This site may earn a commission from merchant affiliate links, including eBay, Amazon, and others.

Cylinder diamiter

JBSracing

JBSracing

Joined Nov 2004
158 Posts | 0+
Can any body tell me the outer diameter of the bottom of the barrel skirt on a pre-split case Husabergs?? If any one knows or is able to measure next time they take their cylinder off I would be very grateful.

I tried to post something like this last night but when I came to check for replies I couldn't find it, forgive me if this is post is some ware else. It was very late last night, often me brain goes to sleep before me body.

I use Husabergs for racing and as such I have to split them every week-end for inspection. I find the fact that I have to split the bottom end rather than just lift the barrel a real pain in the neck! does any body else find this, I am interested in what you all think is the all-in-one split case a good thing or not??

Thanks again

Ben
JBSracing
 
Hi Ben,
To the point as I am on the run:

Can any body tell me the outer diameter of the bottom of the barrel skirt on a pre-split case Husabergs?? If any one knows or is able to measure next time they take their cylinder off I would be very grateful. I will check however it may be a few days.

I tried to post something like this last night but when I came to check for replies I couldn't find it, forgive me if this is post is some ware else. It was very late last night, often me brain goes to sleep before me body.
You are probably old like me :D

I use Husabergs for racing and as such I have to split them every week-end for inspection. I find the fact that I have to split the bottom end rather than just lift the barrel a real pain in the neck! does any body else find this, I am interested in what you all think is the all-in-one split case a good thing or not?? NOT!

Dale
 
Thanks Dale that will be a big help! I agree that the all-in-one case thing is generally a bad (or at least not as good) idea, especially for a race engine if it is to be used as such.

I am interested in older Husabergs because of the above and the fact that I am a greedy guy at least were CC's are concerned, and I have an aluminium foundry. You can guess were this is going.

With regard to being old, you could have fooled me given the flat track pictures! I myself an really quite young, but surprisingly decrepid and senile in spit of it. Honest!

Ben
 
Hi,

can you tell me again which diameter you need?
I´m not sure if I understood it right.
Which model do you have?

I have several cylinders (liners) and cases from dismantled engines in my garage.
So it´s no problem to take every measure you want..... :D

greetings
hribman
 
Hi Hirbman

I am looking for the diameter of the skirt on the bottom of the barrel of a husaberg 600, before Husaberg changed the design of the engine to have the barrel cast in two halves as part of the gear box/bottom end. I.e. what is the diameter of the bottom of the barrel on a KTM 525 style Husaberg, not a 2000 + split case Husaberg.

I hope that makes sense, thanks very much indeed for taking the time to answer this for me.

Ben
 
For poops and giggles, I am going to guess, and offer absolutely no concrete help on this one. 104 diameter x 35 long/tall. I had to turn one of mine down to fit into my old old 91 case. I just looked, knowing the new dia is 100, I guessed I turned down 2mm on the radius, for 104. Am I correct, hribman????

-Parsko
 
For the split cases/seperate barrel thing, I would prefer to see a seperate barrel that has a seperate wet cylinder lining sleeve like Huskies had prior to 1993.

It gives doodlers the utmost freedom to play with bore sizes. The sleeve is cylindrical & can be turned up on a lathe from a different material to what is good to cast the cylinder from. They allow one of the cheapest options for cylinder replacement as the sleeves are dead simple. They give as good heat transfer from the cylinder wall to coolant as the current split cases arrangement (the sleeves are a similar shape). The barrel & piston can be pulled out/off with the engine still mounted in the frame.

The only drawbacks I can see are: it requires a bit more (although much less precise) maching to make it in the first place. The heat transfer from the oil & engine cases to the coolant is not quite as good. Perhaps engine case stiffness is not as good. It may also end up being a tiny bit heavier. The assembler has a minor extra concern to assure sleeve protrudes above the cylinder and that it is sealed to it.

The all in one engine cases, while I have not personally had experience with them, look like a pain in the butt if you have to pull the engine down regularly.
 
I agree with BundyBear the Huskie design pre-93’ is excellent.

Bundy I think you are quite correct about the machining, it does have to be much less precise. It seems to me that there are a whole heap of disadvantages to the all-in-one thing, but a few are – potential to pinch and distort liner oval, more seals to be made on the water in a difficult axis to seal i.e. compression not at 90 degrees to seal, need to split every thing on a race engine you want to look at the piston/barrel 10 times as often as the gearbox in the Husaberg that means 10 unnecessary gearbox splits………………

Don’t get me wrong I’m not trying to burn the Husaberg, I think that at this point in time they offer the most potential for power of any single out there, and the quickest route to big CC’s. But I do think that the Husaberg could be bigger and better with a conventional barrel. The CC limit for a Sidecar is 1000cc so that is were I am headed, naturally I will support the 750cc kits as that is either the limit or close to it for Supermoto, Supermono, Quads etc so that market should remain pretty constant I hope.
 
