| Author | Message | ||
     Reducati |
lost low and mid range torque....rode around about 20 miles, still it didnt come back....anyone have suggestions? i put the snorkel back on and noticed the low/mid range improvment...what happend? | ||
| Wyckedflesh |
When you rode for that 20 miles did you hold the throttle at a steady 3500-3800 rpm to reset the AFV? Just riding for 20 miles won't do it. You need to run for atleast 10-15mins at 3500-3800. | ||
| Jedwele |
I Don't see how de-snorkling can lose power anywhere. | ||
| Mesafirebolt |
I took mine off, feels like it takes off from idle better. I really cant tell a difference up top. | ||
| Metalstorm |
Is this without an aftermarket pipe & race ecm? I remember some one else with a 9R a year or so a go posting that he pulled the snorkel & lost bottom end so he put it back & all was well. I'm pretty sure he had stock ecm & stock pipe. He might have had the K&N filter but I doubt that'd make much difference. I'm assuming that increasing the airflow in defeats the purpose with out a pipe with which to increase exhaust flow. Ahh Crud. I should've looked at your profile first. I see you have the race kit. I'm at a lost. I don't know. Fortunetly I don't have one tenth of the knowledge that a lot of guys here (and some gals) have so some one may yet come up with an answer. Hmmm... Maybe it's just the pipe. The Buell race pipe (on the 9 at least) gives up some bottom & a little mid for a nice upper band gain. I'd try out the new Drummer (good for bottom & mid so I hear) or if you want loud perhaps a D&D. (Message edited by metalstorm on May 01, 2005) (Message edited by metalstorm on May 01, 2005) | ||
| Reducati |
thanks for responding...i will pull it out again, and go for a steady 15 minute ride at 3800 rpm...but yea the difference was dramatic...it ran smoother, but slower...now at 3500 rpm it pulls like a train...but desnorkeled, it just was kinda flat, until 5500rpm...most of my riding is urban, so it is very important to have that locomotive low/mid rpm pull...pm | ||
| Brad_buell |
Are you back yet!  You've got to give us an update! | ||
| Reducati |
no its 45 f/n degrees and cloudy and windy in chicago...some time during the week ill give it a whirl | ||
| Apex_assasian |
i desnorkeled my 12....course mine is all stock it did feel like it lost a bit on the low side of 3500...so i put it back in. sure doesn't make sense. mike | ||
| Deerhunter17 |
I just put mine ( 04 XB 12R, Race ECM, Drummer, Drilled A/B, K&N) back in yesterday. I ride w/out for a few months. I feel it's more comfortable with it in. The motor seems smoother, less pop and crackle, actually NO pop and crackle. Easier to ride at low rpm. As for power, I have'nt notice any difference. Of course to be fair, I also put in a new set of plugs, Cleaned and oiled the filter. But I noticed the rougher engine as soon as I pulled it, and although performance at speed was great, it never rode right at lower rpm's with out the snorkle | ||
| Al_lighton |
I've never heard that it is there for any other reason than noise reduction. I'm pretty sure that the Buell race kit instructions say to remove it. I can't imagine that there is anything positive about it being there other than noise reduction. Whether your view that as positive or not is a very subjective thing.... Without getting too scientific about it (because all my relevant texts are boxed up, and I sure as heck can't remember it!), fluid flow is particularly hindered by the entrance conditions that XB Buells have in that left side scoop. See the picture below:  To analyze the flow resistance of such things, you use a coefficient in the calculation (which is pretty messy, based on reynolds numbers that are dictated by flow rates and viscosity and all that stuff). Roughly, that coefficient is in the .2 range for inlet conditions like d), and 1 for inlet conditions like a). If someone has more accurate info at their disposal, I'm all ears, it's been quite a while since I've done such calculations. But my point is that if you look at the snorkel it does as a little bit of radiusing, but at the expense of further protrusion into the scoop and a substantial reduction of flow area. My best guess based on having done a lot of flow calculations earlier in life is that the snorkeled geometry has substantially more impediment to flow than the unsnorkled geometry. I could be wrong, the folks at Buell aren't dumb. But remember, their reason for the snorkel isn't more power, it is less noise. They've done some