Printable View
The F500 (F5) community is considering allowing 600cc (F6?) motorcycle motors into the class. The draft 600cc engine proposal is very similar to what has been adopted in the F1000 (FB). I’d be interested in hearing from FB competitors your experience with engine reliability. Whether it was a new car or a conversion how many engines have you gone through and have you been able to determine the cause of failure? Thanks. Ted Simmons
I've seen good and bad. I know several guys who have had very good luck with their engines, at least until they experienced a water or oil cooling problem. Based on that, and the fact that we have 2-3 years of bike powered formula car experience now, I think if the engine has sufficient cooling, (and oil pressure, of course), it should be extremely reliable.
I'm a little surprised to see dry sump systems outlawed for the F600 proposed rules, but, having said that, there are a lot of people running baffled wet sumps without problems. I think a lot of front running DSR Stohrs run that way. If it works for them then they must be OK. That will help keep the cost down for F600, too, assuming the wet sump never allows the pickup to suck air. And keeps oil off the crank. A wet sump is a little tougher to cool since the pool of oil lives in the bottom of a hot engine instead of a remote tank.
Every 1000cc engine failure I've heard about had a reasonable explanation. One exception is my last failure - a dropped valve - and it wasn't caused by an over-rev. I haven't looked closely at the head to see what happened. It might be too damaged to tell. George Dean and others say it happens sometimes. My engine was an unopened ebay engine with unknown history. It had good leakdown numbers, but that was all we checked before installing it.
I'm looking forward to seeing F600 cars. I think they are going to scream.
difference in the proposal for F600 that specifically addresses what I and many folks feel is a weak link in the stock Suzuki 1000 engine: connecting rod bolts.
The DSR community for the most part runs aftermarket con rods in their modded 1000's and does not see this problem.
The motorcycle racing guys have to my knowledge, and I know lots of 'em, NEVER seen this problem, most likely due to the fact that their engines do not live between 11 and 13k rpm. They have more off and part throttle time, and probably the biggest reason: the total weight of bike/rider is very close to half of FB car/driver.
I feel, and evidence points to a rod bolt breaking right at the con rod cap/con rod split.
I was on the gas when it suddenly let go, not downshifting, not overreving, just plain old hard on the gas.
All the rod bearings looked perfect, except the one that did the splits that is.
GC
The only engine failure we have seen in any of our F1000 cars happened to me in the prototype. It was in a 2006 GSX-R1000 and after a post-mortem by George Dean....it appeared to be from the piston breaking and the wrist pin being pulled out of the piston. George said simply a fluke deal....piston failure.
Even though it wouldn't have resolved our failure, there's no question that allowing aftermarket rods would be appropriate and would help in the reliability department. The only drawback is their cost....about $350 each. I've always been in favor of allowing parts that added reliabilty and did not enhance performance. Some of the other items that are allowed (billet clutch basket, manual cam chain tensioner) have zero performance advantages...but do increase reliability.
As Glenn states...we are asking these motors to do much more than they were designed for and there will be issues....as there is in any engine that is subjected to the constant WOT that racing demands. As a fun aside....I blew up more Pinto engines in 3 months than I've blown up GSX-R1000 engines in 4 years.
Matt Conrad
Phoenix Race Works, LLC
I've not had any issues with my Suzuki 1000 thus far, although I don't have a lot of mileage on it. Back home in the UK I raced in Formula Honda with a 600cc CBR motor. They where wet sump and basically stock. I ran my car for a full national championship (15 races + testing) and never had any issues at all. Oil/filter was changed every race and cam cover came off a couple of times to check clearances. The cars would never run hot and when I sold my car at the end of the year it did another 1/2 season with the new owner with no problems. He then swapped it out for a new motor and kept the old as a spare. I think that good cooling and plenty of oil is the key to keeping these motors in one piece. F500 with a 600cc motor will be a great class and super quick.
FWIW; I've noticed from my limited experience with my F1000 that if the chain isn't properly adjusted there is quite a large shock in the drive system during up and down shifts. It's reduced by rapid, smooth shifting at very high speeds, but it's still there.
I wonder if this doesn't contribute to the 'surprise' motor failures in the bottom end.
The motorcycles that donate engines to us use cush drive shock absorbers in the rear wheel to both reduce shocks from loose chains and sloppy shifting from operators. This makes motorcycling more enjoyable and safe, especially for neophites. We eliminate this item when we install these engines in our cars and it makes shifting and chain tension adjustments very important to smooth operation and reduced drive line shock.
If I ever endeavor to build another F1000, I'm going to include the original cush drive, at least to test the concept.
I raced zx12's and zx10's for several years, and all failures were either due to oil problems or overheating. Seems like if you can keep good oil in them and keep the water from overheating, they are pretty tough but as soon as they starve for oil, they start throwing parts at you ;-)
I have raced my Phoenix F1000 in 13 SCCA race events, and several open track days. I had a good conversation with George Dean prior to racing the car. The engine is a so called George Dean engine. The engine was totally new when delivered to George Dean for his work, then sent on to Phoenix Race Works for the build of the car. He stated that if the engine was not beaten up, stressed to extreme measures, that the GSXR 1000 CC engine could hold up for a long period of time. The GSXR engine in my car has performed FLAWLESSLY. There are no problems that I can report. I can report however that the car has not been driven to extremes or any extreme stress placed on the engine. Certainly the more you push these engines to extremes, consistent high rpms, the more chance of engine failure. George and I also discussed the riders of motorcycles. Many motorcylce owners have a tendency to push these bike engines to the limit on RPM's and stress, and beat their bikes to death. The motorcycle owners who enjoy driving the bikes, without pushing limits see their bikes last for long periods of time. First of all I know my own driving abilities and have no reason to take the engine to the edge of stress.
