I agree that many question the point, the reliability and the hassle. However just because it hasn't been done doesn't mean it's not going to be fun trying it out.

I recall when I used to play around with Ford 2L OHC engines in capris and escorts, I had similar responses "why bother, the engine won't handle it, it won't last, too complicated etc' Where as the results spoke for themselves. http://www.retrotech.co.nz/Projects/turbo-pinto.php

Since then I've been a strong advocate for forced induction. By putting your efforts into forcing air into the engine seems much easier way of enhancing performance.

That said, I'm new to bikes and new to the savage. I just thought it would be fun. My original idea was actually a supercharger driven off a pulley machined onto the stator drive, there is a convent hole already in the side cover  

Pity that it needs a plenum though.. with such little room, also with a draw-through carb setup I'd be concerned having a volume of fuel/air mix sitting under my butt. Fuel pooling issues in the plenum would also be an issue.

JT

Dave the old 2L Ford OHC was certainly not built to be turbocharged but it's been done it many times with great results, take a look
http://www.retrotech.co.nz/Projects/nismocapri.php

we've supercharged them, turbocharged em, with blow through carbs, draw through carbs, custom made efi intakes, mostly on factory internals on 30 year old engines. At the time people told us the same thing, 'cant turbo something which isn't made for it, won't last, will blow up, you'll forever have problems etc etc.'

you'd be surprised what a standard engine can do with a little bit of boost, as long as you don't get silly with the psi they can be very reliable when compared to n/a equivalents which rely on high-compression and revs which puts more strain on a motor than forced induction.

paulmarshall wrote on 06/26/13 at 14:36:01:


The principles are sort of the same.  The huge difference is one cylinder vs many.

yeah I saw that, couldn't work out why the dump-pipe does back under the bike, are there any more shots of that at other angles?

But yeah that is pretty much how I would see my setup looking with the turbo mounted directly behind the intake.

Looks like it bolts onto something underneath.
SavageRob might be a good place to start asking since he posted the photos.
He might remember where it can from.

ok so more research has confirmed that the pulsation from the single will upset a turbo quite a bit. Although i did find a vid of someone with a turbo single which is making boost
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Fwfe4LhJDqY

not installed in a bike yet though so the actual rideability hasn't been confirmed.

What about machining an extension and pulley off crank and running it out the stator cover for a small supercharger?  

Goldhammer Nortorious (http://thekneeslider.com/notorious-by-roger-goldammer/ and http://www.goldammercycle.com/collection/nortorious) used Rotrex supercharger (http://www.rotrex.com/Home/Technology/Product_Concept) on a single cylinder engine. Seems like a better option for a single than turbo.

A few considerations.

If your plan to turbo/supercharge the Savage is "for the heck of it", do it and tell us about it.

BUT

If your plan to turbo/supercharge the Savage is to gain an extra 50-60% extra power, then you're barking up the wrong tree.

A few engineering considerations:

1. The Savage is a small valve, big bore, air cooled single with well-known valve lubrication issues;
charging the engine would mean extra stress on the crank journals and bearings; have you planned to re-engineer them or do you plan to bend/break the con rod?

2. The Savage is a big single, and charging the engine means the power down stroke would have twice, possibly three times the energy as originally designed...
yet the crank counterbalance weights are engineered for the stock 32hp at 6500rpm... have you considered the vibrations exerted on the piston pin when the piston goes yahoo! at WOT 10-15psi ?

3. The Savage is a 650cc big single engineered to deliver a mere 32 hp; on the other hand, Suzuki's other "big single" family is the DR range (enduros)
which are available in 600-650-750-800 cc variants which deliver 37-42-52-55 hp respectively.

http://imageshack.us/f/29/dr750scat4.jpg/

In other words, you'll achieve more with less work if you shoehorn a DR750/800 engine in the LS650's frame.

My three cents' worth... (there's inflation, exchange commission and overseas allowance  )

PS : I forgot... did you consider if the clutch is capable of handling the increased torque ? Primary gears in the transmission ?