electric start "silver bullet train" engine

[jatgm1]

also getting an adjustable cns carb would probably help you, but according to the manufacturer you will need to either use pvc pipe or electrical tape to make the intake manifold large enough for the cns carb to fit on. having a cns carb and getting a set of jets for it will let you adjust the mixture much more easily, the NT carbs work, dont get me wrong, but their not too good, at least the ones ive owned have always been problematic. i actually use a dellorto SHA carb now, however im likely going to upgrade to either the cns carb or a walbro, im not sure. since the way the manifold mounts onto the block may be different than the grubee, a walbro may not fit, though ive never seen the engine you have in person. the best idea would be to use a CNS carb. also, you should note that if the carb is on too much of an angle, it may be interfering with the floatbowl's operation. it should be generally level when mounted to the engine. having it on an angle may cause fuel to be dumped into the engine constantly instead of air. it relies on gravity to do the metering.

 

[Frankenstein]

An aircraft engines carburetor doesn't care if it's upside down and flying backwards just sayin

 

[jatgm1]

u mean a walbro carb? like the same ones you can put on a grubee and probably the silver bullet train with some rtv paste, isolation spacer and quick steel?

 

[jatgm1]

actually thats a good idea, with these silver bullet train engines an adjustable walbro carb would probably be amazing since they usually offer better top end.

 

[Frankenstein]

No I mean a carb that uses vacuum forces to drive the fill and the input to the motor, the motor needs to be designed to create that force for the carburetor to react and pull fuel.

Our fun little motors don't play well with aircraft carburetors. At least not the conventional type.

 

[HeadSmess]

in other words, a walbro carb. or a carb with no float bowl, the only part that uses gravity... pretty easy to hook up a line from the crankcase to the carb. chainsaw carbs usually have external lines for the pump in the carb, unlike brushcutter/weedwacker types that are virtually identical but use a small hole through the manifold...

and somehow the fourstroker carbs get away without a pulse line at all... still not entirely sure how, i havent had to tear mine down yet.

of course, why would your bicycle be running upside down? other than locating the tank under the engine, there isnt much call for a pumper/walbro carb... but they are easy to tune. if they have hi-lo needles, at least. a lot dont, these days.

and setting up the throttle cable on them can be a hassle.

the starter motor looks like the same type used in pit bikes with E-start, so fairly common. and i havent found any that are unusual, ie, theyre all identical regards bolt patterns and splines on the shaft.

a decent battery is definitely an idea, something from a motorbike rather than cheap chinese SLA junk. Lipo would be smaller, lighter and more compact but then you need a decent charge regulator cus they are very temperamental on charging...

pretty sure this engine has a unified cylinder and head, if what KCvale says, and the pictures from online seem to depict.

 

[Barnfresh]

May want to contact Will Kidd at Bridgman Motorized Bicycles/Very Bright Bike Lights, he's been installing these e-start motors on customer's bikes and should know the pros and cons. https://www.facebook.com/Verybrightbikelights

 

[jatgm1]

No I mean a carb that uses vacuum forces to drive the fill and the input to the motor, the motor needs to be designed to create that force for the carburetor to react and pull fuel.

Our fun little motors don't play well with aircraft carburetors. At least not the conventional type.

except that they do. ya they need slight modification, so what? like your not going to mess with the engine anyway? isn't that the point of these bikes? point being they will work if made to work. adding a carb that doesn't care how you orient it or where the gas is, seems like a good idea to me. plus that little aircraft motor would deffinately not play well with a system that requires constantly pulling it one way or the other at full force when it normally is designed to sit there and spin in circles and push wind. your talking about re-purposing a motor meant for an entirely different application, vs adding a carb that requires slight modification. i found a walbro kit sub 100$ the other day. definitely cheaper and easier than retrofitting an airplane engine to a bicycle drive.

 

[Frankenstein]

except that they do. ya they need slight modification, so what? like your not going to mess with the engine anyway? isn't that the point of these bikes? point being they will work if made to work. adding a carb that doesn't care how you orient it or where the gas is, seems like a good idea to me. plus that little aircraft motor would deffinately not play well with a system that requires constantly pulling it one way or the other at full force when it normally is designed to sit there and spin in circles and push wind. your talking about re-purposing a motor meant for an entirely different application, vs adding a carb that requires slight modification. i found a walbro kit sub 100$ the other day. definitely cheaper and easier than retrofitting an airplane engine to a bicycle drive.

Actually airplanes don't just sit there, they tend to be put up against higher g forces and gyroscopic forces than our bike motors would during normal use, especially the model aircraft type.

As far as what it pushes, it doesn't matter in any practical sense, if it's pulling an airplane with a 27 inch prop or pushing a bicyle with 27 inch wheels the end result is it is doing work and driving a vehicle and a motor through space. I'll also comment that there are motorcycles built with radial engines that would be used in an aircraft, everything from a bicyle sized 5 cylinder to something as large as 13 cylinder world war 2 style aircraft motors. The time and difficulty of putting an aircraft motor into a 2 wheeled vehicle is just to show it can be done, is cool, and yields some serious f***ing horsepower.

Nobody said I was going for cheap (even though I'm an admittedly cheap bastard) I just want (unlike you I suppose) a pet project that when finished will be very very unique, have a definite cool factor (imagine, I can tell the Harley owners I built my bike by hand in my own backyard and I used a f***ING AIRPLANE ENGINE TO DO IT!) and of course a double 2 stroke at 100ccs (50 per cylinder) is going to be firing one cylinder per stroke, with makes it a 50cc 1 stroke being twice the power of a 50cc 2 stroke, and around 20% more powerful than a 66cc 2 stroke. Being my 66 can haul some serious butt I think that 20% more power just makes things better. I also know how to modify a 2 stroke for even better hp, so that's just icing.


How about you just stick the books, and don't innovate or try new an exciting things. I'll go over here and enjoy doing the opposite, and not limit my imagination because the box says airplane on it...

 

[Frankfort MB's]

Actually airplanes don't just sit there, they tend to be put up against higher g forces and gyroscopic forces than our bike motors would during normal use, especially the model aircraft type.

As far as what it pushes, it doesn't matter in any practical sense, if it's pulling an airplane with a 27 inch prop or pushing a bicyle with 27 inch wheels the end result is it is doing work and driving a vehicle and a motor through space. I'll also comment that there are motorcycles built with radial engines that would be used in an aircraft, everything from a bicyle sized 5 cylinder to something as large as 13 cylinder world war 2 style aircraft motors. The time and difficulty of putting an aircraft motor into a 2 wheeled vehicle is just to show it can be done, is cool, and yields some serious f***ing horsepower.

Nobody said I was going for cheap (even though I'm an admittedly cheap bastard) I just want (unlike you I suppose) a pet project that when finished will be very very unique, have a definite cool factor (imagine, I can tell the Harley owners I built my bike by hand in my own backyard and I used a f***ING AIRPLANE ENGINE TO DO IT!) and of course a double 2 stroke at 100ccs (50 per cylinder) is going to be firing one cylinder per stroke, with makes it a 50cc 1 stroke being twice the power of a 50cc 2 stroke, and around 20% more powerful than a 66cc 2 stroke. Being my 66 can haul some serious butt I think that 20% more power just makes things better. I also know how to modify a 2 stroke for even better hp, so that's just icing.


How about you just stick the books, and don't innovate or try new an exciting things. I'll go over here and enjoy doing the opposite, and not limit my imagination because the box says airplane on it...

Because why nah