Powerplus or Bust, Eh?

[Shaky Jake]

totally guessing - cams from a Hendstrom ? they had a shorter stroke, maybe not as much lift on the cams too ?

Great guess, but sorry, that's not it.




Kevin


.

[Tom Lovejoy]

totally guessing - cams from a Hendstrom ? they had a shorter stroke, maybe not as much lift on the cams too ?

[Shaky Jake]

Sorry, meant push rod!

Sorry 301, not that simple. But thanks for having the courage to guess.




Kevin


.

[indian301]

Sorry, meant push rod!

[indian301]

Wrong length pusrod?

[Shaky Jake]

Valve Action

Throughout the entire 2016 Cannonball, I felt like my engine was not making the power that it should. It did fine on level ground, but always struggled with hills, and always ran hot. The other odd thing; the last 1/4 turn of throttle opening made no difference. There was no difference between 3/4 open and full open on the throttle. It was not a function of linkage geometry. I could reach down to the carburetor while riding, hold the throttle at 3/4 open, then turn it to full open. There was no change in speed and no change in the sound from the engine. I suspected that there was shortage of valve lift, causing the flow to be choked either at the intake valve or at the exhaust valve.

I must admit, that, as time was short in the end before the start of the event, I did not mount a degree wheel and indicator and verify valve timing and lift when I assembled the engine, which I normally would have done. I did dimensionally compare three different cams, which all had the same amount of lift, duration, and all had their lobes oriented the same with respect to the timing marks. I figured I didn't have time to do anything about it anyway, so I assembled the timing gears per the marks on and called it good. It ran, and it sounded right, so I never looked back.

Now I have degrees the cam and measured the valve lifts, and I believe I have identified the problem.

Anyone care to offer a guess as to the apparent cause of the trouble?









Kevin


.

[Shaky Jake]

Yes, I well try to do a thread - but I well hold off until, I git enough to be of interest. I am calling it a boardtracker, because I well have those Indian racing handlebars and seat, single speed with peddles . But mine well be for riding also, putting a brake and clutch on it. Probably just short rides though, think my body won't be able to handle to long a ride on the thing :-) a custom Gas tank is being made for it right now, a couple other pieces also. When I git those together, I well start a thread, I am sure progress well be slow though. Would also like to see and hear about your single speed.

Tom, Are you using a rigid frame with the eccentric for pedal adjustment? Mine is a cradle frame, so it has the pedal hanger that bolts on like a transmission. Basically it will be like a 1914 or 1915 single speed, which as called the 225 Regular model without lights, or the 260 Standard model with lights. The difference is that I plan to use a 1916 PowerPlus motor, so it won't be correct, but I think it will be a great bike to ride. The part I haven't figured out yet is the clutch. The Hedstrom single speed clutches don't seem to come up very often. I've never gotten the chance to look at one. I'd like to figure out if I can make a custom hub to adapt a PowerPlus clutch to a single speed. I don't know if it can be done, if you know anyone that's got good pictures of a disassembled single speed clutch I'd like to see them.




Kevin

.

[Tom Lovejoy]

Yes, I well try to do a thread - but I well hold off until, I git enough to be of interest. I am calling it a boardtracker, because I well have those Indian racing handlebars and seat, single speed with peddles . But mine well be for riding also, putting a brake and clutch on it. Probably just short rides though, think my body won't be able to handle to long a ride on the thing :-) a custom Gas tank is being made for it right now, a couple other pieces also. When I git those together, I well start a thread, I am sure progress well be slow though. Would also like to see and hear about your single speed.

[Shaky Jake]

Hey Kevin, I am mocking up a Powerplus engined boardtrack single speed racer and I hope to build the engine also - well be my first. I started reading your thread again from the start - fantastic stuff !! I just made the mounting plates for my engine, really appreciate your very detailed post, as I well need all the help I can git - thanks again and keep it up.

That's cool Tom; I am also building a PowerPlus motored single speed Indian. Mine will be a road model though, not a speedway bike. This one isn't going to be for the Cannonball, it's just going to be a rider. Will you be doing a build thread?


Kevin


.

[Tom Lovejoy]

Hey Kevin, I am mocking up a Powerplus engined boardtrack single speed racer and I hope to build the engine also - well be my first. I started reading your thread again from the start - fantastic stuff !! I just made the mounting plates for my engine, really appreciate your very detailed post, as I well need all the help I can git - thanks again and keep it up.

[Shaky Jake]

Kevin
Sorry I did not mean to confuse you with my use of “adjust”. I should have been more blunt in my response. My “adjustment” was to weld up the notch and make a new notch in the location where needed. As having only the one interlock, the notch location had to be exact, without a lot of slop. Depending on the condition of your shift quadrant, be careful not to damage the little lettering at the front and back when “moving” the notches.
Burgie

No need to apologize Burgie. As always, I value your input. I think we are thinking the same way.




