| Author | Message | ||
     Odie  |
Here's the dyno run from yesterday at Stone Mountain H-D/Buell. Had a great day meeting people I had talked to for months but had never met. Special thanks to Glitch and Clown for making it all happen and putting up with my time piece interpretation handicap! Thanks again..... Here's the dirt- 12S running a K&N, cut airbox, snorkle removed, Special O.P.S. pipe, stock plugs and wires, and Techlusion. The blue runs are before the Techlusion was tweaked and the red runs are after they tuned it on the dyno. Best run of the day was 79 HP and 71 #'s of TQ. Although this may seem noneventfull, the power and tq curves are very smooth, no holes whatsoever. The dips you see in the tq lines are when the valve closes and then opens again. No power loss and a small tq gain was evidenced. Plus the valve is still operational, you don't get the bothersome "CE" light, and it sounds MEAN! The TPS was reset first and it has never run stronger. Smoother running all around and the mid-range will just scare you sometimes. I am very happy. Tech box settings are: 6 3:30 8:30 6 (all clock positions). Later......Odie  | ||
| Cataract2 |
I was under the impression the 12 should have more hp than that. | ||
| Odie |
Every dyno is different. I'm sure you will find a dyno run on a stock bike that makes more power than mine but lets get out on the road and see what happens! If we could all run on the same dyno then there would be no question. There is absolutely no doubt in my mind that the bike makes a good bit more power and torque. Plus it sounds real good too.......Odie | ||
| BadS1  |
No offense Odie but those number are the lowest I've seen.I realize dyno's are all different but wow your doing what most 9's are doing. | ||
| Odie |
BadS1, no offense taken. I agree with you. I was surprised a little when I saw the numbers. I have heard that their dyno is not a "happy" dyno.....trust me, if you were to ride it there would be absolutely no question in your mind that it performs tons better than stock configuration. It will surprise you in a heartbeat if you aren't ready for the mid-range power. If I can ever get into my local shop I will have a comparison of dyno's.....New12r made, I think, 92 hp at the rear wheel on the truck dyno. He was just running the race kit pipe......so who knows?!?!?! Odie | ||
| BadS1 |
New12r's numbers sound a little more correct.I'm not doubting your set up.Kinda like when I put the D&D on I was amazed at what it did for the 12. | ||
| Odie |
In reality, I was after the curves more than anything. If I could get the pipe to perform smoothly power/tq wise with no holes then it would be a successful mod. I truly meant what I said- the bike is wicked fast now and if is making less power then oh well! Let's race!!! There is no way that it is making less power. One ride would tell you that. I'll keep trying to get in some dyno time at a local shop just for a comparison. Maybe even two other places and see what happens...Later..Odie | ||
| Dcmortalcoil |
A dyno run without the techlusion would have clearly shown how the techlusion improves performance. | ||
| M1combat  |
But that's not what he was going for. | ||
| Odie |
I've been looking at a few other dyno runs in the KV and there is no way that a 9 is going to make more than my 12 with the mods I have done to it. I will get another dyno run locally for some comparison and see what I get.....Odie | ||
| Barkandbite  |
Whatever the numbers, Odie, I have to say "nice curves, dude!" (or lack thereof, actually.) That's some really nice linear delivery I mean that in a purely torque-related, heterosexual way, of course. Were you able to get A/F ratio numbers? CHris | ||
| Odie |
No, unfortunately they didn't use the sniffer and that was one thing I was after also. I have no doubt that it is running good and nowhere near lean with the Techlusion. It truly does perform very, very well. Strongest it has ever pulled. I'm making some calls tomorrow to try to get another run here with a sniffer for A/F values.....Odie | ||
| Cataract2 |
Barkandbite, when are you going to get a dyno comparision. I want to see what the 9's doing being that's why I have. | ||
| Firebolt020283  |
well its a nice looking sheet unless u look at the numbers but its like odie said every dyno is going to spit out different numbers but its the curve you got to look at more than any thing | ||
| Barkandbite |
I'm making a target for no later than January; I'm traveling for the remainder of December, but I believe I've found a good source for the dyno that includes A/F ratio measurement. I am eager to see the curve and apply a little straightening myself... Chris | ||
| Dstrat |
Guys, my engine man told me awhile back that every dyno is different...it is a load measuring device.....that enables you to see before and after results....the quoted horsepower is really meaningless especially compared to another dyno...... | ||
| Blake  |
Odie, Please clarify... stock ECM or race ECM? Superflow dynos report significantly lower results than Dynojet. Your runs also doesn't list whether or not they use an SAE or STD or other normalizing factor. That can make a HUGE difference in results. When FUSA switched from Dynojet to Superflow to verify the performance of race bikes in their HP limited race classes this year, they had to change the LB/HP limit of all the classses accordingly. It was a significant change and is directly indicative of the descrepancy that Superflow dynomometers exhibit. I think the Dynojet numbers are accurate. The Superflow numbers are way too low. I hear though that Superflow offers a "Dynojet" equivalence factor. Can you get the shop to tell you what correction factor(s) if any they applied? And can you ask them if they can replot the chart for you using the Dynojet factor with SAE correction as well? No A/F. Bummer. | ||
