cheap carb mod

[mystar_77]

I recently emailed Roger Flynn at HDT/F1 Engineering inquiring about the status on the diesel KLR. With permission from him and at a request to "get the word out", here is his reply (in quotations): "The civilian version of our military diesel KLR has had to be put on the back burner for the time being. We are just a small company and have been working on this engine for about six years now, however we have been unable to attract any financial backers or partners to the project. Even though the US Government has pretty much paid for all of the development of the engine, we need private funding of around $2 million, a very small sum considering the huge market for this particular, worlds only high performance small diesel engine. This funding is required for EPA and DOT testing, crash testing, reliability testing (even though we have thousands of miles on the military bikes), production facilities , marketing, advertising, etc., and a million other details that we are not required to perform on the military units. All of our resources are currently being used on the new USMC contract for 600 Diesel Combat Motorcycles. Scheduled delivery of the first production bikes to the USMC is August 2004, with production continuing through 2006. We had hoped to be building engines for the civilian version alongside the military unit as this would have reduced cost quite significantly, the cost of 5,000 sets of engine castings from the foundry is a lot less per engine than 600 sets. The same goes for everything else in the engine. So, although we are still actively searching for a partner / backer, we are sad that we have not been able to get this great machine out on the highways. However we do still hold out hope that someone will come along with the resources needed to continue on with the project. Meanwhile, yes we are continuing to build the diesel engines for use in the USMC Diesel Combat Motorcycle, and of course our development program continues on alongside the production line. The current USMC version of the diesel KLR is now right at 40 horse power at 5700 rpm with 45 foot pounds of torque. Dry Weight: 369 lbs. Fuel type used during tests; Diesel / Aviation Kerosene / Biodiesel Thanks for your interest. Regards, Roger G. Flynn F1 Engineering, Inc." Thank you, Mike Stephenson A7 w/ A1 bodywork '93 XR250R with ugly bodywork

[PJ Riss]

Wasn't there a post a while ago about suspension components possibly being offered for sale to the public? Paul A16 --- mystar_77 wrote:

> I recently emailed Roger Flynn at HDT/F1 Engineering > inquiring about > the status on the diesel KLR. With permission from > him and at a > request to "get the word out", here is his reply (in > quotations): > > "The civilian version of our military diesel KLR has > had to be put on > the back burner for the time being. > > We are just a small company and have been working on > this engine for > about six years now, however we have been unable to > attract any > financial backers or partners to the project. > > Even though the US Government has pretty much paid > for all of the > development of the engine, we need private funding > of around $2 > million, a very small sum considering the huge > market for this > particular, worlds only high performance small > diesel engine. > > This funding is required for EPA and DOT testing, > crash testing, > reliability testing (even though we have thousands > of miles on the > military bikes), production facilities , marketing, > advertising, > etc., and a million other details that we are not > required to perform > on the military units. > > All of our resources are currently being used on the > new USMC > contract for 600 Diesel Combat Motorcycles. > > Scheduled delivery of the first production bikes to > the USMC is > August 2004, with production continuing through > 2006. > > We had hoped to be building engines for the civilian > version > alongside the military unit as this would have > reduced cost quite > significantly, the cost of 5,000 sets of engine > castings from the > foundry is a lot less per engine than 600 sets. The > same goes for > everything else in the engine. > > So, although we are still actively searching for a > partner / backer, > we are sad that we have not been able to get this > great machine out > on the highways. > > However we do still hold out hope that someone will > come along with > the resources needed to continue on with the > project. > > Meanwhile, yes we are continuing to build the diesel > engines for use > in the USMC Diesel Combat Motorcycle, and of course > our development > program continues on alongside the production line. > > The current USMC version of the diesel KLR is now > right at 40 horse > power at 5700 rpm with 45 foot pounds of torque. > > Dry Weight: 369 lbs. > > Fuel type used during tests; Diesel / Aviation > Kerosene / Biodiesel > > Thanks for your interest. > > Regards, > Roger G. Flynn > F1 Engineering, Inc." > > > Thank you, > Mike Stephenson > A7 w/ A1 bodywork > '93 XR250R with ugly bodywork > > > > List sponsored by Dual Sport News at > www.dualsportnews.com. List FAQ courtesy of Chris > Krok at: www.bigcee.com/klr650faq.html > Unsubscribe by sending a blank message to: > DSN_klr650-unsubscribe@yahoogroups.com . > > > Yahoo! Groups Links > > > DSN_klr650-unsubscribe@yahoogroups.com > > >