Oil is changed on a regular basis, a well as filters, and the water levels are constantly checked. Oil is Amsoil 10 w 40 Synthetic Motorcycle oil, and Wix brand oil filters, I always check the oil window for proper level of oil in the tank. In addition to oil and filter changes, I am also convinced that the builders of the car, Phoenix Race Works, carefully considered the cooling methods for the engine. They used one water cooler and one oil cooler. The side pods are ample size for plenty of air flow into and thru the side pods. I also make sure that the engine is brought UP to temperature before taking the car out for any practice, qualifying, race or just open track day. I was told long ago, to warm the engine to 180 degrees about 10 minutes before any event. So I warm the engine before any driving to 180 and then shut it down for about ten minutes, then go out. I was told this will relieve stress on any bearings in the engine. Whether it is right or wrong, it works, and it takes little effort to do this. Just starting the car and going on the track with a cold engine, then subjecting it to high RPMs when still cold, could very well, cause the engine to seize and place undue stress on the engine parts.
I think in many cases it is easy to stress these engines especially in a formula type car like ours. Easy to miss shifts and easy to stress the engine on downshifts.
Now, I realize to win races you need the consistent high RPM's for maximum power. So if your not a championship racer, go easier on the car and the engine stress. Get on the track and enjoy the drive, the abilites of the car, and the pleasure of just enjoying the superior handling of a formula car. No need to push the envelope of engine stress, the car or the driver.
At first, this thread about F1000 was about cheap-low cost cars to build and race. A $4000-5000 engine is not cheap. I have followed what George Dean told me and instructed me, and up to this point I have had no problems.
In every race only one person can finish first while there is always someone at the end. Perhaps a middle of the pack finish is sufficent. It is for me, and that's one reason, I truely believe that my Suzuki GSXR 1000 has performed flawlessly.
I don't have to be #1 on the track to enjoy the beautiful F1000 race car that Phoenix Race Works built for me. I am in this for the fun and excitement and to keep the car running flawlessly as long as I can. But also maintained to top levels.
It works for me.
Ted, Short answer: no dry sump is the worst idea ever. Engine life with the best wet sump is low. Conversely I run my own dry sump in my Dragon DSR and have never even had to polish a crank journal. I have every crank I ever purchased. I wish I could say that the top ends last as long as the bottoms!
Also, I have yet to see a failure of a rod bolt that did not show excessive temperature (poor oiling) on the rod. Again, zero rod bolt failures on either Suzuki, Kawasaki or Carillo rods as long as they have a good supply of oil with no bubbles in solution. Remember, oil pressure gauges don't show the condition of the oil stream. Every wet sump engine I have ever disassembled showed signs of air bubbles in the oil.
A good dry sump will save it's cost in the first year of racing.
Bill Gendron
So, bringing this back to the top in light of the June Sprints failures, and Coop's recent engine demise. I'm personally on the warpath right now, having eaten 2 engines in the past 3 months in my Stohr.
Seems that there are two common failure modes for the engines: dropped valves, and rod bearings. I think things like Matt's exploded piston are pretty uncommon. I'm after the rod bearing mode, since that's what I've done lately.
Talked a bit with George, Wayne at Stohr, Lawrence Loshak (who ate a rod bearing in his dry-sumped WF-1), and some others. Trying to find a common thread. The engine builder and sump type are all different between the failures between Me, Lawrence, Glenn, and others, so there must be some common element.
Those that have had a bottom end go:
1.) How long are your oil cooler lines?
2.) Which rod bearing went?
3.) What oil are you using?
4.) how were your oil and water temps? (particularly, had the engine seen high water temps, 230+?)
5.) Does your data with the show the typical (for Suzukis) drop into the 20's and 30's under hard braking?
6.) Had you had any spins or other "events" with this engine?
7.) Was the engine oil pump standard, overdriven, or "high volume"?
Hopefully there's some reason for it. I don't know what class I'd go to if it wasn't DSR or FB :(
-Jake
Also, what diameter are your oil lines? Some say the bigger the better. I'm using -12AN oil hose & fittings on my big block (HAYABUSA) bike engine powered Formula S & am in the 4th year with no oil related problems.
"1.) How long are your oil cooler lines?"
Dropped Valves;
My understanding is that the Suzuki valves are of a welded, 2-piece design that likes to break at the weld. There are aftermarket valves supposedly available that match the stock valves exactly, except that they are 1 piece. Maybe you need to look at allowing the stock 2-piece valves to be replaced for the sake of reliability.
Also, it is my understanding that because of the fast lash take-up ramp on the cams, the clearance adjustment is critical - off a thou' or so either way, and the seating stresses will skyrocket.
Death of main bearings will often be traced back to oil that has not been de-aireated correctly. Wet sump or dry sump, it doesn't matter what the system type is for these motors as long as you get the air out of the oil before pumping it back in.
Jake,
I haven't had your problem, but I will be happy to share my data if it helps:
Engine: Suzuki
Dry Sump: 2 stage Small Fortune design
Oil Tank: Peterson 7 quart
1) 34" and 38" in and out #10.
2) Never lost one
3) Spectro Platinum (in my experience, the best)
4) Water temps from 180-205 degrees f
5) No my data does not show this.
6) Stock oil pump and relief valve
Other possible issues: High vacuum on the inlet side of the pump (I have seen evidence of this problem)
Good Luck.
Bill Gendron
On that topic.
When I spoke to Wayne today, he said that early on, it seemed that some engine failures may have been attributable to overlarge oil lines. The smallish bike pump simply couldn't output enough volume to keep long -10 and -12 lines pressurized.
This seems to be corroborated by the notion that a few folks have told me, that the currently available dry-sump systems developed for these engines have typically been somewhat hobbled since they can't generate more normal pressure (55+) when trying to suck from a tank that's 2 feet or so away. I would be interested to see if Coop's data shows that limitation as well?
My answers to the questions are:
1.) Quite long - several feet for the return line, due to triple-pass Setrab
2.) #4, and #1 before that.
3.) Amsoil 20-50 bike oil.
4.) 20x and 24x normally, though the engine had seen 230 water for a few laps.
