 360 degree conversion.
|
Joined: Aug 2006
Posts: 35
Greenhorn
|
OP
Greenhorn
Joined: Aug 2006
Posts: 35 |
This may be a stupid question...but what the hey. I have had my 06 Speedmaster since May...love the machine. Anyway, i am planning on big boring when it hits the 10k mark or so...the funds wil be present then as well. And seeing as I purchased a British motorcycle...I can care less about the lopeing sound of the 270 firing order. It seems fro what little research is available on the subject that a conversion to a 360 degree firing order entails replacing the cams with 360 cams and the ignition box and coils. How close am i to being correct..or is major surgury? If the conversion is simple...would it not open up a plethora of performance options?
Thanks for the wealth of knowledge on this site.
Are you classified as human? Negative...I am a meat popcicle.
06 Speedmaster. 790 Cams, Supertrapp Exhaust, AI removed, 150 Mains, Thruxton needles, Airbox removed with K&N Pods 180 degrees.
|
|
|
Re: 360 degree conversion.
|
Joined: Jan 2005
Posts: 4,932 Likes: 2
Loquacious
|
|
Loquacious
Joined: Jan 2005
Posts: 4,932 Likes: 2 |
you'd have to change the crankshaft...
we should do this every weekend!
|
|
|
Re: 360 degree conversion.
|
Joined: Jan 2005
Posts: 3,611 Likes: 1
Loquacious
|
|
Loquacious
Joined: Jan 2005
Posts: 3,611 Likes: 1 |
You would be better off finding a donor engine and swapping it into your bike if you want a 360.
Stewart
.......
"It's outside your field of expertise."
"Poppycock normally is."
|
|
|
Re: 360 degree conversion.
|
Joined: Jan 2005
Posts: 12,877
Should be Riding
|
|
Should be Riding
Joined: Jan 2005
Posts: 12,877 |
Yeah the crank would be the biggest part. Then the cams and associated electrics. Find a donor motor, get it bored out, then do a swap and sell your motor. It'll be the fastest/least down time too probably.
Benny
Black & Silver '02
Too many mods to list
Not enough miles ridden
|
|
|
Re: 360 degree conversion.
|
Joined: Aug 2006
Posts: 35
Greenhorn
|
|
OP
Greenhorn
Joined: Aug 2006
Posts: 35 |
Thanks...didn't think about the crank...that part would be a b***h.
Are you classified as human? Negative...I am a meat popcicle.
06 Speedmaster. 790 Cams, Supertrapp Exhaust, AI removed, 150 Mains, Thruxton needles, Airbox removed with K&N Pods 180 degrees.
|
|
|
Re: 360 degree conversion.
|
Joined: Aug 2006
Posts: 321
Adjunct
|
|
Adjunct
Joined: Aug 2006
Posts: 321 |
do a google on XS650 rephased motors. They are 360 motors stock, and lots of people have built rephased motors in 270 and 277 variants, mostly for dirt track racing. It envolves cutting and rotating then rewelding the crank and cam (single cam), and also some stuff with the timing/points system. Not simple, but it's done.
It is done becuase there is nothing but 360 motors.
That said, dream on...like they said, buy a 360 motor.
There is no greater thrill than being shot at with no consequence. -Churchill
|
|
|
Re: 360 degree conversion.
|
Joined: Aug 2006
Posts: 321
Adjunct
|
|
Adjunct
Joined: Aug 2006
Posts: 321 |
There is no greater thrill than being shot at with no consequence. -Churchill
|
|
|
Re: 360 degree conversion.
|
Joined: Mar 2005
Posts: 542
Adjunct
|
|
Adjunct
Joined: Mar 2005
Posts: 542 |
The reason why people spend money on converting their XS 650 motors to 270 degrees is that the 270 has better primary balance and is a lot smoother than stock.So you are already better off. 360 degree would be a retrograde step.
Never whistle while you're ******....!
|
|
|
Re: 360 degree conversion.
|
Joined: Aug 2006
Posts: 153
Adjunct
|
|
Adjunct
Joined: Aug 2006
Posts: 153 |
There's already plenty of performance option's for the 270* motors. No need to swap motors...just build up what ya got.
|
|
|
Re: 360 degree conversion.
|
Joined: Jan 2005
Posts: 12,877
Should be Riding
|
|
Should be Riding
Joined: Jan 2005
Posts: 12,877 |
Quote:
The reason why people spend money on converting their XS 650 motors to 270 degrees is that the 270 has better primary balance and is a lot smoother than stock.So you are already better off. 360 degree would be a retrograde step.
