IPB Style© Fisana

Jump to content


Photo

TMF Ducati V-One: a supermono for the new millenia


  • Please log in to reply
12 replies to this topic

#1 jihem

jihem

    Retired Spaminator

  • 813 posts
  • My bike(s):
    2013 V7 Stone. In the mirrors, there were a Griso 4V, 2 x Nato V50, a Ghezzi-Brian STW1100 and a 1979 T3 California
  • Location:
    brussels

Posted 10 January 2009 - 02:53 PM

Bart Crauwels is quite well known in the Ducati world as he had on the market a clutch kit devised to replace the 2 valvers clutches that really weren't never up to the job.
He also had a famous italian motorbikes shop called Motomania.

He's recently been applying his talents in developing a (racetrack only) compressed 498cc monocylinder bike out of a 1000 DS (two valves air cooled Ducati engine) with a special twist: the rear cylinder would be used a a compressor.

Posted Image

Posted Image
I've seen it being tested on the road, it sounds like a big twin morphed with a chaisaw screamer: unbelievable !

Posted Image
This still-in-proto-look monocylinder makes now 102 rearwheel HP and sustains 10.000 rpm without damages.

Posted Image
don't ask me, ask Bart.


Only 40 of these machines will be produced starting mid-year.

#2 gavo

gavo

    Forum-aholic

  • 437 posts
  • My bike(s):
    rosso mandello, ducati tt 650
  • Location:
    Australia

Posted 10 January 2009 - 03:07 PM

good HP figures from a half litre single but why keep the rear cylinder weight and as a compresser surely this would drain power. does the rear cylinder push an extra charge of air into the front pot? :huh:

#3 jihem

jihem

    Retired Spaminator

  • 813 posts
  • My bike(s):
    2013 V7 Stone. In the mirrors, there were a Griso 4V, 2 x Nato V50, a Ghezzi-Brian STW1100 and a 1979 T3 California
  • Location:
    brussels

Posted 10 January 2009 - 03:18 PM

does the rear cylinder push an extra charge of air into the front pot? :huh:

Yes, the front cylinder gets compressed air 2:1 from the rear cylinder.
There's also a 40 bars compressed air tank below the seat that allows for ten seconds burst to the engine.

#4 Paul Minnaert

Paul Minnaert

    "I live here"

  • 2,951 posts
  • My bike(s):
    Daytona 1225, Stelvio

Posted 11 January 2009 - 12:53 AM

but does this give more power then when it was a 1000cc vtwin? Or what is the reason to build it? And building 40? I will be surprised if there are customers for it.

#5 dlaing

dlaing

    Retired Spaminator

  • 7,560 posts
  • Location:California
  • My bike(s):
    2000 V11Sport
  • Location:
    you can't get there from here

Posted 11 January 2009 - 08:04 AM

but does this give more power then when it was a 1000cc vtwin? Or what is the reason to build it? And building 40? I will be surprised if there are customers for it.

I had theorized doing a similar supercharger, not with a Duck, but building a triple where the middle cylinder is bored out to a larger displacement, reed valves to move twice the air.
But yah, it would be tough to make it make more powerful than a real triple.
Perhaps it would be more fuel efficient????

#6 jihem

jihem

    Retired Spaminator

  • 813 posts
  • My bike(s):
    2013 V7 Stone. In the mirrors, there were a Griso 4V, 2 x Nato V50, a Ghezzi-Brian STW1100 and a 1979 T3 California
  • Location:
    brussels

Posted 11 January 2009 - 09:52 AM

but does this give more power then when it was a 1000cc vtwin? Or what is the reason to build it? And building 40? I will be surprised if there are customers for it.



15 HP more than the original twin, more torque and 2500 rpm more (and it's about 30 HP more than the legendary Supermono).
sheer enthusiasm and desire to boldly go where only few have gone before.
40 seems to be a reasonable number when you can see the Ducati D16RR sold 1500 copies.
now, we have to wait and see if he does sell them, sure.
But what an exciting adventure !

