Vader 150 -> 250.

[ProDigit]

I went online to buy an engine upgrade for my Vader 150.
I found what I thought was a good deal on a CG250 (229cc) for $435 on the Walmart website. When I opened the cover, it looked like Arabic writings inside the engine. Didn't look Chinese, Indian or Indonesian, the countries you expect these engines to come from.

Engine: https://www.walmart.com/ip/Vertical-...roke/288560980

Turned out, walmart sent me an engine with step through gearbox. In other words, shifting from neutral into 1st is down, and any following gear is down as well.
Once you reach 5th you can shift down once more for neutral.

It's totally opposite of normal motorcycle gears, and I really have to pay attention that I don't accidentally shift into a lower gear when running already high rpms.

The nice thing is, coming to a stoplight, I only need to shift 1x down from 5th gear to be in neutral, and 1x down from neutral to go into 1st gear.

Bad part is possibly wrecking the bike, when accidentally shifting down twice from 5th gear into 1st gear; as well as when slowing down, but not coming to a full stop (like the light just turns green before you got there). You'll either have to shift 5th gear up to 3rd or 2nd, or whatever gear for the speed you need, or shift down into neutral, first, second, third... to whatever gear you need.
Gear shifts up are very clunky. But I noticed it can be done when not fully engaging the clutch, but keeping it at the friction zone instead. Also,only gear shifts when moving. Nearly impossible to shift when standing still.

I had a few false neutrals, between 4th and 5th.

This new gearing takes getting used to, but it's not entirely unusable.

I can't yet say a lot about the performance of the CG250, other than this version of it, is a rather weak engine.
My 150 was faster in top speed and speed overall, save for low rpm speed.
The 250 is like a tractor, pulling first to third gear as low as 2000rpm.
4th and 5th seem to like speeds above 3k rpm though.

I do realize that the engine is still breaking in (first 25 miles done), valve adjustment done (was too tight from the factory), and the engine by itself had less than 1oz of shipping oil in it.
I took the halfway used oil from the 150, and filled up the 250 with that. Oil will be dumped tomorrow anyway.

The 250 has the same gearing as the 150, comes from the factory with a 14t, but I installed the 19/29t gearing on it.
At the moment the 250 can't yet pull 5th gear past 50mph, but 4th gear it can up to 60.
The 150 could do 70, and 74 when conditions were right; but that engine was tuned to the max.

So far I've found that a 40 pilot is close to ideal, and a 125 main is a bit rich.
I'll look into a 115 and a 120 later. Despite me being at sea level, which requires bigger jets, I do have a silencer in my exhaust, which is why the 125 still was a bit too rich.

I also have to tune the needle jet height. It's set to 1 up from center, with a thin washer making the needle run 1.5 richer (up). I'm using the same PZ30 as my 150 engine had.

As far as installation went,
It was fairly easy.

Remove plastic side panels, remove carburetor, remove kick starter and gear pedal, disconnect wire harness, unplug sparkplug, disconnect sprocket and chain from transmission, unmount the 5 engine mount bolts holding the engine.

Do the valve adjustment on the new engine, install spark plug, transfer air intake manifold from 150 to the 250 (manifold was angled,causing the carburetor not to fit).
The old manifold is slightly smaller in diameter than the new one, but fits nonetheless. This manifold only fits PZ27 carburetors, however PZ30 also fit, albeit barely. The carburetor almost sticks out beyond the seal on top.


Pop in the new engine using a jack. Insert the main (big) 2 motormount bolts, but don't tighten, then insert the other (smaller) 3 motormount bolts.
Plug in the 6 pin cable (gear indicator) into the harness (under booth under seat). In my case, the other 5 (I believe) wires can be connected to one another, as they have a similar color code (pink, yellow, green, black, blue).
Plug in the sparkplug cable, connect the carburetor and fuel line, open the fuel petcock, turn on the bike with key, and turn on starter switch, and test with or without choke on.
Make sure you're in N, when starting from the side stand peg, otherwise you'll have no spark.