You brought up another thing... Ballancing. Each motor has its own ballance shafts, so if you swapped cranks etc, but not that, you'd have a hopper on your hands  The 360 motors are nice n smooth now.
Benny
Black & Silver '02
Too many mods to list
Not enough miles ridden
|
|
|
Re: 360 degree conversion.
|
Joined: Jan 2005
Posts: 2,968 Likes: 1
Loquacious
|
|
Loquacious
Joined: Jan 2005
Posts: 2,968 Likes: 1 |
Quote:
There's already plenty of performance option's for the 270* motors. No need to swap motors...just build up what ya got.
Absolutely, why on earth would you want to go to a 360 if you have the 270. Here is an article on the 270 and why it's superior.
XS650Rephased Crank
Motorcycles come with engines of many different designs - some better than
others. From singles to sixes they each have their own characteristics. For an
engine of a given size and in a given state of tune, the one thing that gives
it most of it's character, and it's sound, is it's cylinder arrangement. Take
a Kawasaki Z-1300 and a H-D Evo. Both are 1,300cc four-strokes, but they
(engines only - ignore the rest of the bike) are nothing alike. Not only do
they look and sound different, but they also "feel" different. This is because
one is an inline six, the other is a 45 degree V-twin. They both produce
enormous torque, but while one is as smooth as a turbine, the other will shake
the fillings out of your teeth. Whether you prefer plenty of vibes or none at
all is entirely your affair - we're just discussing why engines are the way
they are.
Somewhere between these two extremes lies the Yamaha 650. It has a certain
feel about it too. It vibrates a lot more than the Z, but nothing like a H-D.
Some people like it - the vibes that is, others just accept it as part of an
otherwise great little package. As you'd know, the 650's engine is 360 degree,
parallel twin. In layman's terms, that means that the cylinders are side by
side and the crankpins are in line with each other. Put another way, both
pistons go up and down together, but they are one crankshaft rotation apart.
Remember, that a four-stroke engine turns 720 degrees, or two revolutions, to
complete a cycle. During this, the pistons go down on intake, up on
compression, down on power, and up on exhaust. Though they go up and down
together, they are not doing the same thing at the same time. To go through
it, as the No. 1 (left) piston is on the intake stroke, No. 2 is running right
alongside it, but on the power stroke. As No. 1 is on compression, No. 2 is on
exhaust. As No. 1 is on power, No. 2 is on intake. As No. 1 is on exhaust, No.
2 is on compression. Any motor of this type gives an even 1 - 2 - 1 - 2 - 1 -
2 beat from the exhaust.
Compare that to the sound of, say, a V-twin. Why do they sound the way they
do? The crankpin of both cylinders are in line, as on the 650 (usually, it's
one pin), but because the cylinders are splayed, the pistons don't arrive at
top and bottom together. In fact, when one is at either end of it's stroke,
the other is somewhere around the middle of it's. This gives an uneven 1 - 2 -
- - 1 - 2 - - - 1 - 2 beat. V-twins typically have Vs of anywhere between 45
and 90 degrees. The narrower the V, the more compact the motor and the easier
it is to fit it into the frame. Imagine a H-D with it's motor widened out to
90 degrees. It simply wouldn't fit in the available space. Why then does
Ducati, and now Yamaha, Suzuki and Honda make 90 degree V-twins when they
could just as easily make 45s. They choose to sacrifice simple frame-design
and easy engine-fitment for better engine-dynamics. That's a fancy word for
the physical forces that are at work inside a motor. There are many, but the
particular force that concerns us here is primary balance. This is not to be
confused with the balance factor and the matching of weight for each
reciprocating assembly, which is what you're referring to when you say "I've
had it balanced".
At either end of it's stroke, a piston must stop momentarily to change
direction. Of course, the speed at which it travels from one end to the other
is not constant, even though the RPM of the crankshaft may be. At any given
but constant rpm, and beginning at 0 degrees (or the pin at 12 o' clock), it
starts off slowly, gains speed, is going fastest at mid-stroke (with the pin
at 3 or 9 o' clock), slows down, and stops again (with the pin at 6 o' clock).
We've said that when one piston of a V-twin is at top or bottom, the other is
somewhere around the middle of the stroke but, depending on how wide or narrow
the V is, that can be almost anywhere. Does it matter? Yes it does and, in
this regard, a 90 degree V-twin is unique. With a 90, the other piston is
exactly at mid-stroke and travelling at it's fastest. Thus, the kinetic energy
of that piston overcomes the inertia of the other piston which is stopped.
