While digging through the archives in The Kneeslider research library, an interesting article turned up. It was about two engine builders, brothers Robert and Harry Millray of Saugus, California. It seems back in 1969, they had the idea of building a motorcycle engine, a 1200cc V4, and being hands-on "get 'er done" kinda guys, that's what they did.
The engine is a 60 degree, air cooled, pushrod V4 with a 180 degree crankshaft and 2 rods per journal. The connecting rods were from a Studebaker Champion, cut down to fit on the crankpins. Valves were 1 3/8 inches because that's what they had lying around. The cases, heads and pistons were aluminum with iron barrels. It was designed, cast, machined and assembled by the two builders and the finished engine looks pretty nice. They also noted, you could tear it down with simple hand tools.
Millray 1200cc V4 engine installed in a Norton frame
At the time, multi-cylinder engines like the Honda 750 four and the Triumph Trident were making waves so they thought a nice V4 would fit right in. They put their engine in a modified Norton frame and tried to fire up some interest from the various manufacturers, but no one showed any interest and the one and only prototype was the end of their V4 project. It ended up at the AMA Museum on Ohio, though I'm not sure if it's still there.
It's amazing how many start from scratch, do it yourself projects like this existed that practically no one has ever heard of. Neat stuff.
{ 41 comments… read them below or add one }
Oh dear god…I need to change my underwear.
I’d been dreaming of something like this using two Triumph Bonny top ends as the next project. Did they make the heads, barrels, everything? So much great work and no one was interested in ’69? Baffling.
I’ve got an old red/white 750 Bonnie. I remember reading about a dude that mated a pair of 650 pre-units in-line with the left side top-end and cams reversed. The final drive came out the middle to a jack-shaft. From there he used a beefed up Barnet clutch and stock 4 speed in normal location. It was a very cool looking sixty’s vintage red Triumph Speed 4 with 1300 cc displacement.
Oops…Primary to the jack-shaft, then a second chain run to the clutch basket.
to make a modification like that ,will you have to increase or decrease the size of the crankshaft flywheel ??
Sorry for the miscommunication. The project that I mentioned was an in-line set up with basically stock Triumph components and clever rearrangement.
What V angle are you considering for your project? You could research changes to the Buell Blast for starters, followed by Ducati, Vincent, and of course MUSKET.
Hi!
As a rule of thumb, the amount of flywheel you need (in terms of rotational mass), would be less for a twin than a single, less for a 4 than a twin etc.
The fewer the power pulses, the more the inertia of motion required to keep the flywheel spinning with enough force to overcome compression for the next power stroke.
They were merely ahead of their time — nobody was doing V-4s yet. I wonder what kind of performance they got from it? Probably not a screamer but maybe not too slow, either. No matter; it must have sounded great and run well enough. Still, they would have faced a lot of issues such as primary and secondary balance, crankcase venting, etc. And at that time none of the manufacturers would have gotten involved — the Brits were having enough problems of their own, and the Japanese certainly wouldn’t have adopted something they didn’t develop as a matter or pride. Too bad; it’s s sharp bike that looks like it came from the factory with that motor. It must still exist; let’s hope it surfaces again.
Well, maybe AJS years before, but they were way, way ahead of their time.
Reminds me a lot of the old “Super-V” in appearance…. And not too far from the Ducati Apollo, either. A shame it wasn’t put into production, but truly a joy to see. I’ve had designs for a 1000cc v-3 in mind for years, and didn’t follow through because I’m not affluent enough to produce it. This makes me realize I should just build one, and have it as a piece of history. Thank youuuuu!
Interestingly enough, these guys previously built a 1000cc single!
I vaguely recall seeing this way back and in some other print that I don’t remember. It is truly a shame that neither did HD see this double-sided V as a potential addition to the lineup (but somehow the Aermacchi single did) nor did the builders find an investor group within enthusiasts to forge ahead with on-demand production. Like the Munch and others, it would have added an important chapter to motorcycling.
I also seem to recall that the time from idea to functional prototype wasn’t all that long. Just a few short months, in fact.
Although there were no takers, and I agree that the Asian brands wouldn’t be willing to base a bike upon the known product of someone else (who are we kidding, the Asians are damn quick to use other ideas and products), it would be a stretch not to imagine that this bike had some basis in the creation of the VMax 16 years later.
