AlisoBob's Gen 4 A/F Conversion

Post by **AlisoBob** » November 5th, 2007, 3:20 pm

I'm working on it Scott, maybe even to the point of pluming the frame spars to carry fuel....

dannygraves · Post by **dannygraves** » November 5th, 2007, 3:53 pm

AlisoBob wrote:I'm working on it Scott, maybe even to the point of pluming the frame spars to carry fuel....

Post by **AlisoBob** » November 5th, 2007, 4:17 pm

Quick math implies that the spars hold about .406 U.S. gallons total.

Thats worth the effort to go after I think.. Beats a push back the the truck...

iggys-amsoil · Post by **iggys-amsoil** » November 5th, 2007, 5:29 pm

I liked the idea of the frame spars for fuel, however I don't the idea of only two theards of the fittings, because the spar wall thickness.

Surly Clark makes a tank for the 250R?

3 gal. $180.00
http://www.clarkemfg.com/cgi-bin/miva?M ... honda+CR-F

Post by **AlisoBob** » November 5th, 2007, 6:04 pm

I was going to use "push in " style fittings.

I think Clark gets the adding volume, by extending downwards too... Not an option.

Ported&Polished · Post by **Ported&Polished** » November 5th, 2007, 10:10 pm

I thought there were some side plate tanks available. Also a tank like a under fender bottle simular to a overflow bottle could be an option. My buddy witha A/F carries two small bottles of fuel in his pack while he rides, works well for him. Gives him 16 ounces of extra fuel which doesn't weigh much or take up alot of space, but is a good reserve quantity. A third such bottle would be good for desert or dunes imo. And I always ride witha camel back anyways, especially when going for a full tank type ride. Just a easy option for yous guys.

iggys-amsoil · Post by **iggys-amsoil** » November 5th, 2007, 10:14 pm

AlisoBob wrote:I was going to use "push in " style fittings.

Well I know the tank is wider at the top.

The shrouds have a flat area that normally lay flat against the stock tank. Its hard to tell but mine are pushed out and have 1/4 gaps at the top. Course that might not mean anything, comparing a CR to CRF. Just food for thought.

Post by **AlisoBob** » November 8th, 2007, 4:07 pm

Heres the parts.. The airbox, flange, adapter, filter mount, boot, boot spacer.

Heres the view of the assembled flange.

Heres the view from the boot.

The finished unit.

It fits perfectly, has ZERO stress on the boot in any axis, retains the stock filter, clears the shock nicely,and most importantly....has ZERO LEAKS....

Sweet!!

iggys-amsoil · Post by **iggys-amsoil** » November 8th, 2007, 5:28 pm

AlisoBob wrote:

The finished unit.

Sweet!!

Hellbear · Post by **Hellbear** » November 8th, 2007, 8:18 pm

Looks good Bob. If I ever have any problems with my boot I'll give that a go.

97af · Post by **97af** » November 9th, 2007, 6:07 am

Bob,
You do nice work for a white guy.......

Post by **AlisoBob** » November 9th, 2007, 7:43 am

Post by **AlisoBob** » November 12th, 2007, 8:45 pm

Installed shots

britincali · Post by **britincali** » November 12th, 2007, 9:32 pm

Looks perfecto bob

Post by **AlisoBob** » November 12th, 2007, 10:46 pm

britincali wrote:Looks perfecto bob

Not 100%

The 500 boot fits much lower than the 250 boot did. I lightly "Clearanced" the left frame casting to allow it to fit better. Some may frown on this... I figured a little aluminum on the floor wouldn't hurt anything..

lewisclan · Post by **lewisclan** » November 13th, 2007, 6:51 am

Nice work

HrcRacing · Post by **HrcRacing** » November 13th, 2007, 7:07 am

AlisoBob wrote:
britincali wrote:Looks perfecto bob
Not 100%

The 500 boot fits much lower than the 250 boot did. I lightly "Clearanced" the left frame casting to allow it to fit better. Some may frown on this... I figured a little aluminum on the floor wouldn't hurt anything..

Doesn't look much different than what Honda did on the CR250R to me. Should be fine and looks great Bob.

Ported&Polished · Post by **Ported&Polished** » November 13th, 2007, 9:24 am

It's nice to see that you (Bob) are going through all the aspects of this conversion as somewhat of the guiney pig. That will help future builders to acomplish their builds with the same bike. But I wonder what folks here think about the difference between that bike and other donors in reguards to performance verses ease of conversion. For example the gen 1 conversion is a two day project that requires minimal thought and work, where as the bike you are doing appears to need more time and effort. Is the average Hoon (hardcore as they are), gonna appreciate the performance advantage? In other words, should I consider a gen 3 above all others because I will be stoked beyond the stoke I would get from the older A/F donors?

ShanMan · Post by **ShanMan** » November 13th, 2007, 9:58 am

not Bob...but I will take a shot at answering this one:

The answer is YES if you are the type of rider that can take advantage of the chassis tuning and improved brakes and suspension that the newest generation Honda's offer over the older units. They turn better, are more flexible and as such are more forgiving & less fatigueing, and they stop better as well.

