Gav
|
| posted on 19/11/07 at 12:17 PM |
|
|
Fireblade 1000cc engines
Right, i have oppertunity to purchase 2 1000c blade engines, i dont know exactly what year yet as ive not seen them yet, going to take a butchers
later this week.
My uncle was given them when a friend of his was cleaning out a workshop, he wants £500 for the pair(whoopie!) is their any gotchas with these engine
HISS? etc.
What i didnt understand is that my uncle(into his 60's) said they are deffinalty 1000cc engines but with carbs, i think he has mistaken the
throttle boddies for carbs,
he also said they are hydrolic clutches, iirc only the later injection ones are hydrolic clutches?.
[Edited on 19/11/07 by Gav]
|
|
|
|
|
Guinness
|
| posted on 19/11/07 at 12:25 PM |
|
|
I'm no Honda expert, but I think the early CBR1000's have hydraulic clutches and carbs. Check Jambojeef's photo archive for photos
of his engine (which is an early CBR1000).
HTH
Mike
|
|
|
Hellfire
|
| posted on 19/11/07 at 12:27 PM |
|
|
As above. Sound like CBR1000's to me.
Phil
|
|
|
Gav
|
| posted on 19/11/07 at 12:29 PM |
|
|
ah! so they might be CBR1000 engines, he might of been mistaken then as he said they were Fireblade engines, he also said they had oil coolers....?
|
|
|
TimC
|
| posted on 19/11/07 at 12:40 PM |
|
|
quote:
Originally posted by Gav
ah! so they might be CBR1000 engines, he might of been mistaken then as he said they were Fireblade engines, he also said they had oil coolers....?
Yup, sounds very much like the CBR1000F to me. They are a good strong motor and are capable of producing 919 'Blade matching power with
slightly higher torque. However, they weigh approximately 30kgs more than the blade and are more complicated to plumb-in due to the external oil
cooler etc. They have been succesfully used in a number of Indys and Strikers. There are also at least two people on this forum who've
turbocharged these motors too.
Might still be worth a look.
[Edited on 19/11/07 by TimC]
|
|
|
Guinness
|
| posted on 19/11/07 at 12:48 PM |
|
|
There you go, stick them both in a modified chassis and turbo the pair.
Lovely job!
Mike
|
|
|
Gav
|
| posted on 19/11/07 at 01:34 PM |
|
|
I must admit the oppertunity to buy 2 in one go is quite tempting, get passed the sva, turbo one, if it blows ive got a spare 
Do they differ much from and an early blade engine? in regards to the exhaust ports and mounting places, iirc i read some where they are very similar,
not sure if they are interchangeable though...
|
|
|
ChrisGamlin
|
| posted on 19/11/07 at 06:21 PM |
|
|
They're certainly not interchangeable with engine mounts etc, and I don't think the CBR1000F engine bears any real relation to the 893/919
Fireblade engine, as mentioned above the 1000F engine is a lot heavier and a older in design than the blade.
|
|
|
jambojeef
|
| posted on 19/11/07 at 06:46 PM |
|
|
Yeah its no minorly modded blade - very different.
Negatives:
Clutch slave is a faff - need to make up a new mount cos the existing one cant be kept when the sprocket adaptor repalces the front sprocket.
Oil filter is very close to bottom chassis rail in a locost.
Engine is quite tall and so get a bonnet bulge or avoid speedbumps.
Heavy
Mild power output for its weight as standard
Positives:
Built very strongly
Very cheap - £100 for my last engine
Lots of parts availability
Low compression and mild valve overlap perhaps make it a little easier to turbo if you're into having a bit of an experiment with that kinda
thing
Wider ratios in the box making for a bit more usability when in a car
Thats about it!
Geoff
|
|
|
Gav
|
| posted on 19/11/07 at 07:24 PM |
|
|
Cheers Geoff!
i must admit i got all moist about the idea of them being blade engines for soo cheap, but if they are the CBR1000 engine i dont think ill go for it
and seem abit over priced for such an old engine. Must admint i liked the idea of having a go at turboing one, maybe in the future 
|
|
|
TimC
|
| posted on 19/11/07 at 08:18 PM |
|
|
 
|
|
|