This gives perfect primary balance.
Now imagine the inside of a 650. Think of two pistons going up and down
together. All that weight going up, stopping, then going down, stopping, then
up again. Also, two sets of flywheels, heavier on one side than the other,
going around in unison. It might as well be a big single. The only reason a
360 degree, parallel twin feels any smoother than a single is because there is
a small power-pulse twice as often instead of one big one half as often.
Splitting a motor of a given size in two, and firing each half alternately
does smooth out the power pulses, but it does nothing to eliminate the
vibration caused by all that weight going up and down in the same direction at
the same time. The only way to do that, and have both pistons at top and
bottom together (if that's what you want), is to have the cylinders opposed as
BMW has done since the beginning of time. The sound they give is the same as a
parallel twin but, because the pistons are going in opposite directions to
each other at the same time (even though they are going up or down in their
respective cylinders together) vibration is cancelled by the fact that each
force is equal to, but opposite the other. With the 650, the forces of each
piston are equal to the other, but combined and with no opposing force. This
gives exceptionally bad primary balance. Actually, the 650 has no primary
balance whatsoever. To have any kind of balance at all, one reciprocating
assembly must act upon another. Since the two reciprocating assemblies of the
650 are as one, what can it act upon? It has the primary balance of a single -
none.
The forgoing is basic stuff to most motorcycle riders but it had to be said
before we can move on. Move on to where? We all know that our bikes vibrate
and if it's because of the engine's basic design, how can we do anything about
it? We certainly can't move cylinders around to get an opposed or V-twin, so
why even discuss it?
Over the last few years, a few people have been investigating a little-known
operation called rephasing. We've seen how a 90 degree V-twin works and while
it's true that we can't separate the cylinders of our 650s, we can separate
the crankpins to give the exact same result. This idea was first mooted back
in the 1950s by one Phil Irving, designer of the Vincent engines and the Repco
Brabham engine that took Sir Jack Brabham to his formula 1 championship. He
came up with an extremely complex formula for calculating the degree of
separation based on the stroke and the length of the rods. Unfortunately, he
never actually modified a motor like a Triumph or Norton to test his theory,
and it remained that - a theory - for many years.
Around ten years ago, a fellow named Lee Kernich of Adelaide in Australia, who
races a post-classic Triumph, came across Phil's writings in an issue of
Classic Bike that was a few years old at that time. He decided to go with the
idea, did the calculation, and came up with 76 degrees. That will always be
the answer if the rods are twice as long as the stroke which, on a Triumph,
they are. The conversion required a crank from a Norton Atlas with the centre
section made from scratch. With a Norton crank, it's a fairly easy job.
Anyway, the bike was featured in Streetbike magazine about seven or eight
years ago. It's as ugly as sin but goes like a rocket by all accounts.
That particular issue of Streetbike was read by David Rayner who was about to
give his '77 a complete rebuild. He contacted Mr Kernich and they had a long
chat. Lee said that he had never seen the crank of an XS-650 and so had no
idea if it would lend itself to such a modification, but the dynamics should
be the same. David asked, assuming it could be done to a Yam, if it was
worthwhile. Lee replied that it was the greatest thing since sliced bread and
had transformed his bike completely. He sent David a copy of the formula.
Lacking a degree in advanced calculus, David enlisted the help of one Ian
Irving, Australia's best-known bike hot-rodder and great nephew of Phil's. Ian
was quite familiar with this but, like Phil, he'd never done it. Being a
Triumph nut however, he'd always wanted to and, Triumph or Yamaha, here at
long last was his chance. Using a stroke of 74mm and a rod of 136mm, Ian
worked through the formula and came up with a number that David no longer
remembers, but that doesn't matter. Not long after that, David came across an
issue of Classic Bike that contained Phil's story. Not the same one as Lee had
read though, a much more recent edition that had a little something extra.
This one also gave an account by a Brian Wooley, who stated that Phil's theory
was fundamentally flawed. It involves, while one crankpin is at 12 o' clock,
rotating the other crankpin to the point where an imaginary line drawn from
the centre of the crankshaft to the centre of that pin, and then up through
the middle of the rod forms a right-angle. You can see how the rod/stroke
ratio would affect this. The shorter the rod or the longer the stroke, the
lesser the angle (X) will be. Having the crankpins placed so is one thing, but
the result would be pistons that have the same relationship with each other as
those of an X-degree V-twin.
