Nova, if I'm reading it right, there is no difference when doing a sustained roll at 10 mph. Those times were based on accelerating from 0 to where ever, but the timing started at 10 mph. The sustained roll could have been rolling along at 10 mph for 10 seconds. At that time, there is no retard on the stock CDI, so a module couldn't have helped.

 

If you have a proven decrease in elapsed times from 10 to 50mph, what happened from 0 to 10mph has no bearing on what happens from 10 to 50mph. If the accelometer shows a faster 10 to 50 time, the module has to be having an effect over the stock setup. There is no "timer" in the CDI, it doesn't know if it's been going 10mph for 1 second or one hour. Speed signal input and RPM input determine where you are in the timing curve. Just for conversations sake, I had one of the original low frequency Freedom Cycle modules that were built in Quebec. From 45mph up there was a definate loss of power and a several mph loss of top speed, but it worked as good as any of the others at the bottom. If all modules that can fool the CDI into ignoring the reverse timing map have the same result, this shouldn't have been the case. But that's how it worked.

 

MikeyBoyesq,

The Tazzo does calculate average and peak HP figures, but without an accurate measure of the total mass, the numbers are off. Also, all of the times are on the low side because the road was slightly downhill. The comparisons are valid, but the absolute values should be considered on the fast side.

Nyroc,

1. The tests indicate nearly identical performance gains from the different modules. The modules' outputs differ only in frequency.

2. I have been told, and expected to see some difference from low and high frequencies. With this Prairie, no difference could be found.

3. Anyone that doesn't have a module and installs one from any maker out there is really impressed with the power gain. It is like all of the Arctic Cat 650 people who ride for the first time and then comment on how much power and fun the V-twin is like we didn't know this already.

Newbeatle,

I respect REDS650 and Alltoy's comments, and have talked with both of them. Their experience on this subject is vast. I am not saying that they are incorrect about the effect of different frequencies, I just can't find a way to measure it. I've tried directly reading the timing, and now with actual test runs and can't find a difference. I don't know if my method of testing can't find it, or there are differences in ATVs? My beef with HL initially is that I was told that there device is different, and contains parts unlike any of the others. I was convinced enough to shell out another $110 dollars for it and found that it has no special parts or properties. I exposed the circuit and found it in the datasheet as is, nothing special. Then they tried to tell me that it would perform better than the cdi replacement on the low end, and more bla, bla, bla. I have always got measurable explainations from DG, where HL talks about secret parts and unexplainable results? Even if HL had produced a cdi that performed above all else, I wouldn't want a song and dance show about it, just give me testable facts. I welcome doubters and encourage them to do their own tests. I don't want people to have to evaluate me as being credible or not. That is why I have tried to conduct a repeatable method of measurement that others could verify. It's not rocket science, and certainly not voodoo, and I hope others will do more testing with their own atv's, epecially with the new cdi's coming out soon.

Fireman650,

The scoop I got about the unlimiter is that the stock igniter's software has some error detection code that causes hesitation. I was told that when running at 32 degs of timing, the unlimiter Prairie pulled 28ft further in the 20 to 60 MPH range, but the hesitation at engagement negated the gains. According to the DG tech, no one has access to the OEM igniter source code and you have to learn things about it through expensive trial and error. He said the unlimiter project has been handed over to some software guru, and that he is now working on some kind of ATV digital instrumentation project, whatever that means?

Keep the comments coming.

 

Novahawk650,
I had the same problem you mentioned before, at first. Gaining more bottom end, but not long after lossing top end. That was caused with something plewing up in the first modules directly affecting the top speed. I personally plew four. I was told Freedom cycles had sub-contract with someone to produce thoses modules to lower down the cost of the module. Turns out, the guy with the contract used cheaper material to built them than Freedom cycle had in their original module. After my fourth module plown, I had to wait five weeks for the new one. And the problem was solved! The fifth one they gave me, gave me more bottom end and didn't effect my top speed. And no trouble since (that was over two years ago).

 

I had one of the first 4 modules that Freedom got in, it didn't burn out but did have the top end loss. I bet you would find that the last module you ended up with is running at a higher frequency than all the others that you had; that's why there is no top end loss.

 

Prairie633,

great information....I wish you had the dyna CDI to compare.

 

I just mark out 300 feet on the uphill road to my shop trying to get some times on the 785cc of Prairiewrenches, but it just spins in FWD the first 30 feet and only gets up to 57 MPH. I think I will have to put drag slicks and a wheelie bar on it to get any good times on it.[img]i/expressions/face-icon-small-disgusted.gif[/img]

 

PRAIRIE633... thanks for your honest response ( & while it may sound like I'm on HL's side here ), aside from them telling you that thiers was different, ( which we all understand to be hooey ), they claimed that thiers would produce more power... Mike Pendland has been pushing the HL module lately as well... I also respect REDS650 & ALLTOY's ( as well as your ) opinions on this subject, but if your testing proceadures can't quantify the frequency / HP difference, what do we need to do to verify this ???

On another forum, last summer, someone was attempting to use a Tazzo for testing on a V Force ( I think ), & they ended up giving up, as they weren't happy with the results... could it have something to do with the CVT ??? though I love technology, I've always been somewhat skeptical of "these" do it all devises... could the front racks be weighed down, to limit the "wheelie" effect, so that the tests could be run from stand still ???

Maybe everyones full of crab, & the frequevcy doesn't matter ??? ( though I don't think ( or hope ) so ), but there must be a way to verify this...

 

lighten your clutch weights, so you get some belt slippage.

 

Prairie633,
I must say Excellent report well done.

I once stated that a higher frequency did help for top end but it only helps from a dead stop so that it will cary on to the top end almost liked a sling shot. I found that with the higher frequency of up to 1100HZ ( anything more than 1100HZ will actually revert back to its original setup and bounch up agian) it did not take from the 28* of total timing from the cdi. When the first Freedom ones came out there was an actuall decrease in top end but it helped a good deal on the botttom, they have since changed and now has a higher frequency to compete with the others. The one from DG was comparable in frequency amount but has a much cleaner wave form which helped to increase the bottom to mid range. After 30 mph a module will not show any advantage Prairie633's testing shows this. Now when it gets right down it all the modules are basicly the same and for goodness sake, all but old school.

About timing keys:
One millimeter does not give 10* of timing. 1mil will only give 4-5* of timing to get the full 10* you have to move the pickup as well. A 6* key will only give 4.4* of timing on a 4 stroke quad, on a 2 stroke it gives 6* but not on a 4 stroke period. This does not include the timing of the cams!!!!!

What choked me was the secret stuff that HL was supposed to have installed to get more out of their module and they didn't have the guts to tell anyone it hooked up to the pink wire. Right then everyone should have clued into what they were doing. Why did they not mention it was a module? Because they new they would loose sales soon as everyone found out it was a module especially a module that has a 555 timer. Anyone with some knowledge can go to Radio Shack and build one. Why not come clean, admit they had a module instead of letting everyone guess what it was. Anyway it is old news.

I applaud DG for trying to build a mapper the cdi has code that is probably to involved to manipulate. I have said in the past that a whole complete cdi is the only way it can be done succesfully. I went to after market ignitions and have not looked back. The new cdi is the best way to get an all purpose performance gain. I would send my cdi to Prairie633 to test but is on another machine right now, especially a big bore I would like to see what the gains would be.

I will have another P700 later on I will build with a big bore primarily for mud racing and hopefully a full race cdi to be installed. I have had the thought of installing a Harley 1200 in the Kawi frame but that maybe a winter project.

Thanks to Prairie633 for the testing he has done it gives food for thought.