That said, a gen. one chassis is in many ways an order of magnatude better than the steel bikes in terms of handling, suspension and brakes. The steelie still gets the nod for being more comfy...particularly when sitting.

Gen. two bikes became significantly more forgiving (i.e. more flexible) and turned much, much better than the gen. one.

Gen. three bikes were more of all of the above, and are considered by many to be the best handling two stroke Honda chassis of all time. Some think the turning became a little too sharp and lost some stability at high speeds. Most probably cannot tell the difference between gen. two and gen. three outside of the physical appearance. The conversion effort for both is the pretty much same however, and gen. three bikes are plentiful, so why not get the later, better suspension and brakes?

Gen. four through six are all four stroke bikes. They require about the same level of effort and knowledge as the gen. three chassis to convert, but with them you get the very latest refinements in chassis tuning, suspension and brakes as well as the most up-to-date styling.

One last thought as well: The older the bike, the harder it is to get parts. Right now that may not be a significant problem, but it will be in years to come. I used to have a surgically clean 1987 KX500, and it was a good bike with a fantastic engine. But, parts for that bike were tough to come by, and the 1998 CR500 I bought to replace it was a better bike with better parts availability. And so it goes, that in the world of motorsport, newer is usually better (through refinement learned at the track and on the trail) and is for sure easier to live with day in and day out.

Post by **AlisoBob** » November 13th, 2007, 1:27 pm

I agree with Shan on everything, but want to add these thoughts...

I dont like the rad placement on the Gen 1

Honda only made the Gen 2 for 2 years.. Thats allot of development money down the shitter, couldnt be that great of a bike......

I like having something others dont ( Gen 4)

If I was "Joe Average" with only a hammer and a pair of vise grips in the garage, I would be all over that Gen 1. Both for price, and ease of conversion.

My order, best to least... for the general public.

Gen 1

Gen 4

Gen 3

Gen2

dannygraves · Post by **dannygraves** » November 13th, 2007, 1:59 pm

x2 from both of you guys.
I love my gen 1, but being on a budget it was a lot of bang for the buck. Handling, braking, etc are WWWAAAYYY better than my '86 steelie and after everything was said and done I still spent less than $1000 on the conversion. Its about the only thing I've put together that I could sell for more than I dumped into it. the original bike, 2 rebuilds and all the random parts and maintenance combined I'm still under $3000 invested.
A gen 2+ could out handle me, but if I had to do a gen3 I still wouldn't be finished waiting for fundage.

My situation aside, if I were starting from scratch, I'd use a gen3 with a '94+ motor. Pretty easy build, awesome handling, performance and resale value.

Ported&Polished · Post by **Ported&Polished** » November 13th, 2007, 5:07 pm

ShanMan wrote:not Bob...but I will take a shot at answering this one:

a gen. one chassis ...

Gen. two bikes...

Gen. three bikes...

Gen. four through six ...

Sheesh, that's alot of gens. Can someone put the years to the gens please? I know gen 1 started in 97, from there up, I am confused on what years ar what gens. Me dumb dumb.

ISBB · Post by **ISBB** » November 13th, 2007, 5:10 pm

Ported&Polished wrote:
ShanMan wrote:not Bob...but I will take a shot at answering this one:

a gen. one chassis ...

Gen. two bikes...

Gen. three bikes...

Gen. four through six ...
Sheesh, that's alot of gens. Can someone put the years to the gens please? I know gen 1 started in 97, from there up, I am confused on what years ar what gens. Me dumb dumb.

x2

mxracr121 · Post by **mxracr121** » November 13th, 2007, 5:20 pm

GEN 1- '97-'99 CR250
'98-'99 CR125

GEN 2- '00-'01 CR250 and 125

GEN 3- '02-'07 CR250 and 125
'02-'04 CRF450 (although had handling problems the 250 didn't)

GEN 4- '04-'08 CRF250R (and the X model, when it started)
'05-'08 CRF450R( and X)

iggys-amsoil · Post by **iggys-amsoil** » November 13th, 2007, 6:13 pm

ShanMan wrote: Gen. three bikes were more of all of the above, and are considered by many to be the best handling two stroke Honda chassis of all time. Some think the turning became a little too sharp and lost some stability at high speeds.

Well that maybe true in some circles, I have found out from going to the track and races thats its commonly known that Gen III's have a turning problem. Needless to say I got tired of dumping mine. The fix is to spend the dough on 20mm offset triple clamps. Which I did and going to a 100 size front tire instead of the stock 90. Well that must be the ticket cause, knock on wood, I've only dumped it once this whole year, which was in one of Glen Helens finest ruts.

Then there is having it resprung, revalved, correct sag and 12 psi in the front. Stability issues are from the forks set to high in the clamps and that will change when changing the clamp offset,/ or the springs to light for a riders weight.

AH the learning curve.

Glad I'm over it. Now lets ride.

BannedCR500Riders.com

AlisoBob's Gen 4 A/F Conversion