| Author | Message | ||
     D_adams |
Not quite finished, but almost there. Needs the front tab and then polished. I'm waiting on the local dealers to get a dyno fixed, both seem to be broken/down at the moment.       | ||
| Ourdee |
It's purdy. | ||
| Nillaice |
that sure is some pretty work there | ||
| Natexlh1000 |
It's a shame something so shiny has to get all beat up under a bike. My X1's "Daytona Boss" muffler was polished like a mirror when I got it. | ||
| D_adams |
It can be ceramic coated for more durability if you don't like polished. This one will end up polished, I only hit the parts that will be difficult to get at once it's finished. | ||
| D_adams |
Btw, this is what needs to be added to the pipe above, it's not 100% finished.  | ||
| D_adams |
| ||
| D_adams |
Numbers look good. I did not have a stock pipe or ecm for a true baseline, so the baseline is a factory Buell race exhaust and matched preprogrammed ra,e ecm for that pipe. This is just from memory, I'll post pics later Buell factory race = 83+ hp / 70 ft/lbs torque on an otherwise stock XB9. RT-XB-1 with 2.5” internals = 80+ hp / 70+ ft/lbs RT-XB-1 with 2” internals = 80+ hp / 70+ ft/lbs Fueling was pretty good with the factory pipe, 13.5:1 or so. Both of mine require a LOT more fuel, both were way over 17:1. Low end torque showed as much as a 10 ft/lb gain over the factory pipe at around 3-4k rpm. | ||
| D_adams |
Dyno chart pics as promised. RT-XB-1 with 2.5" internals. This one made about 9 hp more than stock on an XB12. Looks like it made 81.7 hp on the XB9. AF ratio was almost off the charts, maxed registered AF was 19.1:1 with the bottom of the trough at about 12.9:1 or so.   RT-XB-1 with 2" internals. Never tested this on the XB12. I opted for this on the 9 based on displacement. It's also better for repacking. 82.8 hp and 69.8 ft/lbs of torque. AF ratio wasn't quite as bad, but it's still way off. Need to remove a bit of fuel for the bottom, add some on top.   The factory race can with ecm to match made 83 hp and 69.9 ft/lbs of torque. AF ratio was pretty good at around 13.5"1 with a high of 14.1 at WOT. It could be a bit better, but overall, it's not too bad of a representation of this pipe. All of this was done in one hour on a superflow dyno.   Lastly a comparison shot of the race pipe on the left, one of mine on the right. They obviously need some tuning to make it right, but what's significant is that mine run very lean even with the race ecm. More fuel in this case WILL equate to more power and possibly quite a bit of it. Also, even though both of mine are lean throughout most of the rpm range, there's no huge dip in torque at 3500 rpm like what you'd see on most pipes.  I know this isn't conclusive data, but it's all I had time for this morning. It's just an apples to apples comparison for a race ecm, the factory race pipe and 2 of mine using the same ecm. All of this was done on a 2003 XB9, thanks to Dave for letting me abuse his bike mercilessly. |