He says that placement of the pins is irrelevant - it's where one piston is
when the other is stopped that's important. He says it must be a maximum speed
and mid-stroke is where that occurs. Therefore, 90 degrees is the optimum,
regardless. David showed this to Ian and asked for his thoughts, and who Brian
Wooley was. Ian said that Brian was an extremely well respected engine
designer and that anything he said could not simply be dismissed. Never mind
blood being thicker than water. Ian thought about it and decided that Phil was
wrong and Brian was indeed right. Most would not have heard of Ian Irving but,
suffice to say that he's spent several years in Japan working for the various
factories as a mechanical engineer and he's on call to several 500cc GP teams.
He is currently putting the finishing touches to the engines of the
Hunwick-Harrop. His credentials are beyond question. His personality is
another matter.
Thus, Ian was to build for David what may have been the first rephased XS-650,
or at least the first one done at 90 degrees. You see, David wasn't the only
one who'd read that issue of Classic bike. Tony Hall of Halco Tuning had too.
He liked the idea, but couldn't think of a way to get 90 degrees or whatever
else would result from Phil's formula, given that the 650's crank is in two
halves - a male and female with thirteen splines. Thirteen - why not twelve or
sixteen? Anyway, for the sake of experiment, he simply separated the two
halves, then rotated one by three splines and pressed them back together. This
gives a separation of 83.076 degrees. He then cut the cam in half and rotated
one side by 41.538 degrees and welded it back together, and moved one set of
points around by the same amount. Tony told David this over the phone late one
night. Needless to say, David asked him the same question he'd asked Lee. Tony
said that it had drastically reduced the vibration and increased the torque by
about as much.
Same story from two people. This was great. A while later, David met a fellow
who races a Triumph outfit in post-classic. You guessed it, this one also has
a rephased crank. David asked him the same again. He said that it was, without
a doubt, the greatest thing one could ever do to a parallel twin and that he
would not have one any other way. Like Lee's, his was 76 degrees. At about
this time, the most promising sign of all came about. Yamaha released the
TRX-850 onto the market. Unfortunately, it's not sold in the US but is reputed
to be a quantum leap in parallel twins. It's a cafe racer that looks a lot
like a Ducati Monster, uses the same basic engine as the TDM-850, but with
it's crankpins set at 90 degrees. Now that the idea had been endorsed by a
major manufacturer, David needed no further proof that the idea was sound and
worth pursuing. Oh, and he says that to hear a TRX at full-noise can induce an
orgasm. Most embarrassing in a public place.
Sometime during all this, David received a letter from Bill Denton of
Pennsylvania. Bill had also read about Phil's theory and had heard somewhere
that David was attempting to apply it to an XS. Thinking that David's engine
was well advanced if not running, he wanted to know about all kinds of things
related to the project. David answered his letter and the two have talked on
the phone many times since then. Bill runs a 650 discussion group on the
internet and everything David wrote was posted there for all to see. Debate on
the subject has gone on ever since. Whether 90 degrees or some other number is
correct, and even if it was worthwhile at all.
One subscriber who had more than a passing interest in all this was Terry
Gliddon of Victoria, Australia. He contacted David and they too have spoken
many times about rephasing. All the while, the three believing that David
would soon be riding such a beast. However, that was not to be. Ian and David
had a major falling-out, and the motor was never finished. Bill has since
ridden a 650 that's had it's crank altered the same as Tony Hall's, and says
it's unbelievable. There is no doubt in his mind that he wants one. That's
four people who are convinced, not counting Yamaha. But how to get 90 degrees?
With Ian's wealth of engineering expertise no longer available, David had to
carry on alone. He came up with an idea that was workable, but very expensive.
It involves cutting up two No. 2 flywheels and making one out of the resulting
pieces. Then came a major breakthrough. Bob Bertaut hit on the idea that if
one could get hold of an extra No. 3 (the female) flywheel, one could simply
have a shaft made that's splined at both ends, one end being 90 degrees out of
phase to the other. This would replace the centre section of the crankshaft,
where the sprocket is. One would then discard the No.2 'wheel (the male), and
assemble the crank using two females instead of a male and a female.
Brilliant. David and Terry discussed this at length, and were so keen to try
it that Terry has since contracted a company to make the shafts.
