Go Back  R/C Tech Forums > General Forums > Nitro On-Road > Onroad Nitro Engine Zone
2017 OS Speed R2103 3.5cc Nitro On Road Engine >

2017 OS Speed R2103 3.5cc Nitro On Road Engine

Like Tree20Likes

2017 OS Speed R2103 3.5cc Nitro On Road Engine

Old 08-16-2017, 03:31 AM
  #31  
Tech Regular
 
Join Date: Apr 2016
Location: Portugal
Posts: 278
Default

Originally Posted by VS_Rody View Post
Yes

Thanks Rody
I thought I could have more evolution move to a 9 ports.
But I'm not an engineer.

Off-Topic: I still have a RB Products S7 MSC 2006.
Pedro Jesus is offline  
Old 08-16-2017, 03:58 AM
  #32  
Tech Lord
 
Roelof's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2007
Location: Holland
Posts: 11,176
Default

Originally Posted by VS_Rody View Post
The more you have weight to rotate to more torque you create, however this also means slower acceleration. A fine balance is always needed.

The steel bearings are more heavy to accelerate compared to the ceramic bearings and so there is some torque difference in favor for the steel bearing. However a little less acceleration.
So it is all about the inertia giving a better push when going to the seccond gear.
Or is it just that we are already low on weight with the clutch (lightened flywheel and aluminium clutchbell) that some rotating weight is needed again to get a more stable running engine?
Roelof is offline  
Old 08-16-2017, 04:18 AM
  #33  
Tech Elite
iTrader: (5)
 
ralphierace13's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2007
Posts: 2,565
Trader Rating: 5 (100%+)
Default

Originally Posted by Roelof View Post
So it is all about the inertia giving a better push when going to the seccond gear.
Or is it just that we are already low on weight with the clutch (lightened flywheel and aluminium clutchbell) that some rotating weight is needed again to get a more stable running engine?
so roelof
what about these motors with the longer stroke they say its for more torque if so how?

also wouldn't u want more torque when u have like a heavier car to pull like an rc truck or like when u stuck in the mud? with the power to weight ratio from todays motors y do we even need more torque ? I rather have the faster acceleration no?
ralphierace13 is offline  
Old 08-16-2017, 04:31 AM
  #34  
Tech Elite
iTrader: (5)
 
ralphierace13's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2007
Posts: 2,565
Trader Rating: 5 (100%+)
Default

Originally Posted by VS_Rody View Post
Hi,

Yes, the RB engines were at that time on a good level. The main difference with the todays engines is that manufacturing technologie has improved constantly which results that today 9 out of 10 engines are excellent out of the box while before this number was less.

After I left the RB company not a lot of development was made anymore and they just followed the NR things which for me was a non sense.
rody how do u feel about 7 ports vs 9 where do u see the main difference ?

thanks
ralphierace13 is offline  
Old 08-16-2017, 04:35 AM
  #35  
R/C Tech Elite Member
 
VS_Rody's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2014
Location: Allevard FRANCE
Posts: 242
Default

Originally Posted by Pedro Jesus View Post
Thanks Rody
I thought I could have more evolution move to a 9 ports.
But I'm not an engineer.
We tried many times 9-ports in several configurations but no real advantage over the 7-port.
VS_Rody is offline  
Old 08-16-2017, 04:38 AM
  #36  
Tech Elite
iTrader: (5)
 
ralphierace13's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2007
Posts: 2,565
Trader Rating: 5 (100%+)
Default

Originally Posted by VS_Rody View Post
We tried many times 9-ports in several configurations but no real advantage over the 7-port.
sorry forgot to ask does it use more fuel?
ralphierace13 is offline  
Old 08-16-2017, 04:40 AM
  #37  
R/C Tech Elite Member
 
VS_Rody's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2014
Location: Allevard FRANCE
Posts: 242
Default

Originally Posted by Roelof View Post
So it is all about the inertia giving a better push when going to the seccond gear.
Or is it just that we are already low on weight with the clutch (lightened flywheel and aluminium clutchbell) that some rotating weight is needed again to get a more stable running engine?
Yes, correct for the inertia.
Since the clutches are getting lighter the inertia is less. Indeed a heavier flywheel could be a solution but it will take more time for the engine to spin down in rpm when you close the carburetor. For sure a little(I mean just a little) heavier flywheel would not hurt.
BTW this is what they start to do in Off-Road sometimes.
VS_Rody is offline  
Old 08-16-2017, 04:43 AM
  #38  
R/C Tech Elite Member
 
VS_Rody's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2014
Location: Allevard FRANCE
Posts: 242
Default

Originally Posted by ralphierace13 View Post
rody how do u feel about 7 ports vs 9 where do u see the main difference ?

thanks
I personally never found a better engine with 9-ports and also no advantage in fuelconsumption either.
VS_Rody is offline  
Old 08-16-2017, 05:13 AM
  #39  
Tech Lord
 
Roelof's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2007
Location: Holland
Posts: 11,176
Default

Originally Posted by ralphierace13 View Post
so roelof
what about these motors with the longer stroke they say its for more torque if so how?

also wouldn't u want more torque when u have like a heavier car to pull like an rc truck or like when u stuck in the mud? with the power to weight ratio from todays motors y do we even need more torque ? I rather have the faster acceleration no?
How further the crankpin is located from the center the more force you can create on the output w/o needing more combustion power. I also believe the larger movement of the piston will make the pump to suck up the mixture a little bit better.

