Ossa chose the EICMA show in Milan to present a prototype that will stand out in the Enduro discipline.
Milan, 8 of November 2011.
After the first presentation of the Ossa TR 280i prototype in Milan, a new development work began before the production of a really new revolutionary bike. Two years later, Ossa Factory has chosen again the EICMA show to present a new prototype that will stand out in the enduro discipline. The Ossa Enduro is born with a large work experience and incorporates some novelties to get a lightweight and maneuverable bike with a brilliant engine.
After the first presentation of the Ossa TR 280i prototype in Milan, a new development work began before the production of a really new revolutionary bike. Two years later, Ossa Factory has chosen again the EICMA show to present a new prototype that will stand out in the enduro discipline. The Ossa Enduro is born with a large work experience and incorporates some novelties to get a lightweight and maneuverable bike with a brilliant engine.
It’s a bike with innovative features that once again make a difference and keep Ossa Factory’s philosophy: to provide the market with a
technologically advanced product with lots of advantages such as performance, and the possibility to tune and adapt it to the requirements of
every riding style.
The new Ossa Enduro 250i/300i recovers the idea of the 70’s and it emphasizes an adventurous design and a compact motorcycle. Within its
The new Ossa Enduro 250i/300i recovers the idea of the 70’s and it emphasizes an adventurous design and a compact motorcycle. Within its
characteristics, the most relevant are a revolutionary two-stroke engine, a perimeter chassis and a new position of the air box.
Revolution
If the Ossa TR280i revolutionized the trials discipline, the new Enduro 250i/300i appears with the same spirit but with the advantage of all the
experience Ossa Factory’s team has gained in the past years. The separable chassis of the new Ossa Enduro 250i/300i made of cromoly,
has a perimeter structure and the fuel tank is not part of it, but it is placed in a lower and forward position. The particularity is that the air filter box
has been placed inside so that it is protected by the cover of the fuel tank. The premium quality suspensions are from Öhlins, a brand with which Ossa
Factory has an interesting cooperation. The position of the rear shock on the right side allows for extra space to fit a part of the exhaust pipe. This
shock works with a progressive linkage system assembled onto tubular swingarm.
The inverted fork has 48mm stanchions and the 260mm disc on the front and 220mm on the back with Brembo callipers ensure powerful and safe braking.
Engine
The two stroke engine with a one-piece crankcase and removable gear assembly
of the Ossa Enduro 250i/300i features a new and revolutionary double injection
system designed in association with Kokusan and an electronic exhaust valve
which is controlled by the same ECU as the injection.
One of the injectors is situated on the crankcase and the other on the
cylinder. This is rather unusual as it is normally placed on the cylinder head, but this new system offers amazing possibilities to fine-tune the bike response.
Design
The design of the Ossa Enduro 250i/300i is aggressive and modern, in the same line as the TR280i and it will continue to make a difference with this
versatile and compact bike, and its prototype is presented in the EICMA Show in Milan. An environment which is part of the history of the brand and
it captures how the Catalan brand is focused on the international market.
Two years of work and an investment of nearly two million euro.
The Ossa Enduro 250i/300i is, for the brand of the shamrock, much more than just a new product. It is an important step as it
The Ossa Enduro 250i/300i is, for the brand of the shamrock, much more than just a new product. It is an important step as it
accomplishes one of the initial objectives of the company when it returned to the
market in 2009. These were to consolidate its trials bike (TR280i), to develop a
mixture of a trials and a trail bike, and finally to launch enduro bike which is presented in this EICMA Show in Milan.
The development of the Enduro 250i/300i has been done by the Ossa team which is in the project since the end of 2010 with the objective to create a pre-series of 20 units for the importers in the beginning of 2013.The first production of 2000 bikes will be carried out in the factory Ossa has in Girona, and they are scheduled to be distributed in June 2013. The total investment of this project will reach the amount of two million euro. The international distribution of all Enduro versions, in the different cubic capacities, will be via importers, in the same way Ossa does it for the other models. Only when the project is completely developed, will the brand form a team for national and international enduro races, by the 2012-2013 season.
OSSA ENDURO 250i/300i
Engine
Type: 2 stroke single cylinder with Kokusan twin injector, admission by
V-Force3 reed rox and electronic exhaust valve.
Displacement: 249 cm³ (250i)
Bore: 66,4 mm (250i)
Stroke: 72 mm
Starter: Electric start- ACG Starter Generator Kokusan
Gearbox: 6-speed, removable cassette type
Primary reduction ratio: 21:51
Secondary reduction ratio: 12:48
Clutch: Hidraulic Wet 3-disc.
Ignition / Fuel System EFI Kokusan twin-injector
Chassis
Frame type: CR-MO – Two side detachable frame
Front suspension: Öhlins Up Side Down 48 mm TTX
Rear suspension: Öhlins TTX
Front suspension travel: 300 mm
Rear suspension travel: 335 mm
Brakes: Disc brakes, Brembo floating calipers
Front brake disc: Wave – 260 mm
Rear brake disc: Wave – 220 mm
Chain: 5/8 x 1/4″
Wheelbase: 1.470±10 mm
Ground clearance (unloaded): 355 mm
Seat height (unloaded): 960 mm
Tank capacity: 9,8 l (aprox) unleaded gasoline mixed with 100% synthetic
2 Stroke oil
Dry weight: 97 kg (aprox)
Thanks to Enduro Extreme for the article.
Amazing looking bike, new tech… outside the box engineering, I like it. I imagine it will be pretty exclusive and kind of spendy… I plan on parking this bike in my garage when it becomes available… something to get excited over for sure.
Fuel injected 2 stroke, finally! I’m so happy, plus it’s an exceptional looking bike. GET EXCITED PEOPLE!!!
thanks ossa
Cool looking bike…..Too bad they went with the standard injection. I would like to see direct injection or just use a carb. At least someone is developing 2 strokes.
Say goodbye to the 4T$.Amazing.
all good and well getting happy. now you need to put your money where your mouth is….
Awesome!
2 stroke revolution seens to be finally taken a huge step to come back!
Wow! Finally a 2-stroke dirt bike that has an excellent design! Cr-Mo perimeter frame,reverse cylinder,fairly large fuel tank and most of all FUEL INJECTION! I wish this bike was on the dealer floors 7 months ago!As ikeshima kazuyuki said “thanks ossa”.
