WR250X R&D

motokid wrote:

oic0 wrote:

12:1 isn't worth the time it would take to install. Something like 13.5:1 or 14:1 might make a difference on mileage (and probably be ok on 92 or 93 octane). BTW, the stock 11.8:1 will actually run on low grade gas so if saving money is your goal stock might be the best bet. You wont increase the mileage enough to cancel out the lower price of the lower grade gas. Also, a cam might improve highway cruising mileage a bit if its the right grind, but since we have to use so much of our rev range across the various speeds, you would pay for at lower speeds as opposed to what you could get with the piston alone.
Porting? probably be to expensive for what most people considering the man hours it would take. Not sure how much there is there to find either, be a roll of the dice. Could be a lot of hidden potential or the stockers could be darn near perfect. Never know with the japanese.

Right. You also have to consider this:


For $500-$600 you can get an aftermarket pipe, fuel programmer, and some gearing. Then throw in the airbox mods and most people get 3-5 extra horsepower from stock. That's without changing any internal anything in the engine or changing the maintenance intervals.


Would the price-point of the R&D Project parts come in somewhere between $500 and $1000? Which also includes opening up the engine?

Would the R&D Project require an efi programmer and after market pipe too? So added cost to what most of us have already spent?

Would the maintenance intervals increase?

If the end result of the project shows a 8 horsepower gain over stock for under $1000 I'm sure people might go for it.
If the end result is 5 horsepower at $1000 I already come close to that with what I already have.


So much depends on the details.


Do we all want more power? 100% absolutely YES.

At what cost?
That's the big question. There's a reason most of us are not going out and buying Turbo kits or Big-bore kits.

Eric; I stated I will start off at 12.5, and work my way up. I can tell you there is nothing wrong with that starting point. I know for a fact bikes can run on 13:1 that were not designed for it(10.x:1). So I'm sure this one being 11.8:1 will be able to. But I will find out where the limit is, and likely back down a little. Not worth the time to install? 11.8/12.5 is a considerable difference. Certainly enough to make a difference in the bike.

With the cam; I will likely come up with a good midrange cam. Pay for it in the low end? I can say, shift down. Lower your gearing. Get a cam that is designed for bottom end. Get a cam that has the same characteristics as the stock, with a little more grunt. With the added power of the piston alone, you probably will have VERY close, if not more bottom end than before.

No, the ports will not be perfect. Hardly at all.. Japanese or not, they will not have a perfect port for a few reasons. One, cost. Too much development. Two, safety. How many first time riders have you seen on a engine that performs "perfect"? There is not "perfect" port. Someone will always find a better way and get more flow.


Motokid; Yes.. You would need an aftermarket pipe and you would need your intake opened. A long with a tuner that is fully adjustable.

I can give you some price ideas on a few thing.

The crank will probably be about $350 or so.

Cams will be about $120 each. May end up only needing one, but unlikely.

Porting will probably be $200-400, if I find a CNC that is capable we can get them a little cheaper and a lot faster.

The prices are listed above, choose which you would like to use and do the math.



You can also use the big bore kits that are in production. But it is Ethena kits so i'm sure there pricey. And probably not high compression.


As for the cost of the R&D, it will be much higher than you guys will have to pay. But done slowly over a few months time.

sswrx wrote:

Engineers always leave some potential for the following year of production so they have something "NEW" to put on the market. Otherwise they wouldn't have anything to sell you when you get tired of your old ride. They have most of the upgrading planned years ahead & release more power or better features a little at a time until it's time for a new design. We've all seen the technology slowly improve on suspension & engine design in the last 10-15 years on most bikes. Again with cars, the same engine will have a few more horses added each year till they design a new engine & start the process again. Guys like Kcabbie are trying to tap the potential that the engineers have hidden within ahead of time. Race teams do the same thing with the factory stuff.

Exactly!!

