| Author | Message | ||
     Jmartz |
Jerome I have recently found a snowmobile product to repack the canister. It is long strand rope like material that simply does not come out. 3 bags resulted is a rather quiet tone. The best sounding muffler I've ever owned was a CF V&H but it died in 15,000 miles. Jose | ||
| Jerome |
Jose : your description of the snowmobile repacking material is much similar to what is found around the SuperTrapp core tube. I've opened mine and the packing fiber is still in pretty good shape after 7,000 miles. If I succeed in repairing my broken ST muffler, I'll probably put back the same packing material. | ||
| Al_Lighton |
I loaned my S3 to Two Brothers a while back for them to do the design of an american spec slip on. In exchange,they gave me one of the first production units, in Titanium. Looks good, I posted their dyo chart a while back, it's pretty much a dead heat with the V&H power wise. I mounted it to my friend Tom's S3, it fit easily enough. However, the rear straps are WAY too thin, I believe they will fail in short order. They use two (good) but the are in line, not staggered (bad). So both straps will be in the same bending mode simultaneously, and will eventually fatigue fracture (100% my guess, no empirical evidence to back it up other than anecdotal knowledge of Supertrapp failures on their rear straps when they were thin. It's real light, and sounds VERY good, but is slightly quieter than a V&H. The sound is great, slightly subdued but REAL throaty, not raspy or blatty at all. I'll post mounted pics of it another time, it was dark when we finished.   | ||
| Ccryder |
Hey Al: You have been working HARD! While you have been polishing I took up the gauntlet to get some real road miles on the TwoBros. I installed the pre-production unit that you saw at TwoBros on Stripe'r the week before Home Coming. Almost 8,000 miles later, everything is FINE. I was also skeptical of the rear mounts, but they have held up very well. I just checked them out Saturday, literally with an 8x magnifier to see if there were any cracks. So far soooo good. Now I'll just have to get a hold of Jeff and see if he wants me to road test something else ;+}. Later keep up the hard work. Neil S. | ||
| Caboose |
So what does everyone think of the new D&D full system advertised on Sport Twin? As soon as my Canadian distributer gets them in stock, I'll be putting it on my X1. | ||
| Blake |
Why not just order it online from Sport Twin?  | ||
| Caboose |
Because my Canadian dollar is at an all time low. It's only worth 0.62 American. I'd love to support a board sponsor, but I think I can wait a while till our economy turns around a bit! Unless of course Sport Twin would like to give a friendly Canuk a break? How bout' my Canadian buck on par for the all mighty American dollar??? | ||
| Buellzebub |
what caboose said, by the time you factor in duty, exchange rates, transit time and taxes, international mail order really sucks. it would be nice to see the d&d done in plain stainless and have a model made for the S1 S1's Rule, S1 withdrawal sux | ||
| Clydeglide |
Caboose, Save your diminshing CDN $$$. Remove your stock muffler, cut the end cap off at the weld, remove internals, weld end cap on, spray flat black. You must use a race ecm if the exhaust is modified in any way (this is good). It will be only somewhat louder than stock. If you have the time and talent remove the heads, match the ports. Did this to our X-1 and with a dirty paper air filter pulled 93.7 RWHP. It also reduced the EPA dip a lot but did not eliminate it. Where the heck is Fenwick? Never could find it. Clyde | ||
| Rocklane |
Caboose, I was at Sporttwin about a month ago talking to Brad and I really liked the look and fit of the new D and D pipe. The only thing I did not like was the price and the sound. The sound on the D and D is not very loud (ie It is quieter than my Vance and Hines) but if it gains horsepower the way its suppose to then I might still put one on my 2000 X1. Just my 1.5 cents worth. Rocklane | ||
| Blake |
But Caboose, aren't wages equally inflated in Canada? I hope. | ||
| Caboose |
Yeah, but trap'n beaver don't pay what it used to! | ||
| Rick_A |
well, I have a race header on the way...and am anxious to see what I can whip up to mate it to my V&H | ||
| Rob99 |
I just purchased a '99 S3T used from a non-HD/Buell dealer. It already had aftermarket intake and a Daytona Boss pipe - not sure how old. I've ridden the bike 4 times, and found the rear muffler bracket just pulled out from the pipe leaving a hole in the pipe. I've been reading the board quite a bit (very helpful) and contacted Daytona HD. They didn't really want to talk to me and referred me to Stainless Specialties. They asked that I ship the pipe back and they will repair or replace. Is this normal that I'm dealing with Stainless Specialties and not Daytona HD? I'm going to be down now for a couple weeks with a new bike, any reason not to have it welded by a local specialist? (It looks like SS now makes the pipe with a wrap around rear hanger - not a welded on tab) Is that a recent change? Any insight would be appreciated. | ||
