| Author | Message | ||
     Chainsaw |
Dynarider: For what it's worth, my XB was 75.8hp on Aarons dyno, bone stock, cold engine. | ||
| Darthane |
"Thanks Darthane. You did say that you beat an X1 and an s3 in a drag race. Once again , the xb's are faster than most people think! (Nothing agaist the tube framers)" LOL...yeah, most of them beat me off the line, but once I hit 4000RPMs the little 'bolt accelerates like mad. Actually, the slowest guy in our group (dubbed 'Safety Bill' on the S3) WASTED my reaction times, pulling down reactions in the hundredths of a second a couple of times. The X1 was second-fastest, and even though the guy that rides it is built like me, he and his bike still weigh at least 70lbs more than me on my 'bolt, and that's a lot of weight when you're talking motorcycles. Bryan | ||
| Aesquire |
Can these (muffler) results transpose over to the tubers?? not the #'s but the relative merits? | ||
| Jasonblue |
The more I read this post the more confused I get. I have been reading with enthusiasm hoping for some info that will lead me to a clear cut descision. I have an 03 9S and my first mod is going to be a new can. However, all this info has just boggled the mind since I have not actually seen or heard any of the exhausts in person. Only web site photos. I like the Latus and D&D best based on the pictures, but still haven't seen a good picture of the force pipe. What I would really love is everyone to rate the pipes they have or have heard on a 1-10 basis. This would be only on the xb9s, pleaz help out a prospective buyer.......Thanx | ||
| Hardwired |
Daves :Guess I'll have to dyno some more of them to see for sure. It just seems we never get big numbers that some others do? just a question, what elevation are you at? FYI. I have 4 dyno runs (oct '99) on a '99S3t bone stock,a short tuned pipe, open intake and pipe, open intake no pipe. IIRC lowest was 89RWHP the most was 108WRHP 98ftlbs. on the way home the header tube cracked below the O2 sensor | ||
| Ar15ls1 |
I rate my Latus muffler at about an 8. It sounds almost perfect.Its not to loud or not to quiet. It gave me just a couple of more horses than the buell race can and it looks real good tucked underneath my blue xb. If I had a good header to go with it ,I probably would rate it close to 10. I know this muffler flows well and a larger diameter header would really let it breath! Thanks again Darthane for the info. Some people think its impossible for an xb to beat an X1 in a straight line. | ||
| Crusty |
My '98 S3-T was dyno'd at Lancaster (PA) H-D in August,1999 with 35,000 miles showing on the odometer. It made 84.9 HP and 75.0 LbFt. The carb had a needle and low speed jet change, and there was a K&N air filter in the breadbox. Otherwise, it was bone stock; it even had the stock muffler. | ||
| Blake |
Hardwired, I don't know how to say this any other way... Your dyno numbers are not believable. Either the dyno operator made a mistake in some way, or you were running on nitromethane. Getting 98 FT-LBs out of a stock Buell? Sorry... no friggin' way. Post a copy of your results if you can. Or tell us the torque and HP at 5,250 RPM. | ||
| Blake |
Dyna says... but what he actually posted earlier was... So the truth is... Your examples are NOT all corrected. Neither are your examples as relevant as the Motorcyclist data I shared. Why? I'll explain. 1. The correction factors used by different testers may not be identical. 2. The skill of the different testers themselves are probably not identical. 3. The weights of the different testers are probably not identical. 4. Only four of the examples you provided are for immediate predecessors of the XB9. 5. Of those four examples, none are stated as being corrected. 