ftp.xmission.com/2014.06.ftp.xmission.com.tar/ftp.xmission.com/pub/lists/klr650/archive/v01.n309

Internet Message Format | 1998-10-17 | 17KB

From: [e-mail] (klr650-digest)
To: [e-mail]
Subject: klr650-digest V1 #309
Reply-To: [e-mail]
Sender: [e-mail]
Errors-To: [e-mail]
Precedence: bulk


klr650-digest        Saturday, October 17 1998        Volume 01 : Number 309




----------------------------------------------------------------------

Date: Sat, 17 Oct 1998 21:55:22 +0300 (EET DST)
From: Burak Say <[e-mail]>
Subject: (klr650) NonKLR - (Help...)

    Hi there,
Sorry for irrelevancy, I am not a KLR owner but, of course, looking
forward to have one. I need creative ideas on how to persuade my brother
to give his to me. I hope you, fans of this amazing two-wheeler know some
ways to convince this klr freak to buy a new one.

ps: he treats his baby like a cardiac patient :)





                                                .~.
     Burak Baris SAY                            /V\   L   I   N   U   X
   Bilkent University                          // \\ >Phear the Penguin<
    Computer Science                          /(   )\
 [e-mail]                   ^^-^^

------------------------------

Date: Sat, 17 Oct 1998 13:10:03 -0700
From: Mike Magier <[e-mail]>
Subject: Re: (klr650) Oil Filters

OK philter phreaks -
I'm no major physics guy BUT it appears that if you're only looking at flow
rate, there are 2 competing characteristics of the filter that come into
play. Increased surface area (a GOOD thing) would INCREASE flow rate. But,
increased pore size (a VERY BAD THING) would also increase flow rate. So, if
we do a simple comparo of flow rates through intact filters we don't know if
faster flow is good or bad. I think we would need to independently test pore
size by using a flattened piece of filter of a standard size, and measuring
flow rate through these to try to get at port size. Even then, I'm not sure
how useful the data would be unless we knew the pore density (how many pores
per unit area). I guess there are actually 3 variables at play. Is it
possible that the companies which manufacture these filters have internal
documents which describe these variables? Any industrial espionage agents
out there, lurking quietly on the list?
Anyone with any ideas on measuring pore size, or counting pore density?
Anyone have an electron microscope in their basement?

Mike Magier
98A12
- ----------
>I'm glad you're doing the comparison, and I look forward to the results.  I
>don't know how to measure filtration effectiveness and contaminant load
>capacity directly without the test stand, etc.  But you may get an indirect
>measure by comparing flow rates, which should be a reflection of surface
>area and filtration media pore size/pore number.  You'd want a bucket of

------------------------------

Date: Sat, 17 Oct 1998 13:20:30 -0700
From: Mike Magier <[e-mail]>
Subject: Re: (klr650) Oil Filters

>
>OK philter phreaks -
>I'm no major physics guy BUT it appears that if you're only looking at flow
>rate, there are 2 competing characteristics of the filter that come into
>play. Increased surface area (a GOOD thing) would INCREASE flow rate. But,
>increased pore size (a VERY BAD THING) would also increase flow rate. So,
if
>we do a simple comparo of flow rates through intact filters we don't know
if
>faster flow is good or bad. I think we would need to independently test
pore
>size by using a flattened piece of filter of a standard size, and measuring
>flow rate through these to try to get at port size. Even then, I'm not sure
>how useful the data would be unless we knew the pore density (how many
pores
>per unit area). I guess there are actually 3 variables at play. Is it
>possible that the companies which manufacture these filters have internal
>documents which describe these variables? Any industrial espionage agents
>out there, lurking quietly on the list?
>Anyone with any ideas on measuring pore size, or counting pore density?
>Anyone have an electron microscope in their basement?
>
>Mike Magier
>98A12

- --------------------

OK, another thought. Maybe we could drip dirty oil (or any other liquid)
through 2 competing filters and measure the turbidity of what comes through.
(That's sort of like how much light gets blocked from passing through the
liquid). In this test, we could totally ignore the time factor, and assume
that the liquid that lets the most light pass through has the smallest
pores. Once we know that, I think most of use would jump on that filter.It
would be inportant to make sure that the light we are measuring is
standardized (same light source, same "thickness" of liquid). If it was a
draw, then we could do the simple flow rate test, as that would measure the
total number of pores (filter area X pore density) which is really the
determinant of flow rate.
There are common lab instruments which measure light transmissivity (either
total or at apecific wavelengths). Again, I don't know if anyone has access
to one, but I'm guessing they're easier to get to than electron microscopes.
Enough geekery for me for one day.

