EFI conversion on a Gen-1

[Hamkaas]

How does those 3-D printed inlets work Rempage?

 

[RempageR1]

Printed the second one, pretty close just needed to change the angle on top slightly. Next, it`s time to print one from carbon fiber reinforced nylon. In the mean time, I`m busy with creating a better wiring loom and putting the Speeduino in a smaller casing that is mounted under the buddy seat instead of the left air scoop. Will update on that once finished.

 

[MaxMidnight]

Out of curiosity, is there any reason why there is a 'spare' mounting hole and are you going to add a vacuum take-off to allow balancing of the throttle bodies?

 

[Parminio]

is there any reason why there is a 'spare' mounting hole

I'll guess that he's making it universal for both sides rather than having two templates.

 

[sdt354]

Out of curiosity, is there any reasonwhync tooly there is a 'spare' mounting hole and are you going to add a vacuum take-off to allow balancing of the throttle bodies?

He could skip the vacuum port for now and use an individual carb sync tool. Edelbrock and Webber make them. The port making the use of a Carbtune type tool is more convenient, I do agree.

 

[sdt354]

Opps, he does need one for ignition advance.

 

[MaxMidnight]

I'll guess that he's making it universal for both sides rather than having two templates.

True, but IMO it makes it look like a part adapted from another engine....

 

[Parminio]

I'm sure that can be sorted for finished product. Why bother with aesthetics during R&D? Especially if it turns out it doesn't work?

That's just time and money wasted for bling rather than results.

 

[MaxMidnight]

I'm sure that can be sorted for finished product. Why bother with aesthetics during R&D? Especially if it turns out it doesn't work?

That's just time and money wasted for bling rather than results.

I disagree that it is bling - why build in a redundant fixing point?

One of the benefits, I assume, of designing something in software is that it is relatively easy to make changes before committing to a prototype.
We saw that in the original manifold when the design was changed to be curved.
Whilst I wouldn't even need a postage stamp to write what I know about Cad and 3D printing, I would have thought it would be relatively easy to make handed variants.

Why waste time and materials printing something that won't be utilised?

 

[Parminio]

I disagree that it is bling - why build in a redundant fixing point?

*sigh*

Because you only have to design and print ONE. It's a universal fit for all locations. It's not rocket science. Why spend the time, energy and effort to have two files, two separate printings times two different sides during an R&D project when ONE will do the job completely?

What's more, as he mentioned, he didn't get the curve right. So instead of having to go back and redo two separate files to get it right he only has to do one.

All of his work to get it done is literally cut in half.

Once he gets the entire system operational then he can worry about appearance. The last thing you want to be doing is going back and working two separate CAD files and printing out two separate pieces every single time you have to make an adjustment. It's time consuming and wasteful.

 

[MaxMidnight]

*sigh*

Because you only have to design and print ONE. It's a universal fit for all locations. It's not rocket science. Why spend the time, energy and effort to have two files, two separate printings times two different sides during an R&D project when ONE will do the job completely?

What's more, as he mentioned, he didn't get the curve right. So instead of having to go back and redo two separate files to get it right he only has to do one.

All of his work to get it done is literally cut in half.

Once he gets the entire system operational then he can worry about appearance. The last thing you want to be doing is going back and working two separate CAD files and printing out two separate pieces every single time you have to make an adjustment. It's time consuming and wasteful.

Bigger sigh...

If you read my original question (post #143) I asked 'is there any reason why there is a 'spare' mounting hole and are you going to add a vacuum take-off to allow balancing of the throttle bodies?'
Your response was (post #144) was 'I'll guess that he's making it universal for both sides rather than having two templates.' The way I read that implies that you think that is how the final article would appear on the bike.

My impression of Mr RempageR1 is that he would want the finished article to look as 'OE' as possible and that a redundant mounting point would not appear in the final iteration; that is what I was querying

As the OP hasn't answered we know not his thinking; it could be that what is shown was for prototype purposes and I understand the reasoning behind that but if that is the final iteration of the mounting points then I stand by my comments.

 

[RempageR1]

Sorry for the late reply but loved the conversation above . It`s indeed a prototype for now and it has four holes so I can check it`s fitment on all four locations. Also working on 1 universal file is indeed easier than working on two subversions. I`m not sure though if I will reduce it to two holes or leave it as-is. The two spare holes fall behind the chrome cover so you don't see them anyway. See the post below for a picture with the cover fitted:

https://www.vmaxforum.net/threads/efi-conversion-on-a-gen-1.49544/post-512680
The throttle bodies already have tubes to connect the MAP sensor do I don't need to add those to the manifolds

I deliberately broke the first test print and found out the weakest spot is where the tube section connects to the base plate so I added some fillet there:


Next up will be printing it with the carbon reinforced nylon. Happy holidays!

 

[Parminio]

Bigger sigh...