Looking back at 1969, I was riding and racing a modded Sportster XLCH which I traded in eventually for my first Commando; and now years later I’m humping a 2010 VMax. If I had known about this bike back then, and if it would have been available at the time I know I would have bought it. Without a doubt.
It looks in some ways much like the VW-based V-four the Norwegian Brudeli brothers built back in the 90′s (see http://www.ntnu.no/gemini/1993-04/16.html). That project did make it into a neat bobber style bike, but not further, even though the plan had been to build more. It was a nice idea, and would have been much better executed than that of the Super-Vee.
After the V4 the Brudeli 625L tilting threewheeler saw the light of the day, and was at some point even featured here at The Kneeselider.
I have read that the Ducati Apollo V4 project was shelved because there were no suitable tyres.
It is easy to forget how great the advances in tyre technology have been over the last 40 – 50 years.
Has Mr. Crowe ever come across a V-type two stroke in a motorcycle frame?
Think RD500LC, well twin cranks. 2-stroke V-twins are difficult to do with a common crank. The motors rely on crankcase compression and a V configuration typically neutralizes that.
-todd
not just twins, I meant any V configuration is difficult with a two-stroke.
I worked on the concept of a two-stroke V-twin. I wanted to use the porting from one piston to transfer charge to the other cylinder..and vise versa. That would yield asymmetric timing so that the exhaust ports were closed prior to the transfer ports – not well after, like conventional two-smokes. Crank-case compression was inherently limited by the layout, though.
Explain the NSR 500 then, one crank, v four gp engine from Honda.
They never did so much as show a single picture of the motor out of the frame unless full assembled.
Honda wizards never seem to share their secrets.
I wish they would’ve kept their oval pistons a very closely guarded secret.
Suzuki RGV250 and the Honda NSR250R both used V-twin 2-strokes. Both are sought after motorcycles especially the high spec SP versions
The 250 Gamma had a 180 degree crank and two issolated/offset cases. Pretty much the same as two singles except for mass-balancing benefits. The Honda sported a 360 degree crank with a central main bearing and seal. Basically same thing. For my concept, neither layout could develop satisfactory crank-case pressure while maintaining enough differential piston travel to provide effective port-timing. I’ve got something better now. Way, WAY better.
Honda made the MVX250 a V-triple two strike, two pistons forward one back at 90 degrees circa 83. Honda were trying lots of things in those days, but it came out when interest in two strokes was already waning. The bike had teething problems when it came out so was only built for one year. All that development and tooling gone to waste (like the oval pistons of the same era.) The MVX had 50hp and 140kg for a budget bike (NZ $3299) it had possibilities.
These guys got their MVX running nicely
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_YUeII3kjJ0
(http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=uU8rmwQweSU)
Thats cool!
I was also thinking these looked a lot like VW heads but modified with the intakes snaking through the push rods. I had a 1200 VW and it had 36hp. I imagine there is more potential (I also had a “40hp” 1200 at one point).
If one was to use the type 4 (or porsche 914) heads you’d be a bit better off with the exhaust routing. I’ve played with the idea of a 1000cc vertical twin based on this idea.
-todd
that could’ve worked,but as noted,the tires would last around the block.now,though…………..
Paulinator – what you describe sounds a bit like a split single two stroke – when those were popular for racing they overcame the crankcase compression problem by supercharging.
I wonder if there is any milage left in a redevelopment of split single technology – perhaps with direct injection?
Ya, definitely some common ground, but issolated combustion chambers.
The ICE isn`t going away any time soon. For weight and cost and simplicity and output and portability there is nothing that competes with the 2 stroke. If the small (ie, 5 hp and less) power-unit can be brought up to match durability, emmisions and specific fuel consumption of an equivalent 4 stroke without impacting its core benefits then it will play a significant roll – globally – over the next few decades….I think?
i was thinking of a project like this one my self,with a BSA side-valve single cylinder,i wanted to transform it to a V-twin ,the only question in my mind is will i have to increase the weight of the flywheel ?? any body have an idea ??
I remember seeing that somewhere else, think it might’ve been written about in Classic Bike magazine ehre in the UK a few years back.
I’d love to see someone attempt this concept with a pair of 865cc Triumph twin engines! Maybe when I’ve got a little more money to buy a milling machine, and of course the Triumph parts to modify.
Anyone remember Oscar (Amol Precision) Liebman’s late-60s or so desmo BMW?