Mine started after a few tries, as I had no spark, due to side stand switch.

Set idle, adjust AF screw for fastest idle rpm.
If idle screw is all the way in or out, means you'll need to go smaller or bigger on the pilot jet.
I went from a 35/38 pilot on the 150, to a 40 on the 250 (229cc).
Still testing out the main jet, but it looks like I'll be going from the 112 main to a 115 main on the new engine.

On paper the CG250 should have 12hp, while the 150 should have 10.
While torque definitely is better on the 250 from 1-4k rpm, I probably will have to wait until the first 600 miles are over, before I can start noticing better higher rpm performance.

I read online the total install takes 4 hours. But for a first timer, and despite everything going well, it took roughly 12 hours.
This included rejetting the carburetor and testing.
Also, I don't have all tools, so sometimes I have to be inventive to get a job done, taking some extra time.

I'm expecting avg mpg to go from ~66 on the 150 (not including leisurely rides
between 30-45 MPH that net 84MPG), to go down to about 50-55, as the engine rpm in 5th is the same as on the 150.
Although it feels like first gear on the 250 is taller than on the 150.

I had a 20t front sprocket once, but it didn't fit the 150 engine.
I might check if it's still available, because it could potentially fit the 250, as it still has some room left to go. (Just ordered one on AliExpress.

[Thumper]

Got a few photos??

[ProDigit]

Sure, will get some soon.
I'm still tuning the carburetor, so the fairings are still not installed. The new engine is larger so swapping out carburetors can't be done with the fairings still on.


Meanwhile, I'm surprised to say, that even the 115 main jet is running a tad rich.

So the swap from a 150 to a 229, didn't require a change in main jet. Just the idle jet needed to be upped from 38 to a 40.

[Deckard_Cain]

Sounds more like an ATV or pitbike variant of the CG.

Should be just fine, just totally different and need to get used to it.

One of the reasons why I bought my Vader 125 instead of the Icebear Fuerza.. Fuerza had an extended swingarm I didn't like plus the all down shift pattern.

To be fair to the walmart page for your engine though, there is a picture with the shift pattern ...

[ProDigit]

Yeah, I think you're right about an ATV engine. it was the cheapest cg250 I could find.
On paper the 150 in my Vader had 10hp, and this one 12HP, so it should be faster.

But this one is still slower.
The top of the engine looks exactly the same as the 150, and weighs also the same. I feel like I got a 150 instead of a 250, save for the extra torque.

I'm going to see if an adjustable CDI can gain me a tiny bit of top speed, as I don't want to tinker with the flywheel to advance the timing.
I'm using the CDI from the 150, so maybe that one isn't ideal for the 250.
I'm presuming it's an AC CDI?

I'm also going to look for a different intake manifold that has a wider opening, because the one I'm using was for the PZ27 on the 150 engine.

[ProDigit]

You know, initially I was complaining about the 250 having less HP?
It topped out at 50MPH with the 19/29 gearing and 140 70 R12 tires (up from the stock 130 70 R12 tires).

Yeah, in 4th gear it could reach 55MPH, but I had hoped those extra 2HP of the CG250 compared to the 150, were hidden inside there somewhere.

So I looked online for adjustable CDIs. To see if I can somehow change the timing.
I also swapped out my exhaust for one with a slightly larger diameter.
A 300CC exhaust, unlike the 125cc exhaust I had on before, hoping performance would go up somewhat.

The 115 main jet was running a tad too rich, so rather than rejetting, swapping to the new free flow exhaust corrected that.

While riding, I did do a fuel up (half the tank with the 150, half with the 250), which showed 84MPG.
I thought it might be an error, and just forgot about it.
After that, I noticed my valves were ticking again.
You know how they always say that valves get tighter, not looser?
This is the second bike where valve gaps get looser, not tighter.
There might be a reason though...
I think that initially, the engine oil has a lot of metal flakes that can get stuck between the tappets. It makes it look like the valve has zero clearance.