Mike Magier 98A12

------------------------------

Date: Sat, 17 Oct 1998 14:04:56 -0700
From: "Darrel & Deanna" <[e-mail]>
Subject: (klr650) (NKLR)  GNC

For those of you interested in watching the season finale of the Grand
National
Dirt Track Championship series on TV, here's the dates/times:

Oct 19 6:30p ET on ESPN2

Oct 23 6:30p ET       "                       (times and dates subject to
change)

Oct 24 3:30a ET       "

Watchin' this stuff makes you wonder what a KLR tanked with nitro methane
would do on a one mile horse track (fitted with Avons of course)!
                                         Darrel  A12 "avenger"

------------------------------

Date: Sat, 17 Oct 1998 17:04:08 EDT
From: [e-mail]
Subject: Re: (klr650) Oil Filters

On 10/17/98, [e-mail] wrote: snip

>I guess there are actually 3 variables at play.

 I'll see your 3 variables and raise you another 3 ;)

 The temperature of the oil, the amount of
 moisture present in the filter, and oil pressure
 will also affect how fast the oil (and how large
 of a particle) will pass through the paper.

 I received 2 requests for more K&P info, so
 here's some more of the brochure from Fred.

 http://members.aol.com/cloudhid/kpinfo.jpg
 <A HREF="http://members.aol.com/cloudhid/kpinfo.jpg">kpinfo.jpg</A>

 Redondo Ron (who's always willing to make a
                      mountain out of a micro mole hill)

------------------------------

Date: Sat, 17 Oct 1998 16:21:45 -0500
From: "Royer, Timothy E." <[e-mail]>
Subject: (klr650) (KLR) Cam chain tensioner

Correct, I removed the entire tensioner assembly, before removing the valve
cover. But remember the later model KLR' s have the spring and ratchet
tensioner ( I read the manual), and they have a different reset mechanism.
I think that the A12 at least has that forsaken cam chain slipper cover
separate from the valve cover, because there is no rubber on the inside save
the gasket itself.
    On a different subject, Fred are the 16 tooth sprockets for the late
model KLR's

Tim (totally bumed, because the Ft. Hood ride was rained out) Royer


>Eldon also said that he couldn't understand why Tim's cam chain loosened
>unless he removed the entire tension gizmo not just the bolt & spring.
>Forgot to include that in my first post. Sorry. To the list police: I've
>confessed my crime. Do what you will with me but leave my family alone.
>Bogdan


>Talked to Eldon Carl. He says the reason to take out the cam chain
>tentioner bolt before removing the valve cover is the following: (Hope
>I've got it right). Adhered to the inside of the cover in the chain
>cavity is a strip of rubber like stuff I thought was there to simply
>protect the chain & cover from each other....Eldon says that this strip
>applies pressure to the chain and if you remove the cover with bolt &
>spring in place will/may cause the tentioner to ratchet the chain too
>tight.
 >                                     Bogdan, Not a real mechanic

------------------------------

Date: Sat, 17 Oct 1998 15:37:27 -0600
From: "Fred Hink" <[e-mail]>
Subject: Re: (klr650) (KLR) Cam chain tensioner

- -----Original Message-----
From: Royer, Timothy E. <[e-mail]>
To: KRLlist <[e-mail]>
Date: Saturday, October 17, 1998 3:26 PM
Subject: (klr650) (KLR) Cam chain tensioner
.
> On a different subject, Fred are the 16 tooth sprockets for the late
>model KLR's


I have two different 16 tooth sprockets.  One for the 96 to 98 and the other
90 to 95.  I have been told that the 90 to 95 sprockets will work on the 89
and earlier.  There is a different part number for the pre-90s, does anyone
know for sure?