Honda’s cheap, reliable overhead-cam electric-start 750 Four made every other bike existing at the time look like last century – the western manufacturers were shell-shocked and ran for cover! Not a good time to start a new company. Even if this Millrod 1200 would have seen the light of the day it wouldn’t have survived for long.
It’s a beautiul engine and a great achievement but it’s questionable if it made the same power as the Honda.
Undoubtedly it didn’t make the same power as the CB750. So what? Today’s Sportster still doesn’t make the Hp or rpm umbers of the CB750 or most all of the current breed of 600′s. The Big Twins and even the VRod don’t make the power of the 600′s. The Bonne, most of the Ducs, and many many of today’s popular rides don’t make the Hp of today’s sport bike counterparts to the CB750.
The Honda was a game changer, not a game ender. The emergence of Asian companies with integrated corporate brands (Kawasaki Heavy Industries vs Ford as example) was a far greater impact. To say thart any machine totally destroyed the opportunity of a nre bike, or killed the potential of a new company emerging, is just plain silly.
It doesn’t matter if it is bikes or electronics or social media. MySpace didn’t stop FaceBook. Windows hasn’t killed the Mac or stop users from relying on Unix and Ubuntu.
In the simplest and most harshly honest terms, the builders either didn’t work as hard at finding a means of production as they did in building the prototype, an/or they had more mechanical and engineering skill than business acumen.
The latter kills off the majority of upstart companies regardless of marketplace or product. It has, and will continue, to kill off (or cripple) many decent sized and even humongous companies on both Wall Street and Main St.. In motorcycledom, the great machines killed by poor management is overly glaring only to those focused on motorcycles..
I wasn’t talking about today’s bike’s horsepower numbers; the manufacturers have proven that building 1200cc bikes producing 200+ hp is possible.
Back in 1969 power was quite a different story and it was important if one bike made 5 hp more than another one. We’re talking 45, 50, 55 hp here.
I’d say the Honda was a game ender for several companies. Of course it was not the only reason by far; major companies were mismanaged, had financial problems and a management that didn’t see anything coming.
I believe it’s quite realistic that investors looking at starting a new bike company forgot that idea real quick when the CB 750 came out. This bike was so advanced and at the same time so cheap that it knocked out the competition so hard that some didn’t get up. Not a good time to try selling something that isn’t half as good!
Hey, Todd
I have wondered about a VW based vertical twin also. Does anyone know if such a thing has ever been done?
I’ve built VW’s in the past. The homebuilt aircraft crowd cuts heads and cases in half for various airframe designs (see hummelbird, etc). I knew a guy that was selling kits for VW air compressors (they ran on two cylinders and pumped with the other two). I guess you could blank off two jugs and all the other stuff, elbow the oil pick-up, put weighted and oil-tight clamps on the con-rod jurnals – then run it. The rocking couple might be very harsh, though, for the 37 hp your maybe gonna get.
I was just thinking of using the upper end. It would need a purpose built 360 or 270 crank and case – maybe even a counterbalancer. But then, I can pick up a great TDM 850 for less than $2000…
-todd
Lets see now. Offroad racers have put several decades of development into VW engines. The home built plane guys have done all kinds of different things to/with them. Dragway set several records at the British drags with a fiddled VW engine. So the hot rodding thing has been established for a while & the hardware is in someone’s catalog. (See HotVW magazine or similar.)
For an 800cc twin engine (or 1000cc) for a bike, maybe replace the left side of the VW engine with an oilpan that will work if the case & right side are rotated 90 deg to put them vertical. Clutch & box from Burman (?). Perhaps the other crank throws can be used for counterbalancing (think Ducati Supermono!) Fit it into a Slimline Manx frame with updated suspension & brakes. Apply a generous bag of bucks, several thousand manhours of skilled labour, & find a marketing whizz to pump it up.
Just like modern farming, if you want to make a small fortune building bikes, start with a big fortune!
PS Have a close look at the cylinders & head(s) of the NEMBO upside triple. Did they get Mr Porsches merry men to do the heavy lifting for them? Why reinvent the wheel.
– http://thekneeslider.com/archives/2010/10/11/nembo-motociclette-inverted-3-cylinder-super-32-rovescio-motorcycle-engine –
That’s my Daddys bike. He was a great man with an even greater mind. He also has another bike he and Harry built from scratch, he called it the “61″ huge single, cylinder was so big you could put a oil can (you know the old round kind) in it. I have more pics of both of these bikes and a video.