When I came back home from a test ride, I opened up the valve cover (hot), and noticed that the play was slightly more than what I had set it to (I had set it to roughly 0.002-0.003" COLD, play was 0.003-0.004" HOT).
So with the engine steaming hot, I got some gloves, and just set the tappet screw to zero (hand tight). Then I tightened the locknut, and closed it.

Immediately out the gate, the engine had a lot more low end torque from that.
Definitely noticeable! I could basically accelerate from 2k RPM onwards in 4th gear, though the bike prefers 3k RPM and up.

I went on a 96 miles fuel economy trip, to and back from West Palm Beach, with little to no stop lights, speeds of between 30-40 MPH, ideal for this little engine.
The Vader 150 has a 1.5 gal tank, and with fuel lines, filter, and carburetor, that's 1.6 Gal (trust me, I know).

With the 150, I would reach 84 MPG on these eco trips, so I calculated I should make it with 1.5 Gal if the CG250 (229cc) would consume at least 66MPG or better (=99 miles of range, plus the 0.1gal in the lines and carb is 105 miles of range).
Not all the trip was a great fuel economy run, I had some stoplights, and some pieces where I started to notice the bike started to go faster than 50MPH in 5th gear.

Once I arrived back to my home fuel station, I was surprised to see that I not even used a single gallon of fuel!
Result: 111 MPG!!! (See sig).
I couldn't believe it.
I remember people saying they got more MPG than my 94MPG Lifan Xpect 200 doing the fuel economy run, out of their hawks, but now I can finally see it myself!

The CG250 had beaten the 150 in terms of MPG numbers!
This also during the break-in, so I tend to believe fuel mpg will only go up from here on.

During the first 30-something miles, the engine was really getting used to running at 3-4k RPM (30-40MPH). I noticed vibrations slowly started disappearing, to the point where 3-4k RPM almost felt like a counterbalanced engine; and engine braking smoothed out to feeling more like coasting in neutral when letting go of the throttle, than braking.
It did still vibrate above 4.5-5k RPM.

As I continued riding, between mile 60-90, I noticed the bike slowly started to be able to
handle higher RPMs and higher speeds in 5th gear!
In one run I was able to reach 67MPH (65 GPS) in 5th gear, with still left to go, but it took forever to get there.
The CG250 really pulls all the way to 50MPH. From there on, it's a slow crawl to more.

What surprised me, was that I was able to maintain speeds of 60+ MPH, without needing to tuck, like on the 150.
So the engine finally is starting to bloom!
I start to fall in love with my Vader 150 once again, as I see the performance above 50MPH was quite exhilarating!

I've even started thinking, if anyone ever wants to steal this bike, they'd get hell of confused, as the gearbox isn't doing your ordinary motorcycle gearshift order.

Right now, I believe the correct gearing for this bike is 19/29t.
But I've already ordered a 20T front sprocket, once the engine is fully broken into.

A new X-Pro Vader/Condor 150 weighs roughly 275 LBS wet.
I shed 7LBS from swapping the exhaust, and roughly 5.5 LBS from swapping the lead acid battery to a lithium one. The difference in weight is roughly the difference between the 250 and the 150 I replaced.

[ProDigit]

Here are some pictures of the new engine installed.
Fairings stay off, as I need to still get a new intake manifold for the PZ30.
I'm hoping that will resolve some intake restriction.

[Thumper]

That starter relay/solenoid seems to be where the coil used to be! Yes, you DID have to move things around. Did the original mounting bracket by the intake vale line up OK? It looks kind of shortened.

Good to hear the engine is loosening up and gaining power. I guess that is typical break-in behavior.

I have never encountered pass through shifter set up. I guess there is no reason why the roller couldn't be engineered that way other than the safety reason (protecting first gear from a catastrophic engagement at 50mph!).

[ProDigit]

Originally Posted by Thumper

That starter relay/solenoid seems to be where the coil used to be! Yes, you DID have to move things around. Did the original mounting bracket by the intake vale line up OK? It looks kind of shortened.

