| Author |
Message |
    
Pilk
| | Posted on Thursday, June 12, 2003 - 12:43 pm: | 
|
I would like to see dyno results from T_dad's bike before mods.
That is GREAT! almost 100hp with bolt ons.
Aaron, could/would you send me a ball park for making my X-1 120hp? E-mail or here.
Pilk |
Aaron
| | Posted on Thursday, June 12, 2003 - 12:50 pm: |
|
What's to apologize for? SAE is more useful than uncorrected. If you notice, almost all the charts posted here are SAE.
If you want to know the raw numbers, divide your results by 1.04.
1.04 ain't much correction anyway. We see 1.15 to as high as 1.30 up here in Colorado. You don't want to see our uncorrected numbers. We have to modify the hell out of'em just to get'em to run like a stock one at sea level.
I've seen this pattern before with these V&H CF cans ... a torque peak, followed by a little dip and then a smaller torque peak. It's your motor's ability to keep that torque from falling at high rpm that's giving it 100hp. Usually, cylinder fill is dropping off up there and causing torque and thus horsepower to drop. |
Thunderbolt_dad
| | Posted on Thursday, June 12, 2003 - 12:58 pm: |
|
As long as everyone here accepts the SAE standard for correction factors, I'm good with it. It was my understanding that the SAE was there specifically for comparing results over diverse conditions. Obviously in reality, my bike would run like crap 'up there' where you guys are. |
Thunderbolt_dad
| | Posted on Thursday, June 12, 2003 - 01:03 pm: |
|
Pilk,
Sorry, I did not do a dyno run before the mods. I assumed (sic?) that my S3 was pushing mid to high 70HP at the rear wheel, as is standard for DDFI Stock Buells. If anyone posting here is in the MetroMilwaukee area, let me know, you can ride/see the results for yourself. I am most definitely not here to aggravate anyone over Dyno results. I know for a fact there are bigger/faster/better bikes than mine. The difference being, this one IS mine. LOL |
Blake
| | Posted on Thursday, June 12, 2003 - 01:17 pm: |
|
Tboltdad, the SAE factored dyno test results are the best ones for posting here. Congratulations on the great results! I saw the SAE factor listed but was confused because the axis labels didn't also include a reference to "SAE" and your comment wrt temperature affecting the run further confused me. Temperature should not affect corrected results. I'm probably in disbelief, cause I'm one of the guys who has invested a bit of money to achieve comparable performance. I don't think we seen any bike using stock cams make 100rwhp, even those with expert valve/headwork and performance intake and exhaust. I won't dipute your results though. They are there for us all to see. Congratulations on finding one very exceptional Buell motorcycle. Hold on to it.  |
Blake
| | Posted on Thursday, June 12, 2003 - 01:32 pm: |
|
Stock DDFI 1.2L Buells usually make between 80 and 85 rwhp from the plots shared here. The one thing that has me skeptical is that above 6,000 rpm your A/F, which was already optimum didn't change, but your engine with no modification, found 9% more power. That is a huge increase in peak HP. You've go to ask yourself, how is that possible? Just doesn't make sense to me. Regardless, even 91rwhp is exceptional performance for never having opened the engine, and your PCIII certainly did cure the lean and rich spots. You can see that the leanness was really hurting your low end around 3000 rpm. The torque curve there not only shifts up along with the entire curve, but it goes from concave to convex in that area. That really highlights what a PCIII can do for a modified fuel injected motorcycle. |
Thunderbolt_dad
| | Posted on Thursday, June 12, 2003 - 01:58 pm: |
|
Blake,
Very correct about the PCIII, the major difference/advantage between my S3 and my previous '99 X1, was the race ECM along with the High Perf Oxy sensor from Dynojet. Why exactly am I seeing all the HP? I have no freekin idea, but I'll tell you this, I am most definitely enjoying the crap out of it. Now, I just need to find a way to get rid of the soreness in my shoulders from the regular stretching they are getting.... |
Thunderbolt_dad
| | Posted on Thursday, June 12, 2003 - 02:01 pm: |
|
The 'genltemen' that work the speed/dyno shop here say they normally see the DDFI 1.2's at mid to high 70's HP, bone stock, I was making my statement from their information, not from a firsthand dyno.
edited by thunderbolt_dad on June 12, 2003 |
Rippin
| | Posted on Thursday, June 12, 2003 - 04:10 pm: |
|
Sorry T-boltD and Aaron,
I'm a little color blind and after closer review I see the error of my findings. I had T's A/F mixed up. Next time I'll put on my color finders before I open up my yap.
