Also, if you didn't know. My engine is rebuilt with new rings, lapped valves, cb900 cams and free flowing exhaust. Prob a little too free flowing...
surffly said:Well I had asked, in this thread and others.
Was ignored.
And now I have been brushed off and been told I know nothing and should shut up..
that doesnt make much diff it is still a 750 a 185cc airpump per cylinderncologerojr said:Also, if you didn't know. My engine is rebuilt with new rings, lapped valves, cb900 cams and free flowing exhaust. Prob a little too free flowing...
xb33bsa said:that doesnt make much diff it is still a 750 a 185cc airpump per cylinder
34's are crazy big
when we were racing a full on 1015cc national caliber superbike back in the day we only ran 31's and 33's smoothbores
like i already said 28's would be ideal for street and some good power.
surffly said:Flow through the head is the weak link on the sohc bikes.
Doesn't matter what carb, cam, exhaust you run. The bottleneck and the restriction to making power is how the head flows.
Heavies said:I initially wanted to go the same route as you with either a 2 carb manifold or a one carb manifold, however due to time constraints and other issue going on right now, I opted to go the CR route.
As I have more time and monies, I still wanted to pursue the idea further, while gathering more information on the topic. This has proved difficult due to the fact that nearly every post I come accross on this question is plagued by the same type of hostility, as seen here. In deed, the option has been done before, yet it is still fun to try to come up with something new.
The argument that the 'bike engineers designed it that way so why change it' is moot in my eyes. If that principal is set in stone, just go out and buy a brand new bike and call it a day. Why even build anything custom then? Why even try any thing new or interesting? In my eyes the point of a custom is to do it different, the goals set there is up to the individual. Building a race bike, then there are specific goals set there. Building a custom then a whole different set of goal may be set there. If you are building a bike to go from point A to point B, in a reliable fashion, safely, and with a little style, then it isn't really necessary to squeeze every available HP number out the engine block. Right? If you are going to get all caught up in the semantics of the term 'cafe racer', well then, just call it something else. Which is fine and dandy. I'd just say 'I'm building a custom', and do what you want, if you have the time, patients, and ability, go for it.
mydlyfkryzis said:Not hostility, just a different point of view.
The reason factory setup is quoted is that is the base line. Customization is wonderful, but it seems a weird thing to me to reduce performance from the baseline for looks. Performance, in my eyes, is not acceleration or top speed. I use performance to mean easy to start, good throttle response, reasonable fuel consumption, good driveability. It seems a little odd that you would sacrifice driveability, throttle response, easy starting, for a system that looks nicer to you. The other odd thing is you did other performance upgrades, like the cam, then want to add down grades for looks.
So not so much hostility, but questions about why someone would reduce capability of the bike, adding compromises in the name of looks. I love better looking bikes, but can't appreciate the crummy engineering into a modification that reduces the proper function or reduces the functionality.
However, these re my feelings. You are free to go and do whatever you want. However, not everybody is going to be "Ooooh, how wonderful". You posted this on a public forum, and you will get differing opinions.
ncologerojr said:I just read thru my posts again. Can someone show me where I said that I wanted to downgrade the performance? Or where I said that performance doesn't matter? Was my initial post not about the performance of my idea?