Speedzilla Forums banner
1 - 20 of 25 Posts

·
Registered
Joined
·
4,632 Posts
lower cg and mass centralization. Unfortunately, the experiement didn't work and they soon after went back to a more conventional layout (helping Freddie to win the 1985 500GP title)....

FWIW, they REALLY dropped the ball ten years later (1994) with a certain alphaneumerically called dud whose mandate was to conquer the world in Superbike (but which sadly managed to get a sound thrashing most times out, and put the lofty reputation of HRC into near disrepute....)
 

·
lidzduc.blogspot.com
Joined
·
3,578 Posts
Discussion Starter · #6 ·
I guess, to answer my own question...they were thinking it would work!!
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
2,607 Posts
Elf had already tried it out on one of their bike in 1979 and it didn't work out for exactly the same reasons: huge steering issues, too low of a center of gravity not transferring weight under braking and acceleration etc.
Elf had struck a deal with Honda that same year (which gave Elf RCB100 and NSR500 engine and gave Honda the single side swingarm used on various bikes) so it's curious they repeated the same mistake with the same consequences.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
26 Posts
There may have been a couple of other theoretical advantages of that layout - the exhausts could have their own free run and not have to be built to fit around the bottom of the engine and that the mass higher up on the bike stayed the same through the race. It may have worked a bit better if they could move some of that fuel tank volume to behind the engine/under the seat by splaying those exhausts out a bit.

An interesting packaging exercise nonetheless!
 

·
TOP GUN Instructor
Joined
·
5,717 Posts
Thinking about their Rider(s)

They did this as a "Just in case" the seaons races went through the Winter!:woot:


god I hate those CRAP ComStar rims!
 

·
V4 CyclePath...
Joined
·
6,827 Posts
Honda was thinking out of the box and wanted to experiment with every new
idea their young buck engineers could dream up... these are the same engineers
that produced the RVF 4 stroke Works racers which born the RC30 and RC45
production racers... too bad Honda don't make them like that any more... too
expensive compared to the pedestrian bikes...
 

·
Senior Member
Joined
·
2,737 Posts
That thing indeed was a bust. With a near empty tank it cornered ok. But with a heavy fuel load so low it had the tendency to try to lift the tires off the ground on fast transitions. Honda learned quite quickly that the center of mass should be at axle level or slightly higher. Can't blame them for trying though. And the pipes do look cool up there.
 

·
...clink...!
Joined
·
1,725 Posts
Honda was thinking out of the box and wanted to experiment with every new
idea their young buck engineers could dream up... these are the same engineers
that produced the RVF 4 stroke Works racers which born the RC30 and RC45
production racers... too bad Honda don't make them like that any more... too
expensive compared to the pedestrian bikes...
Hurry, tits needed...
 

·
He with the senior member
Joined
·
5,671 Posts
That thing indeed was a bust. With a near empty tank it cornered ok. But with a heavy fuel load so low it had the tendency to try to lift the tires off the ground on fast transitions. Honda learned quite quickly that the center of mass should be at axle level or slightly higher. Can't blame them for trying though. And the pipes do look cool up there.
Exactly right - the center of mass of the fuel tank was actually further away from the COG of the bike, and hurt agility. All that fuel mass so low and having to be swung under and around the COG did not help agility of traction. Sometimes lowering the mass like this hurts more than it helps.

Still....it was worth a try.
 

·
lidzduc.blogspot.com
Joined
·
3,578 Posts
Discussion Starter · #15 ·
Honda was thinking out of the box and wanted to experiment with every new
idea their young buck engineers could dream up... these are the same engineers
that produced the RVF 4 stroke Works racers which born the RC30 and RC45
production racers... too bad Honda don't make them like that any more... too
expensive compared to the pedestrian bikes...
Hey Larry,
No interest in this thread-
http://www.speedzilla.com/forums/street-track/63312-just-stir-pot.html
Interesting.....:confused:
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,540 Posts
has anyone ever tried a transverse engine layout with creative packaging of exhaust and fueltank in race applications?
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
4,632 Posts
has anyone ever tried a transverse engine layout with creative packaging of exhaust and fueltank in race applications?
The last of the Yamaha 500GP piston-port inline fours (ridden by King Kenny @1979) had the intake at the front and exhaust facing the rear. It was only a stop-gap measure, however, pending the development of Yamaha's own rotary valve square four and later V4 layouts...
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,540 Posts
just to correct myself; the standard architecture is transverse, I meant to ask about longitudinal layouts (crankshaft is oriented along the long axis of the vehicle)
 

·
V4 CyclePath...
Joined
·
6,827 Posts

·
Registered
Joined
·
757 Posts
just to correct myself; the standard architecture is transverse, I meant to ask about longitudinal layouts (crankshaft is oriented along the long axis of the vehicle)
Laverda made a V6 endurance racer with a longitundinal layout in the late 70's. Some nut balls have tried racing the old BMW "brick" K bikes, as well as 1st gen Goldwings. Those are the only types of that engine layout I can think of.
 
1 - 20 of 25 Posts
Top