| Author | Message | ||
     Mountainstorm |
It's not just the noise, my riding stance presses a certain sensitive portion of my anatomy up against the cover. Maybe if I was a woman this would work out for me...but I find it very distracting when riding aggressively. | ||
| Dannybuell |
Highscore - I tried it and my first response was that a typical gear change at 3500 rpm had the clutch jerking because my usual rpm compensation was NOW too much. I like it. :-) THX Highscore | ||
| Ratsmc |
Crap. I have the cam duration numbers, I just need to figure out what the hell I did with them. Let me dig around tonight. | ||
| Jetbuilder |
High score I am an idiot so forgive me for asking but what was the best combination you have found? Please list them as individual line items. Also are you going to offer the stacks for sale and if not can we get a Drawing to make our own? Also what ecm do you have did you tune the stock or just add the Powerizer? Sorry if I am being redundent. I just added a pipe to my bike and like you I really think there needs to be something done in the intake tract as well not just the exhaust side. Thanks for all you have put into this Red | ||
| Highscore |
Best combination is only a single one, the perfect one. Unfortunately my actual tuning-state is far away from perfection, because two fundamental things are still sub-optimal on my bike: 1. A completely free breathing engine with open stacks makes approx. 5 HP more. This shows that the cover of the air box is still restrictive. 2. The stock primary headers are still in place, just the muffler is different. The first header tubes, attached to the cylinder, show an internal diameter of 30 mm or 1 inch and a nothing. This is clearly to small for an engine, running on this speed and related wave action at its super-sized outlets. I would say, this is a diameter for 8500 and exhaust valves, not larger as 32mm, as the old KTM LC4 engine ran such headers. I am convinced, these headers are a choke for the engine´s efficiency, hindering its gas exchange. So I guess there are at least at least 5 HP waiting for release. Avoiding this loses by a well designed air box and exhaust should therefore boot up the performance close to 150 HP at the rear wheel on a "as-it-is-dyno" like the Dynojet. From this point of view my actual tuning state lacks more than at little. In case of the stock exhaust, it is not the worst design to route such real slim headers end directly into an expansion chamber. This guarantees an immediate expansion of exhaust gases, creating strong pulses. This should work from 9000 upwards.pretty efficiently, exactly within the range where the 1125 makes its peak power. But this means also that it will be hard for any slip on muffler to beat the stock exhaust system, which is not very restrictive at all. The possible gain by reducing any restriction to zero, going the straight-thru-can-style, is therefore rather limited. A slip on arrangement always adds some tube onto the system. This new length shows its best effect at the very beginning of the rev range up to 3500-4000 as the area, wherein the single primaries of the stock exhaust does nothing. Prolonging the stock primary headers may also have a negative side effect: It shifts the engine´s power band down, but at the expense of peak power behind 10000, where the stock exhaust works pretty efficiently. Therefore the design of a slip on for the 1125 represents necessarily a compromise between torque and thrust in the middle and power at the peak. The first Remus exhaust system for example doubled rather the length of the primaries, attached directly to the cylinders, compared to the stock exhaust arrangement. This made strong torque around 7000-7500, but before and after this margin, this pipe worked poor. The actual and improved Remus-header offers diameters and expansion areas to the gas stream out of the slim primaries, which makes a job similar to a megaphone, attached downstream. The goal is to reflect, like the stock exhaust, a major part of the streaming energy of the gases at the end of the primaries and the rest of it at the end of the expansion path in front of the muffler. This arrangement gives best of both worlds, makes torque over a wide range in die middle and peak power at the top. The Remus-muffler itself is unchanged, so it is possible to combine it with this new header as upgrade for an existing Remus-slip on. Brief list of my tuning mods: 1. The EVO-Remus works nicely from idle upwards to 3500, additionally it offers a nice gain around 7000. 2. The 1´´ longer velocity stacks now cooperate obviously real happily with the pipe up to peak torque, bringing it to an acceptable level. 