The guy(Rich) that dynoed mine said(of course after we had it off the dyno) that he has seen as much as 8ft-lbs just in timing alone on some other Buells? I didn't question him cuz I wasn't there but why didn't he ask me when my bike was on the bull if I wanted to try and adjust it a little either way? Two allen cap screws and we're in there. Timing is set at current base stock. I have not tried it either way. It has never ping once since I've owned it.
Thanks again
Ryan |
Aaron
| | Posted on Thursday, June 12, 2003 - 04:15 pm: |
|
Hell yes timing can make a big difference. Sometimes it's off right from the factory. |
Thunderbolt_dad
| | Posted on Thursday, June 12, 2003 - 05:06 pm: |
|
Is the pinging a standard H-D issue?
The S3 doesn't, but 2 springers that I ride with do, a lot. |
Thunderbolt_dad
| | Posted on Thursday, June 12, 2003 - 10:09 pm: |
|
By the way, the previous ride, my '99 X1, can be seen here: http://www.badweatherbikers.com/buell/messages/3842/30482.html?1055296623
OK, back to the topic at hand. |
Hoser
| | Posted on Friday, June 13, 2003 - 01:13 am: |
|
Timing on DDFI bikes is best left set as per factory spec , if the base timing is adjusted in an attempt to find power , you will likely lose some , as well as encounter some drivability issues. The cam position sensor is the only way for the ECM to determine engine phase / crank position .
Here's an example of retarding the timing on a carburetted S1W ......................
 |
Rippin
| | Posted on Friday, June 13, 2003 - 08:42 am: |
|
Thanks Hoser thats what I wanted to see. I realize that not all bikes would improve that greatly but it can't hurt to give it a try.
About how many degrees or 1/16ths of in. did you move the timing plate?
Thanks Ryan |
Hoser
| | Posted on Friday, June 13, 2003 - 08:53 am: |
|
On that one , the timing was "as delivered" , I rotated the sensor 1 mark , each mark being 2.5 degrees at the cam , or 5 degrees @ the crank . |
Aaron
| | Posted on Friday, June 13, 2003 - 11:37 am: |
|
Jeff is 100% correct as usual. You want to do a DDFI bike by the book. And a lot of people don't realize how much of a change each of those timing plate ticks is.
WRT carb'eb bikes, a number of people report a power increase with a slight retard from the factory setting. Myself, I generally see more when I advance it slightly. Probably the altitude.
The other thing I've seen occassionally is the timing set way completely wrong from the factory, like multiple ticks off.
It's been my experience that you always need to dial the timing back in after a cam change, too. You can't rely on a mark you made with your previous set of cams, the precise position of that slot that indexes the rotor cup will likely come out different, relative to the crank's position. |
Philip
| | Posted on Friday, June 13, 2003 - 11:34 pm: |
|
is there a way to set the timing without using a light into the hole and do the clear plugs work or do i just take a bath? my ironhead is a mes to set. 99 m-2 nallin stage 2 1250. |
Aaron
| | Posted on Saturday, June 14, 2003 - 01:11 am: |
|
Some modules provide a timing LED and you can set the timing statically using it. The procedure for most of'em is to put the front piston at tdc of the compression stroke and then rotate the plate clockwise until the LED just turns off, then lock down the plate. Then they generally have switches of some type and the instructions will tell you what switch positions net what curve and total timing. Dyna 2000's are this way, as are Crane HI-4E's and the SE programmable nose cone module.
I find it difficult to set timing on these things with a light, particularly if the bike is dual fire (all carb'ed Buells are dual-fire from the factory). You're right, you have the choice of either the clear plug obscuring your view or taking an oil bath. Then on top of that half the light flashes are at the wrong time with dual-fire.
Best way IMO: a dyno. |
Hoser
| | Posted on Saturday, June 14, 2003 - 01:32 am: |
|
I agree with Aaron , with all of the above , the dyno is quite a tool for finding the "sweet spot".
I just returned from "Rippin up the Rockies" , a 2,700 km high speed , high heat ride at a variety of elevations and atmospheric conditions , all went well with the exception on some pinging under load. This was mainly at lower elevation and during hot weather , a " slight adjustment" of timing during the trip to retard the spark from it's advanced position where I set it on the dyno a few weeks ago corrected the problem .
I too can get away with more advance here at 3,500' , I can also get by without an accelerator pump here when I choose . |
Philip
| | Posted on Saturday, June 14, 2003 - 01:57 pm: |
|
thanks for the input. i had my bike on a dyno a couple of weeks ago but did not do any adjustments. i had 96.4 hp and 78 ft pounds of torque. buell race module cut off at 6800 rpm while hp was still climbing and torque and only dropped off a few pounds. seems like i should have more torque compared to the charts i see on nallins web site with similar setups. it is still nice! |
Hoser
| | Posted on Monday, June 16, 2003 - 09:26 pm: |
|
Here's that race prepped S1 , Tuning is not finished yet ( are they really ever finished ?? )
 |
Darthane
| | Posted on Tuesday, June 17, 2003 - 08:22 am: |
|
All right...Blake crushed the 8 runs into 3 (overlapping) charts, so I'll do my best to distinguish them.
