HANKSXXX

Is the airbox intact along with the plastic baffles, 2 on each side?

Except as Fred noted, both sides are stock and mint. I dis-assembled all the plastic every winter and used a very fine polishing compound, followed by wax. I cleaned the motor, frame, suspension, everything prior to reassembly. I had a number of guys ask what kind of paint I used when I repainted it....Nope, 100% original. It gave 42+ MPG. Suspension btw, is a Penske triple clicker on the rear and Penske Super Sport compression and rebound valves in the front. I tried 2 or 3 other brand valves along with different spring rates. I also tried a Penske double clicker prior to the triple clicker. Forks and shocks were set up on a dyno. Bike is lowered slightly with lots of trial and error due to the location of the intercooler. Fred mentioned he thought I'd fill in the blanks and I'd be more than happy to try. Thanks for the compliments and the interest. Hank

Dunno whats with the formatting but Blackhawk, you're close. Mark Moisan, the guy who developed the turbo kits in 97-98 is an old friend. He built those kits with an Aerocharger variable vane turbo which had a self contained oiling system. Because of the turbo design, they would self destruct if pushed over 240HP or so. His company was called American Turbo Systems and he got lots of press for his carbed BB kits. One of the magazines tested the bike at Daytona and hurt the motor with an extended top end run. Mark knew this was a make or brake moment and asked the magazine if they'd retest the bike again the next day. They said sure and over nite, he dropped the motor and put a set of pistons in it. He did this in the motel parking lot and he arrived for the test the next day, on time. They retested the bike and came back with a glowing review. Mark built 2 customs kits later which were completely different. He had no intention of selling them but finally let them go as he realized he'd never use them. One went to a drag racer from Colorado. The other sat in his garage until I called him... My sign in name of HanksXXX is a tip of the hat to Mark. His original kits included decals for the fairings that looked stock but had XXX instead of XX...:)

Guys, Fred is a very experienced motorcyclist and a good guy to deal with. I felt like my bike went to the perfect home. This is the best bike I ever owned in many respects. I have many pics of the build and full details for anyone who gets past 2nd base with Fred ... Teaser: 255 HP and 155 ft lbs TQ with the reliability of a stocker. Carrazzeria wheels Full Penske Suspension Powdercoat etc.

Check for vacuum leaks

Have you checked carb sync? Only reason I ask is I you said you changed the #3 carb for another one.

No challenge at all...I was qualifying the source of knowledge of your statements; be it first hand or reading. You have answered that you haven't built any turbocharged motorcycles, ridden any or read any books on the subject. Nothing else needs to be said.

Answer to my question: Normally aspirated engine tuning and building techniques do not apply with a turbocharged motor largely because of pressure induced by the turbo..:) See what I did there? Peace!

So I've been thinking about how to tactfully reply to your post and frankly, I can't. You really seem like a guy huddled around a book with little real world experience (in building high performance NA and boosted motorcycle motors), not to mention riding high horsepower turbo bikes. How did you feel when you got off your first 250HP, 155 lb tq, stock wheelbase turbocharged motorcycle? How about after riding your first 300HP motorcycle? How about you post your qualifications and achievements in building high performance NA and turbocharged motorcycle motors and I'll then be happy to do the same. There is flawed thinking here, but it isn't mine. Mine is first hand experience which I'm happy to share. A quick question and something for you to think about: Why do turbocharged motors with mild camshafts, turning less rpm's than a HP NA motor, require heavy duty intake valve springs, larger exhaust valves and porting on the exhaust side?

Thanks for the research and the very informative link. My statement was meant to be more basic. I meant traditional tuning that works with a NA engine doesn't necessarily work with a boosted engine and to consider pressure in the plenum rather than flow through the intake tract generated by the piston. We all know port design on most street engines can be improved up to a point. One of the limitations is the size of the (intake) valve through which air is pulled by the piston. With a boosted engine, air under pressure is pushed through the valve,The more pressure, the more air, the more horsepower. Of interest is that rods are less stressed in a turbo motor because of the cushioning effect of the pressurized charge. It's not unheard of for stock rods to remain intact at almost twice the horsepower output with a turbo as opposed to NA. Valve spring pressure has to be increased when using a lot of boost because of the pressure on the port side of the valve when seated. Rule of thumb is add a lb of spring pressure per lb of boost. This isn't necessary with low boost but becomes more so as boost pressure rises. Per plenum design, I have no problem trying to fix a problem shown by irregular plug readings etc. but in practice, I haven't seen a problem.