| Bluzm2 |
Rob, Stainless Specialties makes the Boss pipe. They have a lifetime warrranty. I'm betting they replace the pipe, not fix it. Check them out here Stainless Specialties Its a great performing and good sounding pipe. It's worth the wait for it's return. I'll bet you could pick up a stocker for next to nothing to use while you wait. Your local Buell dealer may some removed units (replaced with after market pipes). Brad | ||
| Loki |
Rob, You got one of the first generation BOSS pipes. They were known to blow out the welded mount. That is why they went to a dual clamp mount. As far as Daytona HD. The man who did it all is no longer there. That is why they referred you to the actual maker. They are good people and will work with you. Loki (17k on my BOSS now) | ||
| Rob99 |
Loki/Bluzm2, Thanks both for your input. Am new to Buell's and this site, and spent the better part of my work afternoon reading. Very addicting - good stuff. The update sounds like it will fix the problem, will go ahead and ship the pipe back to SS. I had no idea what I was really getting when I bought the bike - I knew I liked the pipe and brought the bike home 8-) | ||
| Bullitt |
I have a Boss pipe on my scoot as well with the wrap around clamp type mount - I bought it from Rek before he left Daytona H-D. He said that he redesigned the clamps to be a little loose so as to make it a "slipper" type mount. Between the clamps allowing for fore/aft movement and the rubber hanger bushings allowing a little side to side it is about as bulletproof a setup as could be had. Just within the last couple of months Stainless changed to a clamp material that is twice as thick - this was about the only failure prone spot. Rob - if you don't have the updated front exhaust/voltage regulator mount, get that too. You can tell by the orientation of the regulator fins if you have it - the new one positions them horizontally. With the movement the pipe mounts allow, it will end up hitting the corner of the v-reg if the bushing isn't brand new. | ||
| Aaron |
FWIW, the problems with exhaust system failures on my M2 went away when I added a collector mount ala the '96-'98 systems, which essentially eliminates the fore/aft movement. In particular, the fore/aft movement allowed by the single front rubber mount was causing header nuts to loosen, and if I took measures to keep them tight, it just broke studs instead. The new front muffler mount that Buell came out with sure seems to me like it's designed to stiffen the assembly and allow less movement also, since they've doubled up the bushings. So I'm skeptical about Rek's approach. | ||
| Bullitt |
Aaron - Having two bushings instead of one has no effect on the fore/aft movement of the muffler with the slipper set up - the clamp hangs from the front mount but doesn't grip the muffler tightly enough to prevent it from moving within the clamp. A spacer is provided with the Boss pipe mount to prevent overtightening and to insure this clearance exists. The net result is the same with either mount. To further damp the vibes the clamp itself can also "swing" in the mount. The vibration is strong and ever present - why not give it a predescribed place to go? The alternative, like you said, is loose flanges or broken studs. As far as the new mount goes, stiffness isn't what Buell was after IMHO - I think they needed to spread the load out across the wider mount with the additional bushing to help with premature failure of the single bushing. I have 10K miles on this setup trouble free so far. Certainly, if you know Rek, I understand your skepticism. No one ever accused him of being wrapped too tight! | ||
| Aaron |
Bullitt ... the slipper setup is based on the theory that more movement is good, yet I have evidence that less movement is good, and I believe that Buell also moved in the direction of less movement when they went to the new mount. I've never met Rek, my theory (and that's all it is) is based on my understanding of how it works and my own experience. Yes, I believe spreading the load over two bushings was a goal of the new bracket, to reduce wear. But consider this. Stand on a mattress on one foot and see how far you deflect it. Now stand on both feet and see how far you deflect it. Spreading the load over more area has a stiffening effect, I have to believe that was also a goal. Now think about how movement affects the header in particular. With the pipes moving around at the ports, the nuts that hold the flange on are constantly having their load changed, no? I believe this contributes to making them come loose. Lock them down by double nutting and it seems to me you're just transferring that movement to the studs instead. It's something I refuse to do. If those nuts are coming loose, it means I have a problem, and I want to know about