So, I had the bike serviced this past week (valves, belts, and custom tune). Looking at the dyno chart, it's a bit lower than I expected. I don't have it with me to upload, but the HP measured at 76 and TQ at 62. Mods include vented airbox with K&N drop in, Boom Tubes, PCIII (the full power run had the fueling as close to 13:1 as possible). I also have a 520 chain set with 15/43 quick change.
The bike feels great and will pull to over 130 indicated, but seeing others post their numbers seems like mine is off by close to 10 HP. I also don't know what brand of dyno the shop is running.
Any insight?
Lose the boomtubes.
My 1996 M900 with flatsides achieved better numbers.
Dynos vary widely between setups, operators, and brands.
Dynojets are notoriously optimistic. Mustangs/Factory Pros notoriously show lower than all others, but claim accuracy.
Test conditions affect the readings more than most expect.
You really can't compare results unless you have the bikes tested at the same time on the same dyno... barometric pressure, humidity, ambient temperature... you are better off doing a before and after on the same dyno and looking at percentage of difference rather than "analyzed numbers."
Quote from: Dirty Duc on August 26, 2015, 12:46:17 PM
Dynos vary widely between setups, operators, and brands.
Dynojets are notoriously optimistic. Mustangs/Factory Pros notoriously show lower than all others, but claim accuracy.
Test conditions affect the readings more than most expect.
You really can't compare results unless you have the bikes tested at the same time on the same dyno... barometric pressure, humidity, ambient temperature... you are better off doing a before and after on the same dyno and looking at percentage of difference rather than "analyzed numbers."
I totally understand that. Like I said, I'm not sure what brand the Dyno was, but I don't think it's DynoJet.
I have before and after and it's about a 5 HP pick up with the tune and 3-4 (I think) TQ.
Quote from: Dirty Duc on August 26, 2015, 12:46:17 PM
Dynos vary widely between setups, operators, and brands.
+1
5 hp is a pretty good pick-up for a tune. I would be more concerned about how the curves looked and how it runs and feels than outright power. It's not like it's a race bike.
My S2R1000 pulled 83HP and 62ftlbs, open udder, stock fueling and open airbox. Im running a full 525 heavy never greased chain (thats like 2hp right there)
My new motor pulls 93hp and 69 ftlbs on termis slip ons and open airbox, then i threw on a BEAST-R kit. It should be pulling more hp, but i havent dynoed it.
these numbers are from the same dyno and same operator.
Quote from: He Man on August 26, 2015, 01:52:39 PM
My S2R1000 pulled 83HP and 62ftlbs, open udder, stock fueling and open airbox. Im running a full 525 heavy never greased chain (thats like 2hp right there)
My new motor pulls 93hp and 69 ftlbs on termis slip ons and open airbox, then i threw on a BEAST-R kit. It should be pulling more hp, but i havent dynoed it.
these numbers are from the same dyno and same operator.
At ECS?
Steve has a Dyno-Jet dyno.
Quote from: Triple J on August 26, 2015, 01:10:44 PM
+1
5 hp is a pretty good pick-up for a tune. I would be more concerned about how the curves looked and how it runs and feels than outright power. It's not like it's a race bike.
Yeah I agree, the curves are nice and linear. Feels much better than before.
5hp is a good gain for sure. Those numbers would be low on a DJ dyno and you would have to suspect the boom tubes from what people have reported. The dyno charts and power/torque curves would be interesting to see against stock on the same dyno, (they should have other runs stored for a comparison chart). From what I've read/heard, the tech probably worked hard at filling the holes caused by the boom tubes.
I kinda hope it was a Factory Pro dyno. :P
My old girl with hi comps, FCR 41s, porting and air box mods made 86hp and 68 ft/lbs on a DJ 250i dyno. I was told that was around what the DS1000 bikes made stockish or with pipes.
I couldnt give that much power away for style (I ride an old Ducati [laugh]), but if you love the pipes who cares.
My bike is 86 HP 42 ft/lbs on Steve's dyno. Stock except for DP computer open air box and Termis.