No. It was literal plug and play. The starter is on the other side of the bike, it's a bit bigger and longer,and sticks out to about halfway the engine.
What you're seeing is the back side of the starter.

The only thing was the carburetor would hit the frame, hence I used the 150's intake. All the rest is just a drop in replacement.

[ProDigit]

I'm thinking the good gas mileage might be because of the restrictive intake tube (between carb and cylinder).
It's a 27mil, and if I change that to a 30, I may need to increase the main jet size.

It should increase 75-100% throttle response and top speed performance, but will lower mpg.
If the gains are more than 5%, I can potentially install the 20T front sprocket, to compensate for the mpg loss, and trade in some acceleration for mpg, which should further increase theoretical top speed.

I'm looking forward to performing some more testing.
But for now, I'm on vacay in Naples FL.

[ProDigit]

I played around with a yellow adjustable CDI today.
At the very best the bike ran well at low rpm but stuttered a bit at higher.
Anything higher or lower from this adjustable setting resulted in worse performance.
So I left the stock vader CDI plugged in, since I got best performance from that one. I have another black CDI that performs the same, and a blue one where the connector is different. Didn't try that one (probably a DC CDI).

Panels are back in place, ready for work tomorrow, if it doesn't rain...

[ProDigit]

Today I was on the highway behind a truck, and reached 70 mph.
The bike did it effortlessly, unlike with the 150 where it feels like I have to squeeze out every last drop of performance.
So at least I know that this engine has more horsepower than the Vader 150.

I also was pondering up on how did they make this engine run so smooth?
Sure, there is some vibration in the foot pegs, and minor tingling in the handlebars, but the mirrors are smooth.
And I was thinking, it could be that they equipped this engine with a much heavier flywheel. And when you think about it it makes sense, when you look at the 250 you put it in neutral, and you try to accelerate it, it's so much slower than the 150.
A heavier flywheel will result in lower acceleration but a smoother running engine, which may also result in higher top speed, and slightly better fuel economy during coasting, But lower fuel economy during start stop riding.

[ProDigit]

The CG250 ran quite ok with the 115 main and 40 pilot jet.
But lately we've been having a bit colder weather, making the bike start a bit hard.

I had set the AF screw to 3 rotations out, but even then the bike needs nearly full choke to start.
The 115 main also runs a tad lean now with the little colder weather.
I'm thinking the jump from a 40 to 42 pilot should resolve cold starts, but also richen up the mixture a tiny bit at mid throttle.
Not as much as putting in a 120 main, but enough to add a tiny bit of power.

If I could only fix that stuck seat lock, so I can access the battery to fix that electrical issue I'm having now, where all the lights and dash went out, and starter won't do anything.
But the bike orherwise runs with the kick-start.

[ProDigit]

I did a few top speed runs on the highway, tucked in, and with a little head wind in 4th gear the bike revs all the way to 8k RPM hitting 70MPH indicated. In 5th that dropped to 67MPH.
On the way back, with a tail wind, the bike did 74MPH in 5th gear.

That's a little slower than the 150cc engine.

The difference between the 250 (ZS167FMM) and the 150 is mainly in low speed throttle use.
I don't need to roll the throttle all the way when riding at 50MPH or below, unlike the 150 where I feel more like it acts like a 50cc scooter, where I got the throttle nearly constantly pegged at 100%.

At higher speeds, the 150 feels like it has the same power as this ZS167FMM CG250 229cc engine.

The ZS167FMM allows for normal traffic speeds up to 50MPH, with less than 50% of throttle; which is kind of 100% throttle, as there isn't really a whole lot of difference past 60% of throttle (60 to 100% seems to run the same at lower RPMs), but once I get into the higher RPMs 60% to 100% throttle does seem to make a difference.