3: The rest is air and fuel. The engine breathes thru a large hole in the air box, the A/F-ratio is adjusted to 12,5:1 by adding the Powerizer as "fuel nanny" to the otherwise stock ECM. To be done in the future: 1. Full exhaust system. In my opinion the Erik Buell Racing full exhaust look like as it is the best performing among the few pipes available. But this system also looks like as it produces more than just aggressive sound waves. It should be really loud. This is not acceptable for the area I live in, riding an open, straight thru exhaust would be a continuous source of avoidable trouble A nice thing could be to combine the headers of the Erik Buell Racing exhaust with the EC-homologated Remus-muffler. This could be the perfect combo. 2. An efficient redesign of the air box. Could be the hardest thing due of the limited space between the "fuel-frame". In this sense my tuning package is just a stage-One. All items, including velocity stacks a commercially available, if there is a demand for. (Message edited by Highscore on June 10, 2010) (Message edited by Highscore on June 10, 2010) (Message edited by Highscore on June 10, 2010) | ||
| Drawkward |
I just did your little mod to my outside cover and took out the inside cover. I also rerouted my temperature sensor to up in the airbox for more accurate numbers. I didn't get to ride it enough to notice a big difference with the temp sensor, but I can attest to the bike being MUCH smooter at and below 3000rpm. I was cruising at 50mph in 6th gear at 3000rpm and there was absolutely no surge. Also, low end tourque has been improved (as decided by my seat of the pants dyno). I'll write up a little temperature and performance post after this sunday's trackday. I have no other mods. Stock can and stock air filter. | ||
| Blower1 |
@ Highscore You write: "In deed the result of these tests is, that it is not worthwhile to play around with stacks, when the stock muffler is installed. Here the stock stacks offer the best compromise." When I dyno test 50 mm longer velocity stacks with stock muffler and stock air box, the dyno shows 7 Nm gain in torque. With proper tune and 50mm longer stacks there was 11 Nm more torque and 5 more top end horsepower. I´m not after max horsepower, but low and mid range torque which makes a street riding more fun. | ||
| Mountainstorm |
Any links to 50 mm stacks that will easily fit in the intakes? I'm interested in trying this out. Thanks in advance. | ||
| Dannybuell |
I want to buy the stacks that make torque at low to mid range (<7000rpm). | ||
| Mountainstorm |
I decided to try out the trim-removal mod Highscore posted up. To tame the noise and vibration a little I lined the airbox cover interior with neoprene foam. It does make less vibration, but it's still pretty rowdy. I want to make a formed metal mesh insert to trim out the gaping scoop around the filler neck. Took the bike for a short jaunt on some twisty 2nd gear roads and it does seem to be more responsive from 3K to 5500 RPM. What I am not sure I like is how damn loud it is at WOT. It's like having a straight through exhaust pointed at your head  Here's a vid of my latest mod | ||
| Anakist |
Mountain: IIRC, the XB series has a mesh insert in the outer cover as standard. I am looking for one on the cheap to put in mine. James | ||
| Mountainstorm |
Ah ha. I was think about cutting out the center of the plastic part...looks like a great way to spend a day lol. I wonder about setting up some sort of intake vent on the windshield and ducting that right to the cut out on the airbox. Thought I would add some more SOTP impressions of changes to drivability from the airbox mod. Now I've only put about 50 miles one but I specifically went over the same roads I ride when I'm doing a shakedown on the bike and it's got a lot more guts at 4K. This is with the stock exhaust, K&N, Race ECM and airbox mod with neoprene lined cover. I've tried this before without the inner cover and the only change I noticed was more noise and vibration...this time was different. I could feel less of a flat spot when I roll on at 4K. Just to put that feeling to the test I ran a road I usually like to run in 4th gear in 6th gear. From day one I've found the bike likes to be at 4500 or above to feel responsive to roll on...the bike felt about the same, but now 500 or so RPM lower. I'm interpretting that as a boost of torque. I also ran the bike up to 120 or so a few times just to see if there was a lack of top end boost. Nothing I could put my finger on there...seemed to rush up to 120 pretty much the same as usual. I would never have thought that removing the little trim piece would make a difference I could notice. It could also be the foam cancelling out some wave reflection too. Either way it's a positive improvement and I'm going to test it out for thoroughly today with a 300 mile roundtrip jaunt over familiar roads. I'd think that some tweaks to the ECM map to acount for more air would really wake up the bike, even with a stock exhaust. (Message edited by mountainstorm on June 12, 2010) | ||