Its so refreshing to see someone thinking outside the box. Sure they borrowed some technology from their trials line, but this is an amazing step in the “right” direction.
I will hold my breath until I see them running in a national enduro race. That’s where we will find out if the bike performs as well as we think & hope it does. This could be the spark that reignites the two stroke flame.
Thanks Ossa
I must … have one !
as suggested… and I agree with Darien. I put a deposit down today, first in line when they come out in a year. Long wait, but should be worth it. My dealer is super high on the trials bike and said that this bike should rock. Gotta milk the Husky for ’12, then off to OSSA. Going to be a long year!!
Anyone hear about horsepower, torque and power curves for this most amazing, revolutionary motorcycle?
This bike should be successful, and whether it is or not, it is so promising that companies are still trying to get smokers back. Fighting the 4 stroke agenda with new ideas is fantastic!
I love it. I was hoping Ossa was would make an enduro. Move over KTM and GasGas, this bike looks awesome. There is a lot that is overlooked on this bike.
The cool:
- The EFI is one step in-between HGT’s EFI and DI. HGT is really making the naming scheme confusing. HGT should call their EFI throttle body injection NOT port injection. This Ossa is true port fuel injection. The injectors are placed in the crankcase AFTER the reeds.
- The shock linkage. It looks very similar to a design I had been thinking about, that is if it is linkage. Hard to tell from the pictures.
- Reverse cylinder: I wonder if it will work better than it did for Yamaha. More rear weight on a 2-stroke could give it more rear traction for better power out of corners. Although the forward gas tank may counter that anyways.
- The low gas tank should improve agility.
I have a few questions/concerns about it as well.
- What is the power/torque?
- When does it get upgraded to VForce4?
- I hope the EFI gets SIGNIFICANTLY better fuel economy than the carb KTMs. With only 2.5 gallons of gas you will need it. And it looks like there is no room for even a 3g tank, much less 3.5g like a lot of current off-road KTMs.
- If this article is correct(there are no specs on Ossa’s website) this enduro has a 66.4x72mm boreXstroke. This is the same as KTM and I am assuming that means the 300 is 72×72. Their TR280i trials bike is 76x60mm boreXstroke. It was under my assumption that longer stroke meant more torque and oversquare meant more rpm->more peak power. That is why 4-strokes are oversquare, for max rpm and power, and 2-strokes have long stroke for extra torque. So why is the trials bike, a bike which peak power means nothing and torque is gold, so oversquare but the enduro, which we do want some power, is long stroke?
One last thing to highlight.
97kg = 214lbs
Holy cow.
A KTM 250SX is 217lbs. KTM’s 250/300 enduro bikes are 229lbs(and GasGas is heavier).
Is this Ossa really 15lbs LIGHTER than the KTM it competes against? Is it really even 3lbs lighter than a stripped 250 2T motocross bike?
That is incredible if true.
I guess I missed one more thing. If you look at the engine pic closely(find a better quality one on google), you can see that, like the trials bike, it has the injector after the reeds, BUT, unlike the trials bike, it has a second injector place in the cylinder shooting into the ports.
I think this may improve power. If anyone has heard of Nelson Racing Engines, they gain 70hp on a big block Chevy V8 just by angling the injectors towards the cylinder as opposed to across the airflow. This may have a similar effect. I hope.
Thank you, Ossa. You just made the new GasGas 300 seem sedate, which I couldn’t have imagined. I can see quite a few factories purchasing these for reverse-engineering…time for the Japanese to clone the small-shop engineering designs like they did 50 years ago.
Truly innovative…bravo. I hope I get the chance to see one in person here in Michigan, or within a day’s drive at a national Enduro event.
I know what Ill be getting myself as a graduation (uni) present this time next year! It was going to be a TM300 or GAS GAS 300… but I think this takes the prize…
that said, Itll have to perform like a TM300 for me to want it, and itd imagine it should cost roughly the same
dont forget the Bimota BBX300 too!
two stroke motorcross.com we want to hear more about the OSSA and BIMOTA 300′s!
Just looked up that Bimota. I would love to read more about it. Looks like they are basically KTM’s though, just with different suspension and exhaust.
The thought of a $25,000 full factory Bimota MX is cool, like their roadbikes.
the bimota code BBX stands for (B) Bimota engine, (B) bimota chassis, (X) offroad
The engine is aparently a bimota designed motor
Hey guys the two stroke direct ijection is here for 2012.
http://xoffroad.dueruote.it/bc_news/notizia.cfm?codice=366958
“The direct injection system DICC (Direct Injection Combustion Control)”.
“The system ensures DICC a reduction of up to 50% of pollutant emissions and fuel consumption.”
” The DICC in our opinion is the technology of the third millennium for the revival of large-scale 2-stroke engines”
“this results in lower fuel consumption, lower oil consumption, up to 65% reduction in CO2 emissions, increased power and the delivery curve”
“KTM, the Austrian leader in the production of off-road motorcycles, is pleased to announce a worldwide agreement with ATHENA, a leading manufacturer of cylinders, gaskets, pistons, and a brand GET (manufacturer of electronic and data acquisition systems). ”
Ktm signed a global partnership with athena 2 years ago, I don’t know when, it doesn’t say what date this article was released.
“The system is conceptually simple, direct injection occurs on the cylinder. Essure can be applied to any type of engine, even aerospace and agriculture, with the simple replacement of the cylinder.”
A really happy week for all 2 stroke enthusiasts…
Besides the Ossa 2 stroke enduro:
- an off road 2 stroke Bimota
- a revolutionary Athena direct injection two stroke
Anyone knows in wich bike this motor will be probably put first?
How about the location of the expansion chamber. No more dents in the exhaust. Great idea. Cant wait for a DI MX Bike.
I am anxious to seee a full test. I’d also like to see how difficult ( or easy, but looks a little difficult ) it is going to be to remove the top end, when repairs are needed.
So great to see companies sticking it to the norm with new ( or any ) 2 strokes in such a politically correct ( read 4 stroke ) society. I love it.