Bob has built one or more motors the same as Tony Hall and Bill Denton's
friend. That is, he's rotated one half of the crank by three splines. They all
seem over the moon about the difference it's made and full marks to them for
doing it. As we've said though, that's not all there is to it. The cam must be
done likewise and so must the ignition. Instead of modifying the points, Bob
has used an electronic ignition from Boyer-Bransden and simply moved one of
the triggers. Recently, a fellow in Victoria did the same but used the
electronic ignition from another bike, moved one of the pick-ups, and runs it
on the crank. He says he has no wish to ride a 360 degree XS ever again. He
works as a mechanic at a Suzuki shop and says that his bike feels similar
(engine only) to an SV-650 - the TL-1000's little brother.
Not to take anything away from these bikes because everyone who's ridden them
is mightily impressed, but the fact remains that some of the brightest
engineers around say that 90 degrees is perfect. Could you tell the
difference? Is it worth worrying about? We can't say, as no-one has yet built
a 90 degree 650. As for the shafts, it's far more cost effective to have a
number of them made and there are now enough people who are willing to spend
the extra money to find out once and for all. Terry wants one, David needs
four, Bill Denton and Bob Bertaut each want one. That's enough to get the
order done. The reason we're telling you this is not because the project has
hit a wall until more people express an interest - it's going ahead regardless
- but so you can have one if you'd like. Whilst not wanting to exaggerate the
importance of it, we believe that this is your opportunity to correct the most
basic flaw in the 650's design.
As for the expense, most of it is the same no matter which way you go. You'll
need to have a cam and ignition modified, and the crank taken apart and put
back together. Bob is happy to handle that and it applies even if you're
simply turning it three splines. Actually, if you're modifying or just
rebuilding the motor anyway, you would have done most of that. Here then, is
where the added expense begins. You'll need another No. 3 flywheel but there
are any number of cranks at the wreckers. Condition is unimportant so buy the
cheapest one you can find. You'll need to have a small amount machined off the
centre-boss of one of the two No. 3s you'll be using. Not expensive. You'll
need to buy the shaft from Terry. It looks like these will cost somewhere
around A$160 - 180 (US$100) each. As we've said, several people have been
wanting to do this for some years and now it's so close they can taste it.
Are these people crazy to insist on 90 degrees when 83.076 is pretty close?
Consider that most V-8 engines are 90 degrees. That the flathead Ford of 1932
was may have been coincidence, but the motor that comes in a Ferrari F-50
being 90 degrees is certainly not. Sure, there are some that aren't, like
there are some V-twins that aren't. All the Japanese manufacturers now make
cruisers with motors of around 45 - 60 degrees. That's so they'll look, sound,
and feel like a Harley. But their V-twins that are meant to go fast - the
Suzuki TLs and Honda Firestorms are 90s. The Yamaha TRX is a 90, and so is the
Triumph Bonnieville-America. In case you missed that - the latest Triumph (the
bike that Phil had in mind when he first thought of this) twin is 90 degrees,
NOT 76 or 83.076 or any other number. All of Yamaha and Honda's V-4s are 90s.
Dr Fabio Taglioni never considered anything else for his machines and nor
would his successor, Dr Massimo Bordi. If, by some chance, Phil Irving's
theory is correct, you should know that 83.076 degrees is not the magic number
for a 650 anyway. It's a lot better than 360 degrees, no doubt about that, but
it's not perfect either. It's just the most convenient and easy to do. If
that's good enough for you, then fine, you save $100. If 360 degrees is good
enough, even better, you don't have to do anything. But if you want the
sweetest-running 650 possible, an overwhelming tide of evidence suggests you
make it 90 degrees.
Even if a rebuild isn't planned for the near future, consider buying one of
these shafts while you can and fitting it when you can. Terry should have a
firm price by the time you read this. Write to him at 95 Willis St,
Portarlington VIC 3223 Australia, call him on 61-3-52593438 or e-mail him.
It's worth saying one more time - this will forever correct the most
fundamental flaw in the 650's design.
Nachtrag mit Beobachtungen aus der Praxis:
There have been several 277° (83°) engines for some time and all the owners
are very pleased with the results and claim less vibration and more mid range
torque but as yet no one has done a 270° (90°). A member of the XS650 club
here in Australia has had a 277° running for over a year and the only problem
he has had is clutch slip due to the increased torque. He claims his XS650
will out perform a friends SV650 Suzuki. Bob Bertaut in the US is almost
finished his 277° engine and also wants to do a 270° for comparison. I have
put some more information regarding these rephases at the following addresses
if you would like to see them:- http://home.iprimus.com.au/toota/tech1 this
page has details of a crank triggered ignition for a 277° (83°) engine and
also drawings to explain the 270° (90°) crank set up using two internally
splined flywheels. http://home.iprimus.com.au/toota/vtwin.htm this page is a
reprint of the original article written by Phil Irving who first proposed odd
firing verticle twins as a means of reducing vibration. This explains why he
chose 76° for the Triumph engine and has an interesting postscript written by
Bian Whoolley explaining why 90° is better.
