| Author | Message | ||
     Jeffb |
Carb idling problem - My 2000 Blast with has been rejetted ( don't remember exactly what jets) and I am running the Pro Series intake and V&H muffler. They engine will not idle down at all. For example if I pull in the clutch rolling into town, it stays at a high RPM. It also starts very hard. Could something be sticking? I am not very familiar with the CV type carbs. Any help? Jeff | ||
| Ezblast |
Intake leak - first try tightening clamps, if that doesn't work - replace rubber intake boot. GT - JBOTDS! EZ  | ||
| Pastor_chuck |
I want to improve the performance of my 2002 standard blast, but I'm a little confused about what to do and what I will get. If I change to the pro-series intake, exhaust and rejet what will it yield? If I just change the exhaust and reject what will I get? Which exhaust system should I have installed? | ||
| Gearheaderiko |
Go with the Pro Series exhaust first. Its the most reliable,durable and bang for the buck you can get. You will notice an immediate improvement.Its also the most quiet of the performance exhausts. You can then change the slow jet to #45 and the main should already be a #170. However the exhaust instructions do not say that any re jetting is neccessary. The Pro Series intake has some suspected reliability issues due to the carb no longer being braced (like the original).Without the brace the carb is just hanging by the rubber coupling only and is more prone to popping off or the rubber coupling tearing.Do that second as the improvement isnt as clearly noticeable as the exhaust change. | ||
| Rcontroler |
My '02 with 13,400 miles seems to be holding back at higher revs such that it won't hit the rev limiter like it used to. Is most noticeable at 70 mph and when pulling a mild grade it slows to 65 where it used to hold speed or increase. Low to mid range torque appears just as good as it always has been. Boot is good, has 175 main, rerouted breather, clean air filter, new spark plug, Kerker header w/glass pack, timing is advanced 2 degrees, primary is adjusted loose enough to make a little lope sound when warming up (this is 1/2 flat from ideal quiet setting). I even tried the stock muffler with stock 170 main but still hard to hit the rev limiter, etc. It is not Calif. model and runs the same with fuel cap loosened. I have not seen much discussion on what happens when the carb diaphragm is bad. Was wondering if that is a possible cause. Any help will be appreciated. | ||
| Ezblast |
Have you tried carb cleaner and some octain boost - yeah I know chemicals - bah, but actually a few shots of gum out carb cleaner has cleared jets before - cause once your really in your carb - its clean bench time to do it right - check the regular KV carb section and NightRider tech section for a good range of carb tricks as well. Also check your plug and run the Kerker at 170 Main. (link in the links section) GT-JBOTDS! EZ (Message edited by ezblast on November 06, 2004) | ||
| Rockbiter1 |
Check your plug, plug wire, clean the carb (and or rebuild) | ||
| Gearheaderiko |
Are you sure the timing is still good? It didnt move when you tightened it down? Is there anything that you did to the bike immediately before this started happening? (I know, dumb question, but I have to ask). If its just not hitting the rev limiter and its not giving any other symptoms, I find it hard to fault the carb. Is the throttle opening all the way? Are you sure the primary chain is adjusted properly? (It wouldnt be so hard to loosen it up to check). Brake dragging? Overfilled primary? | ||
| Rcontroler |
I resealed the rocker box about 1000 miles ago but it was already getting sluggish @ higher revs before that. The primary oil is at correct level. I rechecked timing after tightening module hold downs. I rode it with primary adjusted about 3 flats loose from ideal (I adjust according to sound which is always a bit looser than using the torque wrench). Seems this problem came on gradually and has worsened to the point that it makes a bigger difference at higher speeds (that I can't avoid by say shifting earlier) than when it does it at shifting speeds. I have been noticing the blue rubber particles from the air filter element in the airbox for a long time. Had also noticed that there is less oil leaking from the air box than there used to be after running at higher speeds. Maybe this is an indicator of something or merely a sign that the engine revs less now and therefore less oil is spit out. | ||
| Reepicheep |
Rcontroler... how did you come up with that primary adjustment approach? Seems like a dangerous approach to the engine to me. | ||
| Rcontroler |