My sense is, when these new 2 stroke bikes, sleds, outboards, etc. become more and more popular by beating the emissions worries, fuel economy concerns, that the big 4 will re-think their stupid decisions. Except Honda, I think they are so far in with their agenda that they would look foolish if they went back. Plus, I read a recent interview with a few of the board members at Honda, and the statement was, there is no way they will ever go back to 2 strokes. What a shame ( and foolish ) decision.
About the Athena DICC, “can be applied to any type of engine, even aerospace and agriculture, with the simple replacement of the cylinder.”
How is this possible? How do you oil the bottom end if you are only shooting gas into the combustion chamber?
An engine designed as DI has oil injectors in the crank.
@CRMotard
I did read that about the Bimota naming. guess the pictures aren’t good enough for the 2-stroke. The 4-strokes look like KTM engines at least. The 2-stroke head is not KTM. It sounds as if they may have some deal with JTG (Jotagas).
maybe they will take my origional 1971 ossa 250 stiletto or my 250 sdr in as a trade in. I willbuy one as soon as they are availabe.
I love ossa cycles
Athena must not have done any research on that fuel pump or even ran this engine yet as that pump is the exact same pump the Aprilia SR50 uses which has near a 100% failure rate. It uses a China manufactured motor that is also sold to hair dryer manufacturers. I rebuild 3-4 a week and upgrade their electrical and seal faults.
The Ossa bike looks exciting but no mention of cost or requirements to get past US emissions compliance.
@High Gain Tuning, What?? It’s an enduro ( not a dual sport ) and it doesn’t fall into the epa testing for emissions class. This bike would fall into the closed course competition class and not be subjected to testing. This can be verified by going to the EPA’s website.
As far as your other comments go, you could be right about the fuel pump however, my guess is this bike is probably a prototype and the “bugs” will be worked out and resolved before going to mass production. Let’s give it a fair chance before berating it.
It is so revolutionary on so many fronts that we stroker fans need to hold on to as many positives as we can get. I’m not saying we should embrace a problem child motorcycle as our flag-ship but, it is a 2 stroke, it is generating alot of positive press, it does have a lot of new ideas and most importantly, it is mfg’d by a company that refuses to fall in step with the current ( and idiotic ) 4 stroke agenda that is being unfairly shoved down everyones throat. Look at the positive.
@2STROKEREVOLUTION
I read that the Bimotas use KTM frames & swingarms. And the motors are Gas Gas, not KTM.
Ren… your missing the point.
We are loosing a 2 stroke battle due to emissions. It doesn’t matter whether they cary a license plate or not. The EPA is cracking down on everything two stroke if it’s emissions are high and if we don’t clean them up there gone. It’s why we are seeing nothing but 4 stroke production even in the non plated lines. The manufacturers know where this is going.
Why do you think Ossa put one injector into the cylinder? Ossa is a mix of DI and PFI. One injector in the cylinder and one in the crankcase. DI will give them very good emissions cable of passing current European and US emission standards. DI will not give them the performance which is why a secondary injector is in the crankcase. If they activate that injector above 80% throttle opening, it is excluded from emission testing as anything above is considered WOT and the government does not test at WOT.
Smart move but it will need to remain as purchases with few to no performance options ever becoming available.
7Kgs lighter than the equivalent KTM, lower center of gravity with lower fuel tank and reverse cylinder, protected expansion chamber as it’s rear facing, cool airfilter feed as it’s at the front, 10L long range tank, passes emission tests due to part DI, is road ready with lights, has the power/torque benefits of EFI, has a revolutionary linkage/PDS mix, has a hydraulic clutch, has Brembo brakes, has Ohlins suspension… and weighs 97Kg! I will sell my CR250 and buy this when I have the money.
Also proud that it’s made in my homecountry, Catalunya, home to great racers and now great 2-stroke companies! Go OSSA!
Oh, I forgot, electric start and it still weighs 97kgs, god I want one!
I bet the injector in the crankcase is for lubricating the crank assy..
@High gain Tuning, while I enjoy spirited debating with anyone, I think it is you that is missing the point. BTW, I believe we are on the same side, just different schools of thought.
Anyway, the EPA does not regulate or care about machines that are closed course ( as I said ) and it is to the extent that when the mfgr’s build a specific line of motorcycles, by categorizing them into specific classes, the race machines are no more than a thought in the EPA’s mind. And for your information, 2 strokes are making a killing in racing, sales and emissions testing in the snowmobile industry as well as the outboard industry with DI ( E-Tec ) and EFI. Meaning, 2 strokes can easily beat the emissions testing the EPA DOES regulate.
So if the Ossa boys decide to get into the dual sport industry, they should be able to beat any req’t, as long as they utilize existing technology. Technology that is in use and has been for some time as stated above and especially in the scooter industry.
Also, how can we be losing the fight in regards to the emissions side when thee number one off road mfgr of motorcycles in the world ( and the U.S. ) is KTM? Most of the bikes sold by KTM ( over 48% ) are off road 2 strokes. The EPA cannot and does not regulate or affect these bikes.
Lastly, while we ARE losing the fight, I agree with you on this, but it’s not because of emissions. It’s because of the billions ( yes with a B ) and billions of dollars the big 4 are throwing at their 4 stroke agenda. This is what’s killing the stroker. They are doing it under the guise of being green ( and most people are buying this load of crap ) but if it was really about being green, then why does honda not stop F1 racing? One week of F1 racing pollutes more than an entire season of MX/SX EVER did at the national level when 2 strokes ruled the roost. So it is not about emissions, it is about an agenda and honda owns the FIM and the AMA voting side of both of these agencies, and their agenda ( and subsequent damage being done to the 2 stroke ) is what’s driving everything they do. It’s unfortunate that the other 3 have to follow along, or they know that they will get rolled over by the big honda 4 stroke bus. So nooooosssiiirrreeeee, it is under the guise of emissions that is hurting our passion, but modern day 2 strokes are as clean and they still are kicked to the curb. ’nuff said.
@High Gain Tuning
You need to get some stuff straight. You are really hurting your chances to sell your product to people like me with your uneducated hate for DI. You work with ONE system, a system designed to be cheap, fuel efficient and not powerful. How many times do we have to bring up the other cases where DI works? In one case it doesn’t, in thousands others it does. For 2-strokes: Mercury and Evinrude outboards had no performance loss when they switched to DI, in fact they had benefits and when Ski-Doo switched from EFI to DI they GAINED 10hp. In the auto world cars gain HP when they switch to DI because they can run higher compression. There are hundreds of DI car models, including performance cars like Ferrari and Lamborghini, that have switched to DI for better emissions AND more power. The new Chevy V8 is 5.5L and, partly because of DI, it make as much power as the 6.3L it replaces.
