Please Help. Rear Engine Is Stumbling.

[5-7HEAVEN]

No Stumbling!

Update: "The Dragon Lady" is running well, no fuel delivery or stumbling.

The last time I filled the reserve tank and pumped fuel into the engines' tanks was on Sunday. I've commuted to work on Monday and Wednesday. I also did some errands yesterday on "The Dragon Lady". It's Thursday morning and the engines' tanks have quite a bit of fuel in them.

I just put a quart of gas into my reserve tank a few minutes ago.

That means that the reserve tank is automatically feeding the engines' tanks WITHOUT!!!the electric fuel pump being activated!!

Furthermore, gas is automatically being siphoned to the engines' tanks THROUGH the pump, while "The Dragon Lady" is resting for eight hours or more.

Of course fuel transfer is occuring while the electric fuel pump is off and all petcock and shutoff valves are in the open position.

I am so stoked! I got a flat tire on Tuesday but that can't bring me down!

 

[Zemus DE]

Fisrt off, whoever thinks 40-1 is safer is not doing their research. Mitsubishi knows what they are doing and they want you to run 50-1. I run 80-1 in mine and have been doing so for the last 6000 miles of riding. these mitsu's have extremely restrictive exhausts. you run you mixtures to rich and you will plug your exhaust with carbon. I have been dealing with a few frustrated customers at DE because they listened to you the people on this site telling them to run 40-1, and I've about had enough with this. I just cleaned out an exhaust port that only had a 5 mm hole for the exhaust to escape through all the carbon buildup.

5-7heavan you need to get a TL43 or even TL52 engine not the TLE. the older "TL" models do not have the stratified emmisions system, and have about 5-10% more power. They use WYK warlbro carbs.

If performance is what your about, The chinese 52cc engines they sell at harbor frieght are made to the excact same specs as the TL52, just built with low grade materials. A couple local buddies of mine are using those engines and seem to like them.

I see in many of your other posts you are about the engage and disengage features. and have issues with tire wear. Have you even tried Dimensions Edge's stuff? just curious.

 

[5-7HEAVEN]

Evening Update: Upon arriving home from work today, the reserve tank's level had dropped about 16 ounces. That proves that the engines' tanks are siphoning fuel from the auxiliary tank THROUGH the electric fuel pump. This is with the pump in the off position.

Both tanks have sufficient fuel to commute to work tomorrow, and that's good. Methinks it's because of better fuel line positioning and the absence of the large primer bulb.

Zemus, I'm with you on the 50:1 fuel-oil ratio. That's what Staton and the factory recommends.

I'm stuck with TLE43cc Mitsubishi engines because that's what I have. In the makings are billet aluminum carb intake manifolds to adapt WYK-58 Walbro carbs for the TLE43Mits engines.

I believe I've solved engagement issues and subsequent excessive tire wear on the rear mount. Working to invent a better engagement for the front engine.

I had considered Dimension Edge but purchased Staton and BMP kits instead.

However, I DID manage to find a very old used Dimension Edge kit which had a Tecumseh engine installed. The engine was trashed so I salvaged the rest.

This kit was drilled for 54mm clutch and the housing seemed to be fashioned from thin sheet aluminum. I might try to mount it as a front engine install if I can find some replacement parts.

 

[duivendyk]

The TLE 43 is much cleaner and also more economical because of the stratified charging which reduces unburned HC emissions substantially,a small price to pay in slightly reduced performance IMO.

 

[Zemus DE]

They are NOT much cleaner as a stratified engine on the overall emissions standards then the TL, where do you come up with it being substantially cleaner. All the the stratification does is reduce the need for a catalytic converter, which both the TL and TLE still have built-in to their mufflers anyways. It just something the EPA and California emissions are pushing heavily for on 2-stroke engines to meet their higher classification criteria.

The TL design still makes EPA phase II emission without the stratified design(as a 52cc and with Chinese manufacturing no less), but because of the lack of stratification, the gov won't give them the extended compliance pass. which will be the same for any non-stratified 2-stroke even if it does put out comparible emissions to a stratified counterpart. Essentially, all your stratification does is recirculate a small amount of exhaust back into the combustion cycle to reduce NOx(Nitrogen Oxide) levels anyways, which again is exactly what your catalytic converter does. This is just like automobile emissions bureaucracy started back in the 70s. So ya in the long run, I agree stratified charge engine design will help cut our overall emissions.

There is nothing wrong with the TLE, I have been working on these mitsu engines since they came out with the original TL series in the 90s. I just feel that the non-stratified engines in turns of performance are more desirable. But to think they are drastically dirtier isn't right.