------------------------------

Date: Sat, 17 Oct 1998 14:39:37 -0700
From: Mike Magier <[e-mail]>
Subject: Re: (klr650) Oil Filters

Ron - Correctamundo, as usual. However, these are "dynamic variables"
(change from minute to minute in the life of an oil filter). The pore size,
density and filter area are more or less "static." Obviously, any filter we
look at will be subjected to variations in the 3 you listed below. However,
at any given temperature, moisture and oil pressure, the static variables
will determine the relative performance of the filter at both filtration
efficiency (particles frmoved) and filtration rate (how much oil gets
filtered each minute).

MM
98A12 (feeling rather static myself today)

> I'll see your 3 variables and raise you another 3 ;)
>
> The temperature of the oil, the amount of
> moisture present in the filter, and oil pressure
> will also affect how fast the oil (and how large
> of a particle) will pass through the paper.
>
> Redondo Ron (who's always willing to make a
>                      mountain out of a micro mole hill)

------------------------------

Date: Sat, 17 Oct 1998 18:21:48 -0600
From: [e-mail]
Subject: Re: (klr650) Panic stop, Crash Report

Eric Dietiker wrote:

> I am glad you came out of this OK! Definitely smart to keep the bike
> upright, and not lay 'er down.

Yes, glad that the rider made it OK!

However, considerable experience suggests that there is a time to stay upright
and a time to slide, when there is no way to avoid a life-threatening
collision. A good case in point is a fellow (former) KLR rider out here in the
campo near Colorado Springs. Doing about 50 and German Shepherd runs into his
path from hidden driveway. No reasonable way to avoid the collision. Briefly
brakes and then locks it up to lay it down. (Big) dog is killed in collision.
Rider loses much skin and is later evacuated by helicopter.  In reconstructing
the scene one thing appears clear: his alternative was to hit the dog and go
over the bars, probably breaking collarbone and possibly leg(s)/arm(s) and
maybe worse. Given the same circumstances, and the presence of mind, I believe
that I would have opted for the same action.

FWIW

Dr Robert
(He's not a real doctor)

------------------------------

Date: Sat, 17 Oct 1998 21:44:46 EDT
From: [e-mail]
Subject: Re: (klr650)Super dissappointment

Well. I mounted up the SuperTrapp IDS quiet series today.  Very disappointed
in the fit.  I had to make shims to tighten up the fit where the intermediate
pipe joins the muffers.  Also had to make a spacer that would kick the muffer
away from the plastic.  Haven't rode the bike yet, giving the high temp
silicone a chance to cure before I start it.  Anyone else with an IDS have
this problem?

Gino

------------------------------

Date: Sat, 17 Oct 1998 19:37:35 -0700 (PDT)
From: [e-mail] (Francis Smith)
Subject: Fwd: Re: (klr650) Panic stop, Crash Report

- --WebTV-Mail-1493812678-2602
Content-Type: Text/Plain; Charset=US-ASCII
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7Bit


- --WebTV-Mail-1493812678-2602
Content-Disposition: Inline
Content-Type: Message/RFC822
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7Bit

X-WebTV-Signature: 1
    ETAsAhRuB7Q1jng4YrshJkZzYHFNWbadFgIUQ9aqLgWydGNztA/Cp6pveN/UBis=
From: [e-mail] (Francis Smith)
Date: Sat, 17 Oct 1998 19:36:26 -0700 (PDT)
To: [e-mail]
Subject: Re: (klr650) Panic stop, Crash Report
Message-ID: <[e-mail]>
Content-Type: Text/Plain; Charset=US-ASCII
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7Bit
MIME-Version: 1.0 (WebTV)

Bob:

I offer this for your consideration.  Back in the
early '70s while a CHP motor officer (riding
750 lb HD's at the time), my partner and I were
on our way to work one morning on the Ventura
Freeway here in Southern Calif.  A large dog of
approx. 80-100 lbs. ran across the freeway into
the path of my partner's Harley.  It was still dark
and my partner (doing about 70) had little time
to react; he chose to maintain his speed and
hit the dog amidships rather than take evasive
action.  He ended up cutting the dog in half and
his rear wheel locked up because the dog's
skull got caught between the chain and the
rear sprocket.  He didn't go down, but just
skidded to a stop.