And sorry, but I have to agree with Ren. There is no EPA restrictions on dirt bikes. There haven’t been any changes in the last 10 years and there are no planned changes. Ossa would not put an injector in for emission testing when their is no emission testing. That is a waste of money. Especially when they will primarily sell in Europe, where even carb 2-strokes are often sold as street legal. In most of America you can get a 2-stroke street legal, just a manufacturer can’t sell one. Yes, it is something to consider for the future as I suspect eventually the EPA will care about OHVs. But that is by far NOT the reason 4-strokes. The primary reason for the 4-stroke change was money. Pure and simple. By making 4-strokes “superior” they could get people to purchase more bikes that cost more. It is purely profit driven.
About Ossa, I would bet that the crankcase injector is purely there for lubrication. They still run premix. About Athena, they are a highly reputable company and I doubt they will put to market, or even show off a product, that is unproven. If there dyno graph in their video is any evidence to go by, their system works, about 10-30% power increase.
@2 stroke revolution. Bravo, well said, well put. As soon as people realize they are being duped ( but I don’t think it will happen, remember the “Kings new clothes story?” )then we strokers will have our day.
Honda is driven by money and money only, don’t get me wrong, I am not saying they can’t build a decent product, I am saying they are driven by and make more than 65% profit above and beyond any of their 2 stroke years ever did, by selling a flawed product. I have to credit their marketers and promo teams, as they have fooled millions of people, who I would have never bet against. But, wrong I was.
Thanks for the comments, sanity and wisdom.
I don’t know where you are getting that impression…. I have never said that. I don’t hate DI… I don’t even dislike DI. Why would I? I work on them every day to make them perform better. I have built the highest horse power DI 50cc-70cc SR50′s in the US. I have developed products specifically for DI engines where no one else would. Australia Aprilia Dealers refuse to import any more DI SR50′s because of the cost and technology to repair them.
The fact remains the same, DI does not allow change. I doubt you will see any performance parts for the Ossa or any other DI two stroke because they will not allow the end user to change the fuel trim, injection or ignition advance. Once it ships in any form of bike, that is how it will remain. It doesn’t and cannot run an O2 sensor, therefore if you attempt to change anything it will only run worse. I haven’t even seen a cost for the Ossa little lone the cost of replacement parts or who in the US will even be qualified to work on them.
I would like to hear from Ossa, why they went with DI… What do you think their answer will be. You just do not invest the money and technology into DI unless you are trying to lower emissions.
The Athena DICC article list twice a reduction of up to 50% of pollutant emissions and fuel consumption. Why would they continue to bring that to the fore front if two stroke emissions are not an issue?
Can you point me to that Athena DICC video… I haven’t seen it.
I found the video… The graph shows a 10.3 % increase at it’s highest point.
Something else I found out… it’s a low pressure system and they are not injecting into the combustion chamber which is how they got a new Patent. I also see a Mikuni oil injection solenoid.
It will be interesting to see what they can bring it to market for considering it requires their cylinder which is really going to limit applications. I can’t imagine they will produce cylinders for anything other than high volume two strokes dirt bike engines which pretty much eliminates twins and triples. Old two stroke street bikes and high end engines for racing.
Cylinder
Injector
Injector fittings and lines
Fuel pump
Wiring harness
ECU
Oil Solenoid
Throttle body
Like many other patents, they don’t have to produce a single engine with it and just wait until someone else wants to use the technology.
“Our first goal now is to achieve a joint venture with a manufacturer to spread it on a large scale, but it is our intention to develop it on the track racing”
As far as Canada goes…Ossa should send a couple over to me to trial…I’ll get back to them in a few months as to fuel delivery performance issues,etc…Ossa, you can contact me at….
But the Ossa isn’t DI,is it? It sounds like the second injector injects into the transfer port before the exhaust is closed.
Not per SAE definition. One injector is in the cylinder and one in the crankcase.
DI is in the cylinder head so it sprays into the combustion chamber.
@High Gain Tuning
I do not doubt your experience with Aprilias SR50 system. Nor do I doubt your tuning experience with them. But, Aprilias system is ONLY designed for fuel economy and low emissions. It is not a performance system.
“DI will not give them the performance”
This is why I get the impression you hate DI. Every chance you get you attack it saying it can’t make power. Every time someone brings up all the other systems that work you don’t respond. Again, I don’t question your experience with Aprilias, or the benefits of your EFI system over carb and Aprilias DI.
So even if DI doesn’t allow change, who cares? If it makes more power/torque everywhere and has better “jetting” everywhere, why would I want to change it? Change doesn’t always mean good. Changing a perfect setup will result in a worse setup. If it is done right in the first place you won’t need to be able to change it. Why wouldn’t you be able to change ignition advance? DI cars can. And you CAN run an O2 sensor with DI. As there is no oil in the gas it doesn’t foul it. Ski-Doo E-Tec sleds use it and Yamaha HPDI outboards.
“You just do not invest the money and technology into DI unless you are trying to lower emissions.” I disagree. You don’t invest money to meet emission standards that don’t exist. I would invest in DI just for the fact you can get more power, better “jetting” and more torque everywhere.
I never said 2-stroke emissions weren’t a problem. We will never see a 2-stroke road bike again until this issue is fixed. 2-stroke boat engines and 2-stroke snowmobiles would have become extinct if they didn’t fix this issue. But, there are no laws in OHV now or coming that would force manufacturers to care about emissions.
The Athena kit, like you said, shows at least a 10% peak power increase(the same your kit claims). BUT it also shows a 37.5% power increase at 7000rpm and a 32% increase at 9000rpm.
@High Gain Tuning
There are a few other mistakes you made.
The Ossa is NOT DI. Not because DI is in the cylinder head. DI means the fuel is injected after the ports are closed. I don’t know if the Ossa’s second injector does this, but having an injector in the crankcase voids this immediately.