| D_adams |
 | ||
| Pyrogen |
so if we don't want a ricer looking scoop on our air box, where can we find the XB airbox inlet? It replaces that trim piece that surrounds the gas cap correct? Would the vented inner air box "lid" from the XB fit the 1125R? Makes me wonder why they would switch from the XB set up to the 1125R set up based on highscore's testing the XB intake set up could be supierior? | ||
| Marcodesade |
Would this work? http://cgi.ebay.com/ebaymotors/New-Carbon-Fiber-Ai r-Box-Guard-Buell-XB-_W0QQcmdZViewItemQQhashZitem3 cae0b424dQQitemZ260618011213QQptZMotorcyclesQ5fPar tsQ5fAccessories Like the Adrenaline Moto piece, it would seem to allow even more air than removing/replacing the trim piece. But, IMHO, it's perhaps a little easier on the eyes than either of the other solutions . . . | ||
| T_man |
I ran with my airbox cover off for quite some time (most of last summer) and just a note to those who might like to try this: the bike wanted A LOT more fuel with the inner cover off. Also have we determined where can we get those +1" velocity stacks? | ||
| Bob_thompson |
Many thanks to Highscore for starting this thread and his excellent input. Well done my man. Here is my take after two years of playing with my 2008 1125R and the air box: First I have an aftermarket muffler system of my own design, K&N air filter, and Erik Buell Racing's racing ECM for this combination. When I first installed my muffler system I noticed, w/no dyno time, a definite increase in felt H.P. & torque but I believe still lean due to EPA regs. I removed the inner airbox and felt another definite increase in mid-range acceleration tested against my only guage, my sons SV1000 and still strong to red line. Not a good guage but it is a stable base and where I base my improvements, I.E. roll on from 45 mph to about 120. Mostly mid-range but taking the engine to 10000 rpm's in each gear. AND STILL LEAN. Next was Erik Buell Racing's race ECM for my combination and with Michael Richter's recommendation, I reinstalled the inner air box. Much better in ALL rpm ranges. Finally where this bike should have been except for EPA's restraints from the factory. Fast forward to this thread and still all the same except inner air box removed again and removal of the gas filler shroud and I installed a screen with a filter behind it as seen in pictures below. It should prevent water from entering the air stream in rare case I get caught in the rain sometime. This really, further brought this bike alive in all RPM ranges and the best it has been for my purposes since new as I do not race it.......much. HA! No telling what maximum horsepower is and I really do not care, its the best it has been. Loud, yes from my muffler system and the intake noise but I'm lovin' it and its not really obtrusive. And of course this is my humble opinion only. Sometimes the dyno only tells one side of a story. For the 98% street riding I do, its now outstanding. Stay safe out there, Bob   | ||
| Mountainstorm |
I took the bike for a 300 mile round trip run yesterday and I swear the ECM adjusted the fueling because the exhaust note and throttle response both got sweeter. I even pulled a power wheely when I was least expecting it. At 250 pounds it's not like the bike just leaps up without some prodding. Fuel mileage was 38 MPG maybe because I was running a gear higher most of the time than I usually do. The bike had plenty of pull from 3500 onwards. I found the intake noise was not really an issue. Between the sound dampening and wind noise it was actually pleasant. I could really hear the bike "talking" to me in a good way. Side note, running at a lower RPM through the twisties made me adopt a smooth entry and exit style to my riding, and it seemed to work better than the more agressive style I find myself using when running higher RPMs. Maybe it was that intake noise soothing the savage beast  I got caught in a hellatious downpour for a good 20 minutes and nothing bad happened in terms of water in the intake despite the open scoop. Thanks for the info Bob, I'm definitely going to make some sort of bug catcher over the scoop. I'm happy with the mod I've made and I'll be sticking with it, the bike is so much more Buellish this way. (Message edited by mountainstorm on June 13, 2010) | ||
| Captain_america |