I could keep going for hours on this but i don't have that kinda time right now. I hope this helps in someway

 

[duivendyk]

It was a discription from Mitsubishi about their stratified scavenging system for the TLE engines (I presume LE stands for Lowered Emissions) which cited significant improvements in HC emissions and also improved fuel consumption.It said nothing about any ancilliary catalytic convertor,so it seems reasonable that with the addition of such a device the reduction in emissions is less pronounced.I would hazard to guess that the high 50:1 ratio has to do with using the CAT convertor and not to enhance engine life!!.I don't recall the article having anything specific to say about oil ratios except quoting EU specs about the kind of oils and I certainly don't recall that high a ratio being mentioned,it would have certainly piqued my attention.I filed away the publication and don't have it available right now,but I seem to recall that Forum member Loquin dug it up originally somewhere,he has a TLE 43 friction drive.
You are completely misinformed about the stratified scavenging system,it is NOT a EGR type setup at all.All that does is reduce NO's by reducing combustion temp.
During the intake portion of one revolution clean air is sucked into the transfer passage via a one way valve. that's what the extra air intake on the carb. happens to be for.This clean air also accumulates in the crank case close to the transfer port.When the piston clears the transfer port ,the first slug of micture is actually that clean air, so that most of what later might escape from the exhaust during the scavenging is just clean air and not HC's.This is why the HC emissions are much improved according to Mitsubishi.The article in question describes computer similations and cites test results.

 

[kerf]

It was a discription from Mitsubishi about their stratified scavenging system for the TLE engines (I presume LE stands for Lowered Emissions) which cited significant improvements in HC emissions and also improved fuel consumption.It said nothing about any ancilliary catalytic convertor,so it seems reasonable that with the addition of such a device the reduction in emissions is less pronounced.I would hazard to guess that the high 50:1 ratio has to do with using the CAT convertor and not to enhance engine life!!.I don't recall the article having anything specific to say about oil ratios except quoting EU specs about the kind of oils and I certainly don't recall that high a ratio being mentioned,it would have certainly piqued my attention.I filed away the publication and don't have it available right now,but I seem to recall that Forum member Loquin dug it up originally somewhere,he has a TLE 43 friction drive.
You are completely misinformed about the stratified scavenging system,it is NOT a EGR type setup at all.All that does is reduce NO's by reducing combustion temp.
During the intake portion of one revolution clean air is sucked into the transfer passage via a one way valve. that's what the extra air intake on the carb. happens to be for.This clean air also accumulates in the crank case close to the transfer port.When the piston clears the transfer port ,the first slug of micture is actually that clean air, so that most of what later might escape from the exhaust during the scavenging is just clean air and not HC's.This is why the HC emissions are much improved according to Mitsubishi.The article in question describes computer similations and cites test results.

My friend, although my memory isn't what it used to be, from what I recall from that same article, you are very, very correct. Which leaves me to wonder if Zemus DE is talking out of another orifice other than his mouth.

 

[duivendyk]

I have located the article in question,it is in the Mitsubishi Heavy Industries Vol 38 No3 Oct 2001..I quote pertinent passages from the text: "The new stratified charge engine improves fuel efficiency by 35% while maintaining power output at the same or higher level,"(an accompagning graph shows the output slightly,maybe 5% or so lower). I further quote:" the exhaust emissions HC+NOx are reduced to 1/3 or less and to approximately 1/2 for CO".(this is attibuted to improved carb.calibration not to the strat. scavenging system)
These excellent results were obtained from test engines,so production versions might not be quite as good.It does mention a 50:1 oil micture in the specifications table,but says nothing about cat. convertors.The TLE engine series goes from 20 to 43 cc.I rest my case.

 

[Zemus DE]

um Kirf, that comment was uncalled for... I have been building engine kits with these mitsubishi engines since i was 15 years old. Because the company i work for has been with mitsubishi, we've been getting get all the memo's for the new tech since 99'.

you are referencing this article right(http://www.mhi.co.jp/en/technology/review/pdf/e383/e383151.pdf)? that article is not comparing the old "TL" to the the "TLE". it is comparing a "conventional 2 stroke" to their test model TLE26. whatever case your making doesn't really fit the argument we apparently are having.

I dont want to argue this subject with you forever. both engines are great. I use them both. I just personally like the "TL" better. from my experience there is no dif. in fuel consumption.

Bottom line is neither of us have emission results from both engines so this argument is mute. You just made a bold statement i didn't agree with.

 

[duivendyk]

Agreed Z,it was uncalled for.We don't allways get it right and sometimes are misinformed.Let's just agree on this:TL(E) engines are all great engines,and leave it at that.As a 2stroke fan,I admire the elegant improvement they came up with their statified charging scheme.Running an engine 'rich' does boost output,so it could well be that the earlier engine was a bit more powerful.