JBSracing said:
... need to split every thing on a race engine you want to look at the piston/barrel 10 times as often as the gearbox in the Husaberg that means 10 unnecessary gearbox splits………………
.
Click to expand...

I don´t understand why you need to replace the cylinder/piston that often..?!
I don´t see there any necessity to do it that often. You´re right, when you say that it´s much more easier to just pull of the cylinder of the old style engines, but my engine (and of my friends) normally needs to be splitted every 2 years (motocross use), and then there is also a need of overhauling the crank and all other bearings etc...
The piston and rings is more minor matters....

So in some points I totally agree with Bundy'Bear. Maybe the Husaberg solution of the all-in-one-cases is not the best, but also not bad.
The price of a liner is also important. I was surprised how cheap it was.
It´s almost cheaper than recoating an old cylinder.
And machining on a lathe is also easier.
A disadvantage is indeed that you haven´t got too much possibilities to change the stroke, only with another crankcase, but for me that´s not too important.
 
hribman said:
JBSracing said:
... need to split every thing on a race engine you want to look at the piston/barrel 10 times as often as the gearbox in the Husaberg that means 10 unnecessary gearbox splits………………
.
Click to expand...

I don´t understand why you need to replace the cylinder/piston that often..?!
I don´t see there any necessity to do it that often. You´re right, when you say that it´s much more easier to just pull of the cylinder of the old style engines, but my engine (and of my friends) normally needs to be splitted every 2 years (motocross use), and then there is also a need of overhauling the crank and all other bearings etc...
Click to expand...

I don't need to replace the piston and cylinder that often but I do need to inspect it. I am in the business of developing engines, putting components in (i.e. 105mm piston etc) which have not been tested before unlike OEM stock components in the engine. When you test a piston for instance for the first time you need to fully inspect it every few hours to see how it is running in, if the clearance is right, if there is any scuffing or hot spots etc. When you are trying to take an engine to limit of power and capacity you either exercise great care and strip the engine a lot keeping an eye on things as you go or you take a chance and pay for the smashed cases etc when they happen. I prefer to take things steady and collect as much data as I can. Additionally these engines are being tested by riders who have won world titles under Grad Prix conditions it is common to strip even the more "stock" GP engines regularly.

Hribman - You sound to me like a bike racer, were as I am an engine developer.
 
Hi Ben,

ok, I see what you´re talking about.

I found an old 501 cylinder from 1999.
The outer diameter of the lower end is 102 mm.
I measured as precise as possible.
It makes me a bit disappointed that Parsko was talking about 100 and 104mm. :? Right now I´m a bit confused, because I can´t believe that they have changed the diameter several times....
Maybe there is somebody else who can check it.
 
You very well could be right, hribman. I did a visual last night, as I left my calipers in my car, and was too lazy to get em. The extra 1mm could have been the tool interfacing with the bottom surface of the jug, creating an optical illusion of sorts. BUT, with that said, the bore on the 650 is 95mm (from memory). 102-95=7mm divided by 2 = 3.5mm wall thickness between the piston and the outside of the sleeve. Seems too thin to me. I am guessing the 650 might be a bit thicker than 102.

Yes, you are right though, there is variation in this sleeve. My 91 stock 350 had a 100mm sleeve, that was only 25mm long. The one I turned down was 102 (or 104?) in diameter, and 35mm long. So, it sat deeper in the cylinder. Better for cooling, more surface area, but seemed really close to the crank. Never hit. But, my valves floated into the pistion because they were 400 valves in a 350 piston with 350 cutouts in the piston. Could have made them bigger if I wasn't such a ******* and newbie. Say it, parsko, stop rambling...

JB- if you are casting, make is really thick (106ish) and machine it down so it fits. Sounds archaic, but...

-parsko
 
Ok,

maybe there is a variation between different bores.
The 501 and 600ccm engines has the same bore of 95mm.
3.5 wall thickness is enough, I think. So it could be the norm.
So what would that mean to a 400ccm engine? Maybe the diameter is smaller?....
That would also mean that you cannot use the crankcase for all kinds of engines (350-600 ccm).
I´ll check the parts manual:....
But the pm (1999) says that there is only one case for all. That makes sense.
Too expensive to produce several crankcases for each cylinder capacity...

What a pity:
5 weeks ago I had a dismantled 99 400ccm engine. So I had the possibility to check this measure at that engine...
sorry, too late now. The engine is already assembled.
 

Similar threads

N
Help on oil pump FE 390
Replies
3
Views
960
Nomadahowfar
N
S
2004 650 engine rebuild questions
Replies
8
Views
374
Samuel42
S
S
2004 FS650 - Aluminium shaving in oil filter
Replies
7
Views
1K
Samuel42
S
K
AM fuel pump parts sourcing problems
Replies
1
Views
1K
o6550
o6550
W
2006 FE 650 Top end rebuild
Replies
9
Views
1K
Taffy
Taffy

Register CTA

Register on Husaberg Forum! This sidebar will go away, and you will see fewer ads.

Recent Discussions

Recent Discussions