Quote from: howie on August 26, 2015, 04:44:15 PM
My bike is 86 HP 42 ft/lbs on Steve's dyno. Stock except for DP computer open air box and Termis.
Interesting. Why the huge difference in HP and TQ numbers?
Typo [laugh].
Read 62 at least. Or Howies bike revs to 15000 rpm ;D
Typo. 62 ft/lbs
Howie, your bike holds it's torque well. Must be the open air box. Maybe the cams are set to actual stock or even retarded a bit. You got a chart?
Pm sent.
i'll repeat...slightly modified...
if hp numbers are important...
lose the boomtubes
Quote from: ducpainter on August 26, 2015, 05:38:29 PM
i'll repeat...slightly modified...
if hp numbers are important...
lose the boomtubes
Numbers aren't important. I knew the BoomTubes weren't designed to make power. Was just trying to get a consensus if this was unexpected given the mods.
It feels good, power comes on much smoother now, still loud as hell. I averaged ~45mpg before and based on the changed to the map, that will likely improve. It was leaned out significantly over a variety of RPM ranges and throttle positions.
(http://i1153.photobucket.com/albums/p513/NAKID1/DFFFB6DF-D3DE-4498-A89E-255480EE9BFD_zps0xsl1nex.jpg) (http://s1153.photobucket.com/user/NAKID1/media/DFFFB6DF-D3DE-4498-A89E-255480EE9BFD_zps0xsl1nex.jpg.html)
At least the tech helped largely mitigate the effect of the pipes. You can see what is probably a bad case of exhaust reversion down low that would be difficult to tune out. It seems he did a good job for you.
Quote from: ducpainter on August 26, 2015, 01:54:42 PM
At ECS?
Steve has a Dyno-Jet dyno.
Yea at ECS.
This is my dyno for DS1000
(http://kuixihe.com/gallery3/var/resizes/My%20Motorcycle/My-First-Rebuild/S2R1000.jpg?m=1349551938)
and this is for my 1100EVO motor, the first pull was with a stock Hypermotard 1100EVO Map
(http://kuixihe.com/gallery3/var/resizes/My%20Motorcycle/My-First-Rebuild/S2R1100.jpg?m=1349551941)
Quote from: koko64 on August 26, 2015, 11:47:34 PM
At least the tech helped largely mitigate the effect of the pipes. You can see what is probably a bad case of exhaust reversion down low that would be difficult to tune out. It seems he did a good job for you.
Yeah, I'm definitely happy with the rideability now. So much smoother on the throttle response, predictable power delivery. Gotta wait to see what the next tank shows for MPG...
Quote from: koko64 on August 26, 2015, 05:05:48 PM
Howie, your bike holds it's torque well. Must be the open air box. Maybe the cams are set to actual stock or even retarded a bit. You got a chart?
Pm sent.
(http://i298.photobucket.com/albums/mm276/hlep2890/image1-1%202_zpsn1rpqsnj.jpg) (http://s298.photobucket.com/user/hlep2890/media/image1-1%202_zpsn1rpqsnj.jpg.html)
A bit IZ_. Sent to me From Steve's phone. Can't find my better one. Stock cam timing.
I didn't get to your PM yet, been busy.
Torque curve like Uluru [thumbsup]
Quote from: howie on August 27, 2015, 01:33:48 PM
(http://i298.photobucket.com/albums/mm276/hlep2890/image1-1%202_zpsn1rpqsnj.jpg) (http://s298.photobucket.com/user/hlep2890/media/image1-1%202_zpsn1rpqsnj.jpg.html)
That's beautiful man!
my s2r 800 hit that hp with pods, exhaust, flywheel, dp ecu flash and pc3. our dynos also read low due to the +3500 elevation here. you should be way higher
Nakids bike has boomtubes. It appears they restrict torque (and therefore the hp), above 4000-5000 rpm at the very least. The people that like them really like them despite how incompatible they are to the engine's requirements. They have a very cool and radical look.