Quote :

Engineers always leave some potential for the following year of production so they have something "NEW" to put on the market. Otherwise they wouldn't have anything to sell you when you get tired of your old ride. They have most of the upgrading planned years ahead & release more power or better features a little at a time until it's time for a new design. We've all seen the technology slowly improve on suspension & engine design in the last 10-15 years on most bikes.

Well Yamaha has certainly done NOTHING to advance the capabilities of the WRR/X in the last 4 years, no matter what potential may be hidden untapped. If kcabbie can find some reasonably priced performance mods, it would be a welcome change.

No doubt it would be nice to have such an upgrade. And I have no doubt that it is possible to squeeze more power out of this engine. Still it's the claim of increased power AND increased mpg that makes me skeptical . But sure, give me a call if you get an output of over 40 hp and 80 mpg at an affordable price, with decent reliability and maintenance schedule.

I wont expect to hear anything from the OP soon.


Now if you were to claim either increased power or mpg, I would cast no doubt on such a project. But when someone throws in the air such claims... well, lets just that usually when things sound too good to be true they usually aren't true.


As far as Yamaha goes, I don't think they will ever update this engine. Either they put out something like a 400 with 40-50 horses, or they'll leave the engine as it is at 32 hp. Increasing the power to say 35 or 36 hp would loose them a big market share in Europe as new riders who have to ride within 32 hp for 2 years won't be interested in this bike anymore. (that's my guess anyway).

ramz wrote:

Well Yamaha has certainly done NOTHING to advance the capabilities of the WRR/X in the last 4 years, no matter what potential may be hidden untapped. If kcabbie can find some reasonably priced performance mods, it would be a welcome change.

During those years, no one had a bike on the same level of performance or suspension technology in that 250 class so they had no reason to make any improvements. Now that Honda has brought their new 250 in with the super cheap price, Yamaha is due for an upgrade to stay ahead. Possibly a reason for not having an X in the current line up? Don't be surprised if they come out with a more potent X in the next year or so, then the R will probably get an upgrade once the X is out.

I highly doubt the Honda will influence Yamaha in any way shape or form.

Yamaha was unopposed for years and dropped the X completely.

The Honda addition, at about $2000 less is not going to force Yamaha to do anything in my mind.

Yamaha will be more likely to sit back and watch what happens.

I doubt the Honda will sell.

Time will tell though.

bigg wrote:

No doubt it would be nice to have such an upgrade. And I have no doubt that it is possible to squeeze more power out of this engine. Still it's the claim of increased power AND increased mpg that makes me skeptical . But sure, give me a call if you get an output of over 40 hp and 80 mpg at an affordable price, with decent reliability and maintenance schedule.

I wont expect to hear anything from the OP soon.


Now if you were to claim either increased power or mpg, I would cast no doubt on such a project. But when someone throws in the air such claims... well, lets just that usually when things sound too good to be true they usually aren't true.


As far as Yamaha goes, I don't think they will ever update this engine. Either they put out something like a 400 with 40-50 horses, or they'll leave the engine as it is at 32 hp. Increasing the power to say 35 or 36 hp would loose them a big market share in Europe as new riders who have to ride within 32 hp for 2 years won't be interested in this bike anymore. (that's my guess anyway).

Please read the thread before posting so repeat q and a does not occur.

I have read all most all of the riders of the 250x/r lower there gearing. Why is this? Maybe because they don't have enough low end torque. This trade obviously worsens fuel economy.

They also do it at the same time as adding a pipe/efi controller/air box mods. Making them think its was the performance that killed there fuel mileage. While in some cases this may be true, adding flow(efficiency) to a stock engine will not worsen fuel mileage. Its impossible. Unless you do not have the jetting correct. In this case, taking full advantage of a good efi controller.

I am not talking about throwing in a 15:1 piston and running the best fuel available. I am talking about simply increasing the engines efficiency and moving the power band around a little. The lower we can get the RPM's at cruising speed the better the MPG will be. We can do this by increasing the power(by increasing engines efficiency! porting, higher compression, diff. size valves, better exhaust, etc.)

will be cool to see what you come up with kcabbie

kcabbie wrote:

I have read all most all of the riders of the 250x/r lower there gearing.