5.) Yes, even into the teens on occasion for very slow corners (6th to 2nd braking)
6.) This one, yes, a spin that lunched the starter. The previous one, no.
7.) "high volume" (not overdriven) Rilltech pump.
Some other shots in the dark:
1.) Is this drop a characteristic only of the 07-08 Suzuki? Data from my R1 showed steady ~50psi no matter what, (revs, cornering, braking, whatever) when I had the Radical. My Hayabusa does show mild drops to 35-40psi, in the same car.
2.) Responding to Bill: what causes high vacuum on the pump suction side? I've run an experiment by coming off throtlte on the straights (without braking) to see if the pressure showed a similar dip, and it did not. The dip is only present under hard braking, and gets worse as I drive harder and harder. Bill, how close are you to WF-1 and/or F1000 times in your Dragon?
3.) Inexplicably, but supporting the high-pump-intake-vacuum argument, I tried to fix the problem with a 1qt Accusump, plumbed straight into the #4 side gallery, and it made zero difference on the data. You could see the accusump activate if I turned it on, but it made no discernbile difference in the corner dips in the datalogs.
4.) I have known some discussion that the 07/08 pumps are very small compared to earlier, and competing (i.e. Kawasaki) pumps. Is this the case? Could the pump simply be undersized for our application?
5.) Has there been any extended experimentation with overdriven, higher volume (or both) valves in conjunction with higher pressure relief valves?
6.) One small case-specific suggestion. Tom Beattie mentioned to me that when he first got his flappy-trap-door wet-sump pan, one of the doors tended to stick open, so he had to file/sand it to correct. I doubt that's the case for everybody, and certainly not for the dry sump guys, but if even one person sees this and fixes his pan...
Cheers!
-Jake
jake, as the builder of the dry sump system that lawrence was running, i will defend that he ran the system 3 quarts low on the oil level in the tank by mistake. that was the reason for the rod failure. secondly we have noticed a drop in peak pressure on just about all dry sump systems offered for gsxr 1000's. this is due to the small size of the pressure pump and having troule drawing the oil from a distance greater then the wetsump pickup. i have corrected this with porting in the pan as well as a high volume pressure pump. the system showed 54psi peak at 240 oil temp whereas before it was closer to 40-45psi and the same for kropp stuff. wetsump on same dyno shows 62psi. we will be testing it with the high volume pump soon and hope to get it over 65psi which is where our kawi system runs and we never have engine failures with the kawi. we are also working on a dry sump system that will still allow the use of the stock water pump and plumbing simplifying install and decreasing cost. in short, george and i have been testing all of this very thoroughly, and all data is relative to that dyno, not different data from different cars that could be scewed. if anyone is interested in more info, contact me at 503-810-9755
jesse
Hiya Jesse -
Glad you chimed in. Didn't want to make it sound like I was pointing fingers if I did. I spoke with Lawrence today, and there's no doubt in his mind that he did run that first one low, so no confusion there by anybody. I'm also willing to allow I could have done the same on my first engine.
It's interesting to hear that you've also seen the low pressure intake pressure on your dry sump, Richard at Rilltech mentioned the same about the 3 systems he's dealt with. I think one was a TTS, and the other a Kropp, not sure of the third. His reasoning was the same - just can't draw from the tank 2' away, which is why he does, and continues to suggest that I steer clear of the dry sump. I don't think he's aware of your offering since it's so new.
My engine(s) had a high volume pump like it sounds yours may be, and I also saw 62-63psi normal pressure. Probably the relief valve in action there - my engines had the stock relief valve.
Can you speak at all to the various oil pump differences between the engines you've looked at and dealt with? For example, you're familiar with the Kawi's from dealing with West, correct? From what Eric (Vassian, at West Race Cars) says, oiling was simply not a problem for those engines.
Is your plan to try and combine a higher volume, plus overdriven pump with a higher pressure relief valve (perhaps) to try and keep pressures within the engine high?
you should see more then 65psi with the high volume pump, but i looked at one of richards pumps that george had and it had way too much side clearance and made less pressure then stock. mine is clearanced correctly and expect more then 65psi with stock relief valve. the 62-65psi we see on georges dyno is with stock oil pump and stock gear, i really do not believe in the overdrive gear, it is a cheap bandaid. no matter what though, if you can peak at 65psi and get rid of the low pressure spikes, you should have no problem. we never see below 50psi in a dry sumped west with kawasaki and they will be running my system on the suzuki as well. i have been playing with these bike engines for years and believe dry sump is the only way to go. the power improvement will more then make up for the weight gain, and i am working on a product for stohrs that will allow dry sump and reduce weight, and incorperate a dry sump tank. inquire if interested at the number above. my goal is to get the dry sump working great and reduce cost for the gsxr crowd and simplify install and get rid of oil failure related blow ups. george thought the system would be as good or better then anything else he has ever run without the high volume pump and thought that 54psi at 240 would be just fine as its the low pressure spikes under breaking and cornering that hurt the bearings. bearings dont like air no matter what rpm or load level.
on richards pump, the one george had may have been miss machined and your 65psi may be at a temp higher then 240. i do not want anyone to think that i am bad mouthing richards stuff. you may be able to run my dry sump and his high volume pump just fine. the high volume pump just helps get the oil from the tank. my belief on the gsxr is to run it dry sumped and use high volume pressure pump to turn it into a true race motor. when we build an atlantic engine, the system is designed from scratch and the correct rotor sizes are selected to hit a target volume and pressure for that system. we do not use the stock oil pump at all as it too would not be up to the task. we got lucky on the kawasaki that it comes stock with larger rotors then suzuki, now if only it made power! do these things and you will have a reliable powerfull race engine that lasts and saves you money in the long run. the whole system costs about as much as one engine, so one failed engine pays for it!