it, not break a stud. So that's my fundamental understanding of the issue. For evidence, I have two things. First, look at a '96-'98 Buell (except an S2). They have a little bracket that connects the shock mount to the collector. It essentially eliminates fore/aft movement of the system (although that bracket itself sometimes breaks). Ever wonder why exhaust failures seemed to get so much worse starting in '99? I did, and that brings me to my second piece of evidence. When I duplicated the function of this bracket on my '99 M2, which had a massive appetite for exhaust parts, all my exhaust failures disappeared. Nuts quit loosening, brackets quit breaking, and bushings went from a 1000 mile life to an indefinite life. This experience is what basically convinced me that too much movement is the culprit. So that's my story! Obviously Rek is free to see it differently, I'll agree to disagree. See ya, AW | ||
| Loki |
AW, I have had my BOSS mounted with no bushings since day one. With 17k and no failures to date. I also am still using the original front mount. Even Rek when I talked to him in the flesh did not know the exact place for the bushing in the first place. He had seen it in the front clamp, the rear clamp, even in neither clamp. I believe the bushing was a holdover from the original mounting design for the BOSS. When it had a welded on tab like the Supertrapps did. Then it was more than required. Now, with two band clamps, lock that baby down..... Loki | ||
| Bullitt |
Aaron - This just goes to prove there is more than one way to skin a cat! I respectfully disagree with you however, on the stiffness issue. A good example of this is Buell's own Uniplanar engine mounting system. By allowing the motor freedom to move, the energy created in the vibration is given a predetermined place to go. Without it, this energy would find other, likely unwanted, places to be dissipated. I think the exhaust system can benefit from this line of thought as well. As far as the having the header pipes moving in the ports - they shouldn't be! Since the slipper mount setup is allowing for motion in the same plane that the engine is moving ( and conversely, preventing it in the side-to-side plane, same as the engine mounts ) everything is moving together. As the engine rocks forward in a vibration cycle, so does the header and pipe, then back again. The pipes aren't moving independently of the cylinder heads because they aren't being forced to by being solidly mounted. The nuts stay tight. I think this is where the factory mounting scheme falls down. Although not solidly mounted, the only compliance built into it is in the rubber bushings. Increasing stiffness here, to my eye, would have the opposite of the desired effect - less ability to dissipate the vibe induced energy. The ulimate in stiffness would be a solid metal mount. We know that wouldn't be good. I really think this was a measure to increase the service life of the bushings, with no attempt to increase stiffness. The vibration can't be stopped, so whatever means you use to mount the exhaust must dissipate the energy somehow! If the nuts won't stay tight, or the studs break, the vibration is out of control - the energy found the unwanted path. It sounds like you found an elegant way to redirect it. I think Rek did too. Like you said, agree to disagree. Isn't this fun? I'm really enjoying getting to tap the brains of smart guys like yourself. I thought I was the only person who sat around thinking about Buells this much! I learn something every time I read this board. | ||
| Aaron |
"Since the slipper mount setup is allowing for motion in the same plane that the engine is moving ( and conversely, preventing it in the side-to-side plane, same as the engine mounts ) everything is moving together." I think this is the center of our disagreement. Here's how I see it. When the engine vibrates, it accelerates in one direction, decelerates, reverses, and accelerates back the other way, and the process repeats itself. Since the header has inertia, any elasticity in it's mounting will put it's movement out of phase with the motor's movement, in other words, it'll be lagging behind the movements of the motor. This causes it to move independently of the motor, causing compression and decompression of the rubber bushing, which causes the connection at the exhaust port to constantly be wiggling, which causes the nuts to loosen up. Look at an FXR/FLH sometime. Same basic vibration isolation design, in fact, Erik designed it, it's the grandfather of the system used on Buells. But the pipes mount solidly to the motor. Now sure, you can find isolated cases of exhaust failures on FXR's, but it certainly isn't a widespread issue like it is on Buells. And I'd be willing to bet that the number of FXR's & FLH's in the world dwarfs the number of Buells in the world. Basically, the big difference is they don't allow the pipe to move independently of the motor. Buell must have a reason for not solid mounting the thing, although I don't know what it is. But it sure seems to me like they took a major step in that direction with the dual bushing arrangement. I think if you fought and fought with exhaust failures like I did on my M2, and then magically cured it one day when you took movement out of it, you'd have a different view. AW | ||