Kevin


.

[Spacke2speed]

Kevin
Sorry I did not mean to confuse you with my use of “adjust”. I should have been more blunt in my response. My “adjustment” was to weld up the notch and make a new notch in the location where needed. As having only the one interlock, the notch location had to be exact, without a lot of slop. Depending on the condition of your shift quadrant, be careful not to damage the little lettering at the front and back when “moving” the notches.
Burgie

[Shaky Jake]

Thanks for the confirmation on that, Burgie. Here's a picture of the 1915 shifter with the locking lever on the shift ball that you described:








And, as you indicated, it doesn't have the notched linkage and safety lock on the transmission:










I've tried to adjust the shifter quadrant to match the interlock on the transmission as you suggested, but they don't match up. I've tried two different shift quadrants and two different interlocks. If I adjust it so that first and second match up, third does not, and if I adjust it so that second and third match up, first won't. The best I've been able to get is so that first, neutral and second match up, and third almost matches up. I'm thinking I could file the third gear notch on the shifter quadrant wider and make it work though. I'll give that some thought.

Thanks for the response Burgiie.




Kevin


.

[Spacke2speed]

Kevin
Yes, the ’16 PP transmission do not have the interlocking on the outside of the transmission as the locking is on the shift gate. That is how you can easily tell a ’16 transmission from the later transmissions. You will also notice that in the ’16 literature, they show a cross section of the ’16 transmission. While the main shaft has two thrust washers on ’17 and up transmissions, the ’16 transmissions uses a ball bearing arrangement for the thrust.
While similar, it is not the same problem. I had an issue with the non-interlocking ’15 transmission that use a locking lever on the shift ball, which locks into notches on the shifting quadrant. I had to “adjust” the notches on the shifting quadrant to match the proper alignment of the gears inside the transmission. At that time I had both types, I could have used an interlocking ’15 transmission, which uses a shifter with just slotted quadrant, but I thought the locking setup on the shift ball was more “mechanical” looking and different, so I use it.
While some people may not like this idea, I would “adjust” the notches on the shifting quadrant to match the notches on the transmission interlock.
Burgie

[Shaky Jake]

I was studying some old Indian sales brochures, and it occurred to me what may have been causing my transmission problems. I'm using 1917 or later style transmission & clutch linkage with a 1916 shifter. It doesn't work right. Here's why. This is a picture of the transmission in my Cannonball bike. The fan shaped piece with the notches in its circumference is called the "outside operating lever." The shifter linkage connects to it and moves it to change gears in the transmission:








The piece that I'm lifting in this next picture is called the "operating lever safety lock." When installed, it has a spring pushing against it that pushes it back and causes it to engage the notches in the circumference of the outside operating lever, preventing the transmission from changing gears. There is a dog on the clutch linkage (not shown in this picture) that moves the safety lock, much like my finger in the picture, so that you can change gears whenever you stomp on the clutch pedal. The spring pushes the safety lock back when you release the clutch pedal, preventing you from changing gears with the clutch engaged:








Here's the problem with using that arrangement with a 1916 (or 1915) three speed shifter; the shifter also has notches in it, and you can't adjust the linkages so that all three of the shifter notches line up with all three of the outside operating lever notches. As a result, the transmission doesn't always end up all the way in gear, and sometimes it binds up. Here's a picture from the 1916 Indian sales brochure that shows a 1916 shifter like mine. You can see the notches:








Here is another picture from the 1916 Indian sales brochure, of a motorcycle like mine:








Here's where it starts to get interesting; when you zoom in on that picture, there is no fan shaped outside operating lever, safety lock, nor dog on the clutch linkage:








In comparison, here is a similar picture, but from the 1917 sales brochure:








When you zoom in on the 1917 picture you can clearly see the fan shaped outside operating lever, the safety latch, and the dog on the clutch linkage:








This is a picture of the 1917 shifter arrangement (the horizontal lever). It does not have tight notches like the 1916 shifter:








Based on this information, it is possible that the fan shaped outside operating lever and safety lock didn't come out until 1917 and in 1915 and 1916 Indian depended exclusively on the shifter to properly locate the gears. The 1915 shifter had a little thumb button to hold it in the notch. If this is the case, I can see two possibilities for improving my shifter action; I could either remove the safety lock, or turn the shifter lever around so it doesn't engage the notches.

Here's the fly in the ointment; the parts book lists the same operating lever and safety latch part numbers for 1916 to 1922. It is possible that the intent was for those parts to be retrofit to 1916 models. Who knows. If anyone has any experience with this, please chime in. In any case, when I get the opportunity I plan to make the changes and see if it improves the operation of my transmission.

That's all for now.






Kevin


.