RichRide
570Ride
Installed the GN250 CHI-NA box lastnight on my 1980 xs. I will provide feedback if any issues or thoughts arise! The 40 year old tci let me down and this replacement got me running again.
Thanks Rich.Installed the GN250 CHI-NA box lastnight on my 1980 xs. I will provide feedback if any issues or thoughts arise! The 40 year old tci let me down and this replacement got me running again.
Yes please. The more input we get, the more we'll understand this conversion......but it would be fun to do a side by side.
Yes please. The more input we get, the more we'll understand this conversion.
If you still have the original TCI box, you could reinstall it and do an apples to apples against his bike... doesn't matter who's better, just a baseline to do an "after" comparison. Would be interesting to see.I will try and setup some tests and see if I can come up with some decent data. My ‘83 with the GN250 VS my friends ‘81 stock bike seemed to be quicker with the gn250 but it’s hard because every bike is different. So on the same bike would be easier to tell.
Yeah... that would make a good baseline. I'd remind that the timing needs to be adjusted as required with the GN box to get as close to 35° advance as possible. if you don't do that, I don't think the GN is gonna perform as well as it could.do a high gear 30 to 60MPH run off, swap boxes tween the bikes repeat?
Yeah... that would make a good baseline. I'd remind that the timing needs to be adjusted as required with the GN box to get as close to 35° advance as possible. if you don't do that, I don't think the GN is gonna perform as well as it could.
Another thing I'm concerned with is fuel consumption. Although I don't think that's a worry for most of us, it's still something that needs looking at. I ran out of summer due to medical issues, but I planned on doing a fixed route back to back with a fill-up and box change in 'tween to compare mileage. Maybe someone else could pick up that baton?
We'll leave the light on for ya...I'll be right down to do MPG comparisons on your bike Jim. Hmm down to Bob's and back? Alternating iggy boxes at each fuel stop.
A contrarian view would be that if we all went "by the book," we'd never discover other ways forward. There's been an ongoing discussion on iggy timing. You can read about it here. The upshot is that most knowledgeable folk here agree that 35 to 38° is plenty of advance for these motors and modern fuels... in fact some claim the motor runs better at 35°. Having run it at 35° for about 500 miles now, I'm convinced that 35° works just fine.I am a " By the Book " man if the spec says 41.4 or 40 degrees There should be something
clearly saying 35 can also work. In the long run
Yes SirA contrarian view would be that if we all went "by the book," we'd never discover other ways forward. There's been an ongoing discussion on iggy timing. You can read about it here. The upshot is that most knowledgeable folk here agree that 35 to 38° is plenty of advance for these motors... in fact some claim the motor runs better at 35°. Having run it at 35° for about 500 miles now, I'm convinced that 35° works just fine.
At the least... it's not hurting anything.
But what about exhaust valve temperature in warmer climate ... ?
One word spoken before can save burnt valves for perhaps many owners
Ignition timing actually has very little to nothing to do with burnt and/or overheated valves... which I'm gathering is your main concern?500 miles is Nothing ..If it comes down to overheating the valves.