| Jim_Witt |
Cheers, I've always ignored postings on the Suppertrapp on the BBS, because I've been totally satisfied with my V&H for over 30,000 miles. The RR1200 came with a Suppertrapp and I'm curious how many disks you need to put on the damn thing to make it sound like a V&H? At the moment, it has at least 15 disks and sounds like my lawn mower. E'gad(s) if I have to add another 20 or so disks, it's going to end up hitting the rear tire. (smile) Cheers, -JW:>) | ||
| Rick_A |
I think the basic philosophy is to dampen the vibration in the exhaust system. It's strange to me how Buell took such a different approach than their '96-'98 set up with the new mount. I took the bushing out of my S1 that had 3500 miles on it when I went with an aftermarket exhaust and it had no noticeable wear. Why wouldn't they simply add the old bracket the the newer models instead of designing a new mount? Maybe they were afraid of showing the Buelling world that they were wrong for eliminating it? | ||
| Rick_A |
Hey Jim...sounds to me like you need an open end cap...though that'd probably make sound a bit more stout than the V&H | ||
| Ccryder |
Well Supertrap came through today. About 6-8 weeks ago I called S-T and mentioned my original 1999 IDS. THey were very helpful and gave me an RMA# and said that it would be late October or November before they had some replacements available. I could send mine in or wait. SO I waited and it's here. Let see if I get up around 6:00 I should have it changed out and still have time for my T-day chores, or there is Friday. My only regret is I have to put the damn "Z" bracket back on. For N/C I think I'll do it. Later Neil S. | ||
| Bullitt |
Aaron - Again, we'll have to agree to disagree. The main reason I believe this setup works is because I have never HAD to fight exhaust problems. Every one else I have met - about a dozen or so - this pipe is popular here with my proximity to Daytona - using the newer style Boss have generally nothing but good things to say. My headers have never loosened. How to argue with success....? Obviously, you also found success with a different approach. Doesn't mean one or the other is wrong, just that more than one solution exists. It could be that just the particular muffler I have happens to be just the right weight and size to prevent the out of phase movement, and it survives on blind luck! Wouldn't that just be a hoot? As to the FLH/FXR comparison, for me that just isn't apples to apples. Different engine (with a much different range of vibration frequency), different eng/trans mounting (not Uniplanar) and completely different ehxaust to boot. I think it might be stretching a little to draw hard comparisons when so many of the variables are different. Even the Sportster has much different vibration characteristics - they jackhammer me to death at about 70-75 mph, right where the M2 starts to feel nice - even though these engines are much more closely related. I am no engineer, by any stretch. I am a typical mechanic, looking at things and trying to figure why they do or don't fail. I know that natural frequency plays a big part in this - it's the reason every bulb on the bike doesn't pop when you start the engine. Real engineers at Buell probably spent time making sure the engine's vibes were above or below the natural frequency of the bulb's filaments. This has to be true of the exhaust as well, but only the stock exhaust. More variables! Ay Carumba! Now here's an idea. Corner Mr Buell himself when he comes to Daytona next March and ask him! What do you say? Meet me there? Some smart guy once said "The truth lies somewhere in the middle." I'll bet he's right. | ||
| Aaron |
I dunno, it seems intuitive to me that allowing that header to flex around (relative to the engine) puts pressure on the studs in the heads. But whatever, if you think letting it move makes the system more durable, that's cool. I was just throwing out there that not everyone sees it that way. And they had a whole lot fewer problems back when they had a little bracket to keep it from moving so much. And their current fix reduces the movement. I think the FXR mounting is extremely similar, in fact, the only significant difference I can see is that the FXR suspension doesn't attach to the motor. How do you figure it's not uniplanar? It only moves in one plane, no? Same knife and fork arrangement, same rear isolators, same front isolator (mounted differently though). Now comparing the Sporty to the Buell in vibration, THAT'S apples to oranges. One's solid mounted, one's rubber. The motors could have the exact same vibration spectrum and feel totally different. AW |
