| Author | Message | ||
     Ragnagwar |
I recently tested the flow rates on a Pingel petcock against that of the Buell OEM piece. Everything was kept as uniform as possible for each test. Used same tank, hose and cleaned the screen in the OEM unit. I used a stopwatch to check the time it took each device to fill a marked container with 1 quart of fuel. The results were as follows: (1)OEM petcock (On position) time, 1 min. 56 sec. (average of two tests) to flow 1 quart. (2)OEM petcock (Reserve position) time, 1 min.46 sec. (one test) to flow 1 quart. (3)Pingel (On position) time, 37 sec. (average of two tests) to flow 1 quart. I also noted that the flow from the OEM unit did not remain constant. Form your own conclusions regarding necessity, cost etc. Just posted FYI in case you ever really wondered. (No affiliation with, or implied endorsement of, the above mentioned manufacturer or product intended)YMMV! | ||
| Mikej |
Let's see, 4 quarts to a gallon, 45mpg at throttle on the bike to be conservative (50-55mpg putting along, 35-40mpg whacking it a bunch), 1 quart at 1:50 (to split the difference) = 1 gallon at 8:20, 45mpg at 100mph = 2.22gph or 2.22gp60minutes or 8.88qp60m or .148quart per minute. So unless I lost myself in the calculations as long as a petcock flows a quart of gas in less than 6.76 minutes I should be good for up to 100mph or so. But I have heard of racers outrunning the stock petcock on the back straights at some race tracks with symptoms of fuel starvation that then switching to a Pingel solved their issues. Regardless of how I ride a Pingel is on my list of "someday upgrades", but the stock petcock works for now. Thanks Lawrence for the flow test, and also thanks for the picture of the, uh, bike in your profile pic. Very nice bike.  Feel free to check and correct my math as I'm also shopping for a used geezer glide. |
