i think all bergs crank pins are the same diameter at about 30 mm according to my yard stick but i am not a mechanic and dont work on them myself.dan
Joined Mar 2005
514 Posts | 6+
Sunset desert/ Murray River. S.A/Victoria Australi
Taffy said:
Taffy, I believe you will find early bergs 00,01,02,03s all share the 32mm big end.
Sometime in 05/06 the beefed up cranks started showing up for the 450 and 650- I know the 650 had a 35mm big end and believe the 450 may have also gone to a 35mm big end.
I understand the 550 may have kept the 32mm big end into its 05 0r 06 year- but not totally sure. (HHmmmmm- computer says nooo...?)
Looks like you are up for a bit of cross referencing of the parts books
Please whack it all into the doc when you find out for us. Ta.
regards ,
AUSBERG
Joined Nov 2001
17K Posts | 774+
Ely, England
RE: Re: big end size?
this is from a belgian on katoomtalk. i'm going to suggest that the 650 has a 35mm b/e but that the 450 and 550 stuck with the 32mm. thisbelgian can get lighter rods but in the ktm sizes he wants.
maybe simon or someone SM has a source for rods?
anyway i'll endeavour to find out about the b/e sizes.
regards
Taffy
this is from a belgian on katoomtalk. i'm going to suggest that the 650 has a 35mm b/e but that the 450 and 550 stuck with the 32mm. thisbelgian can get lighter rods but in the ktm sizes he wants.
maybe simon or someone SM has a source for rods?
anyway i'll endeavour to find out about the b/e sizes.
regards
Taffy
Joined Mar 2005
514 Posts | 6+
Sunset desert/ Murray River. S.A/Victoria Australi
Those KTM rod lengths are a good find Taff, but just to clarify the KTM big end sizes
RFS 525EXC & SXs = 35mm
RFS 450EXC = 35mm
RFS 450 SX =32mm (Same dia as early bergs)
That might save someone a bit of confusion in the future maybe .
RFS 525EXC & SXs = 35mm
RFS 450EXC = 35mm
RFS 450 SX =32mm (Same dia as early bergs)
That might save someone a bit of confusion in the future maybe
.taffy
i can tell you that my 01 650 definitely has a 32mm big end pin.
another thing worth noting, when they sent me a conrod kit,for a 03 model ,even though it was 1mm longer it was 12g lighter than my 01 conrod.they shaved 1mm off the width.
look in my gallery.
..weed..
i can tell you that my 01 650 definitely has a 32mm big end pin.
another thing worth noting, when they sent me a conrod kit,for a 03 model ,even though it was 1mm longer it was 12g lighter than my 01 conrod.they shaved 1mm off the width.
look in my gallery.
..weed..
Joined Nov 2001
17K Posts | 774+
Ely, England
that'll go in the doc i hope weed. trouble is, how is the '01 crank balanced? naughty not to stick to original weight. how come you get to be popup here and weed in the gallery? i know json's been losing it for some time but now he's lost it!
to be honest - who was having trouble with the 32mm big end anyway? do we have a record anywhere of a 650 b/e going?????
what i find interesting here is something that i think i've learnt because i hadn't thought about ti and something i really have learnt - and that's rare for me.
i should have twigged that with todays non-destructive testing that you can make a PRODUCTION con rod lighter and lighter and lighter. that gives you a realistic opportunity to lengthen the con rod which causes less thrust against the sidewalls, less friction etc and also a better mechanical advantage. ideally all rods would be a foot long and all the energy would go up and down.
what i think is new is that i think it causes less stress everywhere to have a longer rod and therefore that's why husaberg have got away with the 32mm b/e for so long.
this is why i'm interested in taller cases or do i go and see JBS about a cylinder spacer??????
regards
Taffy
to be honest - who was having trouble with the 32mm big end anyway? do we have a record anywhere of a 650 b/e going?????
what i find interesting here is something that i think i've learnt because i hadn't thought about ti and something i really have learnt - and that's rare for me.
i should have twigged that with todays non-destructive testing that you can make a PRODUCTION con rod lighter and lighter and lighter. that gives you a realistic opportunity to lengthen the con rod which causes less thrust against the sidewalls, less friction etc and also a better mechanical advantage. ideally all rods would be a foot long and all the energy would go up and down.
what i think is new is that i think it causes less stress everywhere to have a longer rod and therefore that's why husaberg have got away with the 32mm b/e for so long.
this is why i'm interested in taller cases or do i go and see JBS about a cylinder spacer??????
regards
Taffy
Joined Oct 2003
955 Posts | 1K+
Sweden
Cheers Taffy!
I think the Swedish motor manufacturer Folan is using 32/20 mm rods which are 140mm long. Perhaps Highland has something that fits too?
The Husaberg 650 rod length increased from 134 to 135 mm from 2002 to 2003. The motard I raced with in 2002 was equipped with a 135,5mm rod with "Rotax" stamped on it...
As the crank is bending, I cannot understand why KTM chose to enlarge the big end for the later Husaberg models? The crank halves are still of the same thickness, which makes the press fit even worse in handling the bending forces. :?:
I think the Swedish motor manufacturer Folan is using 32/20 mm rods which are 140mm long. Perhaps Highland has something that fits too?
The Husaberg 650 rod length increased from 134 to 135 mm from 2002 to 2003. The motard I raced with in 2002 was equipped with a 135,5mm rod with "Rotax" stamped on it...
As the crank is bending, I cannot understand why KTM chose to enlarge the big end for the later Husaberg models? The crank halves are still of the same thickness, which makes the press fit even worse in handling the bending forces. :?:
Joined Oct 2003
955 Posts | 1K+
Sweden
OK. I'll try to find the pedagogic skills I haven't been blessed with (either): The proportion between the length and diameter in a cylindrical press fit is important. Most cranks have shorter length of the press fit than big end diameter. A cylindrical press fit will be more rigid to bending if the length is equal to the pin diameter, or even slightly longer. Husaberg have gone in the opposite direction when enlarging the pin diameter and keeping the length the same...
I wouldn't be surprised if the Husaberg, KTM and Folan rods are forged at the same place. Yes, they are of equal quality to Husaberg rods.
I wouldn't be surprised if the Husaberg, KTM and Folan rods are forged at the same place. Yes, they are of equal quality to Husaberg rods.
Joined Oct 2003
955 Posts | 1K+
Sweden
It is flex at the press fit. Imagine the length of the fit was very short in comparison to the diameter. Such a fit would very easy tilt under a bending force. Now imagine that the length was very long in comparison to the diameter. The press fit would endure the bending forces and let the shaft take a larger part of the load. There is of course better ways of explaning this geometrically on a piece of paper over a pint, or four...
Update on this thread:
I have a part 80030015000 laying here.
It is Conrod Rep. Kit 501/550 03 according to the FS550 '07 spare part PDF
It has 130 marked on one side and R021 on the other side and a 32mm big-end pin. But i cant really measure the lenght of the con-rod precisely? How do you measure the lenght of the rod correctly?
I have a part 80030015000 laying here.
It is Conrod Rep. Kit 501/550 03 according to the FS550 '07 spare part PDF
It has 130 marked on one side and R021 on the other side and a 32mm big-end pin. But i cant really measure the lenght of the con-rod precisely? How do you measure the lenght of the rod correctly?
Similar threads
Register CTA
Register on Husaberg Forum! This sidebar will go away, and you will see fewer ads.
Sign Up
