Torque Converter

Hey Sergio,
The motor base can be made from a rectangle 1/4" plate steel and 4 holes around 1/2" thick or 12 cm.s
Some motor bases have different hole patterns so wait till you get the specs before you drill.
Did you find the torque converter. Look at comet.com or cometclutches.com, they are cheaper than most.

Can't wait to see how it goes!
Doc
 
Those Comet Torque-A-Verter kits are remarkable devises. I've built a number of projects utilizing them, from go-karts to mini bikes. I even modified my neices little Polaris XC120 mini snowmobile with one instead of the stock centrifugal clutch. The back plate bolts right onto most 3-6 HP Briggs, Tecumseh, Honda, etc 4-stroke engines that have a 3/4" shaft. They are very reliable and the belts last a long long time. They give you excellent low end power and good top end speed. The problem I see is that by the time you add the weight of a typical 5HP range 4 cycle engine plus the weight of the torque converter set up, it's getting a tad weighty for a bicycle installation....and believe me, it's gonna be way faster than you might think....too fast for the way a typical bicycle is constructed, at least in my opinion. I mean really, we're pushing the limits simply by installing a cheap 48 cc Chinese engine on a bicycle, let alone something that could propel it up to freeway speeds. I built a 300 lb kart with a 5HP Tecumseh and a torque converter on it that will approach 45 mph. imagine what a 6.5 Hp would do on a bicycle. It sounds like fun, but I think I'd want an ambulance on standby if I was gonna ride one. Those little axles have their limitations, ya know. But, I think it would be a hoot to build such a machine with a more heavily constructed frame and some wheels with some real bearings...a little custom built motorcycle so to speak...gee, if I only had more spare time (and money). By the way, I do have a new Comet Torque-a -Verter kit sitting on the shelf collecting dust. I'd let it go for 170.00 plus shipping to anyone who wants it. Gee, I don't even know if it's ok to say that in this forum....if it's against the rules to 'advertise' as such, somebody please let me know.

Pete
 
it's ok to "mention" it here, thanks for asking...you could go ahead and post it up in "buy/sell/trade" for the duration.

hey, the sooner it sells, the sooner we see it on a motoredbike. this is a great discussion, especially
the part about 60mph bicycles 8)
 
Does anyone know a source for a very large bicycle sprockets?
One possibility is to use a jackshaft, but I rather keep things simple if possible.


You might seriously consider the jackshaft if you are indeed going from a belt primary drive to an eventual chain/sprocket type final drive.

No ?

A little math and some "ratio to ratio" calculations would give the simulated gearing. i.e., final drive RPM on a Chinese engine vs. 3600 RPM reduced through a converter & jackshaft. You may find no need for a larger sprocket, actually.


~DC~
 
The torque converter idea is going to work, but it may require a lot of work.

The torq converter tav2 30 has a ratio of 3:1, which is mostly for torque.
Since 2.7:1 ratio is for providing torque at low speeds and a 0.9:1 ratio for overdrive at high speed.

Since the honda clone 6.5HP runs at 3600 RPM, with the torque converter and a 55 tooth sprocket on the wheel and a 10 tooth on the torque converter will give an speed of 51MPH, but since there is an overdrive the actual max speed will be 56 MPH, at low speed there will be a huge torque.
I do not plan to drive the bike at 56MPH unless it feels safe, but is good to have the extra power for safety (no longer driving on the side and sharing the traffic lane with large vehicles).

The only other way go keep the bike from not going as fast would be using a jackshaft since large sprokets for rear wheel go up to 55 to 56 tooth only, or using a smaller diameter wheel, a simpler method is not to speed when not safe to do so.
I think 55 tooth is the perfect choice.

At high speed the gear ratio will be:
55/10 x 0.9 = 5.0:1 which is a very low ratio, providing very high speeds.

At low speed it will be:
55/10 x 2.7 = 14.9:1 which is a very high ratio, and will be able to climb hills with no problems keeping a good speed.

