Team Orion CRF Wasp Rev X-Dyno results
06-07-2006, 02:24 PM
#271
There certainly is a big difference between “new technology” and “new design”.
It was clearly evident in the WASP Rev video, that the engine implements some revolutionary design changes - but just because a few design changes improve efficiency and performance, doesn’t necessarily make it different technology.
Is a slotted crankshaft new technology? I don’t think so. It’s just a modified crankshaft. Is it a brilliant idea? Yes!
Does any other engine automatically adjust the conicity of the cylinder? If not, then that would be considered new technology.
How about the Typhoon Mixture distribution? The off-center channel exhaust is an innovative design change, but would the fact that it creates the Typhoon effect make it new technology? I’m not sure.
It’s easy to get caught up in the excitement of the new engine’s design changes, especially with the patent filings and loosely make references to “new technology”. I guess my point is, let’s be accurate about what is and isn’t new technology. If it’s just a design change, then let’s call it that.
A lot of this is just purely academic. I think most people just want to choose the right glow plug, fuel and pipe, have the heads correctly shimmed, start the engine, turn a few screws, take temperatures to make sure the engine is in the “zone” and race. If the car is setup right and the engine is properly tuned (which are big factors in making any accurate comment on how the engine performs), they might actually finish well.
All I really want out of the WASP Rev is an engine that will start and run more reliably than my TZ and can run for more than 5 minutes. I’ve already run more than five minutes - and with all the tips I’ve gotten, I’m sure it’s going to run just fine next time out. It’s got more than enough power and speed for the track that I run on, so what more could I ask for? All I have to do now, is work on my driving.
If I move up into the A Main two races from now, the WASP Rev will definitely get two thumbs up from me. 
BTW – The video of the WASP Rev has disappeared from the new site or I just can’t find it. I also liked the WASP Rev FAQ page much better than the current product page.
It was clearly evident in the WASP Rev video, that the engine implements some revolutionary design changes - but just because a few design changes improve efficiency and performance, doesn’t necessarily make it different technology.
Is a slotted crankshaft new technology? I don’t think so. It’s just a modified crankshaft. Is it a brilliant idea? Yes!
Does any other engine automatically adjust the conicity of the cylinder? If not, then that would be considered new technology.
How about the Typhoon Mixture distribution? The off-center channel exhaust is an innovative design change, but would the fact that it creates the Typhoon effect make it new technology? I’m not sure.
It’s easy to get caught up in the excitement of the new engine’s design changes, especially with the patent filings and loosely make references to “new technology”. I guess my point is, let’s be accurate about what is and isn’t new technology. If it’s just a design change, then let’s call it that.
A lot of this is just purely academic. I think most people just want to choose the right glow plug, fuel and pipe, have the heads correctly shimmed, start the engine, turn a few screws, take temperatures to make sure the engine is in the “zone” and race. If the car is setup right and the engine is properly tuned (which are big factors in making any accurate comment on how the engine performs), they might actually finish well.
All I really want out of the WASP Rev is an engine that will start and run more reliably than my TZ and can run for more than 5 minutes. I’ve already run more than five minutes - and with all the tips I’ve gotten, I’m sure it’s going to run just fine next time out. It’s got more than enough power and speed for the track that I run on, so what more could I ask for? All I have to do now, is work on my driving.
If I move up into the A Main two races from now, the WASP Rev will definitely get two thumbs up from me. BTW – The video of the WASP Rev has disappeared from the new site or I just can’t find it. I also liked the WASP Rev FAQ page much better than the current product page.
06-07-2006, 02:40 PM
#272
Tech Master
Well, i have to admit that i am one of the sceptical veiwers of the CRF engine. I am not doing any engine desgining, but i have my theoris and meanings.
I am still a little "concerned" about this engine, and some of that comes from what Edward has been saying. F. eks, clutch settings is mentioned. I find it a little strange that Orion has to make different clutch kits for different cars. Is it because the engine does lack bottom end torque? As Edward said, dyno test does not show how long time it takes to get to 20000 rpms. In my point of veiw maybe orion is masking up a little "sleepy" bottom end? projekts can be very expensive and needs to hit the marked sometimes.....
