Shaft drive dilemma

[Redkite]

My project is a Kwak ZL cruiser married to an Lombo LDW702. The layout is similar to 'Modite' in germany, if you've seen it.
I'm attempting to retain the shaft drive. Unfortunately the shaft is on the left and counter-rotates compared to the LDW flywheel.

I could find a bmw/goldwing/CX right hand shaft/hub, but that also means changing swing arm assy, rear wheel, disc,caliper etc. Has anyone tried flipping the swing arm + rear hub over? Running upside down in effect. The pic shows the gears cut for one direction, but when we throttle off, on the over-run, its the wheel driving the engine, using the back of the gears anyway?
AND whereas the original engine delivered 100bhp thru the gears, the Lombo will now only be pushing 17-ish hp. The breather hole would be switched. Even if the gears mesh ok, the oil reservoir is redundant, with possible oil frothing prob?
Some words of engineering wisdom would be most welcome.
Regards to all, Bob.

[coachgeo]

Sorry not familiar with the Modite bike by name.

Dont know about the running the Final Drive upside down or lube issues.

the kawi engine Im betting ran same direction as the LDW. Difference is that inside the tranny they ended up with a reversed direction at the output (odd number of gear wheels). Instead of adding more gears inside the tranny to bring it back.......... they just did a clutch side (left side) final drive in CW direction. Investigate your Kawi trany to see if you can mate it (or part of it?) to get same CW output.

Another option is to go fly wheel forward. Chain or belt off your CVT to an intermediate drive shaft that runs along side the block to a Ujoint at the swing arm that the final drive attaches to. One advantage to this is you can change sprockets on the chain portion to adjust the final ratio's output. Course you could put secondary CVT clutch right to the intermediate drive shaft too but loose the final drive adjust ability of the added chain

[gilburton]

Personally I would just flip it and give it a go. As you say the BHP is miniscule in comparison. Cars use reverse ok so I don't see why it wouldn't work but as you say an engineer will probably say don't do it lol.
Might be best to carry a spare gear just in case lol.
Are you running a chain from driven pulley to shaft??
As coach says turning the engine round would solve the direction problem but will need a shaft(old car drive shaft for instance) down one side. Could the drive pulley be attached to the bottom pulley shaft of the engine if turned round?? and the alternator be relocated to the flywheel end??

[Stuart]

The Modite is considered by many to be the best conversion out there & I have to agree. If you need anymore pictures let me know as I'm sure I have a bunch somewhere.
I was told that the alternator is within the flywheel which makes getting the engine into the frame much easier.

[Redkite]

Another option is to go fly wheel forward. Chain or belt off your CVT to an intermediate drive shaft that runs along side the block to a Ujoint at the swing arm that the final drive attaches to. One advantage to this is you can change sprockets on the chain portion to adjust the final ratio's output. Course you could put secondary CVT clutch right to the intermediate drive shaft too but loose the final drive adjust ability of the added chain

Flywheel facing forward looked a winner with the cvt driven from the timing belt end, but I'm hoping to fit it without any frame mods, and the downtubes are just a few mil from the flywheel, and I couldnt get the starter motor in. I could move the engine back, but then not enough room for my CVT, that is until Tappy puts a super-slim cvt on the market! I've looked at every configuration, even buying a 2-stroke lump for the clutch/gearbox 'sbrumby' idea.

Are you running a chain from driven pulley to shaft??
As coach says turning the engine round would solve the direction problem but will need a shaft(old car drive shaft for instance) down one side. Could the drive pulley be attached to the bottom pulley shaft of the engine if turned round?? and the alternator be relocated to the flywheel end??

CVT primary will run off the flywheel, and, as Coach suggests, use a short chain drive off the CVT secondary, as you say, to be able to adjust sprockets/gearing, and also to keep the engine central in the frame. I will have to look into Stuarts alternator idea, as I'm about to lop off the bracket.
Using my upside down drive is tempting, but I'm hoping to cross continents on it, so I've been watching (on Fleabay) a GL1200 swingarm/hub/wheel up in Cumbria, for notalot of duckets. well, by chance a customer has offered to pick it up for me, so we'll see what develops.
One things for sure - It wont have 'Modite'* looks, or teutonic build quality! Thanks.
*www.youtube.com/watch?v=SkuxYMszgAs

[XLerate]

Might look into reversing rotation of the engine? That was commonly done on spark-fired IC engines such as VW for use in experimental aircraft. Should be even easier with a diesel if the injection pump will cooperate.

[pietenpol2002]

A bit of a stretch perhaps, but there's always the double-sided cog or poly-v belt. Makes a quiet, maintenance-free option for reversing the drive. The down side is the cost. But, you could tuck it in behind the CVT without reversing the engine while avoiding oily chains or clunky gearboxes.