pretty cool stuff to reduce noise without hurting power in the past, so it is likely there is a good reason for it being shaped the way it is. Then again, like I said, I'm pretty sure Buell says to remove it for the race kit installation. I'd bet that if one was to remove the snorkel, and then build up a radius entrance where the "D" shaped metal tube welded in the frame sticks into the scoop, that there is some measureable gains to be had there. However, I think the 9006 CIA cover with nostrils on the top would do more. Because the other thing that fluid flow really hates is 90 degree corners, and the Buell design thru the frame forces 2 such bends, one into the tube, one out of the tube. The CIA cover helps to minimize the effects of both. Al | ||
| Deerhunter17 |
Nice sales pitch. I agree with your thought process ( as much as I can follow it ). But one thing not indicated is the result to flow as it goes into a chamber that is tapered as the snorkle is. It would seem that the air flow would stabilize as it progresses upward because the area is opened up. Just a thought process though, not a knowledgeable equation based theory ( on my part ). As for noise, I did drill some holes in my A/B cover, and the snorkle removal, and later re installation, noticed no difference in noise. Other than some minor drivability concerns, I mainly reinstalled mine due to the concern of water infiltration to the A/B. I plan on a rather long trip this weekend, and as of now , it looks like we will be riding in some rain. | ||
| Wyckedflesh |
4 hours of riding in a near torential downpour, as well as 2 hours of riding in slush resulted in very little noticeable excess water in the airbox with out the snorkle in place, even with the snorkle you will get some water that is simply caught in the airflow. Some people have teken the snorkle, and trimmed it down to just below the opening at the airbox and placed it back to get that taper you speak of as well as the sealing out of the warmer air under the airbox that could leak in between the airbox and frame top. | ||
| Deerhunter17 |
Thanks for the info | ||
| M1combat |
I rode for about three and a half hours last weekend in some pretty good rain and hale. I have deleted the upper air box (except for the filter seal part). The air/water heads straight in under the airbox cover and the de-snorkeled hole through the frame (which will be capped and filled with fuel once I procure another way of getting enough air in the engine). No adverse running what so ever. Ran great the entire trip. I don't think Al's "too" much into sales pitches. The reason being is that he's a smart guy AND only really sells stuff that should work well. I'm pretty sure he was just telling you WHY that stuff works, not trying to fill you full of lame reasons why you should buy it. It's a subtle difference, but there none the less  . | ||
| Redtail69 |
I don't notice any change in noise without my snorkel. My 12R is just as quiet without it as it was with it. Anybody else agree? | ||
| M1combat |
Mine got a tad bit louder... | ||
| Dago |
I did my snorkel and K&N at the same time. It definitely got louder. | ||
| Deerhunter17 |
M1, no offense to Al, it really is a GOOD sales pitch. I was kinda goofin' around, and meant nothing personal, but am also impressed with the info. Thanks AL, and sorry if I offended | ||
| Redtail69 |
What got louder? Is it a sucking sound or something? cause I just hear the engine components and the exhaust. | ||
| M1combat |
It un-covers what some may know as a "Desmo Wonk". A slight one, but it's there. Delete the upper airbox though... I can hear the injector spray at low throttle openings and low speeds , along with the valves and louder wonk. | ||
| Al_lighton |
Greg, No offense taken, I took your post in the light it was intended. I'm not much into sales pitches, as Don said, because I don't have that touch. I try to stick to the facts, or at least my understanding of them, and let the customers decide what they want. What can I say, I'm an engineer/designer at heart, not a sales guy. I am the worlds worst salesman, I freely admit it. I only carry products that I believe in, because I'm not a good enough salesman to sell them otherwise. Heck, I have a Hayden Krank Vent here that a half dozen people have tried to buy since I bought the biz, and I've talked them out of it since I don't think it does anything. I keep waiting for someone to argue with me so I can sell it in good conscience and just delete it from the web site. But so