6. Your MCN examples show a '97 S3, a ~500 LB non-T-Stormed stock Buell having ~75 RWHP, beating a comparably powered 455 LB XB9R. Their results are obviously not corrected nor valid. But in the end my point was not to prove irrefutably that the XB9's are quicker than the older Buells, but that they are not necessarily, as you claimed "slower". They are not. I've ridden both. The XB9's are without a doubt WAY quicker than any of my stock M2's ever were. Do you think a 3" shorter wheelbase would be an advantage or disadvantage at the drag strip? Check out the wide range of XB dyno charts on Keith's (Skully's) Rider's Log page in the Tale Section. See any below 70 rwhp? The 68 rwhp dyno result that Dave saw is obviously an anomaly. Whether it is a miscalibrated dyno or a really badly performing XB9, I can't say, but it is probably one of the two. Look to your magazine tests both print and online. All of them show the XB9 dynos in the range that Aaron has seen, some are even higher. Cycle World even did a before and after dyno comparison of the XB9 race kit. They thought it was a great value for the price. But, it is all shit to you. Okay, we know your personal opinion. Basically anything Buell does is shit to you. They come out with a new high quality model... To you it's shit cause it's smaller and less powerful. Buell looks to release a new model with a bigger more powerful engine... To you it's shit cause it's an improvement over the prior year's model. Buell offers a relatively cheap race muffler... To you it's shit because it "only" provides a 5 HP boost to peak HP. But wait, according to Dave's information, the race kit actually provides an 8 HP boost. That even matches the results shown in the factory dyno comparison. Yes, the factory dyno is happy as ALL motorcycle factory dyno' are, possibly because they all use a brake dyno in brake dyno mode. But the delta is as valid as it is on Dave's "broke" dyno.  Factory X1 Stock VS. Race Kit Dyno Comparison So if the factory dyno is a bit happy, why don't they show better results for the X1 race kit compared to stock? I won't dispute that some extremely lucky, well put together, well tuned DDFI tube framers might make 90RWHP. I just haven't seen any personally that I recall. But ALL the XB9 dynos I've seen are better than 70 rwhp, contrary to your bullshit claims otherwise. Whatever. Troll off. I'm done with this stupendously stupid debate. You'll have to cast your troll bait towards someone else. In closing... A friendly suggestion... If you really are up to 230 pounds, suggest you try exercizing your fingers less and your legs more... put on a happy face... the bottle's half full... life is too short... discontent breeds more discontent... no-one likes a whiner... | ||
| Darthane |
"Cycle World even did a before and after dyno comparison of the XB9 race kit. They thought it was a great value for the price." <~~Blake That article was actually what prompted me to get the Race Kit when it came out instead of waiting for a Force or some other aftermarket piece. I had no doubts then or now that the aftermarket would be able to beat the Pro Series stuff, but at much higher cost overall and a much longer waiting period. And for Jason, since he asked, I'd rate the Race Kit at a 7 out of 10. I love the sound, the performance gain, while not great, is there, and it was inexpensive compared to other offerings. I did not like the finish on the muffler, so I got mine ceramic coated jet black to more closely match the stock can. Bryan | ||
| Dynarider |
You cant help yourself Blake..you say you are done but I will believe it when it actually happens. #1 point being the XB is slower in both the qtr & on top end then an X1 & tube framers can put out hp in the 90's with a simple race kit. You can post the longest damn post in this thread just to obscure those facts all you want. | ||
| Glitch |
Although the numbers are a bit irrelevant to me (if I was worried about numbers I'd have bought a GSXR1000). According to June 2003 Motorcyclist magazine in their "Hard Numbers" article they claim this... Buell XB9R Firebolt('02) measured hp (@ rpm) 78.2 @ 7250 measured torque (ft-lb @ rpm) 61.8 @ 5500 corrected best 1/4mile* (sec @ mph) 11.71 @ 113.74 Buell S3 Thunderbolt ('99) measured hp (@ rpm) 90.1 @ 6500 measured torque (ft-lb @ rpm) 78.1 @ 6000 corrected best 1/4mile* (sec @ mph) 11.90 @ 113.2 *Performance with test-session weather corrected to sea-level standard conditions (59 degrees F, 29.92 in. of mercury) So, with any of the more free flowing mufflers, race kits,ect. These numbers would only go up, so buy the on you want based on what is important to you. I bought the Buell race kit, mainly because I could put it in with the loan on the bike, and could take delivery with it installed. I'm more than happy with it and the bike. I don't own or have access to a dyno, but, I have ridden my friends Firebolt (stock) and my "seat of the pants dyno" shows a marked improvement. And just in case anyone was wondering, after 20+ of riding street bikes, this is THE most fun bike I've ever ridden, and isn't that what's it's all about? Just had to add to add my .02, seems like oil, exhaust, and tires always make for interesting threads in any forum.  (Message edited by Glitch on May 13, 2003) | ||
