hooch getting a new fuel source

Classic Goldwings

Help Support Classic Goldwings:

This site may earn a commission from merchant affiliate links, including eBay, Amazon, and others.
Overlap is still 10 deg. The stroke is 4.6mm longer so the piston moves a very small amount more up and down during the overlap. Timing marks on the 1000 early models is 5 degrees, but the 1200 is 10 degrees. So if timed at the marks, ignition is quite early on the hooched version compared to what the 1000 early cams are used to. The biggest difference is likely gearing advantage and weight reduction. The 1200 standard was 150 lbs more than the 1000, according to website.??? Motor weights were pretty close.
 
the c5 igmition I have set at TDC ... in crank setting ... I don't see TDC being off on marks ... it is only the 87 Europe model that had 10 degree timing mark .. all other 1200 motors are set at 5degrees... if you can beleave the info out there so much of it is just as wrong as it can be......it seems the 4.6mm stroke has huge effect ....

anyway as I have said its amazing what Honda had in the 1200 and didn't find it or choose not to use it ...the 1200 hooch has so much more power and low end torque ... this mod will make this motor run with just about anything out there in a sane world ....
 
hmmm after looking at the videos I made ..it seems very evident im getting some good running out of hooch and weber DFT 22-22 carb....so im going to hook up transition plate next ... its kind of looking like my throttle hook up will be okay maybe ... seems to be nice day today weather finally giving a better day to deal with though far from pleasant
 
I don't have a manual, but I thought ignition timing was ten deg for 1200's. The Euro model had 10 deg timing for intake valve opening. I have my ignition at around 7-8 degrees right now. I am hoping to try a weber this spring maybe with a little boost. I paid for a vw manifold today. Being I am going to boost it, I may go with a 32/36 set up for a 1.3 liter Samurai. This might go on my 1200, but the 83 1100 could get it too. I have found a couple claims of boosting a weber redline 32/36 right out of the box for this model. I guess from what I'm reading that there are many,many variations of these.
 
Trying to wrap my head around this.

I'm curious how well a stock 1200 engine performs at 8000+ rpm.
Concidering in Joe's case he's got bigger runners, valves, and valve ports than a stock 1200 on Hooch.
Seems to me it should breath fine even if there is a small difference in cammage, differences that really should make the 1200 get more rpms, not limit it. No?
 
hmmm I bet mike the 1200 is the motor in oldwing fours ....im sure dans right ... with my limited access to what I need to dial the weber in ... thers no telling how much is still on the table ... sheesh if this is true then I can expect to have something you will need no blower for

I actually think that the 1000 and 1100 heads intake valves are huge for its size ...I see this as a good thing ... I think this contributes some to the idle being hard to get good on oldwings and stumbling around down low rpm ... but the opposite is true up top ...great maxium flow up top

it appears I am going to get a off the throttle bike that has no quit ... when the weber is dialed in ....cant wait to add the transition plate
 
Just thinking out loud here....

My 1100 running early 1000 cams and smallish runners will go past 8000 rpm. How much I haven't tried yet but just thinking of the 4 pistons as vaccum pumps, and since my runners are smaller than Joe's I would think if any mock up here is going to be limited in rpm it would be mine.
I could be way off here I don't know.
 
Joe, I just thought of something...

Your c5 is set to something like 42 degrees full advance. Could this much advance be causing a top out in rpm or should more advance let rpms go higher?
I would think higher because as rpms go up ya want more advance?
 
I'm not sure if I'd want to wind these old engines past 8,000 RPM. A slightly weak valve spring could bounce, a timing belt tensioner bearing could fry... catastrophic at high speed. Just my opinion...
 
[url=https://www.classicgoldwings.com/forum/viewtopic.php?p=107274#p107274:ay9azbkw said:
Steve83 » Mon Jan 13, 2014 8:21 am[/url]":ay9azbkw]
I'm not sure if I'd want to wind these old engines past 8,000 RPM. A slightly weak valve spring could bounce, a timing belt tensioner bearing could fry... catastrophic at high speed. Just my opinion...

