[Spencer Uzri]

Have any pics of the kart suspended on the hoist setup?

[Spencer Uzri]

Found an article on the IAME 175cc “Super Shifter” engine.

https://forums.kartpulse.com/t/skusa-iame-175cc-shifter-pics-and-details/1389

The Tillotson butterfly carburetor with integral fuel pump & hi/low/idle external adjustment knobs is probably the biggest news besides the obvious displacement increase.  Note the pulse line “adapter plate” in front of the reed valve intake manifold.

Not exactly sure why they aren’t sticking with a 125 cc format.  Guessing the engine will spin relatively slower & therefore wear less…?  I’m also curious to know what the bottom end bearing spec & dimensions are.

[Spencer Uzri]

[quote quote=87347]Not about being afraid of change, just not wanting some bureaucrat dictating the terms. I would personally love to see a good fuel injection package for karts, but don’t think I want it designed by a lawyer. Cost IS a factor here, mass market emissions specs could well kill the whole thing. -bill [/quote]

Bureaucrats are already dictating.  That’s why KTM & Husqvarna have applied EFI to their 2-strokes.  Let’s be frank about this: there is general push against IC engines, with 2-strokes being the red-headed half sibling in the family.  I think this could be a trend, if for no other reason than Europe is the hub of karting, & Europe loves to regulate.

Of course, you do know that by law, IC engine cars will be banned starting in 2040 in the UK, right?  Do you really expect such a sweeping change won’t have a wider, “inadvertent” ripple effect?  If the storage density limitation of batteries can be resolved, then this will be a nonissue, & ekarting will take on a whole new meaning.

[Spencer Uzri]

I’m aware of that kit, but it doesn’t meet the Euro4 mandate, which is the driving point of my question.  If emissions mandates will be applied to off (public) road vehicles, of which karts are a subset, then are true 2-stroke EFI (ie. case & transfer port injectors) engines inevitably in the future of karting?

[Spencer Uzri]

[quote quote=85941]http://shopswedetech.com/product.php?productid=120&cat=24&page=1 $6k for their 1999 read-to-run “stock” honda package. I’m not sure how it’s too much different? I guess that’s after blueprinting – so there will be some of the same work done to a 175cc package that may add some cost. [/quote]

I hadn’t realized SM was in that price territory.  Just for perspective, a TM K10ES (125 cc) goes for ~$5000.  Just sayin’.

[Spencer Uzri]

Will,

If the bottom end bearing is truly a performance hindrance, I’m not seeing it in comparison to the CR125, especially since I’ve watched them race together up here in the PNW at SIMA, where they’ve structured the shifter class at the club level such that the Honda & other TaG-ICC brands race together.  In terms of outright performance, yes there’s no replacement for displacement.  Then again, the X30 SS is itself a TaG-ICC,/KZ & I’d wager it has a larger bottom end bearing compared to the “pure” KZ engines, which is just a plus for reliability.  Tom has made it clear in both interviews that reliability is the expected hallmark of the package; 175 cc leaves no doubt about performance.

I’m not arguing against the performance increase it offers.  Just the cost relative to the maintenance/cost intervals.  The current crop of TaG-KZ engines is comparable to the CR.  Then again, this discussion is academic.  I’m sure it’s nearly a done deal at this stage, & I’m sure the X30 SS is a good engine.

[Spencer Uzri]

[quote quote=85880]Stock Honda isn’t exactly consistent with KZ class…and if you want to keep the user-friendly nature of Stock Honda, it makes perfect sense to go with a larger displacement, less highly tuned engine than the KZ family. Just as much performance, lasts longer. It won’t sound as cool though… [/quote]

The factory suggested top & bottom end rebuild intervals for the TM K9ES (125 cc, 35 HP) are 100-140 L & 400-440 L (or 26-37 gal & 105-116 gal), respectively.  It has a 13.8K RPM rev limiter & a larger bottom end bearing (22 mm, if I recall) to also reduce maintenance.  Even has a simple electric start & the engine keeps the battery charged.  And it works.