__________________________________ Do you Yahoo!? Friends. Fun. Try the all-new Yahoo! Messenger. http://messenger.yahoo.com/

[Zachariah Mully]

On Fri, 2004-05-28 at 10:59, mystar_77 wrote: > This funding is required for EPA and DOT testing, crash testing, > reliability testing (even though we have thousands of miles on the > military bikes), production facilities , marketing, advertising, > etc., and a million other details that we are not required to perform > on the military units. > We had hoped to be building engines for the civilian version > alongside the military unit as this would have reduced cost quite > significantly, the cost of 5,000 sets of engine castings from the > foundry is a lot less per engine than 600 sets. The same goes for > everything else in the engine. To sell the engine to the public would it have to pass EPA and DOT testing first? My thinking is that they should sell just the engine to civilians, using that money to pass inspections and reduce their manufacturing expenses, then start selling whole bikes. I know that I'd rather just buy the engine than a whole new bike. And the engine should be a direct drop in, with some simple upgrades, no? I'd be more than happy to help finance their testing if I got a diesel engine for one of my KLRs out of the deal. Z DC A5X A12X

[Eric L. Green]

On Fri, 28 May 2004, Zachariah Mully wrote:

> rather just buy the engine than a whole new bike. And the engine should > be a direct drop in, with some simple upgrades, no?

Well, not exactly. Diesel engines have no ignition, so that's all gone, leaving some wiring issues up in the air (the kill switch, for example, now has to shut off the fuel injectors, not the ignition). They have no carburetor, so that's all gone. They have fuel injection, so that requires wiring up. The throttle plates are in a different place, so that requires moving things around, and there's a throttle plate position sensor and mass air sensor that have to go to the fuel injection box. Etc. So it's a drop-in, but not a simple drop-in. Not to mention that new EPA regulations on dirt bike engines are taking effect shortly, meaning that even if the engine itself were sold for off-road use only, it would still be regulated by the EPA. And it's unlikely that anybody would be believed if they said a diesel motorcycle engine was being sold for racing use only . (That's why 2-stroke motocross bikes can still be sold, they are supposedly for racing use only). -E

[Krgrife@aol.com]

In a message dated 5/28/04 8:30:44 AM Pacific Daylight Time, pjriss@... writes:

> Wasn't there a post a while ago about suspension > components possibly being offered for sale to the > public?

An article on the F1 Engineering military shock will be in the June issue of Dual Sport News. It will include price and availability info. Regards, Kurt Grife [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]

[Zachariah Mully]

On Fri, 2004-05-28 at 12:57, Eric L. Green wrote:

> On Fri, 28 May 2004, Zachariah Mully wrote: > > rather just buy the engine than a whole new bike. And the engine should > > be a direct drop in, with some simple upgrades, no? > > Well, not exactly. Diesel engines have no ignition, so that's all gone, > leaving some wiring issues up in the air (the kill switch, for example, > now has to shut off the fuel injectors, not the ignition). They have no > carburetor, so that's all gone. They have fuel injection, so that requires > wiring up. The throttle plates are in a different place, so that requires > moving things around, and there's a throttle plate position sensor and > mass air sensor that have to go to the fuel injection box. Etc. So it's a > drop-in, but not a simple drop-in.

