Tony Scott in PB Mag thoughts on the 45 ?

[Moriwaki]

Was a bit upset I must admit....he praised all the exotic parts in the 30 which is fair enough....we all know they are very special.

But he gives the 45 some stick.. saying to sum up....
" it'simply a cheap v4 road bike "....meanng in comparison to the 30.

He says the 45 cams run in the head....no needle rollers lke the 30...
is this correct lads ?

Anyway...I'm still upset...I must be a sensitive type eh ?

[Busy Little Shop]

Was a bit upset I must admit....he praised all the exotic parts in the 30 which is fair enough....we all know they are very special.

But he gives the 45 some stick.. saying to sum up....
" it'simply a cheap v4 road bike "....meanng in comparison to the 30.

He says the 45 cams run in the head....no needle rollers lke the 30...
is this correct lads ?

Anyway...I'm still upset...I must be a sensitive type eh ?

Me too!!!

Funny for the esteem Mr.Scott to say that because its fact that the
RC30 or VFR750R was based on the VFR road bike engine whereas the
RC45 was born from a clean sheet and thus more RVF exotic race
engine... in fact Honda's investment in the RC45 paid off as equity in the
RC211 V5...

Quote Kevin Cameron:
"As many have noted (including Jeremy Burgess) the original RC211V
V-Five was just a developed V-Four RC45 Superbike engine with an added
cylinder."

Quote Neil Spalding:

"It's something Honda got right for the start of MotoGP ten years ago.
We now know that once they'd resolved to build a 990cc five, they
needed a 187cc cylinder. So they dug out the old RC45 cylinder
designs, bored them out a little and snuck a fifth cylinder into the
centre of the front bank."


But its true the cams on the RC45 run right in the head instead of on cam
carriers so there was no option to shim the carriers like he did on the
RC30 when increasing the compression ratio... the chief problem of the
RC45 that was indentified by Tony was the fact HRC design the
compression ratio too low for the designed power output of 150 +
RWHP...

But all in all Tony really likes the RC45 engine, saying it's complex
but good and reliable, and as it's in such a low state of tune
initially, his work brings big increases in horsepower...

Quote Tony Scott
"The compression was about 12:1 where the Kawasaki was at 14.5:1,
but the gear-driven cams meant you couldn't just skim the head. On the
RC30 you could get away with it because the cam carriers were separate
to. the cylinder head, so. when you skimmed the head you could then
jack up the cam carriers to. align the gears, But in the RC45 the cams
ran directly in the head. In the end I bared the small ends of the
con-rods and fitted eccentric bushes to. raise the crowns of the
pistons. I also. worked an the piston crowns but what I really wanted
was blank, unmachined pistons with the piston rings already fitted.
Sataru Hariike (now head of HRC) was the project manager far the RC45
and he flew aver to. see me. I was preparing the Castrol bikes far the
domestic superbike series and the Japanese were fairly reluctant to
send unmachined pistons to a man in a workshop in Lancashire. I showed
him the tools I had and he agreed to give me what I needed. We got the
power up to about 145bhp, something like that - enough to be
competitive with the Kawasakis. And I tuned 45s for everybody: Phil
McCallen, Hislop, Nick Jefferies."


But this is not the full story. Tony Scott's engines are also well
known for their exceptional smoothness and very crisp throttle
response, as well as reliability, all a result of the blueprinting
changes which improve reliability as well as increasing power.

[roger]

Re: Tony Scott quote:

Interesting info (thanks Larry) particularly the way Tony resolved the problem of raising compression ratio – and more particularly by (over?) boring the con-rod little-ends - so as to fit eccentric bushes (thus increasing the big to little-end centre dimension). Not an ideal solution given that little-end extremity metal thickness would have been reduced over its most stressed region, i.e., where the maximum piston (etc.) centripetal accelerative force is concentrated (potential little-end plastic deformation at exhaust TDC, if my basic Physics is correct). I presume this is why specific machining of blank pistons was by far the better option – and was ultimately employed.

I’ve recently been told (not by Tony Scott) that the initial tuning work Tony carried out on a couple of the very first RC45 CHB (Castrol Honda Britain) ‘test-bed’ race engines was somewhat unique (would con-rod machining have been one of the ‘unique’ features?). I’ve also been told (by the same source) that one such engine was fitted to the 1994 F1 & Senior Winning ‘45 ridden by Steve Hislop, i.e.:

.....“As there was no race kit parts available… Tony had to uniquely tune the engines in question. These 2 engines were used by Steve Hislop as a test bed for future tuning for the rest of the team.”

I’m not convinced about fitting a ‘test-bed’ engine to an actual, to be used in anger, race bike as the risk of failure at (by far) the wrong time/venue seems (for several and various reasons) one too great for any race team/manufacturer/factory to take (especially in consideration of the Japanese attitude to ‘losing face’) .

