- Location
- Cruising Around
Told you guys last year to watch for this guy and his motors
Super Jet ET SJ Billet BigBores
- Thread starter E-Tech
- Start date
- Location
- sask, canada
This motor is the real deal for sure. As soon as I get home I'm cranking the timing back up to where ET had it initially because I was amazed at the power before we dialed the timing back a bit. It still hit very hard after dialing it back, but nothing like what we initially had it at. ET said there was a difference of 15 lb/ft of torque between the two timing curves when he was dyno testing it, I'm looking forward to getting that torque back. Might have to prop up, or at least try the long cone I have. And here I was worried that the 13/19 would be too steep, lol.
That all depends on hot pipe or cold pipe. long pulls or 2 sec pulls. The hp for freestyle is quick power mostly in the mid from 4000 to 6500 and you also need the over rev up to 7400. HP is not what we need it is tourque! I used my dyno as a tool to find power after small and large changes in the cylinder ports,angles, widths and heights.
Also combustion chamber design to maximize torque and also have the power on top.
The water cooling ports and flow in the cylinder and head design also played a big part in making constant power after long rides to prevent heat fade.
I will wait to post any dyno sheet or hp # until there is a full comparison to all the other engines on the market.
DAG
Yes, my balls tickled from that landing
- Location
- Charlotte, NC
Great to hear a cast mani coming to the 66e platform 
- Location
- Edmonton, AB
waxhead
wannabe backflipper
- Location
- gold coast
No one really wants to post power figures as then they would have to tell you real figures not the 200hp figures they talk about but the real ones it would be a lot less
- Location
- Cruising Around
I think 200 and up are more common from these 1100 and up than people think. The real catch is how small the gain is percentage wise from the top 900's that are out there. The top 900's are really blowing me away in what they can do in the hands of capable riders. I believe the ET 900 will be a top contender with what its bringing to the table.
Last edited:
waxhead
wannabe backflipper
- Location
- gold coast
The laws of physics come into play and there is only so much you can put through a certain area, when you big bore these engines you get a worsening effect. The gp1200 triple pipe engines were lucky to get much over 225 and they had an extra cylinder as well. These were using the r&d cylinder as well as stroker cranks as well. The big bore stroker engines were are seeing now will have great torque but I would be surprised to see a high figure. A well ported super stock used to make about 130-135 in race trim I remember seeing some dyno figures on that. The big bores till run the same bore spacing which is what kills the 62t platform. But they big bore them and make the weak area weaker by reducing transfer flow. Is they had a triple exhaust so there was more blow down like the tpe engines then I would say yes you may get closer but the laws of physics apply to them as well
Last edited:
- Location
- Cruising Around
does the reduction of transfer port are transfer over to a billet cylinder that was designed from the get go to take, say an 89mm piston? I agree with and am not a fan of stock cylinders big bored because of the loss of transfer port area, but we are talking about billet cylinders I thought. Wax, I do understand what you are saying and I am not arguing your point. This has been discussed a lot, and specifically we are talking about the inner transfers on a cylinder designed for 85mm and up pistons right?
Last edited:
waxhead
wannabe backflipper
- Location
- gold coast
They are 118 centers you can't put much more transfer port area I there with out going into the next piston. Lamey tried to get over this by adding an extra transfer. While this went some way to helping you get the extra wall friction on the charge as well. Unless the cylinder is a tardis you can't get a bigger area into what is a small defined space. These were built based on the 650 platform. Yamaha themselves identified this issue and that's why it became the gpr style engine with greater bore spacing so you can fit in decent shaped transfers. I'm not saying I don't like what he is doing just I don't think many of the 62t engines actually make it to 200hp at all
Last edited:
Transfer area and flow was a big thing in making power. Making the ports flow was a big part in making power.
2 second pull i did see 124 lbs
Full spec 49's over stock 46's 10 hp in the upper mid to top
from 170 psi domes 14.5 pump to 16.5 190 psi domes make 8 -10 lbs all the way through. But you need C12.
ET mani 20 lbs from 5-6k and 8 lbs from 6-6500 and same on top as stock PF mani from 6500 to 7200.
2 second pull i did see 124 lbs
Full spec 49's over stock 46's 10 hp in the upper mid to top
from 170 psi domes 14.5 pump to 16.5 190 psi domes make 8 -10 lbs all the way through. But you need C12.
ET mani 20 lbs from 5-6k and 8 lbs from 6-6500 and same on top as stock PF mani from 6500 to 7200.
Big Kahuna
Administrator
- Location
- Tuscaloosa, AL
Many hear believe knowing the HP and Dyno results is the end-all test on a motor....................... They do not get that the dyno is just a tuning tool and nothing else. It does not matter if a motor makes 200 hp if you cannot get the 200hp to the pump and at the point where the pump is efficient.........
Man this is great info, actual back to back dyno tests on different components. Wish there was more of this info available!
I do agree its all about torque.( for freestyle) If a stock SJ 701 motor can get 75 HP and a limited 701 with b-pipe, alum. flywheel, high comp head, ignition, carb tune and mag 144mm pump can get 100-110HP , then 150-200Hp+ is very possible with 62t cased power valve 1200cc plus engines (with big pump of course)
- Location
- Houston, TX
I agree with you BK, but the flip side to that is all of the "bros" who are judging and hyping a platform by how hard it "rips". While I agree that the dyno isn't the end all be all, it could at least provide empirical data in an arena that is dominated by hype. I don't particularly care about a top HP number, but seeing the torque curve or at least having a peak torque and RPM (as Etech provided) I find useful.
Product looks great Art! Will there be one in a demo hull at Daytona?
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
Product looks great Art! Will there be one in a demo hull at Daytona?
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
waxhead
wannabe backflipper
- Location
- gold coast
Totally agree, and if you look at the stock cylinder and see the angles you will see it tries to force the rising coloum of air out the exhaust port , terrible design.
MY point re the wall friction is , if you could fit a decent loop transfer port in the cylinder then you would not have to have a 7 port cylinder with the extra wall friction in the transfers.
Not many high performance engines run the 7 port by choice. the 62t is a compromise and so we have to look at all different ways to make the cylinder flow enough.
Totally agree with you that its torque that does the work, most people seem to talk in hp as its been sold as the measure even if that not correct.
- Location
- Ogden, Utah
Just for the sake of reference what does a stock 701 make torque wise on your dyno. I understand why your not interested in releasing HP numbers, but maybe you would be willing to release your torque numbers in comparison to a stock 62T. That would probably satisfy everyone so we could see how much power your money is buying you. For me this would satisfy my curiosity and give me a tangible way of seeing how much more powerful these billet engines are.