Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

Turbo?

Collapse
X
 
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

    Turbo?

    I will be the first to tell you that putting a turbocharger on a motorcycle is an absolutely horrible idea. The last thing you want is for that turbo to spool up while you're in a corner. The old VFR vtecs were notorious for bucking people off after the VTech boosted the motor in a corner. But I have to ask the question, has anyone ever tried putting a turbo on a Honda Hawk gt?

    #2
    Originally Posted by Xanderj13 View Post
    I will be the first to tell you that putting a turbocharger on a motorcycle is an absolutely horrible idea. The last thing you want is for that turbo to spool up while you're in a corner. The old VFR vtecs were notorious for bucking people off after the VTech boosted the motor in a corner. But I have to ask the question, has anyone ever tried putting a turbo on a Honda Hawk gt?
    Yes. It's been done before. There is/was a video on YouTube of a running one.

    The issue is that you can make all the power the crank can handle naturally, so there is no big advantage to putting a turbo on and adding that weigh to still only make 80-90hp (depending on the crank you have in it) before she explodes.
    Don't spend money and buy, spend time and learn.

    Comment


      #3
      clutch probably won't handle turbo power, and larger radiators would be needed.
      "It's only getting worse."


      MY rides: '97 VFR750, '90 Red Hawk, '88 Blue/Black Hawk, '86 RWB VFR700 (3), '86 Yamaha Radian, '90 VTR250, '89 VTR250 (2), '73 CB125, '66 Yamaha YL-1

      Sold: '86 FJ1200, '92 ZX-7, '90 Radian, '73 CB750, '89 all-white Hawk, '88 blue Hawk, '86 FZ600, '86 Yam Fazer 700 , '89 VTR250, '87 VFR700F2, '86 VFR700F.

      Comment


        #4
        I’m gonna be the voice of unreason because I want to see this happen. I saw a video once of the turbo hawk idling, but never saw one run. It certainly wasn’t dynoed.

        Modern electronics and proper design can cure a lot of the issues with turbo lag, and a turbo can basically make up for an infinite level of poor flow or lack of displacement.

        That said, yeah, your engine will probably explode pretty quickly at anything north of 80hp without significant upgrades.

        Comment


          #5
          it would be cheaper to just buy a faster, more reliable bike.
          "It's only getting worse."


          MY rides: '97 VFR750, '90 Red Hawk, '88 Blue/Black Hawk, '86 RWB VFR700 (3), '86 Yamaha Radian, '90 VTR250, '89 VTR250 (2), '73 CB125, '66 Yamaha YL-1

          Sold: '86 FJ1200, '92 ZX-7, '90 Radian, '73 CB750, '89 all-white Hawk, '88 blue Hawk, '86 FZ600, '86 Yam Fazer 700 , '89 VTR250, '87 VFR700F2, '86 VFR700F.

          Comment


            #6
            Here you go, this video explains everything (sarcasm font). Of course its a SuperHawk, but the changes should be basically the same.



            And the result:


            Comment


              #7
              Originally Posted by riot View Post
              I’m gonna be the voice of unreason because I want to see this happen. I saw a video once of the turbo hawk idling, but never saw one run. It certainly wasn’t dynoed.

              Modern electronics and proper design can cure a lot of the issues with turbo lag, and a turbo can basically make up for an infinite level of poor flow or lack of displacement.

              That said, yeah, your engine will probably explode pretty quickly at anything north of 80hp without significant upgrades.
              Someone at some point had an explanation of the HP/crank limit being rpm related. There comes a point with an na motor where ita gonna flow what it's gonna flow and you can only make more power by spinning her faster...


              If you could shove a metric ton of boost in early maybe you could make a bunch of tq, make your power early and actually see a benefit before the boom.


              How's that for an uneducated rationalization?


              Hordpower yes. I know it's stupid, but any input here?
              Don't spend money and buy, spend time and learn.

              Comment


                #8
                Originally Posted by squirrelman View Post
                it would be cheaper to just buy a faster, more reliable bike.
                Something like a MT-07 perhaps, lol!
                88 Blue Hawk GT - Under construction but rideable (guest approved)
                89 BlackHawk 2.0 - On the lift and being assembled
                90 Hawk GT (color as to yet be determined) - Still on the shelf in crates

                Comment


                  #9
                  That VTR is hilarious. Jezuz, sounds like a beast. I'd ride it.

                  Comment


                    #10
                    Originally Posted by Toxicwst View Post
                    That VTR is hilarious. Jezuz, sounds like a beast. I'd ride it.
                    I love that the first video is called “How-to turbo a VTR”, and then the guy basically gives you no (real, correct) information…

                    Comment


                      #11
                      Originally Posted by 6 View Post

                      Someone at some point had an explanation of the HP/crank limit being rpm related. There comes a point with an na motor where ita gonna flow what it's gonna flow and you can only make more power by spinning her faster...

                      If you could shove a metric ton of boost in early maybe you could make a bunch of tq, make your power early and actually see a benefit before the boom.

                      How's that for an uneducated rationalization?
                      Horsepower as defined is an amount of force (torque) applied over a certain amount of time. So basically to make more power you can either:

                      a) make bigger bangs inside the engine (a turbo will facilitate this)
                      b) make more bangs per unit time (higher rpm will facilitate this)

                      A valid point here is that 85hp is 85hp no matter how you make it. If you are making 85hp, then theoretically (ignoring any torque holes) you could make the exact same torque at the sprocket via either method if you apply the correct gearing. What people generally call ‘torquey’ is just decent power at low RPM. Power is power.

                      I’m pretty sure however if you decided to try to make 85+ hp on a stock hawk bottom end, even at low RPM, you are gonna snap the crank. Hordpower and I suspect that the source of the failure is the repeated force induced-twist on the crankshaft (by big twin bangs) that snaps the crank, not Rev-related imbalances or vibration.

                      Comment


                        #12
                        There's a ST1300 up in the rafters in the machine shop that I'm going to do a little weight reduction on. Then that baby is going to get a supercharger. If ever there was an engine that should have had more power on tap...

                        Comment

                        Working...
                        X