Man, I'd like to see that. Got a link? Just bumped into this, a Kosman Funny Bike from the early 90's...note the plenum/intake manifold: Bike went 4.62 1/8 mile 169mph 7.08 189mph in 1992 on old carb set up

Take a quick look at this manifold. It's manufactured by Terry Kizer's company, Mr Turbo. He is a many time record holder and builder of turbo bikes. I had one of his kits and this manifold in particular on a Suzuki Bandit. It is far from a good design but is necessitated by the space confines of a motorcycle. The intake or pressure side is the single hole. The boots to the intake ports match up to the 4 spigots on the reverse side. Number 2 and 3 cylinder spigots are partially in line with the single pressure (intake) port while number 1 and 4 are at the opposite end's of the manifold, requiring a ninety degree turn to get going down the manifold and another 90 degree turn to enter the spigot/port. How would flow in the traditional sense function with all these obvious roadblocks? Would the center cylinders not burn way differently than the ends? In use, all plugs burn the same because there is a reservoir of pressurized air looking for a place to escape. Hence my (hopefully) thought provoking statement: think pressure, not flow.

Think pressure, not flow.

If it's too fast you're too old. Well yeah, that too... I think the standard head gasket is .030" thick

Stacking 3 head gaskets will move the cams about 2 degrees, iirc. I tried mixing/matching fi cams and carbed cams and tried degreeing them at 105-105. At the end of the day I'm not sure it did a lot. Damn turbo made 250+HP/150+ ft lbs tq and on a stock wheelbase BB, it was way more than I needed...

My friend Mark Moisan used to supply extra stock head gaskets with his kits, back in 1998 or so. He used Aerocharger turbos. I had Cometic custom gasket division manufacturer head gaskets for my turbo projects but I see no reason not to use 3 stock gaskets. You will have to be careful getting the cams installed at that height but it can be done. I had custom gaskets made because I thought there was less chance of failure but use what you have...

13t will generate boost in the 3500-4000 rpm range but limits HP compared to the 16t I'd use what is available...the buggy, because of its weight compared to a bike, will load the turbo more... Think you will be fine with the 16...

That was a great thread... Coupla guys on here that have a lot of knowledge with turbos; eliXXer, XXturbo, XX4 me... Sorry if I'm not remembering names correctly...Let us know as the project progresses.

Volvo used Mitsuibishi 16t on some models. Its a very compact unit with built in waste gate and blow off valve. Parts are available and its upgradeable. They are a fairly rugged unit. You'll need a boost indexed Power Commander or some other unit for of mixture control. Timing retard might help although I never used it. I'd suggest a Walbro 255 or Bosch 044 fuel pump. You will also need a boost indexed fuel pressure regulator. As far as an intercooler, try to find an air over water unit. It will add another system but will cool the charge better and temps will be more consistant. Charge tube size of 2" should be fine Gravity oil drain is fine if bottom of turbo is mounted above the oil level in the sump. Use a restrictor in the oil feed and as big a drain as possible.

I ran 250 HP for 4 years and 40,000 miles with no problems on my 97 Blackbird. Stock injectors will support 250 HP as will the stock ignition. I think you will need a lock up clutch due to the weight of the vehicle. I always used a .074" thick Cometic head gasket. That is about the limit with an intercooler on 93 octane pump gas. What gas will you use?

How much horsepower do you want to make?

I have a garden tractor with a snow plow and chains/wheel weights. It also has a cart for hauling brush up the street to an undeveloped parcel of land. If I wanted a separate piece of equipment for snow removal, I'd get a ZTR for lawn duties but this does everything so it stays. It's a 2003 GT5000 Sears with 25hp Kohler Pro motor. I paid $1000.00 for it in 2005 and its been a 4 season workhorse since. I've seen lots of problems with some of the Briggs/Stratton engines...head gaskets, push rods, always seems like top end problems. Kawasaki and Honda engines have very good reputations too.

There's an 03 on the premier site with 5300 miles and a few nice extra's for $7500.00. That should help put this bike into perspective, depending how you look at things....

Google Blackstone Labs

Carb work, then a ride to the track...all interspersed with cold brewski's!