| Crosmyn |
Glitch, how much louder is the race kit muffler compared to stock? | ||
| Glitch |
Crosmyn...Alot louder, ya can't hear the fan runnin'... My friend on his XB9R says he can hear me while we're out riding. My wife has time to open the back gate before I get to the driveway... I like it just fine...  | ||
| Skully |
Jasonblue, Hang on a little longer... I have asked Blake to take an audio/video clip of my XB9S with the D&D muffler tonight before MotoGP on STV. Sweet talk Blake and maybe he will post a link to the clip on Wednesday. As I mentioned, I dynoed the bike in stock trim. I will try to get the bike on the dyno again real soon now that the D&D is on. The weather has just been too darned good... Keith | ||
| Hardwired |
Blake: Hardwired, I don't know how to say this any other way... Your dyno numbers are not believable. Either the dyno operator made a mistake in some way, or you were running on nitromethane. Getting 98 FT-LBs out of a stock Buell? Sorry... no friggin' way. Post a copy of your results if you can. Or tell us the torque and HP at 5,250 RPM. Alas, I can not find them, hell I got divorced and moved 3 times and married since then, still have the tuned pipe somewhere, and I could be mistaken, at the time I was just playing around at the Iron Horse Saloon during biketoberfest. Made quite a show till a Big Dog blew me away. As soon as I get my DL back I plan on putting my money where my mouth is. Just for giggles try taking your pipe off and putting on a 3-1/2 x 9 inch pipe with a 2 inch nipple at the back and driving it around for 20 min and you tell me if you don't see a big diff at the top, sucks at low rpm but hey  | ||
| Skully |
I dynoed my XB (with D&D muffler) Saturday. The results are very interesting. The D&D muffler definitely boosted the mid-range as advertised. However, when the air box cover (not the plastic, colored piece)was removed, the results were impressive. Blake is going to compress the charts for me and post at least the audio clip so you guys and gals can hear how the D&D sounds. Keith | ||
| Ar15ls1 |
I definitly felt a difference when I cut my black plastic airbox. Now the air filter can suck air from more than one hole. I just installed over the weekend some brushed aluminum (modified rear heel guards) vents on my outer cover to help suck some air into the airbox. The install is a rough one but they do there job for now. I will be making something a little more apeeling to the eye soon. | ||
| Blake |
Keith's Dyno Results. We will need to confirm that holes in the airbox will produce similar results to the open airbox run. Hopefully it will. Have heard that it does from others. I wonder what it would do to a stock machine's performance. Really surprising that it makes such a HUGE difference. I never would have suspected the intake was a limiting factor. Something goofy seems to be going on there with the stock setup.  Stock versus Race ECM/Race Intake/D&D Muffler versus Race ECM/Open Intake/D&D Muffler Notice the huge improvement at ~4,700 RPM. The bike is up approximately 10 FT*LBs and 10 RWHP compared to stock, almost a 20% improvement! | ||
| Bigsherm9r |
Cool! This is the first I've heard about this. Did you completely remove the black airbox lid? Just to make sure we're talking about the same thing, it's the black cover right under the "tank" cover, and over the filter, right? And you cut holes in the part that looks like the gas tank? So now it breathes through the holes that are in the rear heel guards, or are there more holes? Did you remove the piece around the gas filler neck? This is good stuff! Sherm | ||
| Blake |
