racing successfully with my lightweight pistons, cam and valve train etc. He's ambitions and has already finished two heads. The modification is extensive in order to raise the ports high enough and make them wide enough as the HD KR 750 ports are. Its more work than I want to do. So I'm going to provide all the info I can and hope that he is ambitions enough to make a few of them available to others. At the moment the marketing is only dreaming and such a head may be expensive. But we'll see. These heads could raise the bar on Norton HP levels and there are stress reducing and higher strength components available today that should handle it.
 
jseng1 said:
I'd like to see some proof of any HP gain in a Norton with squishband.

The advantage of the squish band was proven on the dyno many years ago at Norton by Leo Kuzmicki. This was accepted by Joe Craig, who in the 1940s gave the order to change the existing Manx head to incorporate Leo's squish band design.
It gets proven again when a straight hemi Vincent head is changed to a squish band type. A 600cc single cylinder Comet with squish head will stay with a hemi head Vincent 1000 twin. When you put squish heads on an oversized twin, it gets really interesting.
Terry Prince used Leo Kuzmicki's 1940s Norton Manx head design for his 1360 along with some other tricks and got this result

1007cc motor questions...


Glen
 
Worntorn

Here is a quote from an earlier post in this thread.

"I spoke to Steve [Maney], who rather interestingly reckons that dishing the pistons on these big motors to achieve a squish with a lower CR doesn't work very well, as it leads to incomplete combustion. He recommends a flat top piston machined down and / or barrel spaced to give a 9.5:1 ish CR, and says that this will work fine with premium unleaded pump fuel."
 
jseng1 said:
Worntorn

Here is a quote from an earlier post in this thread.

"I spoke to Steve [Maney], who rather interestingly reckons that dishing the pistons on these big motors to achieve a squish with a lower CR doesn't work very well, as it leads to incomplete combustion. He recommends a flat top piston machined down and / or barrel spaced to give a 9.5:1 ish CR, and says that this will work fine with premium unleaded pump fuel."

Jim, this time it is I who needs to clarify...

Steve was NOT arguing against the benefits of squish. Far from it, as I believe he is quite a believer. He was only talking about the fact that dished pistons appear not to work well on the 1007 motors. He was specifically only talking about these motors. As Reggie will confirm, Steve sets up 920 road bikes with dished pistons and working squish bands. He told me he likes to see .040" on race motors BUT that this needs steel rods to be safe.
 
Fast Eddie said:
jseng1 said:
Worntorn

Here is a quote from an earlier post in this thread.

"I spoke to Steve [Maney], who rather interestingly reckons that dishing the pistons on these big motors to achieve a squish with a lower CR doesn't work very well, as it leads to incomplete combustion. He recommends a flat top piston machined down and / or barrel spaced to give a 9.5:1 ish CR, and says that this will work fine with premium unleaded pump fuel."

Jim, this time it is I who needs to clarify...

Steve was NOT arguing against the benefits of squish. Far from it, as I believe he is quite a believer. He was only talking about the fact that dished pistons appear not to work well on the 1007 motors. He was specifically only talking about these motors. As Reggie will confirm, Steve sets up 920 road bikes with dished pistons and working squish bands. He told me he likes to see .040" on race motors BUT that this needs steel rods to be safe.

Got it. But I'm wondering why 87cc difference would make squish work in one motor and not another, especially when the bigger motor has a wider squish and should see more benefit from it. Especially when the dished piston is about the same as a lowered flat top piston except that it has a dish.
 
I think we probably all agree that squish in a Commando engine is a desireable feature, but we shouldn't loose track of the fact that most Commandos, at least all the 850s, have no effective squish because the flat top piston is too far away from the head, due to the low CR, to provide effective squish. And they run fine that way. It's pretty easy to keep the piston-to-head clearance at .040" - .050", where the squish is effective, in a race bike. Typically, we push the piston as close to the head as we can for higher CR. But on a street bike, that's hard to do. When you dish the piston on something like a 1007 enough to get a streetable CR, but still keep .050" of squish, the penalty is a larger combustion chamber surface area, which is not what we aim for for efficient combustion. I really don't know if that's a good trade or not. What I do know is that a Commando engine will run just fine with no effective squish. I recently built an 883 Commando for the street, with a CR of 9.2, and way too much clearance for any squish effect, and it runs like a rocket. The factory short stroke 750s also worked quite well with a fully sphered head and no squish band. The Commando head design, mostly copied from the Gold Star according to some folks, creates enough swirl that you get enough turbulence at high rpm without needing more from the squish effect.