I am not bashing Orion in any way, i have their V2 motors and think they work very well.
I am still a little "concerned" about this engine, and some of that comes from what Edward has been saying. F. eks, clutch settings is mentioned. I find it a little strange that Orion has to make different clutch kits for different cars. Is it because the engine does lack bottom end torque? As Edward said, dyno test does not show how long time it takes to get to 20000 rpms. In my point of veiw maybe orion is masking up a little "sleepy" bottom end? projekts can be very expensive and needs to hit the marked sometimes.....
I am not bashing Orion in any way, i have their V2 motors and think they work very well.
06-07-2006, 03:06 PM
#273
Tech Fanatic
I dont have one of these engines but i commend Team Orion on their decision to think outside the square. Time will tell how good it is. I have learnt not to bash engines before i have tried and tested them. I was the biggest sceptic of the OS 12TZ engine, despite it being conventional in it's design, and thought that all the talk was hype. After i tried it, i thought it was great!
At the track i race at, there are a couple of guys who run Palmaris engines. These guys can never seem to finish a race due to engine troubles. Why??? Because these guys only know clockwise with a tuning screwdriver!!! They run them so lean that they start bogging 3/4 of the way down the straight. Is this Eduards/Palmaris fault? No. Look at the results Ed's drivers are achieving. What im basically trying to say is that dont judje something so easily and quickly and not take into consideration end user error. You dont need to be a world champion to buy one of these or a JP, you can be one day old in the sport with $350 odd bucks to spend on your first engine!
At the track i race at, there are a couple of guys who run Palmaris engines. These guys can never seem to finish a race due to engine troubles. Why??? Because these guys only know clockwise with a tuning screwdriver!!! They run them so lean that they start bogging 3/4 of the way down the straight. Is this Eduards/Palmaris fault? No. Look at the results Ed's drivers are achieving. What im basically trying to say is that dont judje something so easily and quickly and not take into consideration end user error. You dont need to be a world champion to buy one of these or a JP, you can be one day old in the sport with $350 odd bucks to spend on your first engine!
06-07-2006, 03:13 PM
#275
Originally Posted by am
Well, i have to admit that i am one of the sceptical veiwers of the CRF engine. I am not doing any engine desgining, but i have my theoris and meanings.
I am still a little "concerned" about this engine, and some of that comes from what Edward has been saying. F. eks, clutch settings is mentioned. I find it a little strange that Orion has to make different clutch kits for different cars. Is it because the engine does lack bottom end torque? As Edward said, dyno test does not show how long time it takes to get to 20000 rpms. In my point of veiw maybe orion is masking up a little "sleepy" bottom end? projekts can be very expensive and needs to hit the marked sometimes.....
I am not bashing Orion in any way, i have their V2 motors and think they work very well.
I am still a little "concerned" about this engine, and some of that comes from what Edward has been saying. F. eks, clutch settings is mentioned. I find it a little strange that Orion has to make different clutch kits for different cars. Is it because the engine does lack bottom end torque? As Edward said, dyno test does not show how long time it takes to get to 20000 rpms. In my point of veiw maybe orion is masking up a little "sleepy" bottom end? projekts can be very expensive and needs to hit the marked sometimes.....
I am not bashing Orion in any way, i have their V2 motors and think they work very well.
Also from what I can gather the CRF makes so much power they came out with a clutch shoe to help support the clutch system on a nitro sedan thats now experiencing almost 1/8th scale power. All the top drivers have noted having to change there clutchs to reflect its great power.
Finally if you notice Orion is giving us more in tuning and option parts than any other motor to date. This is something thats highly appreciated im sure from a hardcore racer whos looking to tune these things.
Another thing is the motor just came out and im sure there will be some adjustments needed to make this motors truly show there stuff. Who knows , maybe soon someone will be reccomending different needles and pipe combos that can change the power enough to fit anyones needs.