The 55 tooth sprocket is needed since the gear ratio of the torque converter is 3:1, in our china engines that ratio is 83/20 = 4.1:1, therefore a larger sprocket it is needed to compensate for the lower ratio.

Another option is to use a jackshaft but it is not needed using the torque converter and a large sprocket.

lower ratio ==> higher speed.
higher ratio ==> more torque

I just got a torque converter off ebay for $104, it about 2 weeks I will have some results, the hardest part will be mounting the engine and having clearance for the pedals.

In comparison our china 70cc engines run at about 7000 RPM at full speed.
At 7000RPM using a 36 sprocket gives 36 MPH.
since the ratio it that case is 83/20 x 36/10 = 14.9 so we have a ratio of 14.9:1
in the case of the 44 tooth sproket it is 83/20 x 44/10 = 18.3:1 and at 7000 an speed of 30
with a 55 toot 83/20 x 56/10 = 22.8:1 at 7000RPM is 24 MPH.
Here in this case we either have torque or speed but not both.

All the calculations here were using a 26" wheel for diameter.

The big difference is that the torque converter will provide a variable ratio with will let you have torque and speed, the drive chain will also be shorter since the torque converter is about a foot long.

One thing for sure 12g (2.6mm) spokes will be required or better, I have not found a source for 10g spokes (about 3mm).

So far this is the theory, when I try the torque converter I will provide some results.

Do you guys have some recomendations for heavy duty rear whelel hubs, and source for 10g spokes, and also very wide pedal crank which might be needed for clearance with the engine.?
 
this is semi off-topic, but i couldn't resist...

all this talk of primary/secondary drive & jackshafts, if you were to integrate your jack-shaft (whatever ratio) directly into the centerline of a swingarm-pivot, you'd be able to use "real" rear suspension, distance from jackshaft to axle would remain constant, so there'd be no chain-tension issues. another benefit would be using the jackshaft to make any offset you might need to clear a wide tire. make sense?
 
sergio riveros writes: Another option is to use a jackshaft but it is not needed using the torque converter and a large sprocket.


~DC~ writes: You might seriously consider the jackshaft if you are indeed going from a belt primary drive to an eventual chain/sprocket type final drive. No?

I am still at a loss as to the primary drive being the belt and the final drive being a chain.
Does this or does this not require a jackshaft in itself?

At low speed it will be:
55/10 x 2.7 = 14.9:1 which is a very high ratio, and will be able to climb hills with no problems keeping a good speed.


But, you go on to state that the original configuration is: " we have a ratio of 14.9:1
in the case of the 44 tooth sprocket it is 83/20 x 44/10 = 18.3:1 "



I am simply stating, as before, that a larger sprocket would not be necessary using a jackshaft that might [will] be necessary anyway.

Yes?
No?

Addressing the belt to chain solution.


~DC~
 
the belt to chain switch would be thru a jackshaft, right? the jackshaft would/could/should be the place for any final ratio adjustment, so the secondary chain to axle (1:1 if you like) could be as small as mechanically possible for cleanliness. imo, it should still be fairly large to avoid too much stress on the rear wheel.

sorry if i may be rambling, i can't resist this topic, it's getting interesting.
 
the belt to chain switch would be thru a jackshaft, right? the jackshaft would/could/should be the place for any final ratio adjustment, so the secondary chain to axle (1:1 if you like) could be as small as mechanically possible for cleanliness. imo, it should still be fairly large to avoid too much stress on the rear wheel.

Hence my initial statement: You may find no need for a larger sprocket, actually.

Remember, the Briggs knock-off only produces 3600 RPM and much more torque (ft/lbs).

And, requiring the jackshaft just in nature of the belt to chain drive sytem too.

Yes?
No?



Enjoy,
~DC~
 
I just posted an ad for my torque converter in the buy/sell/swap section. Thanks Augie.

Pete
 
Back
Top