bridged transfer ports

So I've been looking at some different cylinders, and at my new kit cylinder, and I noticed something. Occasionally, transfer ports bridged in kit cylinders, like so:

or like the top transfer on this kit

or on this Gilardoni

Anyway, my point is, these bridges are pretty much directly in the way of mixture flow. In most of these castings, these bridges are rounded off at best. I was showing my kit cylinder to a friend of mine who used to race 2 stroke Bultacos back in the day, and he suggested knife-edging those port bridges with some hand files to minimize turbulence. Is this worth taking the time and effort to do, or is it another one of those 200 little things that you can do that provide no measurable performance benefit? Does anybody else do this to their bridged transfer ports (I already did it, but haven't installed yet)?

Re: bridged transfer ports

Brand I eat a treat /

Yes, Gila 2.0 tonight's work

Re: bridged transfer ports

Brand I eat a treat /

now make your own boost ports if you man enough

Re: bridged transfer ports

Cool beans. Here's a picture of my work today. It's a bitch to get in there with the files when the ports are so much smaller (50cc).

1217489494_athena_kit_photos_012.jpg

Re: bridged transfer ports

Whoops. Yeah, yeah, macro, I know.

Re: bridged transfer ports

the bridges keep your rings in. Jennings suggests smoothing, but not knife edging, because the fuel air mix isn't going to go supersonic.

Re: bridged transfer ports

Fred Melonhead /

you are mixed up ... he is talking about the separating walls between the front and the back transfers ... they have nothing to do with the rings

too late then

Fred Melonhead /

Because it doesn't work

.. virtually everybody (through many many years) thinks that thinning and 'knife edging' those separateing walls would increase flow

.. but it doesn't ... flow bench tests have prove that that DECREASES flow

... like most things in physics ... quite often the "common knowledeg" of average people ... proves to be the opposite of what is actually true

.. especially with regards to airflow and that type of thing

Re: too late then

Brand I eat a treat /

don't know why there's so many morons on the performance section....

just like airplane wings the thicker the better right?

it's just common sense, it's more aerodynamic

Re: too late then

on a slightly unrelated note...what are the two holes on the intake side above the intake port of the gila cylinder?

Re: too late then

Better for lift because of the relative vacuum on the top of the wing. If those separations were not in the transfers there would be less resistance to flow

Re: too late then

I would say that you need those separations to divert flow into the individual transfers. But the act of knife edging often does cause turbulence at the split zone which slows down the gases being transfered into the combustion chamber. The other part of the equation is where you want the gases to go into the combustion chamber? Often having different convergent zones will either increase torque or increase high rpm hp but usually will not do both and the design of them should most likely be inline with what you want the motor to do. Street racing, hill climbing blah blah.

-naz

Re: too late then

Well, shit. All that work for nothing, eh?

Re: too late then

Brand I eat a treat /

aeroplane... ok whatever stick your hand out the window and make i knife and then face your palm out. there! those holes are extra boost ports i made check my thread out gila 2.0

Re: too late then

Fred Melonhead /

duh

and your wrong

flow tests with calibrated instruments proved it long long ago

on to your next misjudgement sweetie

Re: too late then

Brand I eat a treat /

common sense: a blunt object opossed to a nice slopping smooth edge will have less resistance and have less turbulence. done

i've done it on all my kits and my e50 does over 65 at over 11000rpm, theres my proof

Re: too late then

Brand I eat a treat /

edit: less = more

Do it.

I've never seen any side by side data on knife edging vs. not. But! I have a friend that i see every now and again who is the head tech on an AMA Superbike Team. He used to build MotoGP 250 bikes back in the 80's and 90's. We were talking 2-stroke theory and he mentioned that knife edging was the way to go; amongst the other things we talked about. In my opinion it probably only makes a tiny difference, but I trust his advice, having built up bikes to such extremes.

Re: Do it.

I really think it comes down to what speed the mixture is flowing through the transfer ports.

Aerodynamics in subsonic vs supersonic are quite different...

The best way to get through subsonic air is with a round shape like the leading edge of a passenger airplane or the shape of most parts on a formula 1 car (smooth flowing transitions).

The best way to get through supersonic air is to cleave through (knife edge) like the wings on the X-15 or most any modern supersonic fighter-jet.

Until we know weather or not the flow going through the ports reaches supersonic speeds you can not say for sure. Might seem crazy that the gasses flowing through your motor could be traveling that fast but in motogp and F1 racing intake speeds reach speeds that high.

Re: Do it.

ERIC WOOLF /

Yep the knife edge is the way to go, it will increase airflow. Anything you do to reduce drag will increase preformance. After this get some CRAYTEX adrasive cones and polish the hell out of everything, mirror finish everything. Yes I know everyone says you have to have a rough surface to keep the fuel mixture in suspendtion but the distance it is traveling is so short and it will be traveling at a high rate. I did this to my kawasaki triples and they ran like a dream, AGAIN POLISH THE FUCK OUT THE ENTIRE INSIDE OF THE MOTOR. You will not be disappointed.

Re: Do it.

looks like pubes with dandruff on the other side of that cylinder.

Want to post in this forum? We'd love to have you join the discussion, but first:

Login or Create Account