If you read my original question (post #143) I asked 'is there any reason why there is a 'spare' mounting hole and are you going to add a vacuum take-off to allow balancing of the throttle bodies?'
Your response was (post #144) was 'I'll guess that he's making it universal for both sides rather than having two templates.' The way I read that implies that you think that is how the final article would appear on the bike.

My impression of Mr RempageR1 is that he would want the finished article to look as 'OE' as possible and that a redundant mounting point would not appear in the final iteration; that is what I was querying

As the OP hasn't answered we know not his thinking; it could be that what is shown was for prototype purposes and I understand the reasoning behind that but if that is the final iteration of the mounting points then I stand by my comments.

Spoken by a man who has obviously never worked in CAD or had to pay for materials out of a 3d printer.

 

[MaxMidnight]

Spoken by a man who has obviously never worked in CAD or had to pay for materials out of a 3d printer.

Spoken by a man who doesn't want to try and understand another point of view.

It's a shame when a discussion starts to deteriorate into veiled insults - I'll not reciprocate.

 

[Parminio]

Pal, I told you why he was doing it that way because I've done it. He told you as well that it was exactly what I was saying.

But you go on and on and on about your own opinion because you absolutely can not say, "Oh. Didn't know that." or "I hadn't considered that." or "Ah. Makes sense I guess." or something along those lines.

And saying you haven't done something isn't "resulting to insults". It's actually "stating the obvious".

Take a look at this:


To hear you tell it, Chevrolet should have never used that. It's "the Mule". It was the test bed for the new Corvette.

Why didn't they have a finished body on it?
Why wasn't the interior completely finished on it?
Why wasn't it painted up real nicely?

Because it DID NOT MATTER AT THE TIME. It was an R&D project, which is exactly what this is.

 

[MaxMidnight]

Pal, I told you why he was doing it that way because I've done it. He told you as well that it was exactly what I was saying.

If I wanted your opinion I'd have asked for it but as it was, my question was aimed at Mr RempageR1 who has now responded (thank you)

But you go on and on and on about your own opinion because you absolutely can not say, "Oh. Didn't know that." or "I hadn't considered that." or "Ah. Makes sense I guess." or something along those lines.

I go on about my opinion? Yeh right - pot and kettle spring to mind.

...and if you care to say which part of 'As the OP hasn't answered (at the time of writing) we know not his thinking; it could be that what is shown was for prototype purposes and I understand the reasoning behind that but if that is the final iteration of the mounting points then I stand by my comments.' you don't understand I will endeavor to help.

Trying to shout down and belittle someone does the individual no credit nor does it encourage others to enter into debate....I know wait for your erudite response.

And saying you haven't done something isn't "resulting to insults". It's actually "stating the obvious".

You have no idea what I have done and I'm not going to get into the 'my experience is bigger than yours' discussion!

 

[Parminio]

double post

 

[Parminio]

Let's review for a moment:

Your all important opinion.

True, but IMO it makes it look like a part adapted from another engine....

My facts:

I'm sure that can be sorted for finished product. Why bother with aesthetics during R&D? Especially if it turns out it doesn't work?

What's more, as he mentioned, he didn't get the curve right. So instead of having to go back and redo two separate files to get it right he only has to do one.

His statement:

It`s indeed a prototype for now and it has four holes so I can check it`s fitment on all four locations. Also working on 1 universal file is indeed easier than working on two subversions.

The rest of it is you crying about your incorrect opinion being wrong instead of swallowed wholesale like many people do your 'opinions' like you're used to.

I await your next "but everybody should simply take my opinion as the gospel" post with great anticipation.

 

[gentsvmax]

Let's review for a moment:

Your all important opinion.



My facts:



His statement:



The rest of it is you crying about your incorrect opinion being wrong instead of swallowed wholesale like many people do your 'opinions' like you're used to.

I await your next "but everybody should simply take my opinion as the gospel" post with great anticipation.

Man your wound tight, park the bike and get a girl you like girls right?
Well what ever ya like besides arguing get some and relax
Happy New Year!

 

[MaxMidnight]

I await your next "but everybody should simply take my opinion as the gospel" post with great anticipation.

Your comprehension of the written word seems to be somewhat lacking?

Let me try and help. The definition of 'opinion' is A belief or conclusion held with confidence but not substantiated by positive knowledge or proof
Therefore my interpretation of 'in my opinion' is that does not imply that it is the correct opinion, the only opinion or it should be taken as fact.

That you have chosen to twist this into the opposite suggests that (IMO) you either don't bother to read and understand what has been written, are unable to understand what was being stated, take some perverse pleasure in arguing or can't accept any opinion other than yours. (There my be other reasons - suggestions to the usual address).

You then twist what I have tried to keep as a civil discussion into me 'crying about your incorrect opinion being wrong instead of swallowed wholesale like many people do your 'opinions'. WTF!?

The most sensible thing that has been written in this exchange is from Mr Gentsvmax which is sage advice and I look forward to hearing how you get on.