The Athena IS Direct Injected. The injector just isn’t located in the head. As Athena writes, “introduce into the cylinder thru an injector the fuel needed only at the end of scavenging.” The key words are “at the end of scavenging.” No unburnt fuel out of the exhaust = DI.
Now some more info on the “inability to modify” DI engines.
When Lamborghini switched to DI they gained HP. Even with the DI, tuners can create 1500+hp turbo engines. If taking a 570hp to over 1500hp doesn’t show adaptability, then I don’t know what does.
DI stands for Direct Injection which is into the combustion chamber….. Period. Those who choose to bastardize the definition are not following J1930 SAE definitions standards.
Google “Direct Injection”. Every explanation say’s “Into the combustion chamber”
Neither the Ossa or Athena are doing this, therefore they are not DI by SAE definition. They are variations of port fuel injection.
Think about it…. how do you put fuel under low pressure which Athena says they are doing, say 60 psi into a combustion chamber coming up on 100+ psi of compression.
The Aprilia for example runs a 95psi compression and injects at 120 psi minimum.
In theory can’t you inject into the cylinder after the exhaust port is closed but before maximum combustion chamber pressure is achieved?Injecting at peak pressure would be the Diesel cycle,no?
This is what many be thinking but there is barely enough Injector on time to inject into the combustion chamber at 9000 RPM before the mixture is ignited when using a high pressure system. At 9000 RPM the piston will go from BTC to TDC in .003 seconds.
@High Gain Tuning
Your words are flawed again.
Athena IS direct injected. DI means it injects straight into the combustion chamber. We both agree on this. This injection occurs AFTER the ports are closed(this is so no unburnt fuel escapes through the exhaust).
Athena’s system injects AFTER the exhaust port closes. As we know the intake port closes before the exhaust port. So how do you recon they inject fuel after the ports are closed but not directly into the combustion chamber?
Like you said, think about it. The only way to get fuel into the combustion chamber after the ports are closed is direct injection into the combustion chamber. Athena’s kit is direct injection.
Sorry, my words are not flawed
When or if the Athena kit ever makes it to production, you will see it is not DI. It is not injecting into the combustion chamber, it is injecting into the cylinder…
Which is why the kit requires a new cylinder, not a new head.
Which is why they can get by with just a low pressure fuel injector.
Which is how they can use common parts.
Which is why the injector is not pointing into the combustion chamber.
http://i41.tinypic.com/160ez4x.jpg
Which is how they received a new patent.
If it was true DI, don’t you think a new cylinder head would be less expensive than a whole new cylinder?
I’ll contact Athena as an Engineer and ask them for documentation. They have a Patent so they should be open to sharing what they are doing.
Not sure why you have a beef with High Tune, 2Srev.
But he is talking fact.
Also you do not have to wait for the exhaust port to close before you inject fuel with a DI system.
It’s all to do with combustion chamber shape and swirl.
Don’t turn this into an argument just respect the fact that Ossa are doing something different.
Well… Athena replied back.
Dear Mr. Bruckner,
thank you very much for your interest in our D.I.C.C. system.
Please see attached flyer for some additional info.
Should you need more technical info, please write to Mr. Benedini who’s reading in copy.
Thanks and regards,
EDOARDO M. MALIGNO
ATHENA SPA
Sales Dept.
http://www.athenaparts.com
They attached a PDF illustrating their system which is clearly NOT injecting into the combustion chamber as I have been saying all along, It injects into the cylinder. If anyone wants a copy of the PDF, just e-mail me.
The cylinder head is one item, the cylinder is another and the crankcase is yet another. Injecting a cloud of highly atomized fuel into the combustion chamber is not the same as injecting fuel alone into the cylinder or crankcase.
Better yet they have put me in touch with their engineer and I have asked to test the system here in the US as I have emissions and dyno testing equipment.
This appears to be what Ossa is also doing with the exception of the additional crankcase injector.
The J1930 SAE DI definition may need some updating in the future because as it is now DI is a cylinder head mounted system injecting into the combustion chamber area. There are now systems injecting into the crankcase, cylinder and probably transfer ports any time soon. They will each need to be identified to separate them. The reason why the SAE developed a standardized nomenclature in 1996 was to eliminate the vast number of definitions manufacturers were naming their components and systems.
I hope to get a kit soon to test out on something I am already doing PFI on.
@HGT
Thanks for posting the data to prove my point.
Yes, just a cylinder head would be cheaper than a whole cylinder, but hen you would have to pay for all the rights to those that own those designs. The only way to get your own product under your own patent would be to design something different. In this case it is DI injecting through the cylinder wall as opposed to through the head. I could see the possibility of having a benefit here. By shooting the atomized fuel AT the spark plug (as opposed to away from it with cyl. head DI) you can get a more complete, controlled combustion(more power + better efficiency).
@HGT
So what is DI?
As we both agree, injecting fuel into the combustion chamber after the ports are closed.
What is a combustion chamber?
The part of an engine in which fuel is burned. Or more clearly, the volume between the cylinder walls, piston and cylinder head.
Now look at this picture from the brochure you received from Athena.
http://i1096.photobucket.com/albums/g328/KC358/AthenaDICCSystemLayout.jpg
Where is that injector located? Clearly in the combustion chamber. All the ports are closed and the injector is spraying fuel in the volume between the cylinder walls, piston, and cylinder head.
I don’t even need to post photo evidence. You can’t even answer my question above, “Athena’s system injects AFTER the exhaust port closes. As we know the intake port closes before the exhaust port. So how do you recon they inject fuel after the ports are closed but not directly into the combustion chamber?
Like you said, think about it. The only way to get fuel into the combustion chamber after the ports are closed is direct injection into the combustion chamber. Athena’s kit is direct injection.”
So, I agree with one more statement of yours. SAE SHOULD change their definition of Direct Injection. As Athena is proving, the cylinder head isn’t the only way to get fuel injected directly into the combustion chamber.
@tmkiwi
“Not sure why you have a beef with High Tune, 2Srev.
But he is talking fact.”
-Fact would mean he is correct. But if you look at the evidence you will see the fact is the Athena is DI. My beef with HGT is that he attacks DI every chance he gets, then ignores counter examples, and he is taking credit from a company that deserves it.
“Also you do not have to wait for the exhaust port to close before you inject fuel with a DI system.
