PHILIPRISING Posted November 20, 2016 Report Share Posted November 20, 2016 he had it set at 12,000 and he will only hit 10,500 in any race race and although he said it "can" hit 14,500 on start line he proberly wouldn't on British tracks so if it doesn't hit the limiter it has no barring on service bills , you do know santa isn't real don't you ? WHAT a time to tell me that wth Christmas approaching... 7 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Vince Posted November 21, 2016 Report Share Posted November 21, 2016 So despite all the theory the only bloke regularly using one says he had no problems and it reduced his costs? When they did the tests at Scunthorpe wasn't David Howe also in favour? He's been around long enough to know what's what I'd have thought. My son rides a bike with a rev limiter that he hits twice every lap, has a carburettor and has yet to wash the bore or lock up. I rode the same bike and did the same thing to it for 4 years and did blow it up, after it had 180 hours on the engine! It behaved no differently hitting the limiter to my injected bike. Despite being methanol that won't happen on a Speedway engine either, it doesn't when they misfire now. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Lord Skid Posted November 21, 2016 Report Share Posted November 21, 2016 No doubt there are good and bad points with a rev limiter, just who is going to police it, with the Germans able to cheat at the drop of a hat, as they proved in the GP's, how do you expect Bert the Machine Examiner to know if it's been set at 9,10 or 12,000 revs, we can't police fuel and carb size, let alone a high tec unit, and when we do catch someone, it's swept under the table, as the powers that be don't want bad publicity. 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
THE DEAN MACHINE Posted November 21, 2016 Report Share Posted November 21, 2016 (edited) So despite all the theory the only bloke regularly using one says he had no problems and it reduced his costs? why would he have problems with it when he doesn't hit the limit and how did it reduce costs ? The limiter didn't do anything and he did 87 races of which Peter John's says he doesn't recommend doing , as I said if it gives you satisfaction then use one but don't force it on everyone when most of the riders don't even Rev high enough for it to do anything and that includes Greg Hancock, I do agree it won't cause any engine damage though Edited November 21, 2016 by THE DEAN MACHINE Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Lord Skid Posted November 21, 2016 Report Share Posted November 21, 2016 Is it a Briggo homoligated rev limiter, available at £299 from approved stockists only. 4 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
speedibee Posted November 21, 2016 Report Share Posted November 21, 2016 (edited) Is it a Briggo homoligated rev limiter, available at £299 from approved stockists only. Oh dear . Phillip Rising has only just had one shock , finding out Christmas is fast approaching , I'm not sure he'll be able to cope with any insinuations about Dick Briggs .............actually thinking about it .£299 is little bit too cheap even for a Briggo version . more like £499 I would think Edited November 21, 2016 by speedibee 3 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
THE DEAN MACHINE Posted November 21, 2016 Report Share Posted November 21, 2016 Why not reduce carb size to 32 mm , can be done cheaply with sleeve , kills all birds with one stone for pennies Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
IronScorpion Posted November 21, 2016 Report Share Posted November 21, 2016 The silencers were enforced to reduce the noise because of the noise made at some stadiums even though when tested, & in some cases, still do get bogged down when riding in the thick shale & that's NOT a safety concern! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Triple.H. Posted November 21, 2016 Report Share Posted November 21, 2016 Why not reduce carb size to 32 mm , can be done cheaply with sleeve , kills all birds with one stone for pennies Oh for goodness sake Dean you must by now know the forum rule regarding sensible posts Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
THE DEAN MACHINE Posted November 21, 2016 Report Share Posted November 21, 2016 Oh for goodness sake Dean you must by now know the forum rule regarding sensible posts sorry , been reading to much fantasy books lately and I'm starting to believe them and it's clouding my judgement 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
speedibee Posted November 21, 2016 Report Share Posted November 21, 2016 Why not reduce carb size to 32 mm , can be done cheaply with sleeve , kills all birds with one stone for pennies That got tried in the 80's but it think it was 34 mm . riders didn't like em said it created flatspots . idea got binned before the season started . Actually I think it may have been early 90s Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Long Eye Posted November 21, 2016 Report Share Posted November 21, 2016 That got tried in the 80's but it think it was 34 mm . riders didn't like em said it created flatspots . idea got binned before the season started . Actually I think it may have been early 90s 34mm is the maximum size allowed now and was introduced sometime in the '80s if I remember correctly. Nothing to stop riders using smaller carbs and a 28mm insert can work well on small, slick tracks. The problem with the 28mm insert is that it makes initial power delivery a bit savage as the torque curve alters drastically. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
THE DEAN MACHINE Posted November 21, 2016 Report Share Posted November 21, 2016 That got tried in the 80's but it think it was 34 mm . riders didn't like em said it created flatspots . idea got binned before the season started . Actually I think it may have been early 90sengines are completely different now from 80s and 90s and i know of at least one top rider who uses a sleeve to reduce his inlet when he rode at lakeside in the last few years Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
proud panther Posted November 21, 2016 Report Share Posted November 21, 2016 Does reducing the carb size make the bike harder or easier to handle ? Not very clued up on engines, so what are the advantages of a smaller carb ? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
speedibee Posted November 21, 2016 Report Share Posted November 21, 2016 34mm is the maximum size allowed now and was introduced sometime in the '80s if I remember correctly. Nothing to stop riders using smaller carbs and a 28mm insert can work well on small, slick tracks. The problem with the 28mm insert is that it makes initial power delivery a bit savage as the torque curve alters drastically. I can remember .buying a couple of sleeves for my nephews .but couldn't remember the size , these would have been on uprights with dellortos of course . Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Countershaftcounter Posted November 22, 2016 Report Share Posted November 22, 2016 A rider I know has emailed Gerhard to enquire about how to try an engine with view to buying several, he's still waiting for some kind of acknowledgement to his email a week later. Doesn't inspire much confidence ... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Lord Skid Posted November 22, 2016 Report Share Posted November 22, 2016 Had to read Deans post again, I thought he wanted to sleeve them down to 34mm, there would be quite a good market for them, especially if they started measuring carbs after a race, and not stupidly before a meeting. 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tsunami Posted November 22, 2016 Report Share Posted November 22, 2016 A rider I know has emailed Gerhard to enquire about how to try an engine with view to buying several, he's still waiting for some kind of acknowledgement to his email a week later. Doesn't inspire much confidence ... You must be easy put off then. Do you know it he is unavailable, on holiday, etc, but once again moan moan. As has been pointed out on here, the problem with the progression of the Gerhard engine is he is a small unit, and would not appear to be able at this present time to consider mass production. It is out of season, you don't know what he is doing, neither do i BTW, and a week is hardly out of order IMO. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sings4Speedway Posted November 22, 2016 Report Share Posted November 22, 2016 Had to read Deans post again, I thought he wanted to sleeve them down to 34mm, there would be quite a good market for them, especially if they started measuring carbs after a race, and not stupidly before a meeting. Surely thats not an implication that riders are using 38mm carbs? Perish the thought that riders have been getting away with all sorts of dodgy tricks for years. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
IronScorpion Posted November 22, 2016 Report Share Posted November 22, 2016 You must be easy put off then. Do you know it he is unavailable, on holiday, etc, but once again moan moan. As has been pointed out on here, the problem with the progression of the Gerhard engine is he is a small unit, and would not appear to be able at this present time to consider mass production. It is out of season, you don't know what he is doing, neither do i BTW, and a week is hardly out of order IMO. Exactly. At this time of the year, there are a few motor shows going on around Europe of which he could be attending or meetings to be attended. Our Motorcycle Show is on now at the NEC & has a stand there for speedway. 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.