Wet Sump vs Dry Sump
in [Motorcycles]
|
Prev: 1974 Honda CJ350?
Next: Time for a new slogan?
From: tomorrow on 11 Jun 2007 00:36 On Jun 10, 9:25 pm, "Steve Paul" <smarshallp...(a)gmail.com> wrote: > Full throttle take offs on my KZ900 would cause the oil pressure to drop to > zero (on the guage I installed down below), and the idiot light up on the > dash would come on. It would take a few more shifts before things would > return to normal. I never did get comfortable with that feature. > > Because of that, I actually prefer the dry sump setup on the Triumphs and > Harleys. When the oil pressure drops in a dry sump, you know you've got a > problem, and there's no waiting a minute to be sure. Modern high performance 4-strokes have heavily baffled, deep, narrow sumps with the pick-ups low in the sump, and the crankshaft high and clear of the oil in the sump, so other than height minimization, there's no real advantage to dry sump engines. A wet sump engine will stay oiled and will not suffer pumping losses from the crank whipping oil in the sump. Take a look at the sump on a Ducati Testastretta 998/999/1098 engine for example.
From: The Older Gentleman on 11 Jun 2007 02:24 "Albrecht via MotorcycleKB.com" <u33665(a)uwe> wrote: > Jeff Mayner wrote: > > >Lower center of gravity does wonders for handling in bikes and cars. > > That's what Irimajiri thought when he designed the NR500, anyway... He was schizoid, because he also designed the CX5090 and his pet theory then was to hoick the weight up so it was high, and all concentrated around the rider's bum. Time has shown that both approaches have their merits, mind..... -- BMW K1100LT 750SS CB400F CD250 SL125 GAGARPHOF#30 GHPOTHUF#1 BOTAFOT#60 ANORAK#06 YTC#3 BOF#30 WUSS#5 The bells, the bells.....
From: Keith Schiffner on 11 Jun 2007 09:15 <tomorrow(a)erols.com> wrote in message news:1181536397.729835.73980(a)g4g2000hsf.googlegroups.com... > On Jun 10, 7:29 pm, "Keith Schiffner" <schis...(a)bresnan.net> wrote: >> "Mark Olson" <ols...(a)tiny.invalid> wrote in message >> >> news:136nqq3ch566dc5(a)corp.supernews.com... >> >> >> >> >> >> > The Older Gentleman wrote: >> >> Gary Walker <t...(a)swbell.net> wrote: >> >> >>> Typically, I think, many of the dry-sump bikes also have >> >>> a separate transmission. Not that this has anything relat- >> >>> ed to dry/wet sump choice. >> >> >>> Notice, I said many. So, don't shotgun 100's of respon- >> >>> ses with exceptions. I know, I had one. My '73 Honda >> >>> K3 was dry sump with no external transmission. I'm sure >> >>> there are many others. >> >> >> No, there aren't. Not post about 1970, anyway. Think Yamaha >> >> single-cylinder dirt bikes, the SR500 single, Honda XBR500 singles, BMW >> >> 650 singles: all dry sump, all with unit engines. >> >> >> I can't think of a single dry-sump engine produced in the last 30 years >> >> that has a separate transmission. In fact, I can't actually think of any >> >> non-unit engines produced in the same time frame, though there may be >> >> some. >> >> > Am I being thick or have you forgotten Harley-Davidson? >> >> They have yet to build a unit motor. The harely badged aerimacchi not >> withstanding. Harley motors are separate from the transmission. Not sure if >> they >> share oil...wait they do by way of the oil tank. > > The Sportster has used a unit construction engine, but only since > 1957, so that hardly counts. > > The big twins' engines and transmissions do NOT share lubricant. > > Other than those minor quibbles, RIGHT ON!!!! Thanks, right after that went out I had this sinking feeling that...well you know. As punishment I'll go start a 15 y/o weed whacker that hates spring. -- Keith Schiffner Assistant to the Assistant Undersecretary of the Ministry of Silly Walks. "terrorist organization" is a redundancy
From: James Clark on 11 Jun 2007 14:26 The Older Gentleman wrote: > I can't think of a single dry-sump engine produced in the last 30 years > that has a separate transmission. In fact, I can't actually think of any > non-unit engines produced in the same time frame, though there may be > some. > > What about the "semi-dry sump" engine in your BMW?
From: The Older Gentleman on 11 Jun 2007 14:47
James Clark <clark35.at.attglobal.net(a)mousepotato.com> wrote: > The Older Gentleman wrote: > > > I can't think of a single dry-sump engine produced in the last 30 years > > that has a separate transmission. In fact, I can't actually think of any > > non-unit engines produced in the same time frame, though there may be > > some. > > > > > > What about the "semi-dry sump" engine in your BMW? It's a wet sump engine. No separate oil tank. -- BMW K1100LT 750SS CB400F CD250 SL125 GAGARPHOF#30 GHPOTHUF#1 BOTAFOT#60 ANORAK#06 YTC#3 BOF#30 WUSS#5 The bells, the bells..... |