far, everyone keeps taking my word for it. If anyone wants one, I'll give you a great deal!! On this issue, I truly don't believe the snorkel does anything good, but Buell has to do what it needs to to get the noise levels down. Look at the inside of your airbox cover, see the ribs? Pick the darned thing up and feel how heavy it is. Why? Resonance reduction. Due to valve overlap (intake valves opening before the exhaust stroke is complete), there is a LOT of noise in that chamber. If that much noise got out of the airbox, they would NOT pass the EPA drive by noise test, plain and simple. That nice rubber tube helps keep that noise from propagating down that tube and out the left side of the bike. I doubt you'd be able to hear it much from the rider position, but I guarantee the microphone on the EPA noise trap can. I've had a couple customers call me about the intake honk they get after installing our open air box kit that gets rid of the top airbox cover altogether. They like it, they just weren't expecting the magnitude. It's a good sound, music to the ears of gearheads. It is NOT subtle. And it is very RPM dependent, due to intake tract resonance. How much that tube affects power, and at what RPMs, would be a good dyno study if I had a dyno and the time to do it. Unfortunately, I have neither at this time. My instincts say that removing it is a good thing. Al | ||
| Bluebuellxb9r |
Al, you are so a great sales man - you should see my credit card bill ! Not to mention my brothers ! Thanks for getting those pads out , too bad I stripped the retaining pin while trying to get it out ! D'oh ! | ||
| Court |
Al: You forgot to mention my two personal favorites:
Court | ||
| Deerhunter17 |
Sorry Al , but your absolutely WRONG! Your a terrific salesman, at least in my book. I prefer the honesty approach, as well as someone passionate about his product. The detailed description above shows that passion, and knowledge that makes for positive sales. I plan on some upgrades of my bike this coming winter. I'll be in touch. | ||
| Al_lighton |
Thanks guys  I guess when I think of a "good" salesman, its a person that could sell ice to an eskimo. As an old saying goes, "Sales starts when the customer says no". It isn't my style, because I suck at that kind of sales and would be very unhappy in life if I had to do that for a living. I'd rather sell ice to people that really need or want it. My wife's SV650 has no airbox at all, just a couple individual Factory Air Filter pods on the carb mouths. The previous owner of the bike was black flagged off Laguna Seca while running the STOCK exhaust, the intake honk is THAT loud. At 5500 RPM, the intake tract resonance is louder at the rider position than the Black Widow high mount race pipe on it, which is NOT a quiet pipe by any stretch. Intake honk can be substantial. It is not as dramatic on the Buell with the stock cams as it is on her SV, the resonance Q isn't as high, and the amplitude is lower. But there is alot of exhaust noise coming back thru the intake tract, even with the stock cams. On the water intrusion issue, it really is not an issue at all. After my wreck on Mt Evans in 2001, where I scraped the race air cleaner off the side of my S3, I rode thru the heaviest rain I've ever ridden in. It was unbelievably heavy, filled my tank bag to the brim in a matter of minutes, caused serious mudslides that closed I70, the works. The S3 had NO air filter on it at all, wide open to the downpour, and it didn't skip a beat. Yea, that's very anecdotal, and not very scientific. But if the S3 wouldn't snuff in that condition, I see no worries whatsoever with the XB configuration. Any water would need to get thru the air filter, then down into the velocity stack, which is a far more torturous route than on my S3 that day. A number of people have chimed in on this issue here on Badweb over the years with their anecdotal stories of open air filters and heavy rain, I can't recall one person indicating any negative effects of water intrusion into their intake system on any Buell. But that said, re-oiling of the K&N filter after sustained riding thru heavy rain is probably not a bad idea. And an oil change probably wouldn't hurt, though I'd bet that if you have the right oil temperature, whatever water that might make it into the oil (minimal, I'd bet) cooks out pretty quickly with any sustained riding. And it isn't a bad idea to drill a small weep hole in the back corner of your airbox to keep water from being able to puddle there. Al |
