Why is this revolutionary? Why is this not standard now

Fuck me.

Best idea ever

Tell me why

http://iffitech.com/project/gp-piston/

B94A935D-BBE4-4E55-9B72-37B0FF688E37.jpeg
C2E5D042-86D2-4BD5-8A54-B5A7A6A46BB4.jpeg
C4BEE02C-FA39-463A-B59D-FB58A1C9EDB5.jpeg

Re: Why is this revolutionary? Why is this not standard now

919F6030-2CC8-4C32-A8D7-F1926DD1C72D.jpeg

Re: Why is this revolutionary? Why is this not standard now

Ye shall catch no ring on thou port

Re: Why is this revolutionary? Why is this not standard now

Fuck, imagine the size your ports could be

FUCKING GAPING

Re: Why is this revolutionary? Why is this not standard now

I want them in 39mm and up.

I’d pay for pistons like that for hobbit. I could only imagine the power you could unleash out of the shittiest kits

Re: Why is this revolutionary? Why is this not standard now

So is the ring clamped down on by crown to keep it from bulging out into ports? I feel like that would act like a stuck ring, leaking compression

Or is it moreso you can turn the crown and ring locating pin wherever you want? What keeps it from unthreading if it's not bottomed out? I don't think thats it

It's late and I feel like I'm missing something obvious

With the exhaust that wide, would crossflow from transfers to exhaust thru wrist pin be a concern? I can't remember where it was, but I think I saw a similar idea where the piston shell threaded onto the wrist pin retaining part, leaving no holes for the wrist pin on outside of piston

Re: Why is this revolutionary? Why is this not standard now

You could make the main port so large you wouldn’t need to port all the way to the pin

And there’s vertical gas ports to keep ring seal kickin ass

Re: Why is this revolutionary? Why is this not standard now

Tweaker trash /

Kinda late to the show guys

Guys name is mark Atkinson

He’s been featured on shows like diesel brothers ( he helped them build a conversion bracket for one of their trucks)

He has Mutilple two stroke speed records

He was helping two stroke stuffing with a 100% exhaust port

Edit: The piston has a few issues... it’s difficult to set the ring groove and stuff

Re: Why is this revolutionary? Why is this not standard now

Saw this too.

It does nothing fix bulging rings genius

That’s the point

No more bridges

Re: Why is this revolutionary? Why is this not standard now

So I know 2strokestuffing guy had issues with his in which he solved by basically running a regular ring with a vertical locating pin to keep it retained over a 100% of bore exhaust port. Limits the bulging (another novel idea).

It would be interesting to see how well these actually work. Low compression is the problem Alex ran into it seems with this design.

There is a patent on it so I imagine that makes it harder to get some?

After you thread the head on the piston you insert a retaining pin to keep it from unthreading.

Re: Why is this revolutionary? Why is this not standard now

Am I stupid? I still don't see how it keeps it from going into the exhaust port. It's still got a gap.

Pistons are tough, they expand so much and take so much force, I saw Alex doing this and it just seems like such a fringe solution. You're adding weight and introducing a major point of failure. If you mic out a basic kit piston it's such a crazy shape, I dunno how you're going to machine a thread interface that is going to maintain the correct contact and strength across 400 degrees and insane forces. You see this stuff and it looks cool, maybe it will survive one or two runs at bonneville.

Re: Why is this revolutionary? Why is this not standard now

The cap has a ridge running around it that the ring sits in. So 2 stroke stuffing ring was retained as well to not bulge? I thought his version didn’t do that. I can only sit thru so much of his vids

Re: Why is this revolutionary? Why is this not standard now

> Graham Motzing Wrote:

> -------------------------------------------------------

> Am I stupid? I still don't see how it keeps it from going into the

> exhaust port. It's still got a gap.

>

> Pistons are tough, they expand so much and take so much force, I saw

> Alex doing this and it just seems like such a fringe solution. You're

> adding weight and introducing a major point of failure. If you mic out

> a basic kit piston it's such a crazy shape, I dunno how you're going to

> machine a thread interface that is going to maintain the correct contact

> and strength across 400 degrees and insane forces. You see this stuff

> and it looks cool, maybe it will survive one or two runs at bonneville.

I've been coming back to this thread trying to figure that out too. It still doesn't really make sense to me, when I initially saw this I assumed the ring was going to be designed to be one continuous ring with like a ring expander or something behind it. But it doesn't seem to be the case, there's still a ring gap

Re: Why is this revolutionary? Why is this not standard now

Ring gap still exists but the ring is captured with a lip on the piston. Ring has a U cutout to hold it from going too far into a port

Re: Why is this revolutionary? Why is this not standard now

> JBOT Admin Wrote:

> -------------------------------------------------------

> Ring gap still exists but the ring is captured with a lip on the piston.

> Ring has a U cutout to hold it from going too far into a port

Okay now I get it....dang that is awesome

Re: Why is this revolutionary? Why is this not standard now

Top drawing is how I understand it. Bottom is what I think Alex ended up doing (I think?).

Same, I should maybe watch the video before spewing conspiracy storys but WE.

Shout out Crayola for making this possible.

IMG_20210212_123221.jpg

Re: Why is this revolutionary? Why is this not standard now

Ah, I see now. I couldn't see the little shelf on the ring in the picture. Makes sense then

Re: Why is this revolutionary? Why is this not standard now

Also problems of the crown getting loose after thermal cycles. Mark talks about they don't last very long.

I designed one for regular rings that allowed for more exhaust port area without cross flow into transfers based on what mark was doing.

I just haven't had time to make one other than the prototype.

Re: Why is this revolutionary? Why is this not standard now

Tweaker trash /

What cool about this is the wrist pin! U can go really big on the exhaust port & not worry about the exhaust and transfer communicating like me when I found my first gf.

Re: Why is this revolutionary? Why is this not standard now

Yes, you can do a double or triple port exhaust and have them extend over the transfers pretty far.

Re: Why is this revolutionary? Why is this not standard now

♣Slew Foot♣ /

Compression thread and interference fit but you could have the wrist pin lock it once scewed in. A short piston like a m48 this is cool.

Re: Why is this revolutionary? Why is this not standard now

This is fucking tight and all...but can you imagine how catastrophic it would be if all the heat cycles would make the crown unthread? It seems like this would be great for a track bike where you are going to fuck with the top end every heat but terrifying for a daily

« Go to Topics — end of thread

Want to post in this forum? We'd love to have you join the discussion, but first:

Login or Create Account