Thumper Racing 610 kit.

HusaBELGfs570 said:

Yeah If I had the cash I would consider a 610 kit but then again the fact you have to bore the case out is a thing I do'nt like.
That thumper kit would be insane with alle the whistles and bells added to it (modified TB/Ported head/blueprint/performance cam/custom FI etc )
That thing would go +70bhp easily I think 8O

Click to expand...

Erm no there is no requirement for boring cases. And yes I'm on the quest for 70 hp but I think I will need to measure it by moroso hp or weight shifted, that is the best way for comparing apples to apples. I have 59 nm already and we all know that's what makes it go want more hp just turn the motor faster.

maKe said:

HusaBELGfs570 said:

Can't wait to see what all those things result to on the dyno
I am also curious what the weight difference might be on a 590cc setup compared to stock maybe 25 extra cc's wil not make that much difference power wise but 18% more weight means more wear on the rest in the motor more fuel consumption less reliabilty :?:
If the 590 kit is only 10% more weight it will rev quicker/smoother I think ,anyway I'm sticking with 565cc's for now but just nice to see these thing

Click to expand...

I heard that the 590 was waste of money. 610 seems to be a good choice but it requires the cases to be overbored to fit the liner. Nothing a good machinist can't do but it's permanent mod then and stock cases are not cheap...

More rotating mass = more inertia and slower revving. Needs damn good balancing of the rotating assembly if you want to rev a 610 or 664 up to 10k rpm's, but then again does it need that much revs anymore because you get 20-50% more torque everywhere? It's kinda like changing a ferrari to tractor. :mrgreen:

Click to expand...

We are talking about a large capacity four stroke single cylinder the whole idea is big fat lazy power, if you want 10k rpm stay with a 450, the 565 has a great mid range but the 40cc extra fills the gap from idle to there, it's not like changing from a Ferrari to a tractor as it was never like a Ferrari to begin with, the idea that the extra weight makes it rev slower is theoretically true but we are also dealing now with a massively over square motor.

maKe said:

berglsmerg said:

We are talking about a large capacity four stroke single cylinder the whole idea is big fat lazy power, if you want 10k rpm stay with a 450, the 565 has a great mid range but the 40cc extra fills the gap from idle to there, it's not like changing from a Ferrari to a tractor as it was never like a Ferrari to begin with, the idea that the extra weight makes it rev slower is theoretically true but we are also dealing now with a massively over square motor.

Click to expand...

Thats why I'm not too keen to up the displacement of the motor. But what I was told and I was quite shocked, when the tuner who supplied me the bigass TB and ECU told they ran 12000rpm rev limiter on Germany S2 bikes he built. 8O

Max power was @ 11000rpm, so I don't really know what I'm going to be expecting soon. :shock:

Click to expand...

:eep: thats outta control Id be waiting for the crank and rod to come flying thru the seat, I m guessing you trust that the factory has the crank balance perfect ?

This is exciting isnt it ? Race ya to 70 hp :lol:

contiman said:

It s not thé same engine but i have dyno sheets on m'y gallery from my 710 Berg (2004 crankcase)

Click to expand...

Very nice, it must be a rocket ship that thing, how does it run ? I love the look of your bike too the graphics are cool and the twin silencer set up looks fat. :cheers:

Torque Monster said:

GOOD LUCK boys - when you guys get to 70hp, I'm going back to the dyno and working some more out of mine.

Post up the dyno sheets please.

Click to expand...

:lol: I will hopefully by Friday. Just need to find a really happy dyno.

True that, I looked into a motocomposites mmx rod a year ago and there was nothing available, when I looked into a Carrillo item i decided I didn't want to re mortgage my home :lol:

Looks like contiman has it sussed, check the max rpm on his 710 dyno run 8O

berglsmerg said:

contiman said:

It s not thé same engine but i have dyno sheets on m'y gallery from my 710 Berg (2004 crankcase)

Click to expand...

Very nice, it must be a rocket ship that thing, how does it run ? I love the look of your bike too the graphics are cool and the twin silencer set up looks fat. :cheers:

Torque Monster said:

GOOD LUCK boys - when you guys get to 70hp, I'm going back to the dyno and working some more out of mine.

Post up the dyno sheets please.

Click to expand...

:lol: I will hopefully by Friday. Just need to find a really happy dyno.

Click to expand...

Bugger not untill Tuesday next week now

Same dyno same atmospheric conditions bigger throttle body = net loss of 4 hp

A/F around the 13.0 mark and mirrors the previous run I did earlier this year but the power curve is horrible, give me an hour and I'll throw the sheet of shame up when I'm at home with a beer in hand surveying the damage from where the tie down let go and spat the thin out the back of the truck

Speed costs, how fast do you want to go ?

Haven't done any head work or cam swapping, just a real blow to spend a fair wedge of folding for les than nothing well at least i gained informatio. 70 hp would be nice but feeding my family is another matter and now repairing all the brocken things from my tie down indescretion.

What a mess, peak power arrives later, flat spots, less HP over all. Still spins that particular roller better than a CR 500.

Well this is the thing mate what works for one may not work for the other, I think you would be best off talking to an expert regarding this before you make up your mind. I'm kind of going out on a limb trying things, trial and error I suppose.

Sorry mate the lower curves are AFR. It felt great riding it but there was a 6 week gap between riding without and with the 44mm TB, it's still got tons of grunt but the numbers just don't match. We checked if the Correction factors were the same, road speed vs RPM over time to eliminate tyre or clutch slip seat on, off and filter out, tried all three map settings all for very little difference. And yes the power curve is horrible.

I am a sporting shooter and work my own hand loads, I have seen cases where a minimum charge outperforms ( in both accuracy and muzzle velocity) a high powered charge because a pressure peak has been reached and that particular round in a particular rifle like to run in that range. Don't know how this correlates with internal combustion engines but I guess the principal is the same, a propellant pushing against a solid cylindrical object in a bore.....

I don't have the answers, just going to replace the clutch and gear lever, rear indicator, handle bars and grips (hoping the bent left hand radiator don't leak) and ride the "@$$@¥£#{ thing over the holidays. Will head back next year and start again with my friends stock TB for a base line and experiment from there. Hope to stumble across the right combination before I rack up Australia's national deficit :lol: