Jump to content

New Honda 260 4 R T For 2016


johnnyboxer
 Share

Recommended Posts

Why have a battery as it adds extra weight - fair question.

This is a bit difficult to explain as it is interlinked with other changes in but here goes.

 

Battery technology has moved on greatly since Honda designed its capacitor based EFI system. They are now much lighter and more powerful. The Honda system is a solution for an earlier era.

 

EFI needs a power supply that cannot come directly from an ACG, that is why Honda went to considerable lengths and complexity to design a capacitor based system to store electricity (as opposed to a battery). Fitting an electric water pump saves quite a bit of weight, mechanical parts, hoses etc but in needs more electric so the ACG has to be increased in capacity and extra rectification capacity. Some of what I am writing next about Hondas present system are my assumptions but I am near certain they are correct. On the present system the ignition requires a fine wire winding on the ACG (an additional expense and complexity) and this has to be at a certain point to give power prior to the time the ignition fires. It cannot provide optimum power over the entire timing range.

There comes a point when it is better to simplify the alternator so it just has identical large diameter wire windings, have a single rectifier regulator, ditch the capacitors and run all the electrical equipment from a battery.

Currently the ignition needs the fine wire coil, 2 sets of capacitors, a control unit and an HT coil. On a battery system there are no capacitors, no fine wire coil, the primary step up (ignition amplifier) can be incorporated into the control unit and the HT coil replaced with a compact, lightweight coil on plug.

In general the Honda system is pretty good and reliable but can be improved with newer technology. An important advantage of battery ignition is optimum coil charging and spark energy at all revs and timing advances. It would for example be possible to programme the system to produce say 5 ignition sparks at a few millisecond intervals around TDC. at starting RPMs. This would provide a sustained plasma "fireball" at the plug which would make starting even more effortless than it is with no chance of kickback.

Bou & Fuji were rumoured to be experimenting with twin plug heads, programmable spark duration may obviate the need for this.

Ossa whose EFI was developed much more recently than Hondas found the solution (after trial and error) was to add a small battery but they might have been better to design a battery based system to start with.

 

Please bear in mind what I have written is true as far as it goes / in general terms, but that is not to say there could not be a set of circumstances where it is not.

 

The overall effect of these changes including addition of battery would be a reduction in weight, even better reliability, easier diagnostics, improved performance and fuel economy.

Edited by dadof2
  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

 

Why have a battery as it adds extra weight - fair question.

This is a bit difficult to explain as it is interlinked with other changes in but here goes.

Battery technology has moved on greatly since Honda designed its capacitor based EFI system. They are now much lighter and more powerful. The Honda system is a solution for an earlier era.

EFI needs a power supply that cannot come directly from an ACG, that is why Honda went to considerable lengths and complexity to design a capacitor based system to store electricity (as opposed to a battery). Fitting an electric water pump saves quite a bit of weight, mechanical parts, hoses etc but in needs more electric so the ACG has to be increased in capacity and extra rectification capacity. Some of what I am writing next about Hondas present system are my assumptions but I am near certain they are correct. On the present system the ignition requires a fine wire winding on the ACG (an additional expense and complexity) and this has to be at a certain point to give power prior to the time the ignition fires. It cannot provide optimum power over the entire timing range.

There comes a point when it is better to simplify the alternator so it just has identical large diameter wire windings, have a single rectifier regulator, ditch the capacitors and run all the electrical equipment from a battery.

Currently the ignition needs the fine wire coil, 2 sets of capacitors, a control unit and an HT coil. On a battery system there are no capacitors, no fine wire coil, the primary step up (ignition amplifier) can be incorporated into the control unit and the HT coil replaced with a compact, lightweight coil on plug.

In general the Honda system is pretty good and reliable but can be improved with newer technology. An important advantage of battery ignition is optimum coil charging and spark energy at all revs and timing advances. It would for example be possible to programme the system to produce say 5 ignition sparks at a few millisecond intervals around TDC. at starting RPMs. This would provide a sustained plasma "fireball" at the plug which would make starting even more effortless than it is with no chance of kickback.

Bou and Fuji were rumoured to be experimenting with twin plug heads, programmable spark duration may obviate the need for this.

Ossa whose EFI was developed much more recently than Hondas found the solution (after trial and error) was to add a small battery but they might have been better to design a battery based system to start with.

Please bear in mind what I have written is true as far as it goes / in general terms, but that is not to say there could not be a set of circumstances where it is not.

The overall effect of these changes including addition of battery would be a reduction in weight, even better reliability, easier diagnostics, improved performance and fuel economy.

There's is only one thing wrong with your 'theory' or maybe 2

Honda didn't really design the battery less EFI with trials in mind specifically

They set about designing a simplified EFI system to achieve their global emissions targets & controls - as they knew in future that carbs were over

They developed it for trials as an aside - to test it in some of the most arduous conditions any motorcycle can undertake - especially slow speeds with a hot engine (think City)

It works and it is reliable - end of............................... despite what you say & tell us it's not

The real reason for battery less EFI is millions of small commuter bikes in 3rd world countries that needs to be bomb proof - just like the carb & cdi bikes have been since Sochiro Honda developed them in the 1950's

When you have no running water or electricity in the bush, what use is a battery equipped bike when the battery fails it goes flat or is totally kaput - Bike no go

Trials was just the test bed for the system - a mere bagatelle for Honda

It works as it is, so we don't need know stinking batteries

Ossa needs batteries because they can't use the Honda technology

I'm sure the HRC engineers will be in touch to offer you a top job on their design team soon

Where do you dream up this stuff - in the shed?

Edited by johnnyboxer
  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

 
 
Some other things they could do: Replace the heavy fuel pump and its steel base by something much lighter.

Switch the location of fuel tank and air filter. Air intake is much better protected and center of gravity drops a bit. + the volume of the current air filter is about 2.5 liters and could even be a bit more, the extra fuel is very welcome i.m.o.

 

These are changes that are already on the after market, so should pose no problems. 

Edited by guys
  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

 

Basically the same model for 10 years now, Montesa needs a revolution

 

In my opinion the 4 RT was the revolution, and if the FIM had not backed out of their proposed rule changes I would suggest that the 4RT would be at the head of the pack. As for no changes in 10 years, I reckon that is a bit harsh. I have had ,05, 06 and 14 R.R's and for me the 260 motor is substantially different from the earlier models. The 2014 is much more rideable for the average rider, I always had to drop the gearing on the older models, the 14 I have left standard and find it is smoother and more tractable than the old motor and seems to find more grip.

OK not a revolution but a worthwhile development I think.

The information coming from our importer is that the 2016 bike will be available earlier than in previous years and that the motor will have more power. ( I interpret that as possibly increased capacity)

 

Did I see around 60 Honda/Montesa machines in this years Scottish?

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

 

Why have a battery as it adds extra weight - fair question.

This is a bit difficult to explain as it is interlinked with other changes in but here goes.

 

Battery technology has moved on greatly since Honda designed its capacitor based EFI system. They are now much lighter and more powerful. The Honda system is a solution for an earlier era.

 

EFI needs a power supply that cannot come directly from an ACG, that is why Honda went to considerable lengths and complexity to design a capacitor based system to store electricity (as opposed to a battery). Fitting an electric water pump saves quite a bit of weight, mechanical parts, hoses etc but in needs more electric so the ACG has to be increased in capacity and extra rectification capacity. Some of what I am writing next about Hondas present system are my assumptions but I am near certain they are correct. On the present system the ignition requires a fine wire winding on the ACG (an additional expense and complexity) and this has to be at a certain point to give power prior to the time the ignition fires. It cannot provide optimum power over the entire timing range.

There comes a point when it is better to simplify the alternator so it just has identical large diameter wire windings, have a single rectifier regulator, ditch the capacitors and run all the electrical equipment from a battery.

Currently the ignition needs the fine wire coil, 2 sets of capacitors, a control unit and an HT coil. On a battery system there are no capacitors, no fine wire coil, the primary step up (ignition amplifier) can be incorporated into the control unit and the HT coil replaced with a compact, lightweight coil on plug.

In general the Honda system is pretty good and reliable but can be improved with newer technology. An important advantage of battery ignition is optimum coil charging and spark energy at all revs and timing advances. It would for example be possible to programme the system to produce say 5 ignition sparks at a few millisecond intervals around TDC. at starting RPMs. This would provide a sustained plasma "fireball" at the plug which would make starting even more effortless than it is with no chance of kickback.

Bou and Fuji were rumoured to be experimenting with twin plug heads, programmable spark duration may obviate the need for this.

Ossa whose EFI was developed much more recently than Hondas found the solution (after trial and error) was to add a small battery but they might have been better to design a battery based system to start with.

 

Please bear in mind what I have written is true as far as it goes / in general terms, but that is not to say there could not be a set of circumstances where it is not.

 

The overall effect of these changes including addition of battery would be a reduction in weight, even better reliability, easier diagnostics, improved performance and fuel economy.

 

 

Dadof2, to be blunt and please don't take this personally but your talking bollox mate, the 4rt works just fine as it is, its not everyones cup of tea but it does what it says on the tin - end of.

Edited by the addict
  • Like 3
Link to comment
Share on other sites

 

Can some people on this forum not be critical without resorting to insults.

I agree the 4rt works fine and I will seriously consider one as my next bike.

Johnnyboxer, I do not dream this stuff up, look at nearly all the latest petrol cars, EFI, BATTERY, COP ignition.

Many cars now have in excess of 30kV ignitions, far better at firing the fuel than the 6 to 15 kV of many trials bikes.

Why are Bou and co messing about with twin plug head if the standard single plug is ideal, they are looking for the benefits of improved ignition.

I am 99.99% certain Honda are considering what I have written before I wrote it.

As for battery failure, sure the Boeing Dreamliner had some battery problems but look at what the use of new battery technology can achieve compared to conventional airliners.

The capacitor storage solution was very clever at the time and is probably still ideal for small equipment like strimmers that pretty well run at fixed  RPM. Many of these small industrial engines do not even have ignition advance, totally different to a trials engine.

In suggesting battery I was not only considering the fact the 4Rts have EFI, they also need power for the ECU and ignition.

One of the most common cause of ignition failure on trials bikes (though rare on a 4RT) is the failure of fine wire components such as CDI source coils and timing trigger coils. Using a battery means a fine wire source coil is not needed and the trigger coil can be replaced with a solid state component as can some of the ignition amplification. Solid state triggers can work off an ACG but they need quite a bit of additional electronics, and this is done on several 2T trials bikes.

 

I did not say the present system is unreliable, I actually posted "In general the Honda system is pretty good and reliable but can be improved with newer technology" so its a bit rich to criticise me for what I did not say, when in fact I said pretty well the opposite.

 

Sometimes I get criticised for being a heavy bike luddite, next thing I get criticised for suggesting technical advancement, you just can't win.

 

Edited by dadof2
  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

 
 

Can some people on this forum not be critical without resorting to insults.

I agree the 4rt works fine and I will seriously consider one as my next bike.

Johnnyboxer, I do not dream this stuff up, look at nearly all the latest petrol cars, EFI, BATTERY, COP ignition.

Many cars now have in excess of 30kV ignitions, far better at firing the fuel than the 6 to 15 kV of many trials bikes.

Why are Bou and co messing about with twin plug head if the standard single plug is ideal, they are looking for the benefits of improved ignition.

I am 99.99% certain Honda are considering what I have written before I wrote it.

As for battery failure, sure the Boeing Dreamliner had some battery problems but look at what the use of new battery technology can achieve compared to conventional airliners.

The capacitor storage solution was very clever at the time and is probably still ideal for small equipment like strimmers that pretty well run at fixed  RPM. Many of these small industrial engines do not even have ignition advance, totally different to a trials engine.

In suggesting battery I was not only considering the fact the 4Rts have EFI, they also need power for the ECU and ignition.

One of the most common cause of ignition failure on trials bikes (though rare on a 4RT) is the failure of fine wire components such as CDI source coils and timing trigger coils. Using a battery means a fine wire source coil is not needed and the trigger coil can be replaced with a solid state component as can some of the ignition amplification. Solid state triggers can work off an ACG but they need quite a bit of additional electronics, and this is done on several 2T trials bikes.

 

I did not say the present system is unreliable, I actually posted "In general the Honda system is pretty good and reliable but can be improved with newer technology" so its a bit rich to criticise me for what I did not say, when in fact I said pretty well the opposite.

 

Sometimes I get criticised for being a heavy bike luddite, next thing I get criticised for suggesting technical advancement, you just can't win.

 

Agree that modern battery technology for such a low power demand are very small, the new Li-On units that hold their charge for months and will jump start a Kenworth truck 15 times are now about the size of a cigarette packet !! With the 4RT I think the benefit of a battery would be to allow a much slower and more reliable idle speed.

 

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

 

Can some people on this forum not be critical without resorting to insults.

I agree the 4rt works fine and I will seriously consider one as my next bike.

Johnnyboxer, I do not dream this stuff up, look at nearly all the latest petrol cars, EFI, BATTERY, COP ignition.

Many cars now have in excess of 30kV ignitions, far better at firing the fuel than the 6 to 15 kV of many trials bikes.

Why are Bou and co messing about with twin plug head if the standard single plug is ideal, they are looking for the benefits of improved ignition.

I am 99.99% certain Honda are considering what I have written before I wrote it.

As for battery failure, sure the Boeing Dreamliner had some battery problems but look at what the use of new battery technology can achieve compared to conventional airliners.

The capacitor storage solution was very clever at the time and is probably still ideal for small equipment like strimmers that pretty well run at fixed  RPM. Many of these small industrial engines do not even have ignition advance, totally different to a trials engine.

In suggesting battery I was not only considering the fact the 4Rts have EFI, they also need power for the ECU and ignition.

One of the most common cause of ignition failure on trials bikes (though rare on a 4RT) is the failure of fine wire components such as CDI source coils and timing trigger coils. Using a battery means a fine wire source coil is not needed and the trigger coil can be replaced with a solid state component as can some of the ignition amplification. Solid state triggers can work off an ACG but they need quite a bit of additional electronics, and this is done on several 2T trials bikes.

 

I did not say the present system is unreliable, I actually posted "In general the Honda system is pretty good and reliable but can be improved with newer technology" so its a bit rich to criticise me for what I did not say, when in fact I said pretty well the opposite.

 

Sometimes I get criticised for being a heavy bike luddite, next thing I get criticised for suggesting technical advancement, you just can't win.

I have to laugh when I read threads like this.  You stick to your guns chap. Why people see the need to insult others for expressing a few views on possible progress is beyond me. Just ignore the knuckle draggers (is that an insult?) who think themselves so elevated in life's gene-pool...you can only hope they'll realise one day that they're just like the rest of us. I suspect not though  :thumbup:

  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

 
 

Bad day at the office possibly although not an excuse, spat that out without thinking so apologies to Dadof2 for my “too quick”comments.

I’ve had a 4rt since 2008, the reason I’ve stuck with them is simply because I love everything about them, the weight, the noise, the size, the build quality, they don’t fall to bits and the most important thing I love about 4rt’s is “they make me smile every time I throw my leg over one”

I’m sure most riders will have at some stage tried a 4rt, many hate them for various reasons but this does not make it a bad bike or a bike that needs changes to those who like them as they are.

I  often hear how “they don’t grip” they do grip but just differently, the idle is high for obvious reasons and this has never ever been an issue with me as you soon adapt and being honest apart from when its warming up I never notice it anyway.

The 4rt is the only bike I’ve ridden that rides the same every time you use it, it doesn’t matter what the atmospheric pressure is that day or temperature the fuelling is that good, so why try and fix something that works perfectly well already.

I’d agree the fuel tank could be a little larger but you can make allowances for that as I’ve learned, and weight saving on a bike for me that feels stable because of its weight is irrelevant especially considering the vast cost involved in shaving off a few grams here and there when to change the bike to anything noticeable in weight would need kgs not grams.  

Knuckle dragger and higher in the gene pool? No offence taken at all Chrisa, there’s little anyone could say to me that I’d take to heart and I wouldn’t ever think I’m higher up the ladder than anyone else either and I’m sure anyone who knows me would confirm that.  

So to sum up, apologies to dadof2 and anyone else who thought my comments offensive.

 

  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

 
 
 

New stickers for sure.  But will they be made of titanium. Titanium stickers would lower the weight.............   :blush:

I heard Helium in the tires and suspension ... Makes floaters easier ! 

Glenn  ;)

Link to comment
Share on other sites

 

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

Loading...
 Share

×
  • Create New...