Snopczynski

Ditto on that. Shogs, your hardly running any low-mid parts except the 2 into 1. Its a waste of money.

Keep them coming. I am not disclosing the info till we have a bunch of answers and a lot of people who have voted on the poll.

Because thats what the customer wanted, and the customer is always right. Bastard customers! The best part is when the call you on the cell phone over a weekend when they have spark or stator problems. All the wiring is the same as stock, and is all there, but it must be something you did because you shortened it for them. It feels great when I put in a new stator and it has spark again. Seriously, if you redo it, its harder to test the wiring, its harder to get to it if there is a problem, and it takes some serious skill to solder it and heat shrink it all so it looks good.

Dont relocate it, its a pain in the ass. JUst cut all the stuff out of the stock harness and tape it back up. I have done it on 3 bikes, and I hate doing it, and cant see a benefit to it.

It uses a vane with a water dampner for creating and governing the load.

k.

Well from what I remember riding the bike with that combo, that was sort of peaky and roaming setup, so I think the elevated hp spikes may have been accurate portrayal. There were other runs that looked like that while we were tuning. Its funny, when I think about it, it almost correlates to rpm where the needle taper would change on the carb setup. I would say the biggest thing was that some of the parts were mismatched for optimum output.

Sure, go ahead and put it out there. Tell us why you picked the ones you did as well.

2 and 3 are different runs, the smoothing is the same.

42 or 45 pilot will be close.

The motor ran ok, and that run was in the midst of all 21 runs we made that day.

All 3 tests had the same porting, shaved flywheel, +4 degree advanced timing, same fuel octane, wiseco pistons, stock cdi, stock coil, and same squish bands. Testing was done on two different dynos, so hp and torque numbers from dyno to dyno cannot be compared. Your gonna have to rely on what the power curves look like. Then decide which combo would have made a power curve that looked like the charts in question. Chart 1. Chart 2 Chart 3

It was off the crank, no tranny used.

Interesting info so far.

Nope.

Thats why this is good. A lot of guys recommend things because they have only dealt with that certain part or modification. A lot of them won't analyze the information from a bunch of different sources and make a decision about the best thing to do because they dont know about anything else. A few weeks ago, a guy said to me " I thought the fatties were a low-mid pipe". You can go right to the fmf website and see what fmf has for a low mid pipe, and its not the fatties.

We gotta wait for all the usuals to be in here and get there input as well. How do you think the power delivery on chart 3 is when riding the bike? Anyone else on which chart would make the bike wheelie the most? Its always nice when we can look at things and not have an opinion that may pull us towards one thing or another.

Well testing different parts on the same setup does give you a baseline for gains no matter what you start out with. So some of the different things ran on these test shows you what a power curve for a certain pipe or carburetion combo will do for you. The idea is to look at the charts, notice the good and the bad before you kow what it is. That way you dont have a biased opinion. You have some hard evidence to support claims (1/2 of it) the other half is the riding part where you see what the bike does with a real world riding load on it. If the power curve looks more appealing in chart 3, but chart 3's hp numbers are not off by much down low compared to chart 2, then what else do you look at? what will the small peaks do to the powerband when your riding the bike? Will you notice a 1.25hp difference at 6,000 rpm? What are you actually doing on the bike at that rpm range, is it even usable power being that low? Heres a fun Question: Out of all 3 charts which one do you think made the bike wheelie more?

Pipes have working rpm ranges. If you per say barely raise an exhaust port, and put a set of t5's on the bike, then your only going to be using part of that pipes working power range. The biggest things that will limitate max rpm are pipes, and port height. I would say if you use an independent builder who is not associated with like toomey or fmf then you stand a much better chance of having the motor built to what you want and the builder recommending a pipe that will work better than anything else. I say tell the builder what you want, then run what he suggest for pipes, carbs, reeds, compression, etc...... A T5 will not do the same things down low that a set of ptr mids will do. However, the ptr mids will not rev as high as the T5 will. The T5 will tend to make more power toward the top of its peak rpm range, with the sacrifice of power towards the bottom of the range. This is a constant that will alsways stay true, no matter what, the pipe you choose, it will dictate the power you make. Every little bit counts, and all the small things make a difference to some sort of extent. When a guy says I ride tight trails, I want to run a 2 into 1 carb, I also run FMF fatties and vf3 reeds. This is not a very good balance of low-mid range power making parts to put together. The point to making a bike work well in a range of the powerband is to line up all the correlating parts and make a substantial amount of power where its going to help you most. All low-mid port jobs will have low port heights, the power is made through the port shape, widths, and velocity. All low-mid pipes will peak at around 9k rpm or lower. The key is to get a nice broad and smooth powerband, good torque backup, good overall torque numbers, and some strong hp numbers. Powerbands with narrow windows that come on quick and peak fast are a handful to handle in tight and technical riding situations. You can end up doing this to yourself with the line up of even all low-mid parts that are not matched together properly.

I understand fully, its lean. What happens when you shut the gas off and the bike runs? It gets leaned out till it wont run anymore. Your needle is choking it to death because its too lean.

Ok, on the two similar charts from the same dyno, anyone pay close attention to the low end numbers on the scale? Anyone compare how far off actual numbers are at the same rpm? The added chart low end looks smoother because of the correction software on the dynojet, so those dips would look alot like some of the other charts down at low rpm if that setup was ran on the crank dyno. Anyone know what max rpm a set of PTR Mids, T5's, fatties, Dynoport 2 into 1, cpi's, DMC's, and Pro circuits would pull? What type of power do you consider those pipes to make. Try to answer on all of them.

Some similarities to one of the other charts. You cannot pay attention to max numbers, these dynos are completely different. If I was to run the other 2 setups from the crank dyno on the dyno jet, the hp and torque numbers would be lower like chart the added chart as well. The hp and torque curves always cross at 5,252 rpm on any dyno if its been set up right. You just dont see it on the other two charts because the sampling range is higher. For those who think certain charts are mid-top oriented, this is gonna be false. All the setups tested were low-mid gains. If you look at max rpm on the chart, there is nothing here making max hp over 8,800 rpm. However, some of you have stumbled on to what I call a "shitty pipe" in one of the charts. Not really a way to overlay charts, especially since one is off a different dyno. But you can look at the curves and get an idea of the power delivery. The bike had a low-mid port job in all 3 charts. (same port job on all 3). Torque backup is actually a high rpm power trait on a low-mid setup. Your basically looking to keep the torque line strong towards the high rpm, so if you let off, its easier to get back on the pipe. Some people may already have good torque backup and not know it, thats why proper jetting and needle setups is key.

Ok, now here is another run showing two major components ran together. Do not pay attention to max power or torque. This run was done on an entirely different dyno than the fist two charts. I know for a fact the dyno this run came off reads torque and hp scaling different through its correction program. You need to pay attention to the shapes of these power curves compared to the other two curves and let me know what you think. compare the 3 and provide feedback. Dont forget to keep providing input on the original 2 charts.

Plastic, more malleable if the chain comes loose. Less likely to rip the mount screws out.

The setup on the dyno has similarities to the setup in the video, and some huge differences as well. But it was my motor on the dyno.