Oh No - Transmission........ BOOM Maybe.

[Rocket Scientist]

Dirt bikes in the 70's had that type transfer gear. Maybe a Yamaha or Kawasaki. High and low range, with a 4? speed trans

One of my friends growing up had a 1970 Suzuki TC90 with a dual range 4 speed transmission. Maybe that's the one your thinking of ?

 

[Frosty Rider]

But the important question is, can you make us a heavy duty tensioner for those of us with a bit more than stock horse power?

A bit more?, that's what you call it? I would be interested your interpretation of a lot more.

 

[Paul Bryant]

Dirt bikes in the 70's had that type transfer gear. Maybe a Yamaha or Kawasaki. High and low range, with a 4? speed trans

Yep that's correct Kawasaki 100 G42R (gears 4, 2 ratio's)
I had a TS 90 Susuki and a mate had one of these Kawasaki's, this at about 15 Y/O

 

[barbagris]

I would be interested your interpretation of a lot more.

500bhp per Litre.

 

[CrzystghndKC]

Well the new MTC clutch basket has arrived.
Pictured next to he old one. Nice bit of kit - it’s a pity to hide it inside the engine.

It is beautiful.

 

[1olbull]

I disagree. Would rather have a nice tall overdrive - say 120kph at 2.5K. or 140kph at 3K. It is NOT a mono-cycle.

Chris,
I just don’t see the big deal with your proposed 3K @86 mph versus the OEM gearing of 3K at 79 or 80 mph.

 

[barbagris]

Chris,
I just don’t see the big deal with your proposed 3K @86 mph versus the OEM gearing of 3K at 79 or 80 mph.

RANGE per tank. Well that would be my wish. If I had the skills of @Claviger and @Speedy (and the dosh) I would try and build a diesel R3. Better fuel energy density. 500km per tank.

 

[mr hunt]

A bit more?, that's what you call it? I would be interested your interpretation of a lot more.

You need at least 350hp on an R3 before hp/litre is equal to the LEAST powerful of the high performance litre bikes and we know at least 500hp is possible so 265hp wheelie monsters like Steel's are barely above stock

 

[DodahMan]

RANGE per tank. Well that would be my wish. If I had the skills of @Claviger and @Speedy (and the dosh) I would try and build a diesel R3. Better fuel energy density. 500km per tank.

The rocket platform would make for an awesome diesel motorcycle. You would only need about half the size motor to get the same torque. Still, look at what riders want . . . HP. No matter what bike (mabye except for the goldwing) riders choose, they always zing it up to get more HP. HP is irrelevant when it comes to diesels. My old 7.3L international (F250) only makes 230hp but yields 550 ft/lb of torque at 1850 rpm. Combine an engine like that with a CV transmission and that would be an interesting animal.

 

[DodahMan]

You need at least 350hp on an R3 before hp/litre is equal to the LEAST powerful of the high performance litre bikes and we know at least 500hp is possible so 265hp wheelie monsters like Steel's are barely above stock

This is why I wanted to try out the rocket, the torque. I really do not care at all about HP (well, at least not nearly as much). My first torque oriented bike was the Yamaha roadstar and I absolutley loved that low end pullaway low end low rpm torque. This machine was completely opposite from the GS1150 I had previously owned.