Before any of this was talked about, I was de-noiding my bike and was like WTF is this cover on here for? So I removed it with 700 miles on my bike and have not looked back since. My bike made more power everywhere and I love listening to the Intake valves gulping in air. It makes the bike sound soooo mean!  Yeah the IAT readings were jacked off so thats why I moved the sensor into the airbox and I have never had more accurate readings.  I too would like to get an XB airbox cover but in the meantime I just drilled hole in the plastic trim piece.  And PS, I hit 157mph with no issues still accelerating. | ||
| Mountainstorm |
Good idea on drilling the holes. | ||
| Dannybuell |
Captain_america - How are you doing? I thought of you when this came up! | ||
| Captain_america |
Yeah the holes don't provide the same amount of airflow that removing the trim piece completely will, obviously. But I thought seeing everything under the airbox cover was kinda ugly. I'm doing good Dannybuell, Thanks for asking man. My finger is finishin up healing and my collar bone seems fine. I'm finally able to get my hand into a glove now so I went for a ride on the ole '03 CRF 450 this weekend figuring that if the collar bone and finger lived through a nasty ride in the dirt then I'll be ready for the street. Now I just need to go pick up my bike from skip and grab a new helmet and jacket. then I'll be causing trouble and getting tickets lol  | ||
| Jetbuilder |
Capt. if you don`t mind where did you get the grill material and foam material? | ||
| Milleniumx1 |
Capt, looks like you've shaved a couple of pounds off the bike by running without that stock front seat ... Good move  Seriously though, I like the holes look. I hate to drill mine since it matches my white/blue '09R, and I'm no craftsman. Wonder if I could buy one and experiment without risking damage to my original? Can't see that messing up my new ECM ... Mike | ||
| Xodot |
stalkin' | ||
| Thurstonbuell |
I have a few Questions if I may , 1) So is believed to be the harmonics or lack of air stealing performance ? 2) Has anyone tried leaving the inner air box cover in place , removing the piece on the outer cover and only removing the area behind it on the inner cover ? 3) Would a rubber flap behind the screen mesh be effective ? dropping down and opening when more air is needed and acting like a check valve and closing when the ram air takes effect allowing positive pressure to build ? 4) There seems to be that much difference in harmonics from inner and no inner air box cover ? 5) Is there a difference in performance with no inner air box cover , with and without the piece removed on the outer cover ? | ||
| Captain_america |
Yeah I don't use the front wheel either, That's the biggest weight savings of all!!!! lol Seriously though I was a little sketch about drilling the plastic too but I was like Eff it! I just grabbed a drill bit (don't remember what size) and went at it. totally random hole placement, I should have drawn a pattern but what the hell? I really just need some fine grit sand paper to clean the holes up a little. Milleniumx1, If you decide to drill some holes, I'd just go for it! | ||
| Highscore |
Thank you, Mountainstorm, for this vid. A picture always tells more than words. Like you I appreciate the stock appearance of this mod - an important detail for the area I live in. May I link your vid to the German Xborg-forum to show, how easy this mode is done? Regarding exhaust effects: The point, I tried to make in my post above, was to explain, why a slip on does not make an huge effect on engine performance, as long a the slim primary headers remain in place. This fact means on the other hand, that air box and velocity effects work on the stock exhaust too. In deed I have done my first testings for different stacks with the stock system. Nevertheless adding a well-balanced slip on to the stock primaries can pronounce the effects by the intake. Both mods, improved breathing & longer velocity stacks, are good for new torque, especially in the first half and in the middle of the rev range. The stock exhaust, expelling its primaries directly into the first expansion chamber if the muffler in front of the catalytic converter, works as a 2-2 exhaust system. Such a lay out is necessarily compromised by a rather small "working" or efficiency range wherein the exhaust "supports" the engine. Adding now a slip on to the stock primaries transforms this lay out into a 2-1 arrangement, which additionally boosts up the engine at low and middle speeds. A 2-1 is simply the superior arrangement because it works over a wider range as a 2-2, plain tubes attached to each cylinder. The principles for this advantage are explained pretty comprehensible here: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=YfSOthdE6lU (courtesy Xborgforum) The effects of an free flowing air box & matching stacks