Jake,
"Responding to Bill: what causes high vacuum on the pump suction side? I've run an experiment by coming off throtlte on the straights (without braking) to see if the pressure showed a similar dip, and it did not. The dip is only present under hard braking, and gets worse as I drive harder and harder. "
I have seen a number of stock motors come apart with the oil pump screen/pickup o-ring sucked into the passage. This o-ring is not retained on the ID and that is poor technique IMHO. When this happens there is an obvious air leak into the input stream of the pump. On my engines I retain the o-ring with an ID sleeve. I would say that there is substantial vacuum on the input side of the stock setup and anything that restricts this area could be a problem. The oil sump tank is only 12" from the pickup and the input line is #16. This is due to the stock passage being larger than a #12 id. One additional thought: I do not use the stock oil cooler ports, all oil out of the pressure pump goes to the filter (WIX 1515R) and the cooler in that order.
"Bill, how close are you to WF-1 and/or F1000 times in your Dragon?"
I expect that this is a friendly question. I wish I could say faster than JRO, but not true. In the NE B Gardner (WF1) and I race together. Ask me again after this weekend's race at Watkins Glen.
05/06 Suzuki GSXR 1000
1.) 48" with -8 fittings
2.) N/A
3.) Mobil 1 Racing 4T 10/40
4.) Water 190 max usually 175, oil 230
5.) No
6.) N/A
7.) Standard, Precision Machine wet oil pan, baffle plate and fixed oil pick-up. No trap doors.
I also have two NACA ducts on each side of the car that blow air onto the headers and block.
I do only have 3 races and 5 test days on the motor which was an 800 mile 'ebay special.'
Talking to some friends back home in the UK they now mostly run dry sump set ups, particularly on the 07/08 GSXR as they found a certain fragility over the 05/06 which ran fine with a wet sump. That said there are people running wet sump 07/08's with no problems at all. Keeping the thing cool (air flow over the motor) was mentioned more than once and is something I've always done. Oil and filter change after every event.
Hello all, long time reader, first time poster. Thanks for the link Jake.
Yes, when I first installed Jesse's drysump system I underfilled it which caused the failure, sheet happens, it was a stock motor and a learning experience.
Since then, Jesse and I continued to develope his awesome setup. But, IMHO is not a solution because it is not the problem. These sytems that have been mentioned are not a drysump system everyone is thinking they are. All they do is scavange the oil and put the oil into a oil tank (mine is the flower pot Peterson tank). The factory pump is still left with the job of keeping the engine alive and its doing a poor job. The pump is so weak it couldnt produce more that 40ish psi when the DS system was installed. With a 14" -10 and then later with a -12 line feeding the pump, no change.
Jesse, dont believe in the gears and billet relief valves now? :confused: The combo does raise oil psi to a steady 58-60psi at 240 in my car. Data available if anyone would like to see it.
June Sprints engine was my first sweet arse KWS motor that was running beautifully all weekend. Well almost all weekend. And it was wet sumped with pan from Stohr. I run a Motec M880, M&W CDI, tuned and installed by myself, running .89 Lamda throughout the rpm range. No signs of being lean or detonation. The oil was changed before the race again with Amsoil Moto 20-50. Oil that was in there prior was ran on dyno and for test day and qualifying. Amsoil filters and changed each time too. The oil is actually still clean despite the rod failure. Carrillo's BTW. This was a full tilt KWS engine with a mild cam, I asked for a safe/6 race weekend motor. :(
And also to clear something up, my oil filling method (since I underfilled one, I was never going to do that again) is to get the oil temp up to 180 and hold revs to 6000 rpm. No bubbles in sight glass. Overfilled? Maybe, but not to much worried about max hp at this point, just looking for reliability.
I think theres more going on here.
First, with all due respect, please dont post how long your engines has lasted unless you are in a car that can generate the G's or lap times like a WF1 AND run competative lap times. The most engines are failing in these types of cars with drivers who are trying to win. I think its great if anyone is ok with just running and finishing wherever, nothing wrong with that. But also dont kid yourself, its just a matter of time.
I want to go as fast as I possibly can at all times, my goal is to win races and aiming for the championship. So yes, I understand I'm using the engine hard, Im racing! :revs: But just to clear it up, I do not use the engine to slow down, I dont bang gears, I have yet to over rev or brake a starter etc. I take care of my equipment and spend a ridiculous amount of time preparing the car. So much for thinking it would be less work than my EP Prelude. I dont think Im known for being hard on equipment, well maybe when I first started racing! :p
I would like to discuss and brainstorm and together, come up with a solution.
Its obvious this is an oiling issue and IMHO, its the pump.
Talking to Jake today he said something that really has been bothering me and a huge point.
Why is the oil psi falling so much under braking? It should hold constant. When we brake we usually downshift in the 6K range i believe. 5,6,7,8K doesnt matter. Why would psi go down? When car is at rest, at 240 oil temp and rpm is anywhere over 2500, it has the 58-60 psi it has during WOT. Why wouldnt it when braking? The engine is still turning, whether its under load/making power or not. The pump is gear driven, shouldnt matter. THIS IS THE PROBLEM. It may not even be the pump itself, something to do with oil pick up, oil path... IDK, but looking into it.
I also believe and always have regardless what race engine, 10psi per 1000rpm. I dont think we need 130psi, but IMHO, it should be a rock solid 85psi at all times. Guarantee give it that and problem will be solved. George is the man, but sorry Jesse, I disagree that 55 psi is enough and have never seen more than 60 psi hot, even with a O/D gear.
Jake was running a Riltech pump but with a stock relief valve so it wouldnt operate any higher than 65psi. I'm really interested to see what it would be with a billet relief valve. DOH! It still drops to the 20's under braking! Dammit.
So, even with bigger/different pump, still got this issue.
I want a real drysump system Jesse!!! Give me a real psi section added to your otherwise brilliant design! PRETTY PLEASE!
BTW, and this is why you dont need carrillo's in FB, but go right ahead if it makes you feel better, but thats how the snowball starts. The rod failures are the effect of the problem not the cause.