Don’t get me wrong, 175 cc is nice, but $6000 for an engine is testing market tolerance.  On the other hand, if it results in volume scaled cost reduction to a level comparable with the 125 KZ engines, then it would be a no brainer.

[Spencer Uzri]

I’m a little surprised that they don’t want to stick to a 125 cc displacement format just to be consistent with European KZ classes.  But I guess it is what it is (or will be).

[Spencer Uzri]

If I understand your question, the chassis bodywork mounting points are standardized according to spec, which the ’08 RR conforms with.  Each bodywork style has a particular brackets/bars, but they all conform to this std where the bars interface/insert with mount tubes on the chassis.

The thing that might take some mount “customizing” would be the front “nassau” steering axle panel.  For example, when I changed mine from NE 2 to Evo, I had to add a ~2″ spacer nut to the bolt to raise the Evo design (It’s a bit more low slung compared to the NA 2 style) so it could clear the steering wheel.  You’ll have to install it to check for clearance issues.

[Spencer Uzri]

[quote quote=83908]New Pro Shifter class iame 175cc soon to come. Why not it is Tom’s (Importer) Motor be crazy not to do this. Honda is done as we know it. [/quote]

While shifters aren’t cheapest thing in karting, & it will be interesting to see what the market can bare.  That’s a nice engine, though $6K is getting up there.  My TM K9ES (125 cc) cost $4K back in ’07, which isn’t cheap.  At current exchange rates, it lists for ~$5K.

I guess, to me, it seems better to allow all the TaG-KZ makes (TM, IAME, Maxter) into the market to compete.  Keep in mind, there is a fair amount of parts commonality between the ICC engine makes (not everything, of course), which mitigates the notion of proprietary issues with parts to a certain degree.  Set up a spec that emphasizes reliability standards/metrics to avoid the cost spiral synonymous with the ICC classes.  Market wise, it makes more sense for the consumer.

A sole engine for all creates a situation of monopoly dependence that is prone to issues like the this current situation with the Honda, where the mfger is/will be withdrawing the product for whatever reason, & everyone is left scrambling for a replacement, or else they bail because it’s cost prohibitive &/or there’s a perception that the class is unstable.

My opinion.

[Spencer Uzri]

TaG-ICC/KZ class.  Just saying.

The different TaG-KZ brands are all pretty similar in performance, but each mfgr has a slightly different take.  At SIMA Raceway, the Tag-KZ & SM run together in the 125 shifter class.  Good racing, & the engines are pretty robust.

[Spencer Uzri]

No problem.

Note that when backing the stand away as you load the kart onto the bed, since the bumper hooks are fairly long, you’ll need to pull up on the rear of the stand as it lowers away, in order to rotate the hooks out from the rear bumper. It’s obvious to see when you are doing this, but thought I should mention.

[Spencer Uzri]

Patrick,

To load onto a truck bed, situate the kart on the stand facing fwd at the gate.  Operate the stand to lower the kart until the stand’s front support drops below the level of the tailgate; lift the front end up & roll the stand fwd to get the kart nose on the gate; now simultaneously push the stand fwd to push the kart fwd & operate the stand to continue lowering, pushing the kart onto the bed & dropping the stand out of the way.

The unloading procedure works in reverse: face the stand towards the back of the truck, setting its height to where the hooks are approx. level with tailgate.  Roll it up to the tailgate so the rear bumper support hooks are just in front of, & the stand’s front support is underneath, the tailgate.  Now back the kart up & slightly off the edge of the gate & get the rear bumper on the hooks.  From there, simultaneously raise the stand up while rolling it backwards, pulling the kart out/off the bed & onto the stand, timing it so the the stand’s front support comes up, clears the tailgate, & catches the front of the kart.

Easy peasy.

 

[Spencer Uzri]

This is kind of like RE.  Location, location, & location are all important factors.  If you live an area where TM’s are supported, then you’re GTG.  If not, top-end maintenance is easy (@ 130 L fuel), while changing the bottom end bearings (@ 330 L) requires more knowledge & the right tools/equipment.  Having a shop that can help support you when you need it should be a real consideration.