[gearhead1951]

you can do the same setup with chain and sprockets a lot cheaper

[gilburton]

Only problem with chains is the lube issue as it would have to be kept away from the CVT!
I think Sam Brumby has had a lot of success with multiple V belts so might be worth getting his opinion??
It would involve multiple shafts/idlers but you have to run some sort of drive to the shaft anyway?
Maybe you could make up 3 plates in a sandwich configuration with the cvt in one part and the reverse drive in the other?
If you think computer fan type construction??

[pietenpol2002]

Good point. The common v-best is also avaialbe as double-sided. The common pulleys would certainly be much cheaper that cogged or multi-v. In fact, it might be cheaper overall than going with chain, while reversing the drive and with the ability to dial in the needed ratio. And then suddenly, I could envision the power being taken off of a pivoting 2 pulley "tensionser" that could be pivoted to provide a reverse "gear" for that sidecar rig.

[gilburton]

Didn't know you could get double sided V belts! That would certainly be a cheaper option. Try these people for your pulleys/belts as they are pretty good.
http://www.bearingboys.co.uk/Mower_Belt ... on_-2606-c

[coachgeo]

Only problem with chains is the lube issue as it would have to be kept away from the CVT!...

Don't see an issue with this at all. CVT should be covered and have a snorkle for cool air. For safety this 3 sprocket chain must be covered so lube making it's way to CVT is a non issue.

[gilburton]

Only problem with chains is the lube issue as it would have to be kept away from the CVT!...

Don't see an issue with this at all. CVT should be covered and have a snorkle for cool air. For safety this 3 sprocket chain must be covered so lube making it's way to CVT is a non issue.

I think he's going to have a problem fitting in all the pulleys/shafts/belt in the limited space without adding separate covers as well? If he used a belt it would just require a safety cover or guard over the whole thing.

[pietenpol2002]

this 3 sprocket chain must be covered

I believe a double-sided reversing sprocket/pulley arrangement will require at a minimum 4 (or more) sprockets/pulleys to get sufficient wrap around the reversing sprocket/pulley. One would want the chain/belt wrapping at least half way around (and it needs to do so in opposite directions) which can't be done with just 3 of them unless 1 or more is extremely large and the third quite small.

And Coach, for being a dedicated CVT/Belt man, I can' t believe you're arguing for a chain.

[gilburton]

Exactly I figured possibly 2 small "idler"pulleys round the pulley on the shaft drive and one for the driven CVT pulley making 4 total ??

[gearhead1951]

When width is an issue , chain is the way to go and an oil bath chaincase wont add that much to the width !

[gilburton]

We're talking length in this particular setup. Looking at the pic he has the CVT vertically behind the engine with the driven pulley at the top. This means any additional length will probably put a chain drive with oil bath too long to fit behind the CVT and between the swinging arm and still line up with the uj joint of the shaft. The drive has to come down from the top pulley to the shaft but extra pulleys put in as well to reverse the drive.
This is how I imagine it with whatever type of drive chosen.
I've viewed it from the front of the bike and I don't know the actual rotation but it works either way.

[gilburton]

Just to add I also think a chain would be easier/narrower and also be a better option if it needs replacing and a split link is used and the idler pulleys made adjustable for wear?
If the idler pulleys/sprockets couldn't be made adjustable another one would have to be put on the longer run of chain/belt.
If a simple sheet barrier was put between the CVT and chain and some sort of guard to catch the oil flung off maybe a drip chain oiler similar to the ones for rear chains could be used??
Would an "O" ring or sealed chain be any good??
I've never had one so I don't know how they are for longevity v cost but oil wouldn't be such an issue

[albertaphil]

I ran an o-ring chain on a dirt bike and found it lasted about 10 times longer than the regular chains I've had. No oil to fling around and collect abrasive dust.

One would need to size the chain carefully for the speed and torque required. A double#40 wouldnt be any wider than a double v-belt or a flat cogged belt.

[coachgeo]

We're talking length in this particular setup. Looking at the pic he has the CVT vertically behind the engine with the driven pulley at the top. This means any additional length will probably put a chain drive with oil bath too long to fit behind the CVT and between the swinging arm and still line up with the uj joint of the shaft. The drive has to come down from the top pulley to the shaft but extra pulleys put in as well to reverse the drive.
This is how I imagine it with whatever type of drive chosen.
I've viewed it from the front of the bike and I don't know the actual rotation but it works either way.

use extra sprocket for a counter balancer? see link below for info

viewtopic.php?f=2&t=2573&p=17559#p17559

[tappy]

Am I missing something?
Look at the LDW702 data sheet here: http://www.lombardinigroup.it/documents ... ENG_LR.pdf

Page 8 clearly indicates that you can take full power and torque from each end of the engine as long as you use the appropriate combination of pulley size & overhang to avoid excessive loads on the crank bearings.

So turn the engine round, take drive off the rear (now the original alternator end). Use a large diameter cogged pulley and belt to transmit torque UP to the first CVT pulley, whilst protecting the crank bearings. Use the CVT to drive DOWN to the shaft input. Leave the shaft drive as it is.