Given the weight of the KLR with an average
size rider (550-600 lbs. total) and a speed of
50 mph, I'll take the 44,000 ft. lbs. of energy
developed therein and elect to hit a large dog
or small dear before I try evasive action or
drop the bike at 50 mph.  I doubt if the rider
would be thrown over the handlebars.

My observations here are not based on any
academic study, but on life experience, many
accidents investigated and hundreds of
thousands of miles on two wheelers.


Jim (sometimes called Dr. Feel Good)


- --WebTV-Mail-1493812678-2602--

------------------------------

Date: Sat, 17 Oct 1998 22:01:25 -0500
From: Ken Belfatto <[e-mail]>
Subject: (klr650) Oil Cocktail

3rd oil change (3K miles) : Equal amounts (2.6l total) of  Castrol =
Syntech 20-50 semi synthetic, and GTX 20-50, plus 1 shot glass of Marvel =
Mystery oil.=20
Runny Cherry
Maybee Santa will bring the loud exhaust
CAD/CAM Kenny A12 whatever

------------------------------

Date: Sun, 18 Oct 1998 14:31:27 +1000
From: Ted Palmer <[e-mail]>
Subject: (klr650) NKLR: clobbering clitters

Francis Smith wrote:

[CHP HD vs dog story deleted]

> Given the weight of the KLR with an average
> size rider (550-600 lbs. total) and a speed of
> 50 mph, I'll take the 44,000 ft. lbs. of energy
> developed therein and elect to hit a large dog
> or small dear before I try evasive action or
> drop the bike at 50 mph.  I doubt if the rider
> would be thrown over the handlebars.

With the kinetic energy possesed by a dressy HD, I'm not surprised.
KLRs are featherweight in comparison.

I've managed to hit a wombat out in the dark aussie bush at 70-80kmh.
Wombats are four legged beasties, around the size of a smallish dog.
They love to burrow, and are pretty dense, in more ways than one.
I had almost no time to react as the wombat ran at my front wheel
from the side of the dirt road.
The wombat turned my steering as I hit it which instantly turned the
bike and sent me flying along the bike's original path as the bike
flipped at least once sideways (top of the Gearsack was ripped up by
the road).

If the wombat were stationary and I'd hit it square-on, I might have
stood a chance, but then I would have seen it much earlier and evaded
and/or slowed a lot by the time the crunch came.

Hitting something like a deer or a kangaroo is best done with as much
bike as you can, so you can avoid hitting it with your body, I guess.
I'd be reluctant to lay the bike down against these enemies as the bike
could take out the animal's legs and the beast could well end up
on top of you as you come sliding along behind the bike.
Closeup, wildly kicking roo and deer are not beneficial to your health.
I imagine that something on deer-size legs could easily get wedged
in between the high mudguard and front wheel, which could play havoc
with the steering response.

Unfortunately, there is not much you can do when in a head-on with
an emu, except maybe you can duck, cover and pray.
Their mass is pretty high up on their long legs, and a whiplashing
beak through the visor holds unpleasant possibilities.
But emus are fairly mobile devices, so your are more likely to get
taken out with some sideways force.


Mister_T
(More concerned about energy transfer than native title)
- --
   \_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\
   |   RC17   KLR600    Roces BCN    FreeBSD 2.2.5-R    NT4W (ugh)   |
   |           tedp[at]replicant[dot]apana[dot]org[dot]au            |
  \|_________________________________________________________________|

------------------------------

Date: Sun, 18 Oct 1998 14:42:46 +1000
From: Ted Palmer <[e-mail]>
Subject: (klr650) NKLR: going Nissan-In-Action for a week off list

Short note to say I'll be off the list for a week or so, taking the
Jap Cadillac for a cruise to Sydney to see family and friends.
I'd prefer to take a bike, it's only about 11 hours up the road, but
Mum whinges about the cost of renting a car while up there >-|

Mister_T

------------------------------

End of klr650-digest V1 #309
****************************