I have a K9ES, & it’s a really nice shifter motor (I think).  The “detuning”, as such, was done with the goal of reducing maintenance intervals.  Boost ports were eliminated to improve mid-range (costing some top end); bottom-end crank & bearings are +2 mm larger diam to improve durability; 13.8K ignition rev limit, & then of course the e-start, which actually works nicely & is hassle-free.  I put a tender on the battery & leave it over the winter.

[Spencer Uzri]

I can’t speak to any of the others, but I don’t think the K9ES has undergone any changes in the engine dept.  You could verify with IM-USA.  Yeah, it has been homologated by TaG USA since intro, identified by the  “USA” stamp on the cyl.  All I can say is the engine isn’t wildly more powerful than a SM.  In fact, I think it may be ~1 HP down from SM, but the power band is fairly broad, & it delivers that power more smoothly in trade off.

This is the SIMA race series, so it’s strictly at the club level, but has been interesting to watch.  I haven’t personally seem the IAME X30 on the grid yet, but they do sell/support it.

[Spencer Uzri]

SIMA has been running the TM K9ES (or any TaG ICC for that matter) since they opened.  It does make for interesting racing.  I hope to join in on the fun this yr.

[Spencer Uzri]

Brian,

I have a TM K9ES & it’s a nice engine.  I don’t know where you’re at, but if you have local support, it’s worth looking at.  Despite opinion about TaG’s, the electronics on these are actually simple & reliable.  Maintenance intervals for the TM are 100-140 L/top end, & 440-480 L/bottom end, making the price difference for parts rather academic, in my opinion.

If you have the chance to drive one, definitely try it out.

[Spencer Uzri]

While a trailer is certainly nice to have, I manage without one & saved some cash.  I have a ’93 Silverado extended cab with camper shell.  Because of the shell, I can’t shelf it like Cory due to the limited headroom, but the bed is wide/long enough to fit the kart by removing the side & nose pods.  The bed can still accommodate miscellaneous stuff, & the extra cab space allows for stowage of tools, the CIK pods, gas & air cans, etc.

A key piece of the puzzle is the “kart carrier” I bought from Tim Koyen to carry my KartLift along.  It locks into the hitch receiver to carry the stand at the back of the truck.

The key is having a bed big enough for the kart.  Figure L x W of approx. 6′ x 5′.  Keep in mind, a 53″ wide CIK rear bumper isn’t – & shouldn’t be – a quick detach component, so if your kart has one, that will determine the min. bed width you’ll need.

[Spencer Uzri]

DD2 is where it’s at.

[Spencer Uzri]

Talked to a co-worker who is also an F1 fan (big-time) about karting & the SIMA facility up in Sumas, showed him photos of my kart, etc. He got really psyched, went up there, drove some rentals, got to meet Michael Valiente, snapped some photos. He’s Jonesin’ for a shifter, but he & his GF signed up for some driving classes in the meantime.

That’s +2 converts to the dark side.

[Spencer Uzri]

Mildly amusing how perception changes over time.  Back when I posted about the TM K9ES TaG-ICC in ’06, every other post was about how the battery+starter was just another layer o f complexity, more weight, blah, blah, & blah…

I went ahead & bought a K9ES anyway & couldn’t be happier (Well, EFI would be a step up).  Now it comes to SM & it’s awesome.

If it’s comparable to the TM K9ES, it will work quite well.

[Spencer Uzri]

[url url=http://www.crg-america.com/pdfs/CRG_Kart_Tuning_Manual.pdf]CRG chassis tuning manual[/url] (.pdf) recommends a “nose down” profile with rear wheels set to max width (55.125″/1400mm) for dry conditions.  Drop the front by arranging the spindle kingpin spacers (thick at base, thin on top) & raise the rear by loosening the bearing cassette to drop the rear axle in the bracket slot.

You’ll have to remove the kingpins to adjust the spindle/wheel height, so be sure to keep the upper/lower shims, spacers, etc. organized & in order to facilitate correct reassembly.  The rear is easily adjusted by loosening the bearing cassette bracket bolts (& don’t forget to adjust/match the rear brake caliper to the disc as well).

[Author]

Posts