More torque is not only about the stroke, it is more about the height and width of the exhaust port together with how much fuel you can burn. The longer the combustion stroke is before the exhaust opens the more power it has. The same is with the barrel of a gun.

Looking at F1, more power comes from more combustions per seccond, to reach that a short stroke engine is needed due the physical speed limitations of the pistons and lubrication.

As Picco has succes with their extra long stroke engines Novarossi did not do well with their xtra long stroke Keep-on and Mito models as their current topmodel is the normal long stroke 35WC.

Longer strokes do not have to be better als also with the amount of ports. It is more about timings, dimensions and materials to make a good engine.
Roelof is offline  
Old 08-16-2017, 06:43 AM
  #40  
Tech Elite
iTrader: (5)
 
ralphierace13's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2007
Posts: 2,565
Trader Rating: 5 (100%+)
Default

Originally Posted by VS_Rody View Post
Yes, correct for the inertia.
Since the clutches are getting lighter the inertia is less. Indeed a heavier flywheel could be a solution but it will take more time for the engine to spin down in rpm when you close the carburetor. For sure a little(I mean just a little) heavier flywheel would not hurt.
BTW this is what they start to do in Off-Road sometimes.
So adding a set screw to one if the holes in each fly weight would be a good idea?
ralphierace13 is offline  
Old 08-16-2017, 07:04 AM
  #41  
R/C Tech Elite Member
 
VS_Rody's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2014
Location: Allevard FRANCE
Posts: 242
Default

Originally Posted by ralphierace13 View Post
So adding a set screw to one if the holes in each fly weight would be a good idea?
No, I strongly not suggest this kind of solution, the flywheel has to be 1 piece only otherwise too dangerous. Also this solution can create unbalance with even more worse results.
VS_Rody is offline  
Old 08-16-2017, 07:50 AM
  #42  
Tech Master
iTrader: (8)
 
BigC2007's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2007
Posts: 1,870
Trader Rating: 8 (100%+)
Default

Originally Posted by VS_Rody View Post
We tried many times 9-ports in several configurations but no real advantage over the 7-port.
I was under the assumption that 9 ports produced a little more RPM's then a 7 port. Looking at Novarossi's legend 9ON and legend 7ON the 9 port is putting out 400 more RPM's which is not much but could come into play.

So if there is no real advantage why even make a 9 port motor ?
BigC2007 is offline  
Old 08-16-2017, 08:05 AM
  #43  
R/C Tech Elite Member
 
VS_Rody's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2014
Location: Allevard FRANCE
Posts: 242
Default

Originally Posted by BigC2007 View Post
I was under the assumption that 9 ports produced a little more RPM's then a 7 port. Looking at Novarossi's legend 9ON and legend 7ON the 9 port is putting out 400 more RPM's which is not much but could come into play.

So if there is no real advantage why even make a 9 port motor ?
As said before this is my personal experience.
I have not experienced better power with 9 port engines, the same goes for ceramic bearings.

It could be that a 9-port engine produces a little more rpm but this is not all you need to win races.
VS_Rody is offline  
Old 08-16-2017, 08:15 AM
  #44  
Tech Master
iTrader: (8)
 
BigC2007's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2007
Posts: 1,870
Trader Rating: 8 (100%+)
Default

Originally Posted by VS_Rody View Post
As said before this is my personal experience.
I have not experienced better power with 9 port engines, the same goes for ceramic bearings.

It could be that a 9-port engine produces a little more rpm but this is not all you need to win races.
Thanks and I myself have very little personal experience when it comes to the science of these motor's and you are very correct on rpm's and winning races.
BigC2007 is offline  
Old 08-16-2017, 08:16 AM
  #45  
Tech Lord
 
Roelof's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2007
Location: Holland
Posts: 11,176
Default

Originally Posted by BigC2007 View Post
I was under the assumption that 9 ports produced a little more RPM's then a 7 port. Looking at Novarossi's legend 9ON and legend 7ON the 9 port is putting out 400 more RPM's which is not much but could come into play.

So if there is no real advantage why even make a 9 port motor ?
First of all, do not rely on the written specs, mostly they are made out of nothing. And because Novarossi is producing several engines from cheap up to expensive they would never alow a cheaper motor running faster (in real and on specs). As I have mentioned several times that I have made 5 port engines run as fast as many top range models by just changing some timings. Timings is making the engine, not the amount of ports.
Rick Davis and VS_Rody like this.
Roelof is offline  

Thread Tools
Search this Thread

Contact Us - Archive - Advertising - Cookie Policy - Privacy Statement - Terms of Service - Do Not Sell or Share My Personal Information -

Copyright © 2023 MH Sub I, LLC dba Internet Brands. All rights reserved. Use of this site indicates your consent to the Terms of Use.