and a healthy "suction" by a well balanced 2-1 slip on works in combination not only additively but synergistic, boosting engine performance to a new torque level. And this is no wishful thinking, it is true: On my bike the tire wear looks like as it has doubled now. But for me that is the price for fun. Because the fun factor is also now doubled compared to stock. The rideability is perfect, also fuel consumption, which dropped down for 25%. And this with instantaneous and never ending acceleration from idle upwards. From my point of view it is a question of aesthetics, using a stock cover, modified in in the way described above, or a after market lid with large holes in it. But is a matter of future testing. But it is also true. that such a flowed air box in combination with a not so well balanced slip on may cause some unwanted effects as there are poor throttle response and fuel consumption. Nevertheless this does not mean, that said mods are for itself not efficient. In deed they are too efficient: The Air/Fuel Value (the term "value" stands for it) is a calibration factor. So it has nothing to do with the base- or core-map, which represents and "reflects" the engine´s breathing, its VE or volumetric efficiency. What the ECM "learns" at closed loop via feed back by the lambda probes, is gathered at low engine speed and little load. This is o.k, but what the hell lets the ECM "think" that, what happens here at 1/8 throttle up to 4500 (that is the closed loop range) is the same thing and story, what is also valid for higher engine speed and and load like WOT? To use a light load adaption or correction (value, )as it is, for high load too, is a severe mistake in my sense. It gives the closed loop an authority to calibrate something which it has nothing to do with and has no experiences with. The is the stuff for a complete new, independent thread, but I guess, here we find the reason for that undesired + 20% offsets for front and rear injector timing in AFV due of closed loop (long term) adjustment. "+20%" offset in injector timing would be equivalent to a difference of 20% VE or cylinder charge between front an rear. Sorry, I cannot believe, that even a real "bad" exhaust may cause such an enormous variation. This strange thing happens only in the "Mind" of the ECM´s algorithm. Therefore, Mountainstorm, you are lucky, that obviously your ECM-adaption was able to improve your bike´s fueling over time. At my bike the opposite was the case: After a reset to 100% by the dealer, the mixture of front and rear cylinder always drifted apart after some time of riding. It looks like as a slip on exhaust, which boosts up engine performance and charge efficiency especially at low engine speed, which is also the range of closed loop adaption, is prone to amplify this side effect. Here the ECM-algorithm obviously cannot handle this increase in cylinder charge within said range, in correlation to its internal preprogrammed VE-numbers, valid for the stock exhaust system. The attempt of the EC; to reset this values to "known" variables, brings then its fuel calibration into confusion, when applying this "learned" values to open loop and WOT too. At my bike I solved this issue by removing the lambda probes to switch off the undesired calibrations by the ECM and "freeze" its internal mapping. Before I did this I made a reset of the ECM to 100%-AFV "Unplugging" means, that I routed the signal wires to the ECM of both probes via a 1 Meg-Ohm resistor to ground. This mod was the key to solve the fuel problems on my bike. But you should only go this way, if you have "something" to recalibrate the injection. Otherwise that new re-flashed and "pure-100%"- map inside of the ECM is definitely to lean, not just a little, in fact it is very lean. I use for this purpose my "Kastl", the Powerizer, which enables me by pulse modification of the timing at the injectors to "draw" an all new effective fuel curve according engine speed and load, and this in a real sensible and accurate manner. (Message edited by highscore on June 14, 2010) (Message edited by highscore on June 14, 2010) (Message edited by highscore on June 14, 2010) | ||
| Mountainstorm |
About the AFV on the E B R Race ECM, for some reason that I cannot fathom the values have always been 100 100 and have never changed. Are these locked? According to an answer to my email query to E B R on this the Adaptive Fuel Value is not locked. Yet it has not changed one whit even after swapping from HMF to stock muffler. Yet the bike feels and sounds different: deeper, snappier. It revs faster. You are welcome to link my vid. (Message edited by mountainstorm on June 14, 2010) | ||
| Smoke4ndmears |
highscore. have you considered the motty afr tuner? |
