Sequential shifting question for the cycle racers...

Discuss all things 1970 & later Airheads right here.
User avatar
dwire
Posts: 403
Joined: Sat Nov 20, 2010 1:15 pm
Location: OHIO

Re: Sequential shifting question for the cycle racers...

Post by dwire »

George Ryals wrote:I think the reason we can down shift our airhead transmissioms without very close matching of engine rpm, is the size of the holes the shift dogs engage to lock the respective gears to their shafts. The holes are close to one and one half times the width of the dogs that slides into the holes to engage the gear. There are four dogs and four holes so it is a pretty coarse situation compared to the spacing on synchronizers. Any crashing/grinding heard from an airhead trans is the dogs banging the edges of the holes, not the gear teeth themselves. The dogs will and do break off of the slider that moves between the meshed gears as we shift.
Yes, in fact, gears can never collide in ANY transmission I have worked on, provided the shift forks do not become mis-adjusted, and/or one manually attempts to place it in more than one gear at once. I suppose there could be exceptions, but I am unaware of them of the several auto and truck designs I've rebuilt through the years.

I have no-doubt the interface in question, dogs-to-holes in these and any other straight cut transmission is the ONLY real weakness, other than simply wearing the bearings out and such, but I am still unclear for certain as to why there are these two critical differences in what would appear be the very similar designs. One being not HAVING to spin them up on down-shifts and two, well while we have already covered how unfriendly it may be on our BMW's transmissions, why I can't run up near the red line, preload the shifter "burp the throttle" and jam it into the next higher gear, that is without expecting to NOT hit every shift that way. I know the transmission would not "last" this way, but also feel it would unlikely be able to hit up shifts every time without the use of a clutch.

I have expanded technical views of the BMW transmission and somewhere (other than in my head) I have a similar blow up of one of the sequential shifting, straight cut boxes I used to race with. If I can find the old diagram, perhaps I can post both here, or look more closely and see that difference for which I have missed all of this time. It would be quite interesting to know why they behave differently; this could lead to some additional "hardening" of our beloved BMW boxes, for which I'll be doing a few this winter... :-)

Thanks for posting.
1971 R75/5 (SWB)
If you're going to hire MACHETE to kill the bad guy, you better make damn sure the bad guy isn't YOU!
Scot
Posts: 390
Joined: Tue Aug 03, 2010 11:24 am

Re: Sequential shifting question for the cycle racers...

Post by Scot »

Synchronizers. Think about it.
User avatar
dwire
Posts: 403
Joined: Sat Nov 20, 2010 1:15 pm
Location: OHIO

Re: Sequential shifting question for the cycle racers...

Post by dwire »

Show me some in our BMW boxes then.

They (our BMW boxes) don't even come close to working anything like a synchronized non-sequential box such as is installed in a consumer automobile.
1971 R75/5 (SWB)
If you're going to hire MACHETE to kill the bad guy, you better make damn sure the bad guy isn't YOU!
Major Softie
Posts: 8900
Joined: Tue Aug 03, 2010 1:46 pm

Re: Sequential shifting question for the cycle racers...

Post by Major Softie »

dwire wrote:Show me some in our BMW boxes then.

They (our BMW boxes) don't even come close to working anything like a synchronized non-sequential box such as is installed in a consumer automobile.
I know that Scot knows this. I think maybe, since we were comparing them with auto gear boxes, he may not have noticed that the auto boxes we were talking about were automotive sequential racing boxes.
MS - out
Scot
Posts: 390
Joined: Tue Aug 03, 2010 11:24 am

Re: Sequential shifting question for the cycle racers...

Post by Scot »

Major Softie wrote:
dwire wrote:Show me some in our BMW boxes then.

They (our BMW boxes) don't even come close to working anything like a synchronized non-sequential box such as is installed in a consumer automobile.
I know that Scot knows this. I think maybe, since we were comparing them with auto gear boxes, he may not have noticed that the auto boxes we were talking about were automotive sequential racing boxes.

OOPS! Nevermind. :roll:
User avatar
dwire
Posts: 403
Joined: Sat Nov 20, 2010 1:15 pm
Location: OHIO

Re: Sequential shifting question for the cycle racers...