Sorry for the book I just wrote,
Lawrence Loshak
#02 DSR Stohr WF1
Yes, absolutely. No forum hero here, I'm glad to have a :beer: with anybody :DQuote:
Originally Posted by dragonbill
I just want to be able to reliably go take a :greenflag: with anybody too!
Appreciate the input.
-Jake
let me clarify lawrance. i dont believe in the overdrive gear and never really did. i told you and others about it as it worked on wetsump pre 07 engines that have and even smaller pump then 07-08. i told you up front that i was working on a high volume pressure pump and believed it to be the real solution. george now has one to test and will be testing it with your dry sump soon to hopefully get it over 65psi. i aggree that 54psi is not good enough that is why it is being further tested and not just sent back to you to run. we are on the same page. since the testing that george and i have done, the engine needs the high volume pump. you say you want me to add a higher volume pressure section to my scavenge pump, but that increases cost and packaging and that is what is keeping people away. i have to listen to all customers. instead i am adding a higher volume pump inside the motor and have moved the scavenge pump inside the motor to improve packaging as to numerous requests. blocking off the internal pressure pump and adding an external pump requires too much modification for most customers. it still uses my technology and dual scavenge and gerotors and all that good stuff. on the billet relief valve, i believe in it strongly, but do not think it is required, if i say it is, people freak out and claim i am expensive. but as you know, i am like you and just believe in doing it right. i think that running dry sump at 65psi with high volume pump would be ideal and adding the billet valve and getting to 75psi would be perfect. the west guys with dry sumped kawasaki zx10's see anywhere from 70-80psi depending on temps, and rarely have blown an engine in 3 seasons and 10 plus cars. your system will be tested with high volume pump and billet valve and we wont rest until we see 75psi! for those of you that dont want all that added cost, or believe that 75psi will rob power or whatever you believe, i believe it will run way better then wetsump and last way longer just running dry sump with high volume pump, but in all reality, the billet valve is only $80. i just got off the phone with jake and he mentioned that all the pro bike guys actually reduce the size of there pressure pumps and max out at like 45psi in order to increase hp, and that is true, but they dont see the stress we do and they rebuild there engines after each event for the most part, and that reduction in pressure is only worth maybe 1hp, but everything matters in bike racing, it sells bikes! the dry sump is the solution, but a high volume pump is required to make it work right. as is with no overdrive gear and stock relief valve we see 54psi. you see 58-60 with overdrive gear and billet valve. and you see low pressure spikes under braking, thats what blows the engine, and the dry sump will fix that. the high volume pressure pump will add a lot more then 5psi to my system. so my system with high volume pump will run at 65-75psi and will eliminate low pressure spikes.
Hi Again everybody -
Productive mosts, which is most appreciated. I know that this issue is particularly up my a** since I've recently had trouble, and I know Lawrence is pretty bent, so hopefully we can turn that into some solutions for the community. I don't know about you, but I feel just that little bit smaller when Erin from Enterprises says "lost another motor?" :D
Everybody has been very helpful and open, which should be really productive to fixing any issues we ultimately identify with the engines. George and Kevin and Richard all talk to eachother, so it's nice this is a 'for the common good' kind of thing.
So, my misc notes from the day, in no particular order. Some obvious, some not so obvious.
1.) Spoke to Jesse (urbanimports/BRD/etc) at great length on the phone. He's not done much by way of introduction, but it sounds like he's been around the scene a long time, at Loyning, West etc. Had a lot of good points to make about oiling and such, so I'd suggest giving him a call if this is something at all on your mind. Educated me, at least.
Particularly interesting is the setup that allows for retention of the stock water pump, which he is developing. If dyno testing goes well with the higher pump on the updated system, hopefully we can get it on a racecar and see if it eliminates the dips that we all see on the data.
His observations match those I've discussed with Richard and George, which is that the current dry sump systems have the same issue with low system pressure - about 45psi, since the stock pump is simply inadequate to pull strongly enough from a remote tank. As Jesse aluded to, his solution is improved routing in the sump pan itself, and an improved oil pump for the engine.
The ultimate goal is 65+ psi pressure at all times, not just straightline acceleration. This is what has served the West cars well for the past few years. Granted, those Kawis don't make much power compared to the Suzuki, but they do have a large oil pump, that has proven to be reliable on those motors.
2.) Somewhat related, on the oil pump topic. While speaking to George, he did mention that for the wet sump guys, he doesn't ever do anything with the pumps on the '07-08 engines, and that they don't have any issue maintaining 65psi. This seems to be corrobroated by the data I"ve shared with 07 guys out there. Further, he mentioned that sometimes the 05/06 motors do need some help with the overdrive gear.
2b.) On the topic of the overdrive gear, again, Jesse, George, and Richard are all in agreement that it's somewhat of a "band-aid" that seems to help somewhat, with the real solution being a higher volume pump that simply flows a bit more.
2c.) So, ultimately, what this is somewhat coming down to for the moment is a lot of pretty knowledgable fingers pointing at the smallish oil pump on the 07 Suzuki as the culprit behind some bottom-end failures on wet-sump cars, and the insufficient pressures on dry sump cars. Perhaps factory tolerances are to account for the inconsistent lives-or-dies behavior, or just whether you've sacrified a bottle of Sunoco recently to your favorite god. I mentioned to George how my data from the R1 showed that it was solid 55psi pretty much no matter what, and he did recall how they just seemed to be amazingly good in that regard, and sure enough, that engine lasted for 3 years.
I don't mean to start a pitchforks-n-torches sort of thing here, but perhaps we're onto a tickle of something? George and Jesse's testing this week should hopefully be enlightening.
3.) On the topic of Accusumps: George again echoed what Richard has told me, that they essentially don't seem make a whit of difference on these motors. Perhaps the volume of oil we're moving at 12K is such that the accusump is empty very, very quickly, so that all you do is delay the inevitable dip. George mentioned Brandon Dixon's recent experience at the Sprints, which basically boiled down to the same as I, JRO, and others have seen, which is that it doesn't seem to do bupkus.
