| Author | Message | ||
     Father_of_an_era |
I have taken the R out for about a 50 mile ride and did not notice any loss in the mid range as some have suggested here on badweb. I did however notice a slight gain in the top end and slightly increased throttle response in the higher rev-range. Was the HP increase substantial? Well, no. But, it was however enough for me to be happy with. I have to remember that I do not have the specific tune that was developed for the stacks so, my assumption is that there would be a larger increase in RWHP with the stack specific tune and setup. But I don't know that for certain. Though some may not be happy with the overall results, I am more than gratified. What ever I can do to excavate all of the potential ponies without changing the inner workings of the engine or dumping a ton of cash into to the motor is all I am after. Key.Points: More power on the top end Better throttle response A slightly nicer growl in the higher rev-range No loss in the mid or low ranges Who knows, maybe the bike needs to adjust a little more before I feel the real potential the stacks may be able to unlock. Unfortunately, I don't have the connections to get her on a dyno but by the seat of the pants evaluation, there is a definite difference. | ||
| Buellrain |
Agree with all "Father" say's, especially the throttle response and the "growl", although I notice that all the way through the rev range. For the money a good add on  | ||
| Buelldr |
nice | ||
| Father_of_an_era |
That growl may be there all the way through but with the KEDA RT2, its a bit hard to hear. lol Love that exhaust! | ||
| Littlebutquick |
i am still running the same fuel map that i had before the stacks were made just fitted them in bikes never been on a dyno twinmotorcycles just sent me the map ran this @ the weekend still stock motor just bolt ons from twinmotorcycles and Erik Buell Racing  | ||
| Fresnobuell |
NIce LBQ--I know there's someone out there who can quantify the stacks' performance. The SOTP dyno is extremely subjective and a stronger pull on top could be mistaken for a midrange drop with no or little gain on top. Just saying.... (Message edited by fresnobuell on March 14, 2011) | ||
| Avalaugh |
LBQ whats with the reaction times ?? your better than that  I am most definatly going to stage up against you this year (once my bike is actually working). Thread jack but are you using your ignition barrel still ? i'm in desperate need of the back of one, loom part as mine has snapped at the solder point inside  | ||
| Littlebutquick |
it was only a test and tune reaction not important.still beat the 1400 zzr | ||
| Blower1 |
Sorry to hijack "Fathers" topic, but want to show again my dyno results, when I was testing the velocity stacks first prototype. The first prototype was nearly 1" longer than the final one, which makes nearly the same mid range torque, but more top end power.  Run file 6 is with stock bike. Run file 7 is with the velocity stacks added to the stock bike. Run file 5 is with the stock bike and *** tune. Run file 8 is with the stacks and *** tune. This dyno runs was made in the V-Twin City`s dyno in the same day and with in one hour. As shown in the picture, there was most top end power without the stacks and with *** tune, but when Dris tested the different stack lengths, he find the short stacks made nearly the same torque than the longer, but more top end power. When I get the Dris`s tune in my Buell with the short stacks, it was a much better than with the old *** tune and longer stacks.  | ||
| Father_of_an_era |
Why do all of these dinos have different HP and torque readings? | ||
| Kinder |
^ Are you asking about the results posted by Blower or about dyno's in general? | ||
| Blake |
Blower, If you'll send me the data files, I can post a more legible digital version of your dyno plots. | ||
| Blake |
Joe, You never cease to amaze. That is some serious "quick" you have going on over there! | ||
| Father_of_an_era |
In general. Every time someone posts their dyno results, the numbers are very different. How are laymen like myself supposed to differentiate the differences in HP expectancies? I have an R with a KEDA RT2, e.b.r pump gas race ECM, K&N filter and velocity stacks. I assume that I push about 135 to 140 RWHP but really have no clue for certain. I am just curious what HP range I may be in. | ||
| Ohsoslow |
every dyno, bike, and operator, are different. not to mention weather conditions, take what you read for HP and TQ numbers lightly, use them as a ballpark for what your bike could be. the only way to be certain is to have it on a dyno and once again, comparing your dyno chart with another bikes that has the same mods as yours is not really a good comparison unless both bikes were done on the same dyno by the same operator in the same weather conditions. | ||
| Easyrider |
Ohsoslow, a little correction here The same weatter conditions is impossible.. For that reason you use a barometric computer, that corrects the weather conditions.. I have one, it cost extra but then you always can run on every time of the day and have the same results and conditions The barometric correction should be shown on the sheet like mines:  |
