| Author | Message | ||
     Buellman39 |
 2004 XB12R current mods Desnorkle Iridium Plugs Cut Airbox Odie Heat Blanket Techlusion New Loud Drummer K&N Filter I need to figure out why it gets lean in those three spots on the A/F chart | ||
| Norrisperformance |
Two clock positions more on pot 2 and 3 will get a couple more hp and about 6 more on TQ. | ||
| Norrisperformance |
 | ||
| Norrisperformance |
Can I get the TFI settings you used on the dyno. I'm trying to help someone over the phone, set one up. That info would help me a lot! Thanks Mike | ||
| Buellman39 |
3,7,4,7 So you think turning them up a little like you said will smooth out the A/F | ||
| Thomas_lindemann |
isnt the whole chart a little lean? it doesnt look to me like it is below 14:1 | ||
| Buellman39 |
Yes It is, but I need to get the three lean spots smoothed out. I don't think it will be to lean if I do that.  Any suggestions? | ||
| Jerseyguy |
It appears to me that your A/F is very close to the stoich. ratio of 14.7 to 1, however the general consensus among tuners is that 10% to 15% rich produces the most power. That would be an A/F ratio of about 12.5 to 13.2. I would concur with Mike that you should crank up the TFI a couple of clicks and see what happens. I have done extensive A/F testing with the race ECM on my 9 and and it favors the low to mid 12s A/F especially under high throttle openings. Looks like you are definitely headed in the right direction though. Please keep us posted. | ||
| Wheelsleaning |
90hp and 76 tq with mods??? What am I missing here? I thought that was stock #s. | ||
| Scitz |
Brake horsepower compared to crank horsepower. | ||
| Wheelsleaning |
I know that comparison. Crank is said to be 103hp and 84ftlbs. This chart is straight from http://sportrider.com/bikes/146_Weights_Measurements/ and they go by the rear tire.  | ||
| Jerseyguy |
You mean "Rear Wheel Horsepower" as opposed to "Crankshaft Horsepower". Most all manufacturers give crank HP as its higher due to drivetrain losses. The dynos that are typically available to us measure rear wheel hp. | ||
| Buellman39 |
Jerseyguy, from your experience do you think if I move pots 2&3 like mike said that I will be alot closer to where I need to be? | ||
| Wheelsleaning |
Quote: You mean "Rear Wheel Horsepower" as opposed to "Crankshaft Horsepower". Most all manufacturers give crank HP as its higher due to drivetrain losses. The dynos that are typically available to us measure rear wheel hp. I know. The chart IS REAR WHEEL. | ||
| BadS1 |
Jersey Buell lists at 103hp yes crank.Sportrider lists it at 99.6 hp thats a Dyno run.Cycle World lists it in December 2003 issue at 92.3 hp also Sept 2003 a prior test they said they put it on a Dynojet and were getting between 95-96 at the rear wheel.Like I said all dyno's are different.I can't believe how important this is?? | ||
| Taxman |
buell made an xb12r in 2003? | ||
| BadS1 |
Thats when it was released.I got mine in August 2003 through Dave.Probably the first one to hit the streets in Wisconsin possibly. | ||
| Wheelsleaning |
It's important in this thread. Especially when #s are lower after all the mods (dif bike, dif dyno known). Isnt this the purpose of spending all that $$$ on K&N, TFI units, ....? | ||
| BadS1 |
Motorcyclist Jan 2004 issue tested 92.2 hp. | ||
| Buellman39 |
Every dyno is different. I dynoed my bike to get the A/F right not for the numbers. Every time someone posts a dyno chart the numbers are different. And the same questions always surface...why are those numbers so high or why are those numbers so low? Its just a referance point for me to get things dialed in with the TFI  | ||
| Jerseyguy |
Wheels - My apology, our posts crossed. Didn't mean to insult your intelligence. Dana - Why do you bristle so whenever there is a post regarding Drummers? I don't get it. We are discussing A/F and TFI settings to maximize the power on Buellman's bike. | ||
| Norrisperformance |
Buellman39 If you look at my dyno above you can see how a little more fuel will make a big difference. The dyno above is before the TFI and after. Looking at your dyno and the settings you gave. I would try 4, 9,6, 8 I think you will see a big difference in power. I ended up with 92.57 hp and 80.92 TQ But those are peak #s, look at the whole curve on a dyno chart. Here's a stock vs race kit dyno, posted by xb12s_streetdemon. Look at the TQ around 4000 rpm.  | ||