Is that not simpler? As I say - what am I missing?

[coachgeo]

Am I missing something?
Look at the LDW702 data sheet here: http://www.lombardinigroup.it/documents ... ENG_LR.pdf...
Is that not simpler? As I say - what am I missing?

What's missing? For Redkite your right on though either way is not a huge difference. Both ways your running a secondary chain or belt, divorcing the CVT from the engine. Both ways your got other added complexity that steals some HP.

That and in a more general point not specific to this thread... which is others are watching this thread to see how this three sprocket chain system goes do not have access to Lombardini engines (aka USA) so this idea may be more valid for them. But thanks still......... now we know to look up what Kubota, yanmar etc says in their data sheet to see if its like the Lombo

[gilburton]

Redkite has already said that he didn't want to modify the down tubes which he would have to do if he turned the engine round as it is wider at the flywheel end!

[tappy]

right on though either way is not a huge difference. Both ways your running a secondary chain or belt, divorcing the CVT from the engine. Both ways your got other added complexity that steals some HP.

The HP stealing point is indeed the same for both, the issue I thought was being resolved was the direction of rotation and not wanting to hack the shaft drive about or use it upside down.

[tappy]

Redkite has already said that he didn't want to modify the down tubes which he would have to do if he turned the engine round as it is wider at the flywheel end!

Gotcha - missed that. Not sure I understand how / why it would be a problem, but now I know what I was missing

[gearhead1951]

Go to www.speedwaymotors.com and check out the "Quickchange" gearsets ! I dont know the center to center distance but you can get anything from a 1 to 1 all the way to a 10 to 1 ratio !

This could give you the rotational reverse you need for @ $100 !!

[coachgeo]

Go to http://www.speedwaymotors.com and check out the "Quickchange" gearsets ! I dont know the center to center distance but you can get anything from a 1 to 1 all the way to a 10 to 1 ratio !

This could give you the rotational reverse you need for @ $100 !!

Interesting. Assume a gearbox and lubrication system would have to be designed too.

[Eddy Wane]

Bob.
Read your post re the 702 engine. I am starting a build using the 602 motor. I would be interested to see how you build is progressing and if you sorted the drive problem.
Eddy .

[gearhead1951]

Go to http://www.speedwaymotors.com and check out the "Quickchange" gearsets ! I dont know the center to center distance but you can get anything from a 1 to 1 all the way to a 10 to 1 ratio !

This could give you the rotational reverse you need for @ $100 !!

Interesting. Assume a gearbox and lubrication system would have to be designed too.

Yes on the gearbox and these gears just need enough oil in that case to splash lube the bearings and gears !

[Redkite]

An overdue update for my build.
Thanks for some interesting ideas and suggestions from Gilburton, Tappy, Coach and pietenpol, and Ian, who I met at the Big Knock, also SBrumby, who's creations can be seen elsewhere in this forum. Mounting my Lombo LDW702 diesel twin inline was my first choice, but I faced many difficulties. Mounting the CVT, reversing the rotation, looking back, I should have ditched the Kwak frame and tried a BMW K75 or K100 or any rolling stock with a right-side shaft-drive set-up, where the engine is a stressed member, but I was too attached to this bike, with its laid-back riding position. I finally settled on a transverse layout, This meant dumping the shaft and go with chain, thus building a new swing-arm. The CVT concept is great, but if you want to mount transverse engine central in the frame, the cvt sticks out a mile (Ex Aixam Cvt's anyway). I have no main stand, so I'd like to have a neutral, so I needed some cogs.
I don't like a right-side gearchange so that ruled out a british gearbox, phosphor-bronze bushes and all, and a harley box is equally last century design and overpriced. I wanted a nice silky smooth (cheap) Jap tranny + clutch, so i've gone with an up-ended Suzuki two-stroke bottom end, with a 25mm solid shaft replacing the crank, made from EN-8 steel. This way I hope to use the original bearings/seals which are 52mm outer, 25mm inner. The shafts are made. 3 re-designs later, the gearbox mounts are nearly done. I don't know yet if this layout will work, but i hope to find out pretty soon.
Chain driven primary looked good, but I'm told that the power pulses of a diesel would be damped better with a belt-drive, so it'll be taper-lock hubs with a 3-belt pulleys. The gearbox will pivot, allowing some adjustment for the belts. If you search Sbrumby's belt drive pix on this forum, you'll get the idea.
DVLA are not helping. I sent the V5 in with detail changes for the diesel lump, it took them 8-9 weeks to reply, asking me to get 1, A receipt of purchase for the engine on headed paper from a garage, or 2, An AA / RAC insp. report blah blah, so I went to my local DLO with a written engine receipt from the (ebay) seller and the engine manufacturers spec sheet. Another 6 weeks and I get the same reply. When its rolling I'll take it to a vehicle engineers.