The Burning Question...?

[silverstrom]

I've had no issues with DOT 5. (not to be confused with DOT 5.1 which is only 70% silicone and still hygroscopic like DOT 3 and DOT 4). I've been using it in one of my bikes for 10 years.

Switching to DOT 5 after a full brake system overhaul is ideal, and that includes new brake lines. That is the only way to avoid the serious non-compatibly issues between silicone based and glycol based fluids. Mixing them just about guarantees brake failure.

[tacky1]

Yep, Dot 5 in all mine also, I even swap out the cars and truck
Higher boiling point especially with a trailer...

[Smoker]

Not sure, but I think most 2-stroke factory race bikes use a header cross-over design. I've also seen RZV500 cross-over street pipes in Japan. Definitely not just for looks.

Got any pictures of this. I haven't seen this before.

I'll post pics in my custom pipe thread.

[kpke]

Another DOT 5 user here. All new builds get it.

[steveho]

Re. DOT 5….
I was under the impression that DOT 5 is more compressible than Dot 3/4, so is not ideal for performance applications.
Any of you guys using it, noticed any detriment, i.e. more lever travel or sponginess?
Maybe I have been mislead all these years….!

[phildu31]

All liquids are incompressible.

[steveho]

All liquids are incompressible.

You are wrong……..
There are varying levels of liquid incompressibility.

http://hyperphysics.phy-astr.gsu.edu/hb ... press.html

[phildu31]

Of course, but that is negligible.
Even at 100 bars ( 1000 m under the level of the sea ), you'll only notice a variation of 0,5% in volume for the water.

[giron]

Ok is not on any of my motorcycles but on my 911. I try DOT5. The pedal felt spongy. I don't know if its because the 911 is 1971. The hardware has been replaced and the calipers are upgraded to 930 (turbo calipers)

[Jeff B]

I had Dot 5 in an old Buell. The front single caliper worked quite well. Too many variables between the Buell and a typical twin caliper setup to really judge the fluid though.

[lucky mike]

Hello again, gentlemen.

I trust everyone enjoyed a restful holiday and has now joyfully returned to work, perhaps a few pounds heavier after the break's indulgences.

I'm pleased to share that Andrew Jones of ATR and I have reached an agreement, marking the exciting beginning of the engine enhancement process. The engine is set to embark on its journey via courier to Andrew's shop in Peterborough early next week.

Acknowledging the ambitious timeline, both of us foresee the build potentially extending into mid-March to late April, contingent upon the unforeseen intricacies discovered upon opening up the engine. So, in a worst-case scenario, envision the possibility of hitting the road with this revamped bike by early summer – very acceptable.

I'll be sure to provide updates as more information unfolds, and, as always, eagerly welcome the valuable advice and insights from you, the seasoned two-stroke aficionados. The year is off to a promising start, and I look forward to the journey ahead.
m.

[Strokeofgenius]

In the beginning of this topic, the RG 500 Gamma was mentioned as to be so much better than the RZ, but what hasn't been mentioned, is the RG's transmission issues, and was why I stayed away from them.

I'm not sure Giron said the rg500 was much better then the rd500 more that it was best to put money into the rg500 if you wanted more power,the rd500 being harder to extract power from.This of course was no good to the original poster unless he has an rg500 aswell as the rd.I have both bikes and can assure you the rg500 is not a better bike.It has a more prenounced power band but is no faster then my standard rd500.The rg is lighter and easier to work on but thats just aswell as they are not well put together.Everytime I do a job on the rg a thread shears somewhere,engine or frame.The rd500 is much better put together with stronger everything,hence the weight increase.I've recently had to buy engine case's for my rg after another seizure.The amount of wrecked cases out there from gearbox failure is astonishing.My friends rg put the conrod through the case,1500 miles after new cranks.The people that are having no issues from their rg's are not using them very often,they are fragile but fun when running right.Issues with mine mainly were the pertinax on discvalves breaking up and messing up the engine x 2.Second time piston broke up and damaged cranckase.Other issues are mainly carbs,no gearbox seizures yet but if it happens your in trouble as pulling the clutch will not help.The rd500 is a better road bike and the rg better for the track.Both were blown away shortly after production by the cbr600 but who would want one of these.

[giron]

The RG has the issues with the tranny, but I never did with mine. The RG is faster in steering response and throttle response then the RZV (that's what I have) When I made that comment that you need an RG so how the RZ should have been made. It was a conversation with Wynn, Rick Lance and Ken Smith that I had with original members of this forum. It will be a very good comparison with my RG500 (Walter Wolf original 99 serial numbers) and my VJ22 with an RG500 engine.