It’s all to do with combustion chamber shape and swirl.”
-DI means you are injecting into the combustion chamber. It has nothing to do with “shape and swirl.” Now, if you didn’t inject after the ports were closed, then you ruin most of the benefits of DI.
“Don’t turn this into an argument just respect the fact that Ossa are doing something different.”
-How am I not respecting Ossa? I, let me repeat, it is ME defending Ossa and Athena. Besides, I never said Ossa was DI. It is the other guy who attacks DI every chance he gets, and trying to take away credit from Athena that they deserve.
Anyways, it is not an argument, it is a conversation/debate, since we are using evidence.
The system in question IS a DI, a combustion chamber by it’s very nature is just that: A combustion chamber, meaning any chamber that is in the process of compressing and in this case quench ( air/fuel mixture ) and it makes no difference whether it’s aimed at the plug or the opposong cylinder wall. If there are not any openings ( i.e. valves, ports, inlets or outlets ) then the quench will combust ( upon pressurization ) thus making it a “combustion chamber.”
It’s not a matter of semantics, a rose by any other name is still a rose and this system is different enough to be patentable ( I presume but I am not a patent att’y ) but not different enough to be anything other than a direct injection system. Looks pretty cool too….
Would still like to see some power curves, as well as horsepower and torque numbers and how much a person can change the mapping and in what respect.
Well… It was obvious you didn’t understand any form of fuel injection and frankly I didn’t care but now you have removed all doubt that you don’t even understand basic 2 stroke engine design or operation.
I thought for sure after e-mailing you the PDF from Athena showing a cylinder mounted injector you would agree with what I have been saying but even after that you continue disagree with what Athena and myself are both stating.
“Where is that injector located? Clearly in the combustion chamber.”
Once again, your lack of 2 stroke knowledge doesn’t bother me, or maybe you just like to disagree despite the facts. What does bother me are you false and personal accusations.
I don’t attach DI and no one but you has ever accused me of doing so. Call one of the largest and most respected Aprilia Dealers in the US (AF1 racing Toll-free: 877-626-3966) and ask them who they would recommend you take a Ditech to for tuning.
Now that it’s clear all your interested in is disagreeing, I will leave this thread and hopefully it will get back on topic. I’ll report back if Athena let’s me test one of their conversions.
“I thought for sure after e-mailing you the PDF from Athena showing a cylinder mounted injector you would agree with what I have been saying but even after that you continue disagree with what Athena and myself are both stating.”
What?!?!
First off, Athena themselves say it is Direct Injection, so how am I disagreeing with them? YOU are disagreeing with them.
Second, I never said the injector wasn’t cylinder mounted. But that doesn’t mean it isn’t DI.
If you are so smart, and I lack knowledge of 2-strokes, then explain, WHERE does the Athena FI spray if it is not the combustion chamber?
Here is the picture again, where is the fuel spraying if it is not the combustion chamber?
http://i1096.photobucket.com/albums/g328/KC358/AthenaDICCSystemLayout.jpg
“I don’t attack DI”
“DI will not give them the performance”
“Direct injection is designed for ultra low emissions and moderate power, not for the performance industry.”
Contradiction. You say you don’t attack DI but every time you join a thread it is to say DI is not good for performance. That is an attack on it.
2STROKE
Your arguing with one of the most knowledgable guys I know in the Ditech and 2 stroke community with less than basic knowledge of an engine. Who gives a crap what Athena wants to call their fuel system. They haven’t even found anyone to buy into to it yet.
I just wanted to do a little correction to HGT’s comment, and at the same time to prove your point HGT
” At 9000 RPM the piston will go from BTC to TDC in .003 seconds.”
That’s .003 seconds it takes for 1 stroke, but if they are trying to inject after the exhaust port closes then it would be only half of a stroke from BDC to TDC. That leaves it with 0.00166 seconds to inject the fuel. Now imagine a 125 @ 12000 rpm = 0.00125 seconds for injection, and it has to do it 150x a second, comare this to a 4 stroke @ 12000 rpm = 0.00250 seconds for injection, and 75x a second. That’s 2x less time for injection and 2x more injections for the 2 stroke. That’s why KTM had problems with high rpm, but the bike was running perfect “like a 4 stroke” at low rpm, I think in ’09 I red it some where, that a secret ktm test rider briefly described it, he didn’t say much else, just that it ran really good on low rpm and not so good on high rpm, and he commented that he already said too much.
If the Athena system is based on a production bottom end, how is the crankshaft assy. lubricated?
If they get a Rekluse fitted to this thing this will be in my garage!
I have been following this thread for a few days now with great interest. Especially the debate between 2STREV and HGT. One is correct, and the other is not paying attention.
2STREV is correct, and HGT is confused in this debate. Not knocking anybody but this is pretty simple to understand.
The system is clearly direct injection, a guy only needs to look at the drawing posted by 2STREV to see the fuel charge is injected “DIRECTLY” into the combustion chamber.
@HGT- you said the following……
“They attached a PDF illustrating their system which is clearly NOT injecting into the combustion chamber as I have been saying all along, It injects into the cylinder.”
“you will see it is not DI. It is not injecting into the combustion chamber, it is injecting into the cylinder…”
Look at the drawing! You are not paying attention……The fuel charge is injected “directly” into the combustion chamber……
Perhaps there is confusion between the words “mounted” and “injecting”.
Here is clarification- The injector is “mounted” on the cylinder, but “injecting” into the combustion chamber.
It escapes me how there is confusion with this????
Not to mention that Athena themselves call the system “Direct Injection”.
@SuperTune- “Who gives a crap what Athena wants to call their fuel system. They haven’t even found anyone to buy into to it yet.”
Time to get informed…..do a bit of research. Check out this links (hope they work)-
http://babelfish.yahoo.com/translate_url?doit=done&tt=url&intl=1&fr=bf-home&trurl=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.athenaparts.com%2Fblog%2Fktm-da-lannuncio-di-una-collaborazione-mondiale-con-athena-get&lp=it_en&btnTrUrl=Translate
http://www.athenaparts.com/blog/ktm-da-lannuncio-di-una-collaborazione-mondiale-con-athena-get
(run this site through a language translator as it is in Italian)
Seems like somebody is buying into it! KTM no less, with Roger DeCoster in attendance!