#7 Skeeve

Skeeve

    "I live here"

  • 2,451 posts
  • Location:Lo-cal So.Cal., where the money is plastic & the people are too!
  • My bike(s):
    2003 Le Mans V11. WooHoo! :-D
  • Location:
    SW corner USA

Posted 11 January 2009 - 08:08 PM

good HP figures from a half litre single but why keep the rear cylinder weight and as a compresser surely this would drain power. does the rear cylinder push an extra charge of air into the front pot? :huh:


:nerd: Well, since this guy stole my idea [I hate it when they do that! ;)] I'll try to explain:

Smaller displacement is more efficient on fuel.

Rear cylinder doesn't need same level of sealing as regular piston: replace piston rings w/ O-rings for less friction & better low pressure sealing. Lighter piston & con-rod required than on a firing cylinder too, so it all adds up to less wt. [Or rather, larger displacement for same wt., for more compressor flow.]

Since it's a four-stroke engine, the rear cylinder travels up & down 2x for each firing interval on the front cyl., so you get 2x the volumetric efficiency (actually less; nothing is perfect) than the NA front cylinder alone. VE=power, ceteris paribus.

You still have the perfect primary balance of the 90deg V, so no counterbalancer or excess vibes nonsense of a true single cylinder.

Depending upon class rules, you could still end up with a bike legal to race in a Singles class.

And of course, the final (& possibly best) reason: "Because it was there."
:thumbsup:

#8 jcbooghs

jcbooghs

    Guzzisti

  • 139 posts
  • My bike(s):
    MGB Guzzi Sport 1995

Posted 11 January 2009 - 11:19 PM

Isn't he racing a Paton, and THE man to beat, in 500 and 750 classic bikes?

#9 raz

raz

    alive and ticking

  • 1,576 posts
  • My bike(s):
    '97 1100 Sport i.e.
  • Location:
    Stockholm, Sweden

Posted 12 January 2009 - 01:18 AM

Lighter piston & con-rod required than on a firing cylinder too, so it all adds up to less wt.
...
You still have the perfect primary balance of the 90deg V, so no counterbalancer or excess vibes nonsense of a true single cylinder.

Wouldn't lightening the piston and con-rod ruin the balance? :oldgit:

This reminds me of http://www.kompresso...i.de/kguzzi.htm - I love those torque graphs :o

#10 jihem

jihem

    Retired Spaminator

  • 813 posts
  • My bike(s):
    2013 V7 Stone. In the mirrors, there were a Griso 4V, 2 x Nato V50, a Ghezzi-Brian STW1100 and a 1979 T3 California
  • Location:
    brussels

Posted 12 January 2009 - 08:59 AM

Isn't he racing a Paton, and THE man to beat, in 500 and 750 classic bikes?



yes, that's Bart :)

#11 dlaing

dlaing

    Retired Spaminator

  • 7,560 posts
  • Location:California
  • My bike(s):
    2000 V11Sport
  • Location:
    you can't get there from here

Posted 13 January 2009 - 08:07 AM

And of course, the final (& possibly best) reason: "Because it was there."
:thumbsup:

Good man have died (gloriously) following such logic :grin:

#12 Skeeve

Skeeve

    "I live here"

  • 2,451 posts
  • Location:Lo-cal So.Cal., where the money is plastic & the people are too!
  • My bike(s):
    2003 Le Mans V11. WooHoo! :-D
  • Location:
    SW corner USA

Posted 15 January 2009 - 02:35 AM

Wouldn't lightening the piston and con-rod ruin the balance? :oldgit:


Of course, unless you use the difference in mass to make a larger dia. compression piston & get more boost. Read the rest of my post already! ;)

#13 raz

raz

    alive and ticking

  • 1,576 posts
  • My bike(s):
    '97 1100 Sport i.e.
  • Location:
    Stockholm, Sweden

Posted 15 January 2009 - 11:54 PM

My bad! :oldgit:


0 user(s) are reading this topic

0 members, 0 guests, 0 anonymous users