What do you mean by dangerous approach? About the third time I adjusted the primary (book method), I marked the adjuster flat w/reference point. Started engine and slowly tightened until idle speed started to slow. Then loosened until small amount of noise started. Tightened until all noise just disappeared. Tightened lock nut. Noted reference mark. Mark was almost 1 flat looser than when I started. I think the object of adjusting the chain is to remove any excess slack (signified by noise) that develops over time/miles and not to tighten too tight (as signified by idle speed loss) so as not to put strain on the engine/tranny components. NOTE: I am not recommending this procedure for others to do to their engines because it deviates from the proper procedure. If they decide to try it they should proceed at their own risk. It has worked for me thus far and cuts down the time it takes to do the job. AGAIN I AM NOT RECOMMENDING THIS PROCEDURE! | ||
| Reepicheep |
That makes more sense. I thought from the description previously posted, you were using a torque wrench on the tensioner and setting the tension with that, then backing off a fixed number of turns. That is what scared me. That above procedure sounds better, and sounds like you will end up on the loose end of the spectrum, but at an acceptable range. The only danger thing that would concern me is the forces generated with a primary chain so tight that idle slows. I guess if the slowing comes from the chain under tension against the primary shoe, it is probably fine. But if it is because the chain is tensioning the bearings enough to slow the idle, that is scary. That is a clever approach though! | ||
| Rockbiter1 |
The text-book method is 29 inch pounds of torque, then backing off 3 flats...exactly what you describe as "dangerous"...Rcontroler is using a "real world" adjustment, as opposed to a "theoretical" adjustment...(theoreticly, if you follow the book, it will be correct, but we all know thats too tight) I'll use what works over some techno-geek's theoretical method anyday  | ||
| Rcontroler |
SUCCESS!!! I removed the gas tank to check compression today (175 lbs good). With the tank off, access to the 4 carb slide diaphragm cap screws is easy. Out they came and when I removed the diaphragm, guess what I found? There was a 1mm long split in the diaphragm. So off to the local Harley repair shop and $40 later a new slide/diaphragm assembly was installed (He said some aftermarket companies sell the diaphragm only and I will check later.) The tech at the repair shop said he has worked on hundreds of Harleys through the years and until today had only seen 2 with split diaphragms. The trip home tonight revealed what I have been missing for awhile. That same grade that she could not maintain 70mph and even slowed to 65, tonight she not only held 70 but when I twisted the right grip she accelerated to 85 mph with more to spare (She does have to work hard all the time as I weigh 215 lbs.) I'm so happy I could spit!! Thanks to all for your suggestions. I won't forget this one and I hope others will benefit from my experience.  | ||
| Reepicheep |
My bad, I come from the tube framer side of things... Is that procedure a Blast thing? How does it account for gunk on the tensioner adjustment threads? Are you supposed to have the bike in neutral at the time? | ||
| Rcontroler |
My bike is a Blast! Don't know if it works for others. Bike doesn't sit still long enough for gunk to accumulate. Ha Ha! Seriously I don't know if it accounts for the gunk. Neutral during entire procedure. | ||
| Burnmyheartdown |
Anybody thought of trying a pumper carb with the pro series intake? There's no room for one with the stock airbox but with all that opened with an aftermarket air intake...you've got potential. | ||
| Ezblast |
LOL - can you say Quicksilver? - GT - JBOTDS! EZ  | ||
| Newblaster |
Thought of? Yes, several people have been talking about it for a while. Don't think anyone has tried it yet, at least not on this board. EZ will probably chime in soon, as he's been thinking about that for a while now... Speaking of EZ chiming in... lol... (Message edited by newblaster on November 11, 2004) | ||
| Gearheaderiko |
The results I've read is that there is minimal gain changing carbs. You also lose the tps sensor and auto enrichener. The money is better spent elsewhere making the engine breath better internally before you can really benefit from a better carb. I do theorise its possible to mate the Sportster/big twin accelorator pump carb with the Blast carb and get the best of both. I still havent had the opportunity to get both carbs on a bench together though. (Message edited by gearheaderiko on November 11, 2004) | ||
| Ezblast |