| Blake |
Also, if you are looking to evaluate the effects of a new muffler, you really need to have a baseline dyno of the stock exhaust with all else the same. Otherwise you are just guessing as to what your pipe is doing. The relative flatness of the curve does look promising. Cheers, Blake | ||
| Blake |
It appears that the dyno operator stopped your run at 6,500 rpm. Though it drifted up to 6,600 rpm before ceasing to take data, it is pretty obvious that the throttle was cut at 6,500 rpm. | ||
| Odie |
Blake, I assume that since the chart says SAE corrected at the top that is what was used. I will check and see if the Dynojet equivalence is possible with their software. I took my stock pipe with me just in case we had time to run it but it didn't happen. I am running a stock ECM. I will be making some calls this afternoon to try to get a comparison run locally. I know for sure the bike is making more power, I just need to get it on paper from different dyno's to compare fairly....Later....Odie | ||
| Glitch  |
The dyno at SMHD&B rated my bike, 03 XB9S, Buell Race Kit at 53HP right after I bought it. SKS has the DynoJet and I got a 77HP. Both curves looked the same. Hopefully we'll be able to afford to do before and after runs for both bikes. Time or money, I don't know which is harder to come by. | ||
| Odie |
I may have some time around Christmas if that fits into your schedule. I think the wife and kids are going to Pennsylvania for Christmas. I can't go as I don't have enough vacation time built up yet....Odie I think time is the hardest for sure.... | ||
| Henrik  |
Odie's dyno runs were made on a SuperFlow dyno. AFAIR they are know to be a lot less "optimistic" than the Dynojet dynos. Just look at the curves themselves - that's where it counts. Henrik | ||
| Blake |
Odie, I can't believe I didn't see that! LOL! I scare myself sometimes. Henrik, In my experience, the Superflow dynos are WAY pessimistic. I really think they have a serious problem in the formula they use. | ||
| Glitch |
It's only a problem if you try to compare data from one to the other. After all, it's not really for bragging rights, it's a tuning tool. The curves seem to match up fine, only the numbers seem to be different. From now on we'll be using the Superflow probably. We like to support SMHD&B as they have been doing a great job of supporting us, as well as putting up with me and mine! SMHD&B is even going to support the BadWeB at the first of the year. | ||
| Reepicheep  |
So Glitch, do you have a 9 chart from that same Dyno? That would be a good datapoint... | ||
| Glitch |
If I can dig it up, I have one of my XB9S with about 1000 miles and a Buell Race Kit. Scott Zampach gave it to me when he still worked there, got it after my 1000 mile service. I'll look when I get home. | ||
| Odie |
I talked to Clown at SMHD and he said he should have a stock 12 run in the database on the dyno's computer. He will be at work wednesday and will either post or send it to me and then we will have a little better comparison. Still looking for some local dyno time also. Will let you all know....Odie | ||
| Noface  |
Odie, What's a "Special O.P.S." pipe? Who makes it? It looks like a Drummer from the pic in your profile. | ||
| Craigster |
As far as the Dynojet vs. Superflow numbers: Dynojet originally tried to make the rear wheel hp equal what others got at the output shaft of the engine (like Kerker's 800, and RC Engineering's Superflow 901) so they put a scaling factor in from the outset. That made the values close to what the magazines were reporting with their previous dyno mules. The dynojet values have bounced around a little over the years. DOS software revisions were quite interesting as you never knew if the new software would read higher or lower than the last version. They seem to have stabilized with the Windows versions, but most everyone in the industry agrees they are too high. Superflow is pretty trustworthy as far as actual hp/torque numbers as they have a few decades head start at dyno manufacturing over DJ. I believe their experience in truck chassis and towing dynos as well as automotive chassis and engine dynos has given them more experience in what real aerodynamic loads appear on the drum as well as frictional losses at bearings and tire roll interface. They also show real time torque...DJ doesn't. Wonder why? The DJ numbers wouldn't make sense if you compared what you saw on the screen during a run vs. the post run data. Kinda cheesie. You can do that with a Cycledyn and guess what? The numbers agree! (although most often step and hold tests read slightly higher....no inertia losses). I was over at a dyno manufacturer's facility not long ago and the software manager showed me the decompiled DJ code and how they simply add a value to increase the measured power over and above the raw numbers after weather correction. That's why you can't go into an old run and change the correction method from DIN to SAE. It's altered post correction factor. In truth it's not too important as long as the dyno is repeatable. It's just tough to compare improvements with different manufacturer's and with DJ - different software rev's. |