This second address is a five page scan and will take a while to download but
is well worth reading!
A member of our club who is a cam grinder will be able to supply camshafts for
the 270° rephase so when I get a price and details of the cam grinds available
I will let you know. I whole idea of rephasing the XS650 has generated a lot
of discussion both here and in th US and will continue to be a source of
debate until both rephases are done for comparison. Will the winner be 277° or
270° ? I suspect all this interest will make the XS650 the winner.
Last edited by Fishercat; 12/05/2006 8:37 AM.
|
|
|
Re: 360 degree conversion.
|
Joined: Jan 2005
Posts: 3,753
Loquacious
|
|
Loquacious
Joined: Jan 2005
Posts: 3,753 |
holy crap!!!!! thats a lot of reading
Frank
(Former)05 BA tbike pipes, ai removed, Freak, mikuni hsr 42's, 904, ported/polished head, 1mm oversized valves
NOW-2010 silver and black tbird
|
|
|
Re: 360 degree conversion.
|
Joined: Aug 2006
Posts: 321
Adjunct
|
|
Adjunct
Joined: Aug 2006
Posts: 321 |
Good read, thanks for posting. Now I want a Scramber...how do I rephase my bonnie to 270?
just kidding!
There is no greater thrill than being shot at with no consequence. -Churchill
|
|
|
Re: 360 degree conversion.
|
Joined: Sep 2007
Posts: 1,668
Learned Hand
|
|
Learned Hand
Joined: Sep 2007
Posts: 1,668 |
Must dig deeper... into the wallet and the motor. You'd have to change the crankshaft too. If the funds are there, why not just buy a used motor and istall the big bore while its on the bench? 
Howbeit when He, the Spirit of truth, is come; He will guide you in all truth:
|
|
|
Re: 360 degree conversion.
|
Joined: Jan 2005
Posts: 8,639 Likes: 3
Old Hand
|
|
Old Hand
Joined: Jan 2005
Posts: 8,639 Likes: 3 |
Crankshaft, balance shafts, cams and alternator rotor need to be changed. The rotor has the lugs to create the timing signals for the igniter, and you only want one lug for a 360 engine. The carburettor needles and jets are different, but I think that's to match the different exhaust system.
One advantage you would gain is that the ignition system will be able to perform at much higher RPM's because it is firing half as many times.
Let's hope there's intelligent life somewhere in space 'cause it's buggar all down here. -- Monte Python
|
|
|
 Re: 360 degree conversion.
|
Joined: Jun 2006
Posts: 2,626
Loquacious
|
|
Loquacious
Joined: Jun 2006
Posts: 2,626 |
One of our Swedish members, can't remember who, did a 270/360 engine swap. Anybody remember this one?
Steelheart- '03 Speedmaster Black/Yellow
The Hayabusa Killa
16" Shorties/140 mains/Airbox drilled
Procom CDI
"There is no cure for Celibacy. But we can treat the symptoms."
|
|
|
Re: 360 degree conversion.
|
Joined: Jan 2005
Posts: 6,308 Likes: 4
Worn Saddle
|
|
Worn Saddle
Joined: Jan 2005
Posts: 6,308 Likes: 4 |
Probably Jojje, he does all kinds of cool stuff.
Also, don't forget you would also need to swap the CDI boxes too, add another $500 to the price tag.
If you want to do a 360º motor, just buy a used Bonnie, cheaper and easier on the brain cells.
A word to the wise is not necessary. It is the stupid ones who need the advice.
Pat
|
|
|
Re: 360 degree conversion.
|
Joined: Sep 2005
Posts: 3,816
Freelance Jedi Knight
|
|
Freelance Jedi Knight
Joined: Sep 2005
Posts: 3,816 |
Last edited by Grzegorz; 06/05/2008 2:14 PM.
|
|
|
Re: 360 degree conversion.
|
Joined: Jan 2005
Posts: 18,825
"Lighten up, Francis."
|
|
"Lighten up, Francis."
Joined: Jan 2005
Posts: 18,825 |
Your dealer can help you with the conversion. It's costs around $8000, minus your core, which is probably worth $5-6000. 
|
|
|
|
|