I'm not saying squish isn't a good thing, particularly for low speed performance. I'm just saying that a Commando will run fine without it.

Bottom line is, don't worry so much about squish, particularly in a 1007, which should provide massive low end torque just from the extra displacement.

As usual, just my humble opinion.

Ken
 
Well, if anyone should know about running a 1007 on the street, it would be you, John. I really enjoyed talking to you about your bike at the rally.

Ken
 
lcrken said:
I think we probably all agree that squish in a Commando engine is a desireable feature, but we shouldn't loose track of the fact that most Commandos, at least all the 850s, have no effective squish because the flat top piston is too far away from the head, due to the low CR, to provide effective squish. And they run fine that way. It's pretty easy to keep the piston-to-head clearance at .040" - .050", where the squish is effective, in a race bike. Typically, we push the piston as close to the head as we can for higher CR. But on a street bike, that's hard to do. When you dish the piston on something like a 1007 enough to get a streetable CR, but still keep .050" of squish, the penalty is a larger combustion chamber surface area, which is not what we aim for for efficient combustion. I really don't know if that's a good trade or not. What I do know is that a Commando engine will run just fine with no effective squish. I recently built an 883 Commando for the street, with a CR of 9.2, and way too much clearance for any squish effect, and it runs like a rocket. The factory short stroke 750s also worked quite well with a fully sphered head and no squish band. The Commando head design, mostly copied from the Gold Star according to some folks, creates enough swirl that you get enough turbulence at high rpm without needing more from the squish effect.

I'm not saying squish isn't a good thing, particularly for low speed performance. I'm just saying that a Commando will run fine without it.

Bottom line is, don't worry so much about squish, particularly in a 1007, which should provide massive low end torque just from the extra displacement.

As usual, just my humble opinion.

Ken

Ken, your "bottom line is..." comment pretty accurately echoes the message Steve was giving me.
 
Nigel wrote;
He was only talking about the fact that dished pistons appear not to work well on the 1007 motors. He was specifically only talking about these motors. As Reggie will confirm, Steve sets up 920 road bikes with dished pistons and working squish bands.

Steve Maney did machine dished pistons for my 920, and we ended up with a 0.050" squish and and a "dish" that was primarily to get the CR down and we settled at 9.8:1. We didn't discuss the benefits of a flat topped piston as far as I can recall, but my engine hasn't been built for racing and goes nicely. It does seem strange that approx. 4mm wider piston for the 1007 would make such a difference? Is it to do with the more offset valve location in relation to the cylinders?
 
It seems that as long as the squish area stays completely clean, it is working to some degree.
When one does nothing more than change the head to a bathtub squish head on a Vincent, the low and midrange power goes way up.
The ultimate HP, the number most are fixated on, might only improve a few percent. The overall power under the
Curve is more dramatically improved however. Also, the detonation problem from high compression goes away so one can run higher CR and get another gain.
With the Manx Norton, it is always the maz HP number that is quoted, however Joe Craig stated in interviews it was both maximum rpm and also high midrange torque they were chasing. Leo Kuzmicki's ideas fit beautifully.

Later on hotrodders cottoned onto squish or quench as did Ford with some of it's high output v8s of the late 1960s.
Those quench heads are highly prized items today, and for good reason.

Gle
 
You have to consider weight as well. A dished piston is heavier because of the raised periphery and increased surface area. Flat top pistons are the most compact and the lightest. Weight, vibration stress and crank/case cracking is more of a problem with the big bores. A dished piston is custom made. I can make custom dished pistons to any spec - but custom always means a little more cost.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top