You’re right nobody is buying into it……
OK now Ossa spent a lot of money to bring this to us I hope now everyone buys a new Ossa! We don’t want these to sit on showroom floors like the 4 stroke do!
43 years ago the first 2 stroke showed up at an MX race and it swept the 4 stroke MXers off the face of the earth!
Lets do it again
@ iluvmx
The combustion chamber is usually considered the space between the piston at TOP DEAD CENTER and the cylinder head. In the picture from Athena, by looking at the crank and conrod, you can see the piston is not at the top and that the injector is injecting from the cylinder wall and will probably get covered when the piston is at top dead center. Therefore it’s clearly not injecting into the combustion chamber, it’s injecting into the cylinder.
@ HGT – Thank you for forwarding me the Athena pdf and please continue with your great job of introducing PFI into motocross engines.
By the way, we still have to see when does the Athena engine inject. No question the injector is in the cylinder but it may be injecting before the ports are closed to deal with high rpm little time to operate at high pressure, basically making it better but not perfect. Just a supposition.
BTW guys, try to get back on topic. A bike with double injectors, rear facing exhaust port, 97kg in full enduro trim and we can only discuss about the definition of DI? Come on!
Another thing, after seeing a local video OSSA made, the main engineer behind this project commented they will present for next year an OSSA Yankee revival motorbike aimed at the american market. The video is in Catalan language but if you want to watch it I can post it here. If you don’t remember or know what the OSSA Yankee is listen to this: 500cc 2-stroke street bike! Future for this brand sure sounds amazing for us 2-stroke fans!
@Max Müller Corróns
“The combustion chamber is usually considered the space between the piston at TOP DEAD CENTER and the cylinder head.”
We can define the combustion chamber as TDC or not, either way it is the SAME volume of space.
“we still have to see when does the Athena engine inject”
Actually, Athena have said it is AFTER the ports are closed.
So if it injects “into the cylinder” it is exactly the same as “into the combustion chamber”. Once the ports are closed it is one space, the only change is the volume. So if it is injecting into this space it is Direct Injection.
On a side note, as it is impossible to spray fuel only exactly at TDC (as HGT was going through that time math before) even cylinder head mounted DI sprays before TDC, so would you now not call it DI?
The fact is, whether the injector is mounted on the cylinder head or the cylinder wall, it is injecting into the same exact place, after the ports are closed. They are injecting into the same place, at the same time.
It is Direct Injection.
@Max Müller Corróns
You should totally post the video of the OSSA Yankee. I am interested and I am sure others are as well.
Thanks Vitaliy Khomich, I thought I already divided by 2 to account for BDC to TDC travel so I did the math again and get the same as before, .003
9000 divided by 60 = 150 revolutions a second.
1 second divided by 150 = .006666 which is the time to make one full revolution.
.00666 divided by 2 is .00333 which is the time it takes for 1/2 a revolution or to go from BDC to TDC at 9000 rpm. Correct me if I am wrong, i’m no math major. but I did sleep in a Holiday Inn before.
Now for some Ditech facts. The Aprilia Ditech does not wait for the ports to be closed before injecting as scavenging is complete and gasses are actually trying to come into the cylinder via the exhaust port and not out. (2 stroke operation 101)I am sure no one is as there is not enough time to do so on a two stroke.
Some fun facts: The Aprilia DiTech at idle (and I am sure many follow this strategy) has completed the opening and closing of the fuel injector. It has completed the opening and closing of the air injector which occurs .0002 (two ten thousands) of a seconds after the fuel injector closes as measured on an Oscilloscope by myself.
http://i43.tinypic.com/wiolfr.jpg
It now starts the combustion process by firing the plug. This is at 44 degrees BTDC. Now, if you know a little about port timings, this is well before the exhaust port has closed, in fact the exhaust port is very much open.
As said by Max Müller Corróns: The combustion chamber is usually considered the space between the piston at TOP DEAD CENTER and the cylinder head.
This is correct and what everyone follows. Now to split hairs… sure, the Athena injector is “spraying towards the combustion chamber” in there picture I provided from Athena. That does not make it DI per SAE definition. Is it directly injecting somewhere… sure. All forms of fuel injection directly injects somewhere.
As an engineer that follows current engineering standards, all I have been trying to say is according to SAE definition which has been in place since 1996 to eliminate confusion amongst manufacturers (which Athena is not following)is unless it is a cylinder head mounted injection system that sprays into the combustion chamber (not at or towards) it is not a DI fuel system. This may be why they had to call it DICC which by the way is not in the current SAE J1930 definition list
If this is true about the SAE definition of a combustion chamber and Direct injection, then the Aprilia system, Orbital, Mercury, Evinrude, and all car systems are not DI. In fact DI is impossible and does not exist. As you stated yourself, HGT, the Aprilia injects before TDC.
The reasons given to discredit Athena’s kit as DI would also discredit every other system known as DI.
So make a decision and be consistent. is Athena’s kit DI or is there NO engine that is DI?
The debate is really taking shape around the definition of “combustion chamber”. SAE J1930 does not define combustion chamber, but Direct Injection is defined on Page 29 in this link>>>> http://www.ferraritechinfo.com/files/j1930_200204.pdf (google is a wonderful tool!!!)
As for the combustion chamber debate, here is the Class Definition of Internal Combustion Engine from the U.S. Patent and Trademark Office>>>>>> http://www.uspto.gov/web/patents/classification/uspc123/defs123.htm
The first two paragraphs speak of the combustion chamber as such…….”a combustible material is burned within an enclosed space or chamber”……and goes on to say……..”The space or combustion chamber above referred to is ordinarily the interior of the working cylinder of the engine”
According to these definitions I would classify the Athena system as Direct Injection.
Can we please keep this on topic guys, I don’t want to disable comments.
Focus on the advancement not the specifics.
Thanks guys!
To HGT
“9000 divided by 60 = 150 revolutions a second.
1 second divided by 150 = .006666 which is the time to make one full revolution.
.00666 divided by 2 is .00333 which is the time it takes for 1/2 a revolution or to go from BDC to TDC at 9000 rpm.”
