As I promised, I had more dyno work done on Wednesday. It finally happened. The numbers posted below are given to show effective gains and/or losses. The figures are come from two different dynos that are within .4 hp of each other on two different days. All figures were provided by DynoJet Dynomometers and are calibrated to DynoJet Research standards. While many dynos produce numbers that seem inflated, rediculous or even severely low, my dyno time was used as a tool to compare engine enhancements and theory. While I can't speak to the accuracy of the particular numbers, I can only speak to the changes in my bike on two dynos that show less than a 2 percent differential.

I posted this on the first update a couple of days ago...

Stock Bike out of the box - two weeks old and about 11 hours on it. (I have a Friday bike and it made more than most)
32.6 HP

W/RWR CDI, Big Gun pipe/header, direct mount K&N on the TM45 - After dyno tuning
37.9 HP

Stage 2 - Web Cams 110 intake cam and stock exhaust cam, RWR 11.5:1 piston - No dyno tuning on carb, just a jet change (dyno tuning session to come on Wednesday of this week.
43.5 HP (DIRECT MNT. K&N)

Hoping to get about 1 - 3more ponies this Wednesday Text

Here are the most current numbers as of Wednesdays session:

Dyno tuned and running the Direct Mount K&N
45.3 HP

Prototype tube and K&N
46.7 HP

Once the jetting was corrected and they rigid tube was in place, the corrections produced a very smooth HP curve. No dips due to squash or lack of fuel, and in fact, the curves were MUCH more smooth than that of the direct mount K&N. Also of importance was the point at which power was developed. Power started to develope almost 5 mhp ealier and alomst 600RPM earlier.

While it did not produce the expected 2 - 4 hp more than the stock curve at peak, it did produce that 2 - 4 hp gain earlier and through out the curve before peak. I believe that the stock tube shape would even be better, however the squish of the tube is a problem and band clamps aren't the definitive answer.

At this point in testing, it has become evident that the stock head configuration is close to losing it's effeciency. The next step is to port the head. That will be done in the next month or two and I will keep you all informed.
For now, we have a good base/control from which to compare aspects of power and stage efficiency. Hope I've been of some help.


Big Daddy

 

Are you going to post the dyno sheets? I would be interested in seeing the torque numbers.

 

I have no way of posting the dyno sheets. Also, I don't have the torque curves from Skip, just the HP curves. I do have the torque curvs from Monday's run though. I just don't have a way of getting them posted.

Over the las 3 days, I've spent $310 in dyno time, I'm not running out to buy a scanner or camera.

BigDaddy

 

What were the torque numbers you saw? How were the torque curves?

 

What jet did the best for you. great info.

 

With the initial tube (stock) there was a monster jump in torque early! I don't know if the massive gain in torque was there with the proto-type, one can only assume that there was a similar gain due to the fact that the same increase in HP was seen over about the same part of the curve.

Jet size. My jet size (if you remember) was 150 before the stage 2. After the stage two It seemed to be good at 155 with a little more color than I had before the stage 2 - am I explaining that correctly????

RWR told me that most likely I would stay the same from stage 1 - 2 and could even be too rich, which would require a 145. the final jetting is as follows:

Stage 2 w/tube and K&N
160 main
96 needle third from the top
air screw at 1 1/2 turns out.
50 pump nozzle (once it's dialed in it's AWSOME)
RWR Heavy spring for the Pump

I'm a big guy and don't have too much problem with riding all day with a heavy throttle or clutch. For some reason or other, I have way more difficulty with the twist!

I do have access to a camera, and will try to get pics up of the dyno sheets and the tube. Not sure the dyno sheets will come out very good.

 

thanks for the report. hope it all works good for you.

 

Thanks, but at the same time. A stock 2004 DS with a predator tube made 1 1/2 more than the stock DS setup. Why, well I'm only posting this for info. I do'nt own a D.S. just trying to help you guys out. The guy that has the dyno sheets on this will'nt give them to me. I do'nt know him that well.



later

 

MAddog, I looked at a stock pred tube, it is nothing like the DS tube.. Was the Pred tube cut, and a filter put on the end of it? If you can give us a few more details. A friend is sending me a stock Pred. tube to mess with, if someone has pics of the instal I would like to see it.

 

thanks much BigDaddy for following through.

having a filter diameter larger than that of the carb intake, which tapers to the carb size, is what causes velocity increase as the air travels down the tube. this tapered feature is the key, and an intake tube that does not collapse, but built to the same physical specs as the stock DS tube, is the answer.