I've seen an ESR 310 kit, and let me tell you it ripped....I have a 400 Polonda and thought I was going to spank him, only to see he was closer than I thought ever time we ran. I did beat him though, with 170 psi comp. Now I am going to 220 comp. That ESR will beat alot of 330 kits out there. Don't forget to get the billit clutch basket and +4 to +6 inch swingarm to keep the front end down..... [img]i/expressions/face-icon-small-smile.gif[/img]

 

weird..he quoted me around 1700 with full methanol porting and head mods..

I know he's totally swamped with stuff, so maybe he's upping his prices to drive some people away so he can catch up (not sure)

Dave's not a big fan of the 330 and 350 Pro-X cylinders, although he does do a bit of work with the 310's, I think he likes the stock barrels the best, and of course, the Polaris cyls for the R.

Not speaking for him, just my thoughts about it, and I have spoken with him many many many times.

Also, I think you need to get the nieghborhood kids some 'my other toy has hooters' stickers [img]i/expressions/face-icon-small-wink.gif[/img]

 

Well, I think that my figure was including the pipe, carb, intake stuff and all the other nickel and dime stuff that it needs to work. I would have done it for 1700. This was a few months ago but I am pretty sure of my memory.
Funny you should mention the billit clutch basket. I broke my foot badly the second time I rode it. I hit a jump I normally do but I didn't get a very smooth run at it. It felt like I was spinning but then it hooked up and went sideways up the face of the jump. Landed Badly and am getting the cast off at the end of this month. Turns out the clutch basket, which was inspected at the time of assembly, failed. I ordered a billet unit from Magic Racing for 150 bucks. It is made by the outfit that makes Hinson's stuff so the only difference is 70 bucks in the pocket. I also had to replace the center hub.
I am really interested in finding out how it does at Glamis for Turkey Day.
By the way, nice machine. The quad shop has a pic of mine on thier customers ride's page for any interested parties.

 

Does the 310 require special pistons? If so, there would would more cost for later rebuilds.

I pay $72 for Wiseco piston kits. I would not want to pay $150 or more for a custom piston.

Not that I would go with the 310 kit anyway. I would lose displacement. The FL350R bore is 78.5mm. The Wiseco bores go from 80mm to 82mm. I want to put a Polaris jug on it with an 86mm YZ490 piston and have a few bores left to go. I see 87.5mm pistons listed for the Polaris on RCR's site.

I have not dynoed my current setup, but can blow away another guys machine dynoed at 44HP. We both have the same air box mods and pipe. I run a 39 PWK and he runs a 38 Mikuni flat slide. I have V-Force Delta 2 reeds and his has Boysen's on the stock cage that does not have a stuffer. I have an aftermarket intake designed for the larger carb and matched up to the V-Force cage. He stretched his stock rubber boot for a 32mm carb that partially kinks now. His is not ported, but the compression has been raised. Mine spins 9K, about 2K more than his.

I would like to and believe I can get well over 70HP with the Polaris jug and YZ490 piston. The Pilots with a CR500 jug setup by ATV Racing put out 72HP. They have more potential, but will rip the studs out of the welded up cases. I would like my FL350R to beat these machines.

 

Steve: just an FYI on dyno's and CVT's:

The numbers given by HPD on their race motor(72HP) are readings off the crank. I ran my 400 with that set up on Charlie Othon's chassis dyno and bested 56RWHP.

Darrell Olsen of HPD stated that the load of the chassis dyno's throws the numbers off for a CVT machine. One could literally take a bike such as mine and change clutch components (primary spring and weights) after each run and get different numbers, however the set up resulting in the highest HP rating on the dyno more than likely would NOT be the best set up to use when riding.

Given the numbers I produced compared with the numbers HPD claims one could infere that the CVT creates a loss of power of approximately 22% (at least in my case).

Personally I find that number to be a bit high, and suspect the loss on a "PROPERLY TUNED CVT" to be closer to 15-20% which should put me in the 58-62RWHP range. Anyone know the efficiency rate of a manual tranny?

So is my clutch not dialed in or does the chassis dyno fudge the numbers a bit?

Have you ever tried AAEN Performance for clutching parts? Not sure if he has much for a Honda be he has a really good book on tuning a CVT that would help you get your new found power to the rear wheels more efficiently.

 

Manual trannies are a 12 to 15% loss...

If you have your CVT down to a 22% loss you're doing exceptionally well. From my snowmobile experience, the magnitude of loss in a stock machine can be as high as 50%. For example: Ski Doo 700 Summit HM, advertised crank HP of 125-130, whereas when initially put on a track dyno, you're lucky to get 60. They can be retuned to get into the 70+ range...Sometimes into the 80's...

I'm a bit skeptical as to why the drum on a chassis dyno would interefere with a CVT...RWHP is RWHP...I dont necessarily agree with the dyno being the final word, the hill can sort that out, but I do also think that dyno numbers are an important reference tool. I choose not to delve too deeply into whole skewed results and "correction" factors applied...However, it's back to RWHP is RWHP regardless of how testing. The drum simply measures the linear function of force required to spin the drum. The algorithim takes the speed at which it was spun up in "X" time and then spits forth the power figures. Maybe there's a factor of the CVT and it's relation to how the algoritim calcs the power...BUT...you're still talking about propelling X mass in Y period of time, that's acceleration no matter how you're getting it to the ground. Accelleration in Y period is then converted to HP figures...