You need the actual airbox lid to provide a seal to the filter. There is a significant gap between the outer cover and the frame that allows air to enter. First approach will be to simply yet judiciously cut some holes into the sides of the airbox lid. Keep in mind that the lid needs to maintain enough structural rigidity to still develop and maintain a good seal against the top of the filter. The idea would be to use a lot of smaller holes versus a few large ones, and also to avoid putting holes near fasteners. I'm sure Keith will take some pictures and share them with us when he gets around to cutting up his airbox lid. Then we'll try to get it back on the dyno again to hopefully confirm that the holy airbox lid produces results comparable to those produced with the completely open airbox shown in the dyno chart above. | ||
| Ar15ls1 |
I cut 2 fairly large holes in the front of the black actual airbox. Then I used a hole saw and cut a 2'' hole on either side of the blue plastic airbox cover just under the buell decals. this is where I mounted the rear heel guards. It looks pretty good except for the way that I had to mount it. I used some blue rtv(matched the color perfectly) to mount them. The problem is that you can never get the rtv perfectly smooth.I need to find a better way to mold the heel guards into the airbox cover. There was a good power increase by the seat of my pants. I did not dyno this ,so I cannot back up my claims. I do know when you remove the velocity stack you will instantly gain about 2.5 horsepower. I did prove this on the dyno! | ||
| Darthane |
Ar15ls1, Is there any way you can post some pictures of your airbox modifications, both to the black cover and the blue? Thanks, Bryan | ||
| Bigsherm9r |
All hail the Holy Airbox Cover! | ||
| Darthane |
"All hail the Holy Airbox Cover!" ::snort:: Pictures, please. | ||
| Jim_m |
Why the hole at 3200? Maybe it looks more pronounced due to the width of the image? | ||
| Darthane |
That's just the way the XB's torque curves are. Supposedly the Force pipe gets rid of the dip in the midrange. ::shrugs:: I kind of like it, because even from 3000RPMs it pulls hard, and you REALLY get kicked in the seat when you hit about 4500 and it flies up to redline. Bryan | ||
| Aaron |
Damn near every bike I've ever tested would pull more power with no air cleaner, 2-3hp is not unusual. This bike is showing what, 4hp between the two pulls that are otherwise the same configuration? So it's a little more than usual. Nothing dramatic though. Did you guys take an air/fuel measurement? Does this bike have a Power Commander and has it been mapped? It'd be interesting to see how much, if any, of the gain is coming from a closer-to-optimum mixture. As I understand it, the injection is running open loop when WFO. Somthing else to think about, sometimes I've seen intake length interact with the exhaust system too. For example, a Forcewinder worked well on my M2 until I stuck on our Signature Series pipe. Now it hates that Forcewinder, even if I remove the filter element it still runs like crap. Bucks and kicks if you give it a handful of throttle from any medium to low rpm, and costs like 7hp on top too. Take the thing off, it runs great. But I doubt that's what's happening here. | ||
| 03xb9r |
are you gonna post the sound clip? id like to hear what the D&D sounds like | ||
| Ar15ls1 |
Sorry Darthane, but I do not own a digital camera. I will see if I can get my buddy to snap some shots of it with his camera.I will wait until I have a finished product though. I found out with all of my cars that I have fooled with, that even hot air is better than no air. So anytime you can free up the airbox by cutting holes in it is better than a sealed system(except at very high speeds). The firebolt system is not really a ramair so I figured that there would be a decent improvement opening the airbox. I also will probably bore my throttlebody pretty soon. If our computers are learning computers then hopefully it will compensate for the extra air after 50 or so miles. This is true with some speed density and most mass air controlled cars. If the xb is getting 4 or so horsepower without the airbox cover on the dyno then at higher speeds it should be even more. |