Well, being that you could take a rolling chassis and this engine and have a working bike in a matter of hours (assuming what I've seen of it is representative), I would consider that a "drop-in". Even if you've got to pull the airbox and some of the wiring harness (which doubt has been modified heavily), it'd still be an easy switch. The new EPA regs mention, but do not detail, any requirements for diesel bikes ("As of today EPA is aware of one CI [compression-injection] motorcycle family;"), so perhaps part of the problem is that the EPA has no idea what to do with it. The EPA report is actually quite interesting, and very accessible, http://www.epa.gov/otaq/regs/roadbike/420r03016.pdf Still, I want one. Bad. Z DC A5X A12X

[Barnaby Robson]

>Fuel type used during tests; Diesel / Aviation Kerosene / Biodiesel

drool. barnaby

[Richy]

All of the DOT/EPA mumbo Jumbo can be avoided if the parts are offered instead of the whole bike. If the stuff is offered as a kit of parts, one could simply modify a stocker and make it into an actual military model. No need for all of the crash testing etc. Forget offering this bike as an actual model, it would be too costly to do in the states.. I've dealt with the EPA and DOT on federalizing cars for use in the states. Although I've had little trouble with them if you follow the documentation its clearly another case of the govt sticking its nose where it doesnt belong. If one wants to drive something that places their life at risk such as a non federalized vehicle, so be it.. IMHO I very much doubt a diesel version of a commonly sold motorcycle is anything to worry about anyway. I really dont think there is any safer way to build a bike and crash testing seems to be a moot point. Good Luck and good riding... Richy 99klr

[westnash1]

The way that Dual Star touts the Diesel klr you would think that they would be trying to develop and sell them,,,,,its just one more case where Dual Star should get the Emmy award for BS that they put out on their exclusiveses and technical expertise! --- In DSN_klr650@yahoogroups.com, Zachariah Mully wrote:

> On Fri, 2004-05-28 at 12:57, Eric L. Green wrote: > > On Fri, 28 May 2004, Zachariah Mully wrote: > > > rather just buy the engine than a whole new bike. And the

engine should

> > > be a direct drop in, with some simple upgrades, no? > > > > Well, not exactly. Diesel engines have no ignition, so that's all

gone,

> > leaving some wiring issues up in the air (the kill switch, for

example,

> > now has to shut off the fuel injectors, not the ignition). They

have no

> > carburetor, so that's all gone. They have fuel injection, so that

requires

> > wiring up. The throttle plates are in a different place, so that

requires

> > moving things around, and there's a throttle plate position

sensor and

> > mass air sensor that have to go to the fuel injection box. Etc.

So it's a

> > drop-in, but not a simple drop-in. > > Well, being that you could take a rolling chassis and this engine

and

> have a working bike in a matter of hours (assuming what I've seen

of it

> is representative), I would consider that a "drop-in". Even if

you've

> got to pull the airbox and some of the wiring harness (which doubt

has

> been modified heavily), it'd still be an easy switch. > > The new EPA regs mention, but do not detail, any requirements for

diesel

> bikes ("As of today EPA is aware of one CI [compression-injection] > motorcycle family;"), so perhaps part of the problem is that the

EPA has

> no idea what to do with it. The EPA report is actually quite > interesting, and very accessible, > http://www.epa.gov/otaq/regs/roadbike/420r03016.pdf > > Still, I want one. Bad. > > Z > DC > A5X > A12X

[Devon]

Does dual-star have ANYTHING to do with the diesel KLR? They were doing the conversions for the gasoline powered KLR. F1 engineering is doing the diesel conversion, and it looks like the rest of the bike as well. I think Dualstar is selling body parts from their gas-powered contract. While "a dual-star exclusive" was the punch line for many, many jokes at NOAB, they do make or sell a lot of nice stuff for the KLR. If their stuff sometimes costs a few bucks more, consider the convenience factor. Devon westnash1@... wrote:

>The way that Dual Star touts the Diesel klr you would think that they >would be trying to develop and sell them,,,,,its just one more case >where Dual Star should get the Emmy award for BS that they put out on >their exclusiveses and technical expertise! > > >