| Buellman39 |
Thanks Mike, Kevin just called me and I will Turn them up and ride it. I will let you and kevin know how it runs.  | ||
| Buellman39 |
I would like to try a race ECM without the TFI on the same dyno to see the differance. Mike, I will call you then. | ||
| Charlieboy6649 |
I'm gonna throw this in the mix because I thought I wanted a PCIII. After talking to dynojet, they don't make the PC for Buell any longer because of the type of fuel injection system used. The reason they gave was the fuel curve is changed by the ECM from input at the temp sensor. This means as your eng temp changes, so will your curve... SO, once you've dyno tuned your bike, your settings are for not once your bike adjusts for temp changes... Because the TFI is a fuel adder, so to speak, to the ECM curve, is it a better choice? | ||
| Hogs |
Buellman39, Yes it wd. be nice to see how it turns out with you trying a race ecm with the TFI if u ever try that... I have one and so far just leave pot 1 on 3;30 pots 2,3 off and pot 4 7:30 No dynos here to check with So will keep an eye on your posts thanks... | ||
| Wyckedflesh |
The difficulty with the dyno run posted by Buellman39 is we don't have a baseline run on that dyno. So all you can really do is look at it for the AFV which is exactly what is being done. As BadS1 has pointed out, not all dyno's read the same so simply posting a dyno without a baseline is pretty much bling bling. In this case its good for the AFV listing. Now when he goes back after making the adjustments then he can compare the two and see what changes were made. Also with as compressed each of the blocks is, its difficult to see the actual curves of the power, it gives it an extremely linear look to the power delivery. Suggestions for your next run: 1) see if they can expand the graphs so you can also see the falls and peaks to better see how they correspond to the AFV. 2)After you do the run with the new TFI settings, do a run with the stock airfilter in place, but with that being the only other change. I think you might find it helps to richen the mix all the way across the board with out any effect on power loss due to all of the other airbox mods. Charlie thanks for the update on the PCIII situation. | ||
| Wheelsleaning |
Jerseyguy -  | ||
| Jerseyguy |
Buellman - I'd really be interested in seeing how the race ECM alone works on the 12. I've convinced myself that for me the race ECM alone on a 9 with a Drummer & open airbox is best. I think Mike leans toward the TFI on a 12 so it would be great if we could compare the two on a 12. | ||
| Buellman39 |
Alright when I got home I checked the settings on the TFI and they were 3 7 5 7.5 I changed them to 3 9 7 8 and rode back to work (18 miles of twisties  ) and holy •••• this thing freak'n run awsome!! | ||
| Norrisperformance |
Steve The red line on my dyno above, is the race ecm by it self. Blue line is race ecm and the TFI together. I think you already knew that, I posted just encase you didn't. LOL www.badweatherbikers.com/cgibin/discus/show.cgi?tpc=32777&post=440141#POST440141 | ||
| Norrisperformance |
I changed them to 3 9 7 8 and rode back to work (18 miles of twisties) and holy •••• this thing freak'n run awsome!! CooL !!!!!! | ||
| Starter |
That Dyno curve posted by xb12s_streetdemon has been tampered. The HP Torque curve intersections don't line up. One (or both) of the curves has been shifted on the x-axis. | ||
| Jerseyguy |
Mike - Thanks. I had forgotten about that and I couldn't remember if your TFI pull was made with the Race or Stock ECM. | ||
| Norrisperformance |
That Dyno curve posted by xb12s_streetdemon has been tampered. The HP Torque curve intersections don't line up. One (or both) of the curves has been shifted on the x-axis. He traced the lines so they would show up. But the numbers are good. Curves shoudn't be that far off. www.badweatherbikers.com/cgibin/discus/show.cgi?tpc=32777&post=437553#POST437553 | ||
| Buellman39 |
Well, just want to thank Kevin, Mike and everyone else for all your help. This thing really runs good now. I thought it ran good before but now it pulls real hard and smooth from 2000 to 6000 rpm's. Thanks again Chad Rhoads |