Runs 001 and 002 are from an XB9R with the Buell Pro Series Race Kit installed, no other modifications.
Runs 003, 004, and 005 are the same bike with a homemade 'Force' air intake on the bike. See these posts for details ~~> http://www.badweatherbikers.com/cgibin/discus/show.cgi?tpc=4062&post=171150#POST171150 & http://www.badweatherbikers.com/cgibin/discus/show.cgi?tpc=4062&post=171656#POST171656
Runs 006, 007, and 008 are the same bike and same modifications, but with the blue outer airbox cover removed. I'd say there is a fair amount to be gained by cutting holes in it. The bike gained 2hp and 2ft/lbs across the board with it off.
After talking to the technician that runs the dyno, it was determined that their dyno was improperly tuned (too high, unfortunately) for the first two runs and runs 003-008 are 'correct' numbers.
Max power now is 75.49hp at 60.92ft/lbs
Removing the airbox cover raises that to 78.10hp at 63.26ft/lbs
The erroneous numbers were 82.67hp at 66.38ft/lbs, so either their dyno was REALLY off, or now they are a bit on the low side.
It was 65 degrees, sunny, low humidity, and to my knowledge these are uncorrected numbers.
Bryan
edited by darthane on June 17, 2003 |
Aaron
| | Posted on Tuesday, June 17, 2003 - 08:47 am: |
|
"and to my knowledge these are uncorrected numbers."
It says "SAE Horsepower" and "SAE Torque" on the charts. |
Darthane
| | Posted on Tuesday, June 17, 2003 - 01:53 pm: |
|
LOL...I bow to your superior dyno knowledge, Aaron. I hadn't had my coffee yet.
BTW, have the XB series Force kits started shipping yet? Pipe, O2, PCIII, and can included, yes? I'm thinking of switching this winter while I have the bike apart.
Bryan |
Aaron
| | Posted on Tuesday, June 17, 2003 - 04:51 pm: |
|
Yes, they're shipping. Only a couple have come through the shop, most of'em are drop shipped out of Force directly to the customer. Pipes are expensive to ship and there's no point paying twice. We do program the PC3 and ship it along with the baffle and O2 sensor directly from our shop, though. |
Darthane
| | Posted on Tuesday, June 17, 2003 - 05:26 pm: |
|
Do you have the link to the XB9S stock vs XB9S Force-kitted dynos? |
Noface
| | Posted on Tuesday, June 17, 2003 - 05:28 pm: |
|
Aaron, have ya'll come up with an alternative to the PCIII since it'll soon be gone?
Just wondering. I'll likely have to wait until winter to get one :-(
Jody S. |
Bud
| | Posted on Tuesday, June 17, 2003 - 05:37 pm: |
|
LOL,
My bike did 78 hp half a year a go, ( @ www.bikehospital.nl )
Only with a race kit,
And it was low already, a Xb9 from a mate did 80
I wonder watt my little bolt is doing now with the open air box.
Ill post it
Gr,m
|
Aaron
| | Posted on Tuesday, June 17, 2003 - 05:57 pm: |
|
The chart is on our exhaust page. Yes, you're right, the Buell PC3 has been discontinued and yes there's an alternative under development. I'm concerned though about the potential for a gap, between when the PC3 supply dries up and the new solution is ready. |
Blake
| | Posted on Tuesday, June 17, 2003 - 05:59 pm: |
|
Darthane,
Please ask your dyno tech how it is possible to "tune" a dynomometer. Doesn't sound right to me. If I didn't know different, I'd say that runs 001 and 002 are the good ones.
Opening the airbox can cause the bike to initially run leaner. If the DDFI had, as it is designed to do, previously self calibrated the AFV for optimum power, and you then free up the intake tract, your performance could actually be negatively affected. The bike needs to be run in the correct range (speed and throttle position) for a long enough time so it can recalibrate its AFV for its new intake.
Unfortunately I cannot see the A/F data. The current version of Dynojet's Runviewer program has a lot of bugs in it. Maybe Aaron can take a quick look at your dyno files, plot the best run from each configuration (runs 002, 005, and 007) all on one chart along with the A/F ratios on a separate plot so we can see what might be going on.
Interesting stuff, but you gotta be careful running DDFI bikes on the dyno. It's may be important in some cases to let the AFV recalibrate after making any changes to intake or exhaust tract configuration.
Here are the files...
|
|
»
Buell Dynamometer/Dyno Testing Archives »
Archive through June 17, 2003
Darthane's Dyno Data Files