4.) In the potentially obvious category, but worth mentioning: Everybody I've spoken to agrees that about 240* is optimal for horsepower, and 265* should be thought of as a "safe maximum" for oil temp. Some indications that closer to 220-230 does better for the life of the bearings. Anything beyond 230* water is pretty damn hot, and nobody really had any issue with anywhere between 180 and 210 for water.
5.) Specifically on rod failures, George said he basically had to shrug and tell me "dunno", as he hasn't seen it lately on his engines, which sure seems fair. His concern currently is more around the valve failures that many are seeing. He mentioned something about Lucas Magic Smoke :ha: (just kidding)
6.) There is some hypothesis, that Coop has raised before, that one common link could be the rod bolts. They stretch, clearance opens up, and the bearing pounds itself out. I don't know if there's an off-the-shelf solution for this, or if it's available for FB per the engine rules. (recall I'm in DSR)
7.) Regarding valve failures, nobody seems to have many ideas as of yet. Evidently Kevin/KWS is recommending frequent replacement, but that's secondhand hear-say. That's certainly a nut that needs to be cracked.
8.) There's pretty significant disagreement about the need, or even benefit to the aftermarket valvesprings available, even on built DSR motors. There's even some thought that the stiffer spring may contribute to valve failure by snapping the vavle shut that much more harshly, although hard to make much correlation, as both C/D guys are seeing this, as well as FB guys with stockers.
Looking over my scribbles, that's most of what I've got for the moment. Obviously the wet sump system works pretty well since so many folks are having good results, but it'd sure be nice to know why some live and some don't.
----
Responses:
Brands: Appreciate the input. Interesting to hear the move back to dry sumps for the 07's. Are they using primarily the Nova system that comes from the UK?
Lawrence: Wow, a Midwestern Tolstoy ;)
Jesse: Probably Coop that mentioned the pro bike guys. My knowledge of bikes starts and ends with the pedals on my 20-year-old Schwinn ;)
Cheers everybody,
-Jake
In our early years (2003) with the wet sump Yamaha, we would see 18psi in the corners at MidOhio, and the engines lived. Never saw much over 50. Hot idle was zero psi. I used to add oil until it started coming out the breather into the catch bottle at race speed. Then back off a bit. Well above the sight glass at a cold idle. The Suzuki seems a little different in that high oil levels cause higher temps.
If it turns out that one of the main problems is the Suzuki pump not easily sucking oil from a remote tank, here's a trick I've heard people have done:
Put a low (4 psi) radiator cap on the oil tank.
I haven't done it, but it sounds interesting. I'm not sure exactly how you'd plumb the venting to the catch tank, or if it would make the scavenge pump work harder to get oil into the slightly pressurized tank ...
sounds like everyone is starting to catch onto what i have been studying for that last year or so. first of all, the wetsumps work well to an extent. i have been working on atlantic cars in the pro series for 10 years now and all of these cars are dry sumped properly. that is they have the correct size pressure section and relief valve to make the pressure needed to keep bearings happy. these motors are extremely high strung compared to there stock configuration and last pretty well. i have also been involved with formula renault where we would see engines easily make a whole season. that is the reliability that i am after. the high volume pump will help the volume and peak pressure, and the scavenge system will help keep the pickup in oil 100% of the time to get rid of the low pressure spikes. the other thing i work on is getting a motor to make solid pressure at EVERY track not just it worked here or worked there. when i built the R1 engines at loynings, some lived half season + before refresh, while most seemed to blow for unknown reasons and none of what we are doing now, compiling data, was taking place so all were considered fluke. if you are seeing low pressure spikes at one track and do not blow an engine, damage is being done and it is a matter of time. low pressure spikes may not blow your engine on the spot, but its a matter of time. a proper race car needs to work everywhere, and that is why most race cars run dry sump. the west cars have been drysumped for 3 years with very few failures on 10 plus cars at tracks across the country. next, larry kropps system does work ok for some guys, it is single scavenge, and his idea of running 4psi radiator cap will help, but is also just a band aid. no proper dry sumped car runs this way. a dual scavenge pump is a must, we see most of our problems under braking meaning all the oil goes to the front of the motor, so you need a scavenge pickup up there to put it back in the tank to be picked up when you get back on the gas. next, a properly sized pressure pump is a must. so far, no proper dry sump has been offered for the suzuki, so no one has gone to the runoffs etc to prove that it works better then wetsump. i am setting out to prove it and there will be drysumps taking advantage of reliability and improved hp at the top of the runoffs grid this year.
Jeff at Loynings was the only guy I ever saw build the Runoffs winning Yamaha's.
I spent a lot of time with Jeff and spent time in the dyno room with Arnie.
i wont go into details here on the forum, but jeff did do some of the original r&d on the R1 but when i came along, i contributed my share and built more then half of the bike engines at loynings and even worked directly with you lee. mostly with the hayabusa stuff. i did the big valve r1 engine for ralph mayfield, which made more hp than any other r1 we ever built and did john hills motor that year as well. i built three of the hayabusa engines ran at that first runoffs with the csr cars including dominic ciceros stohr csr which ran motec which i spent hundreds of hours on the dyno to get it close to 220hp at 1300cc and mj's and even helped you guys when the cam timing failures reared there ugly heads. i dont need a kudos from you, but i built well over 50 r1 engines in the 2 years i was at loynings and at least a dozen hayabusas as well as steve otts gsxr ran in the speads that challenged john hill for the lead in that runoffs. not to mention all the wiring and ecu stuff to run r6 ecu on r1 engine. the whole reason i left loynings was my skill sets were not being challenged enough and pay was never going to be what i expect. thats why i am on my own now and work with george on all my stuff including the motors i still build for customers, as well as doing the engineering for west race cars. the new west wx10 was built by me here in portland and before that, i was there doing development stuff after i left loynings. as mentioned by jake earlier, i stay under wraps for the most part and participate very little here on the forums, so if you and others feel you dont know me or my credentials, i appologize. i guess you too will have to wait and see what i have in the works for these engines, west race cars, and even some goodies i am working on for the stohr cars.
i guess i did go into details, but i left out the juicy ones! oh and motor #02-290 that won many of the runoffs was a good motor originally built by jeff, but i had my hands on it more then a few times, and all of the motors built by either of us made similar horsepower no matter what we did. and we tried different stuff even after that motor did well. the real odd part is they dont make anywhere near that number on any other dyno?