Yes, it takes 0.00333 seconds for 1/2 of revolution, that’s for 1 piston stroke from BDC to TDC, but the exhaust port closes at around half of the stroke distance from BDC to TDC. So now devide 0.00333(time for 1/2 revolution or 1 stroke) by 2 = 0.00166(time for 1/2 of the stroke or 1/2 distance from BDC to TDC after exhaust port closes).
HGT can you please send me the PDF file to vitaliycrx@yahoo.com
@ 2strokerevolution
The video is the presentation of the trial bike (TR280i) in which the engineer speaks about the future enduro (i.e. the bike on this page) and the retro/vintage Yankee model for 2012. A EPA approved 500cc 2-stroke bike sure will make a notice when it comes out so you’ll definitely hear the notice when photos come out! Ossa, the same as GasGas and Montesa, are from Catalunya so in the video they are speaking in catalan. He starts speaking about it and names it at minute 1:02.
More news from OSSA.
They’ve started building a new warehouse (4000m2) and meanwhile they’ll rent one. They are also planning on buying a third one. They are also expanding the amount of workers, 3 times more, making them have more workers than even the Gas Gas factory.
They’ll start with 3000 enduro bikes (2013 distribution) per year (eventhough they’ve received proposals for 5000) and 500 explorer bikes (2012 distribution). The trials bike production is around 1500 if I’m not mistaken. BTW, for those who didn’t know the OSSA enduro won the EICMA Milan best enduro bike prize.
About the Yankee (500cc 2-stroke roadbike) they are thinking which of the 2 other projects they will finish and put onto production, the Yankee or an electric bike (enduro). According to them the electric bike is very upfront and will take them more than 2 years because it’s a very different design to the electric models that there are now.
My opinion: making a factory bigger than GasGas, producing 4 revolutionary models of which they are receiving more orders than they can produce seems to predict a bright future for this company.
Source – http://www.elpuntavui.cat/noticia/article/4-economia/18-economia/478082-ossa-es-queda-a-girona-i-preveu-construir-una-altra-fabrica.html
Hey Charles, what gives man, why’d you pull my comment? I was trying to keep things on topic. Wow!!
Sorry Ren, We lost a few days worth of data yesterday when we switched to the dedicated server.
I had no control over it.
I thought he was pissed at me also… I saw there was a long outage and figured it was that.
Athena Italy called me today (way out of business hours time zone) and left a message. I let them know when I would be in tomorrow to discuss adding the Athena kit to a low RPM cleaner emission street offering.
More from Athena:
http://www.athenaparts.com/blog/69eicma-antonio-cairoli-ha-presentato-athena-dicc-la-rivoluzione-del-2-tempi
Antonio Cairoli introduced the DICC.
And here is a video, but it is in Italian:
I think that would be really cool if Ossa came out with a 500cc 2-stroke roadbike. For me the perfect one would be a KTM 690 Duke type bike. <300lbs ready to ride with 100hp and a nice torque curve in a comfortable sporty riding position.
Electric bike would be lame, as they all have been.
I just hope Ossa isn't overzealous with their production. If they don't meet their expected sales and they spend this much money on design of 4 bikes and purchasing/renting 3 warehouses, they could kill themselves.
Athena will be at PRI if anyone’s going and can get a chance to talk to them. I don’t know if they are setting up anything related to D.I.C.C. but if they do, get pics. Wish I could be there but I usually do the Indy show instead.
I had a very nice and lengthy talk with Athena’s Paolo Pedersoli today as he was still in town after attending the PRI show. I would be interested in working with them in the near future to add DICC to our line up or maybe a mix of the 2, HGT PFI and Athena DICC.
Paolo made it clear (and they are watching this thread) that there is no KTM and Athena partnership with regards to the DICC system which as stated is still in development and will remain that way throughout 2012.
Some here assumed that the collaboration included that, it does not so I doubt you will see any KTM 2 strokes sporting the Athena DICC any time soon if ever.
Paolo stated Athena has the one engine running as seen in the video and is now looking for a market. I am willing to look at it but fear I am much too small for what they need to recoup expenses on. Requiring a specific cylinder per each application isn’t going to get their attention as much as a company needing hundreds of the same cylinder which is their target.
As an engineer, I know how long it takes to bring something to market after you have it perfected which is why Paolo said to not expect anything next year either.
So other than the video of the engine and some limited articles, you know everything to be known.
I don’t think that as big as a company as KTM is they’d need Athena to help them develop their injection system.
I would think KTM hasn’t introduced this already because they’ve already got the market of 2 stroke bikes. Introducing this would make their package more expensive (carb vs TB, injectors, ECU) probably decreasing their competitiveness regarding their price advantage compared to 4 strokes.
Conclusion: I’m selling all my apples, why would I make them more expensive and better if that will only cause people to buy pears instead?
With the battery under the engine what happens in deep water crossings.I hope it won’t short out.
Does the Ossa use a battery?
Finally, to settle why the Ossa has a second injector in the crank. I read it in a new motorcycle mag.
Ossa learned from Bombardier that a high performance DI engine can overheat. The gas charge cools the crank as it evaporates. The second injector is to cool the crank with fuel.
Very interesting, something I didn’t think of.
Yeah, the Synerject DI system is not what I would call high performance but as I have said, they produce moderate power in snowmobiles and 2 stroke outboard engines. Even the Aprilia DI engine can run WOT all day long for 20,000 miles without crank or bearing issues and they sip oil.
I’m not on board with the crank cooling statement based on my rebuilding experience and lack of crank and bearing failures I have seen on oil injected cases. Of course, you cannot pre-mix a DiTech as the case would get no oil. All crank and bearing failures I have serviced on DI’s were due to failed injection pumps or human error in letting the oil run out.
I just took a DI out of it’s 8k RPM comfort zone and ported the cylinder and added a performance pipe doubling it’s HP. 3.25 to 7.25 is a huge improvement for a DI engine.
[IMG]http://i41.tinypic.com/34rvxjp.jpg[/IMG]
Outboard 2-strokes make very low HP/L for 2-strokes (~100hp/L). They are designed to run WOT. They Synerject is designed to be a low fuel consumption and low emissions engine, not performance. Those types of engines won’t have heating problems. But, engines like Ski-Doo’s E-Tec snowmobiles ARE high performance. They make over 200hp/L AND have to run WOT continuously under a heavy load.