4LikesBore = Stroke?
07-05-2017, 02:33 PM
#2
Long stroke motors are a bit more temperamental about a tuning window. Square stroke motors tend to have a larger tuning window, and are less finicky. There are other reasons, long stroke = more torque, but tuning is what im more concerned with.
07-06-2017, 12:28 AM
#3
There is no way to tell the behavour of an engine. All engines you can compare are all different timed, have different needles in the carb and could have different materials.
On the track all differennt strokes can perform the same.
On the track all differennt strokes can perform the same.
07-10-2017, 09:23 AM
#6
That's a myth.
Every engine configuration has pros and cons. Novarossi is telling you a square motor is desirable because that's what their marketing wants you to believe.
Every engine configuration has pros and cons. Novarossi is telling you a square motor is desirable because that's what their marketing wants you to believe.
07-10-2017, 12:15 PM
#7
A change because they have to make changes.... Otherwise we "stupid" consumers will not buy new motors.
Beside that, within Novarossi there are more brands (internal and external) and the different dimensions are splitted to keep the aftersales also with that brand.
Beside that, within Novarossi there are more brands (internal and external) and the different dimensions are splitted to keep the aftersales also with that brand.
07-10-2017, 01:18 PM
#8
the only possible advantage i can see is the break period will be relatively shorter
07-10-2017, 01:19 PM
#9
07-10-2017, 01:24 PM
#10
Shorter stroke = less travel through the mechanical pinch.
07-10-2017, 02:30 PM
#11
So what? It's still an engine revolution.
Anywho,
the square thing is just marketing wank, as stated. There's nothing novel here, these manufacturers just make some little changes here and there and make it out to be a big deal. Which they have to, to make sales.
These engines have like three moving parts...they are so simple there's no magic benefit to a 1:1 bore/stroke. It's just another little specification they can change to make this engine different then another.
No one is going to be changing the game until someone figures out a realistic EFI to do away with the carbs.
Anywho,
the square thing is just marketing wank, as stated. There's nothing novel here, these manufacturers just make some little changes here and there and make it out to be a big deal. Which they have to, to make sales.
These engines have like three moving parts...they are so simple there's no magic benefit to a 1:1 bore/stroke. It's just another little specification they can change to make this engine different then another.
No one is going to be changing the game until someone figures out a realistic EFI to do away with the carbs.
07-10-2017, 02:39 PM
#12
Are you one of those guys that has to quote someone to flex you keyboard skills...
Anywho I based my comment on engines I've ran from the past and present, the VZB was easier to break in than the XZB the only mechanical difference was the bore stroke.
The Ws7 from rb was easier to break in than it's life g stroke variance the C6... i never onc said performance of some sort would be better or worst...
It is marketing, of course.
Anywho I based my comment on engines I've ran from the past and present, the VZB was easier to break in than the XZB the only mechanical difference was the bore stroke.
The Ws7 from rb was easier to break in than it's life g stroke variance the C6... i never onc said performance of some sort would be better or worst...
It is marketing, of course.
07-10-2017, 02:46 PM
#13
Are you one of those guys that has to quote someone to flex you keyboard skills...
Anywho I based my comment on engines I've ran from the past and present, the VZB was easier to break in than the XZB the only mechanical difference was the bore stroke.
The Ws7 from rb was easier to break in than it's life g stroke variance the C6... i never onc said performance of some sort would be better or worst...
It is marketing, of course.
Anywho I based my comment on engines I've ran from the past and present, the VZB was easier to break in than the XZB the only mechanical difference was the bore stroke.
The Ws7 from rb was easier to break in than it's life g stroke variance the C6... i never onc said performance of some sort would be better or worst...
It is marketing, of course.
As for breakin, I believe "ease" of break-in relies more on the actual amount of interferance present at the beginning. The tolerances of manufacturing can vary a lot. One engine could be fairly loose, another identical engine might need to be preheated to even be able to make it through the pinch.
If tolerances were not a problem, there would be no break-in at all because the engines would be manufactured to exactly the correct clearances from the factory.
Again no attack, just conversing.
07-10-2017, 02:51 PM
#14
This is why I compared engines of same brand or manufacturer and also personal experience, I would think that the tolerance and materials used to be the same..
Just an opinion made on experience..
Just an opinion made on experience..
07-10-2017, 02:53 PM
#15
Engine knowledge all the way!!!! NOT!
Due tolerances the pinch of a normal Novarossi can start at 5 up to 7mm from the upper edge. With a square stroke it is nothing different.... A square stroke is just 0.4mm shorter than the normal long stroke, over the pinch zone in your thoughts it will only differ 0.2 mm or less.
And square stroke new? 15 years ago the square stroke RB WS7 was a winner. Even the WS7-II was a winner between all longer stroke models.
Due tolerances the pinch of a normal Novarossi can start at 5 up to 7mm from the upper edge. With a square stroke it is nothing different.... A square stroke is just 0.4mm shorter than the normal long stroke, over the pinch zone in your thoughts it will only differ 0.2 mm or less.
And square stroke new? 15 years ago the square stroke RB WS7 was a winner. Even the WS7-II was a winner between all longer stroke models.