I’m interested in such matters because some years ago I purchased a full kit RC45 from Tillston Motorcycles (Stockton-on-Tees). Tillston’s purchased the bike (I believe quite early on) from CHB and subsequently raced it, primarily with James Courtney on board. The ‘rumour’ was that the bike Tillston’s purchased from CHB happened to be the 1994 TT F1 & Senior ‘45 ridden by Steve Hislop; and (given information I have) it is possible that it (my ex-Tillston bike) could indeed be the ’94 TT winning Hislop bike… either entirely, largely, partially, or minimally (or indeed not at all.. but not at all is the least likely possibility for various reasons).

Though I could be wrong, I don’t imagine the engine fitted to the ’94 TT winner (my bike?) would be in any way a ‘unique test-bed engine’ as this would imply CHB treated Hislop differently to its other riders (!?). Not only that the risk of 'test-bed' failure would have been elevated (one way or another), not only that its riders would have been far from amicably and equitably treated – what sort of race team would employ that sort of ‘nonsense!?

Anyway, does anyone have any further info on the early CHB RC45’s which might help to ‘clear the mist and throw a little more light’ on matters?

Any info much appreciated,

Regards to all,

Roger.

[JonR]

Hi Roger,
Maybe you could try emailing Paul at prauk at yahoo.com
He has a lot of Honda Britain information I believe.
Regards,
Jon.

Re: Tony Scott quote:

Interesting info (thanks Larry) particularly the way Tony resolved the problem of raising compression ratio – and more particularly by (over?) boring the con-rod little-ends - so as to fit eccentric bushes (thus increasing the big to little-end centre dimension). Not an ideal solution given that little-end extremity metal thickness would have been reduced over its most stressed region, i.e., where the maximum piston (etc.) centripetal accelerative force is concentrated (potential little-end plastic deformation at exhaust TDC, if my basic Physics is correct). I presume this is why specific machining of blank pistons was by far the better option – and was ultimately employed.

I’ve recently been told (not by Tony Scott) that the initial tuning work Tony carried out on a couple of the very first RC45 CHB (Castrol Honda Britain) ‘test-bed’ race engines was somewhat unique (would con-rod machining have been one of the ‘unique’ features?). I’ve also been told (by the same source) that one such engine was fitted to the 1994 F1 & Senior Winning ‘45 ridden by Steve Hislop, i.e.:

.....“As there was no race kit parts available… Tony had to uniquely tune the engines in question. These 2 engines were used by Steve Hislop as a test bed for future tuning for the rest of the team.”

I’m not convinced about fitting a ‘test-bed’ engine to an actual, to be used in anger, race bike as the risk of failure at (by far) the wrong time/venue seems (for several and various reasons) one too great for any race team/manufacturer/factory to take (especially in consideration of the Japanese attitude to ‘losing face’) .

I’m interested in such matters because some years ago I purchased a full kit RC45 from Tillston Motorcycles (Stockton-on-Tees). Tillston’s purchased the bike (I believe quite early on) from CHB and subsequently raced it, primarily with James Courtney on board. The ‘rumour’ was that the bike Tillston’s purchased from CHB happened to be the 1994 TT F1 & Senior ‘45 ridden by Steve Hislop; and (given information I have) it is possible that it (my ex-Tillston bike) could indeed be the ’94 TT winning Hislop bike… either entirely, largely, partially, or minimally (or indeed not at all.. but not at all is the least likely possibility for various reasons).

Though I could be wrong, I don’t imagine the engine fitted to the ’94 TT winner (my bike?) would be in any way a ‘unique test-bed engine’ as this would imply CHB treated Hislop differently to its other riders (!?). Not only that the risk of 'test-bed' failure would have been elevated (one way or another), not only that its riders would have been far from amicably and equitably treated – what sort of race team would employ that sort of ‘nonsense!?

Anyway, does anyone have any further info on the early CHB RC45’s which might help to ‘clear the mist and throw a little more light’ on matters?

Any info much appreciated,

Regards to all,

Roger.

[markrc45]

think it has happend again you have all took what the press have said as the out and out facts.......
i called in to see tony the other week and drop something off for him. and when i put this to him that he had broken a forum members heart by saying the 30 was better than the 45 he smiled and in the words of the man him self said total sh#t. he has never said the 30 was better than the 45 at all. it was just the typical press twisting words and not sending to print what was actually said.......

And to be honest even if he did say the 30 was better than the 45 coming from the best v4 engine tuner in the world with the most amount of tt winning engines under his belt in all engine types .... who are we to say any different....

[Jamiec_c]

Just a few pics of our chassis and engine dyno;

chassis dyno, tuned this yesterday, Speed four

engine dyno room


control desk

[roger]

Hi jay,

I think you’re ‘right on the money' at “45/50 rwhp back in the day (about the same as a good mid 60’s Thruxton T120 Bonneville, e.g., as per Malcolm Uphill’s first 100 mph Production TT lap on the model).

I’d agree with 60 rwhp (24/7) for a modern Manx, so that’s an increase of 30 to 33% thanks to ‘production uplift’ of an engine design that doesn’t really impart much in the way of scope… so my view is that the percentage increase in latter-day Manx output really is ‘rather spectacular’.

So what now for the RC45?

Regards to Jay and all,

Roger.