The fact remains the same, the force at the point the tread hits the ground will be Z regardless of the manner it got there.

 

I guess I could've been a bit more specific. The RWHP #'s were thought to be accurate, however the dyno showed my bike making that power around 5500RPM's, whereas my motor is designed to make the power closer to 7500RPM's. Hell, a stock 400 will rev to 5900?

Some how the load on the bike affected the RPM's, or at least how they were measured. The peak RPM was some how derrived by averaging a reading from the coil and the crank? Hell, I was totally confused when it was explainded to me, but the point is that to efficiently use a CVT one must know exactly where the motor is making it's peak HP, and then tuned to shift out there.

So while the dyno is a good tool to gauge HP, it's not a good tool to use for clutch tuning.

 

Again reverting to my snowmobile experience, it has been shown that the dyno is an excellent way to tune the CVT. The CVT is easily changed and tweaked, and while on the dyno you can get instant verification if you headed the right way. Do some tweaks, do a couple pulls, decide what you like, then head out and run it.

Your shift out problem could be couple possible things. Only developing 5900 RPM of the potential 7500, indicates that there is likely binding of clutch components. Do you regularly remove, clean and inspect your clutches. Belt dust can choke a clutch up real easy. I would also be suspect, though slightly less than from above, that there is a TON of belt slippage. But you'd see fried smoking bits of belts pretty regularly if it was slipping enough to cause that drastic of an RPM loss. Pull it all apart and ensure that it's clean. No oil or lube in the clutches, it attracts belt dust and makes a nifty abrasive then, ensure that the clutches can shift out all the way.

Another trick to see if your clutches are shifting out completely is to take a magic marker, and draw about an inch wide line up each sheave on both clutches. Gently accelerate to top speed. Shut down and inspect the line. For snowmobiles you'd want to see the line scrubbed off to within about 1/4" of the top of the drive sheaves, and then the line scrubbed to the bottom of the driven sheaves. This is also a good way to ensure that your clutches are paralell, very important! Check the scrubbed off portion to ensure that they are equal between the sides.

RPM is controlled by the drive, and torque sensing is controlled via the driven. I've tried to chase RPM via the driven and it was woefully a poor idea. I got my RPM but shiftout was nil...

Thought I'd try to share at least some ideas that I have, maybe help you or someone else out down the line with them....

 

Thanks for the tips, all of which I regulary do. The bike had just been reassembled less than 2HRS prior to running.

Both clutches had been cleaned/inspected. I installed new springs/weights/aluminum buttons and a new 100% kevlar belt. I did the magic marker trick, and the belt cleaned them off. I know there is absolutly no silpping as both were aligned prior to re-installing.

I rode a bit in the street prior to dyno'ing and the thing rips. The front end wants to rise at the blip of a throttle. The motor pulls way hard all the way through, and the dyno provided good proof by displaying a huge "rainbow" for the powerband. whereas when compared to some of the 75+HP Shee's he had done prior had real sharp peaks looking like Mt. Everast.

I really feel that I am dialed in and that the error is on parer only, as the tach on my bike is showing my shiftout points to be where I want them. Charlie admittedly has no experience with a CVT and may not have had things adjusted with the program he was running.

FYI: He uses the MJP2000

 

I would think the track loss would be significant on a sled. It is much easier to push an ATV than a snowmobile across the garage floor.

I have Aaen's book. [img]i/expressions/face-icon-small-happy.gif[/img]

Honda used Salsbury clutches on the FL350. Salsbury was bought out by Comet. The Pilot driven was their own design. It is a double helix roller on a production machine back in '89. The helix and rollers are sealed and greased. Too bad you can't get tuning parts for it.

I have a Comet 102C drive with notched cam arms (C-1). As shipped with the upgrade kit, the engagement was 4800. It is now 4900 with the spring I am running.

The driven is the stock 8" Salsbury. It mounts on a 7/8" keyed shaft (American made clutch, bolt is metric). If I could find a roller clutch or a clutch with a roller kit available that was 8", I would switch. I might buy a kit for something else and adapt it.

AZ400L, I think you may be having the same problem I was and probably still have. The shift out RPM is too low. It may manifest itself differently on the dyno because the load is different. I thought my machine seemed fast. After I raised the shift-out a little, it made a huge difference. I want to raise the shift-out RPM a little at a time until it hurts me and then go back one step.

I plan on putting a little more preload on the driven spring and seeing where that puts me. I want to help back shifting and I think I am getting excessive belt slippage due to the increased power. I have been wearing out belts much faster than it did before. I need to install an outriger bearing before I do this because the extra belt tension will distort the tranny cases and can break them. The Pilot has a slipper clutch to absorb shock loads like landing off a jump. The CVT will spool your tires up quickly while in the air. The slipper clutch looks just like a manual tranny clutch basket and plates. The FL350 does not have this. I make an effort when jumping to keep the wheel speed the same as the machine by letting off the throttle some. When racing was big, it was not uncommon to see an FL350 split it's gear case open landing off a jump. Some of those motors sounded like chain saws, they revved so high.