No ones tried the Quicksilver double pumper 40mm on a Blast yet, KTM and several other Eurosingle bikes run them - they make a kit including throttle cable mech for the last M2's that would bolt right up on a Blast - you'd have to talk to a rep to find out what the proper jetting would be as an equivelent to the jetting on a Blastcarb - lol - however the quicksilver also compensates for altitude - a nice feature - and are generally considered a very good carb - the old style used to by used be early CA model Buells, but it didn't have an accelerator pump (new style does) and was droped in favor of the Kehin CV - the only other carb tried is the HSR42 - a very nice carb also. GT - JBOTDS! EZ (Message edited by ezblast on November 11, 2004) | ||
| Ninjabob |
I consistently get 54 mpg! The Buell website boasts 70... I fill up w/ 2 gallons. At about 108 miles I have to switch to reserve. This may be because I’m 19 and like to accelerate/ get up to speed a little faster than a blue haired grandma. I’ve been riding like this. I shift at 20 into 2nd. 30 3rd. 40 4th. And 50-53 5th, And downshift accordingly. I’m wondering if there’s a mechanical issue or am I just burning fuel ? Most of the time im at about 45 mph so I cruise around in 4th. Should I be in 5th at 45 ? or driving different ? it’s a thumper but… I don’t see why its called a thumper except when a newbie tries to take off in first on it. | ||
| Burnmyheartdown |
I shift into second at the limiter. I shift into everything at the limiter, then run it almost 40 miles around 85...I usually switch to reserve at 113 miles...so I'd say there is something up with that, from my personal experience. | ||
| Gearheaderiko |
70mpg is optimum (hwy) and the Buell site probably isnt giving the correct city mpg (note the HP rating is wrong). Low 50's for city, 70 for hwy is about right, variable on how you run the bike. Ninjabob, sounds like you are running in the middle of grandma and aggressive and unless you run at say 40mph in second gear all day, your gonna get mpg in the 50-70 range. | ||
| Newblaster |
I consistently get mid-50s to low 60s. Of course, that's a mix of city/hwy riding, and I don't exactly baby her on the acceleration. Also, for better performance, you may want to change your shift points. Try hitting 2nd at about 25ish, 3rd at 37ish, 4th at 50ish, and 5th at 65ish (run all the gears up to 6000 or so RPM.) No, that won't help your gas mileage, but it won't hurt it, either. Plus, you'll skip the dead spot in the midrange. Not trying to tell you how to ride or anything, just a little fun-enhancing tip. All the usual disclaimers apply. (YMMV, just one man's opinion, worth exactly what you paid for it, any damage or misfortune resulting from following said advice should not be blamed on me, the badweb, or anyone or anything else, etc. etc. etc... lol...) | ||
| Cybercycle25 |
whatz up. Has any one thought about a cooling fan in the big open space behind the head after you get a after market intake?use it for traffic light stops on hot days.maybe maybe not.well just a thought. | ||
| Gearheaderiko |
The Blast doesnt need it.Harleys overheating problems have usually been with the rear cylinder and the Blast doesnt have one. The XB's now have a fan there to cool the head so the oil doesnt burn off when its shut down. An oil cooler would probably be more effective and more reliable (to keep the operating temp down), but Erik (Buell) says the Buells dont need them and would also keep the oil from reaching proper operating temperature. It actually takes quite awhile for the oil temp to rise that high even in summer conditions. If you have a problem overheating, look for a cause first, then a solution, as it normally shouldnt happen. | ||
| Cybercycle25 |
thanks 4 the low down.yeah just an idea. those oil coolers cost some serious cash.dont have a over heating problem but toying around with the idea of a very cheap but neat look of a alternative hidden behind the head and no oil hoses in the front.not as effective as a oil cooler granted, but effective none the least.Any temp drop at a stationary idle would help.just toying around.Any thoughts anybody.thanks. | ||
| Gearheaderiko |
Oil coolers generally run between $100-$200 but that would be significant as opposed to a $20 12v computer fan. I do know a guy that uses them (fans) on starter motors. If you are considering this I would find out the set up Buell uses as they obviously did the research to find the most effective place to direct the airflow. PS The XB head is bigger with what looks like a greater surface area with which to dissipate heat. | ||
| Cybercycle25 |
sounds good.How about trying to save more money and not even get a computer fan, but a more powerful fan from a hair dryer that the heat coil is burnt up on.I like to be as cheap as I can.lol  |