With at least one exception going the other way. Me!

I went up one tooth from stock on the counter sprocket. That said, I have a few engine & other mods that make slightly taller gearing a reasonable option.

As an added benefit of the extra tooth, my speedometer is now much more accurate!

BuilderBob wrote:

kcabbie wrote:

I have read all most all of the riders of the 250x/r lower there gearing.

With at least one exception going the other way. Me!

I went up one tooth from stock on the counter sprocket. That said, I have a few engine & other mods that make slightly taller gearing a reasonable option.

As an added benefit of the extra tooth, my speedometer is now much more accurate!

I read you had the big bore kit installed. Idea on how many H.P. you gained, and does it pull the taller gearing as hard as it did with stock setup(top end/sprockets).

Krispy wrote:

will be cool to see what you come up with kcabbie

Thanks, excited to start doing something new. If I haven't already said, you can expect a minimum of two months before I get it going. Gotta get the bike first, possibly find some used cams off ebay so I don't have to have my bike sitting while I am waiting on them to be done.

kcabbie wrote:

Eric; I stated I will start off at 12.5, and work my way up. I can tell you there is nothing wrong with that starting point. I know for a fact bikes can run on 13:1 that were not designed for it(10.x:1). So I'm sure this one being 11.8:1 will be able to. But I will find out where the limit is, and likely back down a little. Not worth the time to install? 11.8/12.5 is a considerable difference. Certainly enough to make a difference in the bike.

With the cam; I will likely come up with a good midrange cam. Pay for it in the low end? I can say, shift down. Lower your gearing. Get a cam that is designed for bottom end. Get a cam that has the same characteristics as the stock, with a little more grunt. With the added power of the piston alone, you probably will have VERY close, if not more bottom end than before.

No, the ports will not be perfect. Hardly at all.. Japanese or not, they will not have a perfect port for a few reasons. One, cost. Too much development. Two, safety. How many first time riders have you seen on a engine that performs "perfect"? There is not "perfect" port. Someone will always find a better way and get more flow.

Rule of thumb for most motors is 3-4% power for each point of compression gain. 12.5-11.8=0.7, figure we have roughly 28hp after the normal uncorking mods then 12.5:1 compression ratio would give an estimated 0.59 - 0.78 extra hp across the rev range. Not worth it to me. 14:1 would make roughly 1.8- 2.5hp. Sorta worth it.

If you can get us a good cam, that I would probably buy. Personally though I want something aimed more at 7k - 10k. When I compared side by side an older R1 dyno (motor ours is roughly based on) to a WR250R dyno, our motor would make 35-40hp at our redline if it were tuned to keep on carrying power up there like the R1 instead of flat lining after 8k rpms. https://2img.net/h/oi39.tinypic.com/ngc5eq.jpg
That would cost me on mileage (compared to stock cam with higher compression alone) bellow 65mph but it would be worth it for the grin factor and highway power imo

oic0 wrote:

kcabbie wrote:

Eric; I stated I will start off at 12.5, and work my way up. I can tell you there is nothing wrong with that starting point. I know for a fact bikes can run on 13:1 that were not designed for it(10.x:1). So I'm sure this one being 11.8:1 will be able to. But I will find out where the limit is, and likely back down a little. Not worth the time to install? 11.8/12.5 is a considerable difference. Certainly enough to make a difference in the bike.

With the cam; I will likely come up with a good midrange cam. Pay for it in the low end? I can say, shift down. Lower your gearing. Get a cam that is designed for bottom end. Get a cam that has the same characteristics as the stock, with a little more grunt. With the added power of the piston alone, you probably will have VERY close, if not more bottom end than before.

No, the ports will not be perfect. Hardly at all.. Japanese or not, they will not have a perfect port for a few reasons. One, cost. Too much development. Two, safety. How many first time riders have you seen on a engine that performs "perfect"? There is not "perfect" port. Someone will always find a better way and get more flow.

Rule of thumb for most motors is 3-4% power for each point of compression gain. 12.5-11.8=0.7, figure we have roughly 28hp after the normal uncorking mods then 12.5:1 compression ratio would give an estimated 0.59 - 0.78 extra hp across the rev range. Not worth it to me. 14:1 would make roughly 1.8- 2.5hp. Sorta worth it.

If you can get us a good cam, that I would probably buy. Personally though I want something aimed more at 7k - 10k. When I compared side by side an older R1 dyno (motor ours is roughly based on) to a WR250R dyno, our motor would make 35-40hp at our redline if it were tuned to keep on carrying power up there like the R1 instead of flat lining after 8k rpms. https://2img.net/h/oi39.tinypic.com/ngc5eq.jpg
That would cost me on mileage (compared to stock cam with higher compression alone) bellow 65mph but it would be worth it for the grin factor and highway power imo

Sorry but there is not "rule of thumb" with hp:X amount of compression. Every engine act's differently to different changes. There are a lot of engines that LOOSE power after a certain point of compression.

The fact that you say its worth it to put a 14:1 piston in your bike tells me you have not actual experience with building engines. Do you realize what that will do to your engine? How quickly you would have to go about refreshing the top end, and more importantly you would HAVE to use race fuel. Not really going to save you much money.

How are you comparing this single cylinder engine that is %75 smaller than the r1, to the r1? A engine will not just keep pushing out more and more horse power by increasing the duration of the cam. I will simply ration out what is already there. Maybe a little increase, yes, but not a extra %33. Sorry.

I encourage you to try the things you have suggested. Because I am telling you they will likely not be done, because I am not going to waste the time and money it takes to do these things. I would ask why you haven't already, but I think that is obvious.
Where did you get your information from? Wikipedia?

Thanks for the advice, but I will stick to what I know for now.

kcabbie wrote:

oic0 wrote:

kcabbie wrote:

Eric; I stated I will start off at 12.5, and work my way up. I can tell you there is nothing wrong with that starting point. I know for a fact bikes can run on 13:1 that were not designed for it(10.x:1). So I'm sure this one being 11.8:1 will be able to. But I will find out where the limit is, and likely back down a little. Not worth the time to install? 11.8/12.5 is a considerable difference. Certainly enough to make a difference in the bike.

With the cam; I will likely come up with a good midrange cam. Pay for it in the low end? I can say, shift down. Lower your gearing. Get a cam that is designed for bottom end. Get a cam that has the same characteristics as the stock, with a little more grunt. With the added power of the piston alone, you probably will have VERY close, if not more bottom end than before.

No, the ports will not be perfect. Hardly at all.. Japanese or not, they will not have a perfect port for a few reasons. One, cost. Too much development. Two, safety. How many first time riders have you seen on a engine that performs "perfect"? There is not "perfect" port. Someone will always find a better way and get more flow.

Rule of thumb for most motors is 3-4% power for each point of compression gain. 12.5-11.8=0.7, figure we have roughly 28hp after the normal uncorking mods then 12.5:1 compression ratio would give an estimated 0.59 - 0.78 extra hp across the rev range. Not worth it to me. 14:1 would make roughly 1.8- 2.5hp. Sorta worth it.

If you can get us a good cam, that I would probably buy. Personally though I want something aimed more at 7k - 10k. When I compared side by side an older R1 dyno (motor ours is roughly based on) to a WR250R dyno, our motor would make 35-40hp at our redline if it were tuned to keep on carrying power up there like the R1 instead of flat lining after 8k rpms. https://2img.net/h/oi39.tinypic.com/ngc5eq.jpg
That would cost me on mileage (compared to stock cam with higher compression alone) bellow 65mph but it would be worth it for the grin factor and highway power imo

Sorry but there is not "rule of thumb" with hp:X amount of compression. Every engine act's differently to different changes. There are a lot of engines that LOOSE power after a certain point of compression.

The fact that you say its worth it to put a 14:1 piston in your bike tells me you have not actual experience with building engines. Do you realize what that will do to your engine? How quickly you would have to go about refreshing the top end, and more importantly you would HAVE to use race fuel. Not really going to save you much money.

How are you comparing this single cylinder engine that is %75 smaller than the r1, to the r1? A engine will not just keep pushing out more and more horse power by increasing the duration of the cam. I will simply ration out what is already there. Maybe a little increase, yes, but not a extra %33. Sorry.

I encourage you to try the things you have suggested. Because I am telling you they will likely not be done, because I am not going to waste the time and money it takes to do these things. I would ask why you haven't already, but I think that is obvious.
Where did you get your information from? Wikipedia?

Thanks for the advice, but I will stick to what I know for now.

It is different for every motor, thats why its called a rule of thumb and not a law or fact. For most motors, 3-4% per point is the rough rule of thumb. Anyhow, if you think you're going to gain a good bit, with 0.7 extra points of compression, go ahead and pay to have that piston made so you can try it. Also, I didn't say 14:1 would be good for durability or run on pump gas (although it might, the off road bikes sometimes get away with it, but 13.5:1 is a more safe bet). I merely said that is how much it would take to be worth it to me power wise.

How and why am I comparing to an R1? because our motor is based on it. I said IF you tuned the rest of the motor for those rpms. You don't think you could get a 28-30hp motor up to 35hp with a higher compression piston, ported head, higher rpm focused cams, and a bigger throttle body?
I also didn't say anything about saving money, that's your game. If I want to save money Ill do as I said before and run 89 octane on the stock motor to save more than you'll ever get with your plan.

Why haven't I modified my motor to make a bunch of power? because there are next to no aftermarket cams available for this bike, the ones that are available are expensive. All of the parts are damn expensive. By the time you crack the motor open and do anything you may as well just buy the turbo kit or sell it and buy a different bike. I HAVE done these things on other off-road only machines. They do work pretty well but because of the lack of cheap parts available for this bike, its just not economically attractive.

Quote :

It is different for every motor, thats why its called a rule of thumb and not a law or fact. For most motors, 3-4% per point is the rough rule of thumb. Anyhow, if you think you're going to gain a good bit, with 0.7 extra points of compression, go ahead and pay to have that piston made so you can try it. Also, I didn't say 14:1 would be good for durability or run on pump gas (although it might, the off road bikes sometimes get away with it, but 13.5:1 is a more safe bet). I merely said that is how much it would take to be worth it to me power wise.

How and why am I comparing to an R1? because our motor is based on it. I said IF you tuned the rest of the motor for those rpms. You don't think you could get a 28-30hp motor up to 35hp with a higher compression piston, ported head, higher rpm focused cams, and a bigger throttle body?
I also didn't say anything about saving money, that's your game. If I want to save money Ill do as I said before and run 89 octane on the stock motor to save more than you'll ever get with your plan.

Why haven't I modified my motor to make a bunch of power? because there are next to no aftermarket cams available for this bike, the ones that are available are expensive. All of the parts are damn expensive. By the time you crack the motor open and do anything you may as well just buy the turbo kit or sell it and buy a different bike. I HAVE done these things on other off-road only machines. They do work pretty well but because of the lack of cheap parts available for this bike, its just not economically attractive.

I can not say out of the various types of engines I have built I have seen that trend. Sorry, but I just don't.
And I am going to have made what I see fit, that's what I do. I appreciate your expert opinion on the subject, But again, I will go with what I know. And until I have put a piston in the bike and put enough miles on it to see consistent wear patters to the stock setup, I will start off small.

Why would you suggest buying a turbo kit after breaking the engine open?? You do realize sooner or later every engine will have to be taken apart. Probably sooner than later with the super moto's as they get more miles then off road bikes. And it would not be that expensive to get cams made, something you would know if.. anyways, the difficult part is knowing what grind to have done. So I think the reason you "modified your motor to make a bunch of power," is because you can't. Not until someone has a kit, or parts to make a kit, ready to buy.

The statements give make you seem to not have any first hand experience with the topic.
I say make the engine more efficient, with out spending a ton of money, and you say you might as well buy the turbo kit. This is not making the engine more efficient, all it does it stuff air through the engine. Ever used a turbo setup before? A well ported head will require less boost to make the same amount of power. Know why? Because it is a more efficient engine.

If you can not tell, I am not asking for suggestions. As I already stated I started this thread to see if any of the wr250x/r guys would be interested in some performance gaining and/or increased fuel mileage. By all means, start a thread and express what ideas you have that will increase these things.


And with the comparison of the two bikes, do you know how many engines that are made are a original design? Not many. At all, Honda still to this day used a engine design from the 70's on multiple models being produced at one time. That being said, they range from 70cc(original) all the way up to a 230cc. They share a lot more similarities then the 250x to the r1 and still don't have very similar power characteristics.

What you should take from this --- Just because a engine is based off of a extremely high performance engine, does not mean it can be made to have the same power band. In the same topic, no matter how alike two bikes are(same engine, exhaust, intake, etc) they will be different EVERY-TIME.

Quote :

"So I think the reason you "modified your motor to make a bunch of power," is because you can't. Not until someone has a kit, or parts to make a kit, ready to buy. "

Whats not available? you can buy pistons, big bore kits, turbos, head porting, and even premade cams. Nothing is stopping anyone except the idea that dropping a bunch of money into a 250 motor is a waste.

Youve got a chip on your shoulder so I'm done with this thread.

oic0 wrote:

Quote :

"So I think the reason you "modified your motor to make a bunch of power," is because you can't. Not until someone has a kit, or parts to make a kit, ready to buy. "

Whats not available? you can buy pistons, big bore kits, turbos, head porting, and even premade cams. Nothing is stopping anyone except the idea that dropping a bunch of money into a 250 motor is a waste.

You've got a chip on your shoulder so I'm done with this thread.

I don't have a chip on my shoulder, If you have good input then please, let me have it. I learn something new every day.

I just do not like seeing false information, or bad advice given on a forum. People see these threads and actually take that advice. If you don't like dropping a bunch of money into the 250, why would you suggest putting a turbo kit in it? For half of the price of that you could have cams, piston, decent p&p, and all of that equals a better performing engine.

Let me tell you what made you feel like I am a prick.
1. I posted a thread trying to get a idea on how many people would want more power/mpg
2. You post criticizing what I said I was going to do(my mistake, should keep that stuff to my self)
3. You post other "better" options, that you(anyone you know?) have not personally tried.
4. I post so that readers know they should not take the advice given by you, and to wait until something is proven.

I'm all for constructive criticism. You won't hurt my feelings. Just make sure the info you put out is true. And true does not mean reading what someone else has posted on the internet.

kcabbie wrote:

I don't have a chip on my shoulder, If you have good input then please, let me have it. I learn something new every day.

You're sure swinging big dick on this thread on a bike that you dont even own yet! I have some good input. Why dont you wait until you get the fucking bike, ride it for a few thousand miles, tear it apart, work your motor building "magic" and then report back.

Even then if you do accomplish what you state...which i doubt you will, I wouldnt buy a fucking thing from your prick ass! I couldnt even imagine the kind of customer service/support, or lack there of, you would/could offer.

kcabbie wrote:

I just do not like seeing false information, or bad advice given on a forum. People see these threads and actually take that advice.

To Swagger and Oic;

I am sorry for my attitude towards you guys. I have no excuse for bein a ass.. I will get this on the roll asap and let you guys know what I come up with. Sorry again, hopefully you won't let it effect your opinion on any product that will have my name on it.


Kasey

kcabbie wrote:

To Swagger and Oic;

I am sorry for my attitude towards you guys. I have no excuse for bein a ass.. I will get this on the roll asap and let you guys know what I come up with. Sorry again, hopefully you won't let it effect your opinion on any product that will have my name on it.


Kasey

That's a tone I'd rather read. Take the high ground and you'll get better results...not to be confused with the high and mighty ground.

I hope your experiment brings marketable results and we're the first to hear about it.