Post by dwire »

Scot wrote: OOPS! Nevermind. :roll:
No worries mate. Wish it were just that simple, "hidden synchronizers." :lol:
1971 R75/5 (SWB)
If you're going to hire MACHETE to kill the bad guy, you better make damn sure the bad guy isn't YOU!
User avatar
Zombie Master
Posts: 8821
Joined: Sun Aug 22, 2010 12:21 am
Location: Vancouver Island BC Canada

Re: Sequential shifting question for the cycle racers...

Post by Zombie Master »

dwire wrote:
Zombie Master wrote:I've been continuously riding Airheads for nearly 40 years. I have never had any problem shifting them. You just shift them like they want to be shifted. A smooth rider is always a better rider. Airheads reward the smooth rider. These are mildly tuned touring motorcycles for mature individuals. Unless you are building a bike for racing I see no reason to explore clutchless shifting. If it ain't broke.... don't break it. When I want to get all nasty I take out my Jap bike and ride it like an animal. It doesn't see to care and goes really fast. Can't understand why guys want try and go fast on these old Merecedes like bikes.

Could you explain non sequential shifting please?
Yes, just trying to understand the design...

QUOTE:
Zombie Master wrote: Could you explain non sequential shifting please?
Sequential = lever with no "pattern" just higher and lower gears selected "IN SEQUENCE."

Non-sequential = any transmission that one may select the gear ratio directly - you can pick any gear you like, whether it be the next higher or lower gear or not. One can't do that on anything that is sequentially shifted (LIKE ALL MOTORCYCLES I've ever ridden.) Think "H" pattern here...

I just couldn't understand why you were asking about sequential gearboxes on bikes. They are all sequential
Any and all disclaimers may apply
User avatar
dwire
Posts: 403
Joined: Sat Nov 20, 2010 1:15 pm
Location: OHIO

Re: Sequential shifting question for the cycle racers...

Post by dwire »

Zombie Master wrote: I just couldn't understand why you were asking about sequential gearboxes on bikes. They are all sequential
Like mine, many people's attention span can waver. If you read post #1, as well as the posts leading up to yours, you would see how things got more confusing and you very well might not have posted your first or last comment (both listed directly above this post.)

Sequential automotive racing gearbox -vs- BMW box - WHAT IS THE DESIGN DIFFERENCE THAT MAKES THEM BEHAVE DIFFERENTLY?

Get back to us on that. 8-)

Besides, you needn't be defensive, no one was insinuating or implying anything of of you by your comment(s.)
1971 R75/5 (SWB)
If you're going to hire MACHETE to kill the bad guy, you better make damn sure the bad guy isn't YOU!
User avatar
Zombie Master
Posts: 8821
Joined: Sun Aug 22, 2010 12:21 am
Location: Vancouver Island BC Canada

Re: Sequential shifting question for the cycle racers...

Post by Zombie Master »

dwire wrote:
Zombie Master wrote: I just couldn't understand why you were asking about sequential gearboxes on bikes. They are all sequential
Like mine, many people's attention span can waver. If you read post #1, as well as the posts leading up to yours, you would see how things got more confusing and you very well might not have posted your first or last comment (both listed directly above this post.)

Sequential automotive racing gearbox -vs- BMW box - WHAT IS THE DESIGN DIFFERENCE THAT MAKES THEM BEHAVE DIFFERENTLY?

Get back to us on that. 8-)

Besides, you needn't be defensive, no one was insinuating or implying anything of of you by your comment(s.)
All I know is: four wheeled vehicles lean the wrong way in corners. So I try to live in a two wheeled environment. Cars are necessary, but much less fun.
Any and all disclaimers may apply
Motu
Posts: 67
Joined: Wed Aug 04, 2010 5:05 am
Location: New Zealand

Re: Sequential shifting question for the cycle racers...

Post by Motu »

dwire wrote:Sequential automotive racing gearbox -vs- BMW box - WHAT IS THE DESIGN DIFFERENCE THAT MAKES THEM BEHAVE DIFFERENTLY?
Perhaps it would be better for you to compare an automotive sequential racing gearbox with a motorcycle sequential racing gearbox.Airheads are touring motorcycles - apples with apples sorta stuff.Truck gearboxes are constant mesh with sliding dogs,and are considered slow....but clutchless shift very well.Not sequential....but back in the day I sometimes wished they were when I got lost in the box on a hill.
Post Reply