:thumbsup: Thanks Jesse, thats music to my ears. ill try to give you a call later today,. its been a while.Quote:
your system will be tested with high volume pump and billet valve and we wont rest until we see 75psi!
Jake, "tolstoy" hey? :D Yeah, I know I may have laid it on a bit thick, I apologize if I offended anyone, that was not my intention. This blowing up engine bit is getting old. We've done pull/install routine 5 times already this season. 2 blown engines and R&D with the drysump. And its not just me and Jake that are the unlucky ones, it has nothing to do with luck. Its happening to alot of WF1 drivers. So just a bit edgy when I hear the dips are normal and its a fluke etc. In the begining days of the Prelude it took several engines to get it right (power/reliability). Eventually it was drysumped and became very reliable.
Valves breaking are not caused by springs, its caused by improper vlave/cam clearence and/or improper cam profile. Besides the job of opening a valve, the cam also assists in the closing of the valve. If it doesnt, valve will break, suzuki or not, car or bike. plotting out the lift on a graph paper will determine the amount of clearence needed. Different discussion. Lets stick with the oiling issues first.
I love the class, love driving a WF1, I dont want to switch or keep replacing engines like lighters.
George has a ton of experience building some awesome engines. I just dont understand how it has been stated that his engines magicly produce 65psi and no rod failures. Is some GDRE magic available in a can or only comes in a built GDRE engine? :D J/K George, are you tightening up clearences to achieve these higher psi's? Tips? Enquiring minds want to know. Can I try to break one? :p
Cost, HA! Its funny how we can run these awesome DSR's, FB's, data aq's, beautiful trailers and tow vehicles but a $2000-3000 drysump system or $80 billet relief valve can be considered expensive. I really dont care about the cost when it can save me time and money in the long run. At this point I'd run christmas lights on my car if someone could prove that it will make things live.
Thanks to all who are working on a solution.
hey lawrence, we are working on the solution and will get it there. running clearances to the tighter side helps, but we are not talking much. it doesnt take much. one color tighter makes a small change, but do that to all the bearings and you can buy 5-6psi real easy. i will let george divulge his info if he wants. georges dyno is a very nice superflow dyno and his instrumentation is top notch. i only use his numbers begining to end as your data or the next guy could be slightly different either way. what i look at is pressure made wetsump on a given engine then test drysump on the same engine, same day. i will say that your oil in the car is probably a little more aerated as it is in a car reaching nearly 3g's. that can account for the different numbers. lets keep all comments about george friendly, he is the most helpfull and generous guy in this crowd. i would have no data or testing if not for george. he has let me on the dyno for countless hours to help find the solution. we realy believe we are on it now and this next test with the new oil pump should do the trick.
The dangers of forums and typing. George is by no doubt a VERY good and reputable engine builder. Him sending me a billet relief valve, overnight to the race track while testing (and it wasnt even his engine nor have I ever been his customer!) speaks volumes of his generosity any his best intrests of keeping everyone on the track. Both of your efforts are greatly appreciated!!! Iw ouldnt be against running tighter clearances ever little bit in the right direction is a good idea in my mind.
I’m curious what kind of rod clearances folks are running, and are you torquing your rod bolts, or measuring the stretch?
If I told you guys everything I do, I guess I wouldnt have to come to work any more.
Hummm That doesnt sound like a bad idea
George
Just make something up, like .008 thou. clearance, finger tight on the rod bolts, then a quarter turn. Could be good for business.
Lawrence, Jake, What do your engine builders say about the bearing failures? Yes I do have my own way of screwing these engines together and let me say this, I dont think tighter bearing clearence is the answer. But I do think a bigger part of the picture may be my breakin procedure. It is vey common for me to run as much as 5 gallons of race fuel through an engine and over an hour of run time on my dyno, Before it leaves my shop. This is probably why I have over 17,800 dyno run files in my data base. When the engine is up and running I am monitoring engine oil pressure, oil tempreture, water tempreture, horsepower and torque, piston ring blowby, lambda, and in some cases exhaust tempretures, Intake tempreture and pressures. If the engine does not make the power it is supposed to after 3 pulls it gets taken off the dyno and taken apart to find out why. If the engine does make the power it is supposed to, I continue to run it monitoring all of those things and after an hour or so I do a few more serious pulls on it just to make sure every thing is ready for racecar use. Then after all of this I remove the engine from the dyno fixure, I pull the oil pan off and look and see if there is anything bad going on in there. If all is good, it gets shipped
Just my opinion and way of doing things, No real magic, maybe I am just lucky
Hope this helps
George
George -
Glad you've chimed in.
This most recent engine I haven't taken back to Richard yet, but I'll see if he comes up with any ideas when we do tear it down. I'm leery of putting this lump back in the car ever, but it may be educational if we can figure out why it failed.
The last one, he didn't really have any ideas as to why, beyond "maybe put together wrong at Suzuki" which seems like quite a stretch to me, if we're all being honest here.
I guess it's pretty unusual (?) for #1 and #4 to go. In his experience, it's usually #2 or #3 like Lawrence had go. So having had it happen twice, I think he's honestly pretty puzzled.
The first engine I broke in, in the car per the directions in his website, which boils down to a gradual increase in load over the course of several laps/miles. The second he did on his (chassis) dyno, so I don't know the details. But, from the sound of it, what you're doing is far more thorough.
Whole lot of shrugging shoulders for the moment.
-Jake
Yeah, thanks for chiming in George.