I swapped out the intake manifold (tubing between the carburetor and engine air intake). The new intake I dremeled it out, as there were some ridges between the carb and intake port, so I tried to even that out, to allow for maximum airflow.
The tube diameter was about 3mm bigger than the old tube (from the 150).
It also had a vacuum nipple, where I connected the hose going to the tank, and got rid of my carbon canister.

The main jet was still a 115, and the pilot I've upped from 40 to 42, as the 40 pilot was running too lean.
The 42 pilot on the other hand, was running a tad rich, even with the AF screw almost all the way in (less fuel).

When riding, I could feel the difference. Though not in top speed.
When I had the 150cc engine with the PZ27 carburetor, it gave great acceleration below 5k RPM, abysmal performance between 5-6k RPM, good performance between 6-7k RPM, and lousy performance between 7-8k RPM.
This was true for both the 150 and 250 engine; which had both intake and exhaust in common.

Like the whole setup had some torque dips and troths at certain rpm ranges.

Putting a PZ30 instead of a PZ27, somewhat evened out that curve, however, there still was a noticeable dip in performance between 5-6k RPM.

Swapping out the intake tube from the 150 (27mm) to the 250 (30mm), caused the butt dyno to register a much smoother and more linear acceleration curve. It's like the bike has slightly less torque at below 5k RPM, but more torque between 5-6k rpm.
Unlike before where the bike would get stuck at 50MPH and I had to tuck to go faster, with the new intake, it just keeps accelerating past 50, without tucking.
With the PZ30 and new intake, it now feels more like an OHC engine, than a pushrod engine.
Sure, it still has torque down low, but I can feel the HP keeps climbing across the rev range all the way to 7k or 7.5k RPM.

Unlike the 150, the 250 doesn't have that 8-8.25k RPM bump in performance.
I always thought that this must be valve float on the 150.
The 250 I have, seems not to have enough power to surpass 8k RPM, even in 3rd gear, where it tops around 55MPH at 8k RPM.

I was wondering if I would equip the CG250 with softer, less tense valve springs, to get that valve float effect of the 150?


About the intake tube, I was hoping that the larger intake will cause better top end performance, but I was wrong.
All it did was smooth out the curve, allowing for a more consistent acceleration across the board.
It still topped out at roughly the same HP as with the other intake.
I'm thinking that the vacuum nipple may play a role in that, as I'm thinking it's possible that in some RPMs the nipple provides fuel vapors when the vacuum line pulls it out, and at other RPMs the air gets pushed back into the hose??
Not sure if the nipple makes that much of a difference, however, I will want to try plugging it, to see if that makes any difference in the acceleration curve.


Aside from that, I did a fuelup, however lost some fuel replacing the carburetor, didn't get 1 to 2 miles recorded due to empty battery, and I spilled some fuel while fueling up, making the 62.5MPG closer to 65MPG.
This was with top speed runs, and commuting to work (lots of stop lights).


One thing that feels less safe on this engine, is shifting up a gear when turning left.
My foot touched the ground, even with the shifter up.
I feared I'd fall, but thankfully the turn wasn't too tight.
On a normal motorcycle gearing, you'd never experience this, as the foot will be ABOVE the shifter to downshift, not below.



So overall, the CG250 definitely is a better engine,
However, I would not recommend anyone to do a CG250 engine swap, if they are expecting better top speed compared to their OEM Vader 150 engine.
Both engines perform roughly the same.
Unless one can find a better performing 300cc engine, or a counterbalanced or 6 speed engine, it's really not worth doing the swap for, unless you want better MPG between 30-50MPH.

[slithica]

Originally Posted by Thumper

Hmm... Another tome no one will read past the first couple of sentences in your monologue to yourself.... Waste of your time pal. Really. You have lost credibility.

No, but maybe you can increase the horsepower of the engine with new sprockets. Yes... THAT's the ticket. Please post.

Ignore that guy, I read it. I'm happy it worked out so well for you.



It gets better MPG because the engine isn't working as hard to maintain the same speed the old engine was at max to do.



A larger engine running below full throttle is more efficient than a small engine at max load.