06-07-2006, 03:16 PM
#276
Originally Posted by Artificial-I
Also from what I can gather the CRF makes so much power they came out with a clutch shoe to help support the clutch system on a nitro sedan thats now experiencing almost 1/8th scale power. All the top drivers have noted having to change there clutchs to reflect its great power.
06-07-2006, 03:46 PM
#278
Originally Posted by WorldCup2004
Stephan, check the dyno testing, how is your novarossi performing vs the Wasp Rev ? Please let me know
06-07-2006, 03:55 PM
#280
GrandeGixxer- Yes I believe Josh was racing with the engine at the MWS race last weekend. That was his first time out on a bigger track. How was it?
With the little bit of knowledge about the motor, yes it will take an experienced racer to get the most from the engine.
BUT, when there is a larger knowledge base and all the tuning options are out just about anyone with limited racing knowledge will be able to be very fast no matter how small their pocket book. They will also know with in a very close range what combination will work for any track they race on, because of the consistancy of the engine.
How is anyone being defensive in here? People are asking questions and others are answering. If no one answered people would freak out.
With the little bit of knowledge about the motor, yes it will take an experienced racer to get the most from the engine.
BUT, when there is a larger knowledge base and all the tuning options are out just about anyone with limited racing knowledge will be able to be very fast no matter how small their pocket book. They will also know with in a very close range what combination will work for any track they race on, because of the consistancy of the engine.
How is anyone being defensive in here? People are asking questions and others are answering. If no one answered people would freak out.
Last edited by SCIDA; 06-07-2006 at 04:06 PM.
06-07-2006, 07:14 PM
#282
Originally Posted by Josh Cyrul
I typed a big long reply to everyones comments (mostly the negative ones) but I decided to just let the performance at the Nats tell the tale since that's what everyone really wants to see.
Actually, I think we would get more out of a controlled test. Run 50 laps with the WASP Rev and 50 laps with the Sirio and then just share the lap times. (You could even run 3 tanks WASP, 3 tanks Sirio, 3 tanks WASP and then 3 tanks Sirio. ) This way, you've got the same car and the same setup. It's more of an apples-to-apples comparison.
I would like to see how the engine performs at the Nats, but it's really introducing other variables into the equation. Now you're comparing your car, tires, engine, setup and driving against other cars, tires, engines, setups and drivers. That's proving something at an entirely different level.
It's just a thought...
06-07-2006, 07:14 PM
#283
I have to say I am eagerly awaiting the arrival of my CRF engine(it's on the boat somewhere!).
I love trying new things. Some I have success with and some not. This is the risk you take. I know that I can't buy a JP Team engine like the ones that came to our track for the nationals, so I need to keep an eye on what might be best for me. The dyno results for the CRF engine are enough to get me interrested. But like it's been said, we don't race dyno's.
Josh has been around long enough to know not to put his backing to some rubbish, so I'll take his word for it. After all, he's played with the engine more than most.
As for people making long posts on here that are very inexperienced with engines and try to lean the top end to fix the idle, then I'm sure the experienced people will read between the lines to get a jist of what is fact and what is fiction.
As the experienced racers have said, the proof will be in the pudding when the engines get some more track time. The Nats will be a good example.
Just my 2c.
I love trying new things. Some I have success with and some not. This is the risk you take. I know that I can't buy a JP Team engine like the ones that came to our track for the nationals, so I need to keep an eye on what might be best for me. The dyno results for the CRF engine are enough to get me interrested. But like it's been said, we don't race dyno's.
Josh has been around long enough to know not to put his backing to some rubbish, so I'll take his word for it. After all, he's played with the engine more than most.
As for people making long posts on here that are very inexperienced with engines and try to lean the top end to fix the idle, then I'm sure the experienced people will read between the lines to get a jist of what is fact and what is fiction.
As the experienced racers have said, the proof will be in the pudding when the engines get some more track time. The Nats will be a good example.
Just my 2c.