Motor that failed at Sprints was broken in as you describe George. Ive always brake-in RACE engines on the dyno too. It was my first built motor for my DSR and had to set-up my Motec to run it. Actually first day and start-up was done on 10-40 Mobil (non-syn) then next day it was drained, new Amsoil filter and Amsoil 20-50 Moto oil went in. Then many more hours and runs were done on the dyno. Lamda, oil psi, temps, etc all logged. First filter cut open and inspected, looked great, oil had some glitter in it as any new motor would but otherwise oil was still new looking. This oil was ran for test day and qualifying. New oil and filter was put in for race.
Spoke to Kevin today (KWS) and he said he cant see anything that he could point his finger at. He said my tunning looked great, no pounding on the bearings/detonation or any signs of being lean. Oil was still clean not even dark. But #3 rod was black and the cap was ripped off. All rods had some damage. Main bearings looked fine. Cam is still good but when piston hit valve in chop-suey'd the cam bucket destroying the head.
Garry Crook, Charles Dempsey just raced a double national at Roebling with no problems. Same engines ran at Sprints.
Dont know. New one on the way thanks to Kevin lending a helping hand, should be here before next weekend giving us plenty of time to be ready for the CAT National. He did say he will always stand behind his motors and really is interested in figuring out some type of solution. One thing he did say is in the bikes, they never see dipping. But we all know bikes cant brake like we can. He also said 30psi doesnt worry him as long as it comes right up once we get back on the gas.
Im just going to do a dance around the motor and sacrifice a chicken and hope for the best. Just hope I can finish the season on this motor...
Thanks again George.
Lawrence Loshak
:(There's that phrase again.Quote:
Originally Posted by LLoshak
My data shows that the oil *eventually* comes back up to pressure, but it does not coincide directly with throttle position. I see many corners, especially slow ones after hard braking, where I get back on the gas, and there are 2-3 seconds of WOT at low (often 20-30, occasionally 10-20) psi before the oil comes back up to the 40+ range, and does so suddenly.
Isn't the fact that the bike engines do *not* see large dips, but we *do* see them a big :redflag: pointing to the wet sump pans not controlling oil sufficiently to prevent starvation under hard braking?Quote:
One thing he did say is in the bikes, they never see dipping. But we all know bikes cant brake like we can.
I saw a similar pattern in my data while scrubbing a set of tires. the magnitude of the dip corresponded almost directly with braking g's.
-Jake
Ill be checking data soon to see how long the delay was/is in my car.
Loaded up RA/Sprints race data. Intresting stuff.
I think we are starving the engine of oil.
Under braking for corner 1 (of best lap, 240 oil, 188 water) from 149mph to 102mph (10K RPM), oil psi drops to 28 psi around 118mph (1 second into braking). At 105mph (.5 second later), its on its way back up and only 0.2% throttle. By the time I pick up the gas (another .5 second) oil psi is already 54 psi. 1.3 seconds later I'm at 100% throttle and have been at peak oil psi for over a second.
That is the problem. Just like I was thinking before in previous post, pump is turning, braking or not, should be making oil psi regardless especially at 10,000 rpm.
Thinking of pinning the front door closed in pan and/or covering those drain back holes up front and possibly a scoop to catch oil as it goes forward and directs it into sump section.
Hmmmm.
I went back through all my data after we talked Jake and I have 0 (zero) traces that show full throttle after braking without the oil pressures immediately coming back up. This is two years worth of 07/08 GSXR data from over 50 different sessions. As I told you too I run with the oil 3/4 to all the way up the sight glass and have ran tracks with both long left handers and right handers without issue. Putting more oil in the sump than up the sight glass 3/4 to full just caused the motor to puke it into the catch can.
Funny we're both looking at the data at the same time. :) My T1 entry on my best quali lap is braking from 144 to 100 and dropping to 95 mid turn at 9800 RPMs. Under braking with the wet sump I am at 31psi throttled closed...1/3 the way in the turn I pick the throttle back up and bounce back to 49psi at the 9800 then up up to 60 by corner exit.Quote:
Originally Posted by LLoshak
John, it has nothing to do with you picking up the throttle. My point is, even if you didnt pick up the throttle there, the oil pump already got another gulp, psi was going up regardless. Think about it, throttle has nothing to do with oil psi, only rpm. And any pump better be putting out max psi well before 9000rpm.
Arnd possibly our failures are happening sooner because of the built/added power. More power more wear. Slowly damaging rod bearings because they are the last to get oil. And then....Kablam :meatball::debris:
And this explains another thing. Why some dont have failures and some do. Its the track! RA is know to be one of the hardest on brakes. 1,3,5,8,12. Input guys? Jake?
Are we on to something here?
Guys,
Check your data in turn 8 and 12. These corners are a bit more prolonged under braking. Turn one as I used to take it was a early on the power type of corner. Maybe the data on 8 and 12 will have more to back up your theory.
Lawrence -
how 'bout the sections where you really have to drop anchor? I don't know the corner numbers, but the lefthander before the Toyota bridge, and the lefthander that leads into the carousel?
John Stecher and I compared our data, and his shows the exact same kind of dip, even including the delay between throttle pickup and when oil pressure starts to increase again.
Looks like I was typing while John and Lawrence were.
-Jake
So below are my two fast laps from BHF earlier this year and then the sprints in both races. All the other laps mirror these. z-axis is psi of pressure measured at the stock bike position and then RPMs is the top line and brake/acceleration G's is the other line. Might as well talk to empirical evidence so everyone knows what we're talking about and has a visual reference.
What I don't understand is if this is a sump problem why only under braking? I pull much higher G loads under cornering in the carosel and other places without the pressure missing a beat...
So here's a few laps of mine at HPR. Note how long it takes for the oil to return to "normal" after Turn 8 (highlighted). You come up to it approx 100-105, and go down to first. Hardest braking on the track:
Attachment 15085
Attachment 15086
Maybe there's more to it than I can see?
-J
I'm probably missing something, but it sounds like the oil pick up is becoming uncovered during braking. Is there something that is making you think that isn't the cause?