+1 Subaru's are rev limited below 7000 rpm
 
There are limits to everything, the higher the rpm the better and higher the psi the valve springs need to be to slam the valves shut and eliminate valve float which could be catastrophic in an interference engine. The more advance that is run, the more likely it is to lean the engine out and cause piston/cylinder wall etching and the cv carbs due to design tend to lean out in the higher rpm range. I agree that 8000 rpm on occasion should be about the max rpm if you want any kind of extended service life out of these engines unless you went with an all out race built engine. I would love to have one of these 1200's maxed out and then have the whole engine balanced. Would be awesome.
 
I took mine, 1200 with 77 heads, up to 9500 a couple times. It's still pulling but I think shifting at 7-7500 brings more torque in the next gear. New springs would make feel happier. As far as I'm concerned, I am treating it like a 1000 as far as redline. It's got a tad longer stroke, but the bottom end is bigger too.
 
well that's pretty much the way hooch is...... shifting around 7000-7500 seems the best spot ......ive had hooch over 8000 a few times to .....with same results ....as eric says the 1200 revs fine ...there quite the motor ....I need to get some weber carb bits ...so I can dial this carb in perfect
 
well I just seen over at ngw hotts kind of put forward where I am going with hooch ive been talking quite a bit to V and dan about adding a small exhaust turbocharger to hooch and the weber set up ... this is where I an going .. it seems the price if these turbos is reasonable now ... and for the cost of a rebuild kit you can get a turbo brand new ... that's a lot of bang for the buck in comparison ... plus it seems this mod would really help in the conditioning of air for the weber and its icing issues to some degree or huge degree don't know yet ...but think so ... im not looking for off throttle power so lag time is no issue with me .. making the free exhaust power perfect to run the turbo with no discounts for me ...

I am really not looking for more power either just the best running set up ... I know my 1990 cougar supercharger car I have is not only last it efficient so I am thinking this will mpg big time as my cougar did super well for a fast car ... in the upper twenties and 30 mpg on trips .... .

so I have a background on how efficient a set up like this can be ... and what I am shooting for :mrgreen:
 
Bold move Joe! I will be watching! Are you looking at a new turbo or junkyard special?

There are the ones used for Pontiac, VW and that one Ford used in that 2.3L 4 cylinder.
 
I have one in the works, probably for my "hooched "version, but maybe for an 83 that's collecting dust. I have a turbo from a 2010 BMW 3.0L twin turbo. It's set up for close to the same cc's, 1200 vs 1500. The little bit I've read about them is the torque is spread out more, and some BMW drivers say it doesn't feel like a turbo because the boost comes on early and gradual as opposed to some turbos that jerk your head a bit when they spool up. I think they are run at 15 lbs of boost or more, too much. They are EFI too. On a bike I would prefer gradual boost. Forget about it once in a corner and it might not be good, at all. I have seen quite few reports of people doing a blow-through to Weber 32/36 up to 8 pounds of boost with no mods to the carb. Most feel 6 pounds is max on a gl. I believe Tom's carb could be run close to the same as the fuel bowl can be easily pressurized. Need a rising rate fuel pressure regulator to bump that up and more pump pressure than stock. To be safe, you need an O2 sensor somewhere to be sure you're not too lean anywhere. I have an 86 Subaru sitting in the woods, but I think it's too big and boost would be too delayed. I like FIT's version, but I have been thinking of two radiators stuck to the sides and the turbo coming up the middle. With the HOTT kicked out front end, there is room, ---I think. The 32/36 has a bonnet which is suited for this location. It would be cool to divert the heat in or out as desired for cooler weather operation like the 1500's and up. I need warmer weather and less snow. But this where my head has been spinning all fall and winter. Love to do EFI, but I am afraid that is going to run into more cash than I have.
 
Top