Dyno pull. Frank, whatchya think?

Getn off

Registered
Had a local bike night this past weekend. A local tuner showed up with his mobile dyno. Figured I would donate $50 to see how she is running.
Bike is a nearly stock (engine wise) 2013 with just Coffman tips and flashed by Frank at Powerhouse. Mind you the flash was only done to change fan times and remove limiter. Also small tweeks to make it more drivable as I understand. Very happy with the flash btw.
Graphs are below. He didnt hook up the tach, so no TQ, and everything based on mph instead of rpms. I really had no expectations other than similar numbers to what Zuke says of a stock gen 2...170 at the wheel. I do know the tips may pull TQ and not add any HP, but I didn't add them for that, I just love the sound and looks of them. If I wanted power, It would be blown by now.
162 seems right in the grand scheme of things...hot FL 85 degree day and a different dyno.
As for AFRs. Bit lean early, then again near the top, but I dont believe too bad. To my unexperienced eye, I am happy with the numbers.
What do you think Frank, and other dyno professionals...or hell, any squid with an opinion!
Just thought I would post up a real world chart on a nearly stock bike. Hell, this could turn into my "pre" baseline for future endeavors!
Troy

image.jpeg


image.jpeg
 
Actually it seems low. I was at mid-170's with Yoshi slipons on a 90+ degree day and Tidewater VA humidity. Is that Gen 1 or 2?
 
Getting a bike into the correct stoichiometry earlier in the rpm makes more power and torque through the middle and at peak. That is why a tune can be so important, even with just tips on the bike. I think you should hang a powercommander on that bike and bring it to me . . . a proper, complete tune will make a HUGE difference !
 
He said that big word the other day and i just kind of smiled...i had no damn clue what it was and my google skills just didnt feel like happening. Thanks for asking lol!!!!
I had a professor who said "there are no dumb questions, just dumb people asking obvious things they should already know if they done their reading." I still laugh at that.
 
Lol Brian! Leave my tips alone! I actually prefer the sound and looks to pretty much every set I have heard in person...and I have been to many Bike Weeks! Once my garage gets done (couple months), and if Zuke doesnt come out with a blown model in Sept, I may bite the bullet and get it to Frank for some lovin.
And its a Gen 2 Wilie.
Troy
 
Lol Brian! Leave my tips alone! I actually prefer the sound and looks to pretty much every set I have heard in person...and I have been to many Bike Weeks! Once my garage gets done (couple months), and if Zuke doesnt come out with a blown model in Sept, I may bite the bullet and get it to Frank for some lovin.
And its a Gen 2 Wilie.
Troy
the funny thing is Getnoff has more money than most anyone here... he can try to deny it and be modest all he wants.... New Vipers don't lie... don't hurt the bike, get a good tune.
 
Stoichiometric by definition is the ratio at which all the oxygen is burned completely with the fuel in the combustion chamber. It is NOT a term to be used to describe a range of AFR’s to target while tuning.
 
Stoichiometric by definition is the ratio at which all the oxygen is burned completely with the fuel in the combustion chamber. It is NOT a term to be used to describe a range of AFR’s to target while tuning.

Stoichiometry deals with ratios and is used in chemistry. It has been used for years in relation to air fuel ratios, the correct "stoichiometry" or ratio, or "balance" of chemicals to cause a certain effect. It's only been used in when discussing air/fuel ratios for about 40+ years that I know of. So YES, it has been used for many years by many people. This is from Google:

What is the best air fuel ratio for power?
We mentioned the stoichiometric air-fuel ratio (14.7:1) that is the ideal ratio for lowest emissions, but this isn't the best ratio for power. It used to be that 12.5:1 was considered the best power ratio, but with improved combustion chambers and hotter ignition systems, the ideal now is around 12.8:1 to 13.2:1.

Terms are sometimes used in different ways, no need to nitpick.
 
Wrong again. Stoich of gasoline is 14.7:1. We both know at that ratio, the Busa engine is starving for fuel and will not make power as clearly shown in the dyno sheets posted which appear to be 14.7-14.8.

I’m not debating the use of the terminology for the last 40 years. I’m debating that fact you threw out a big word that has nothing to do with what’s actually going on here. The actual stoich value of a given fuel is a tool for the tuner to gauge what ratios should be target. This is why VP posts on their site the stoich of all their fuels. They don’t give a range at which oxygen is completely burned. They say specially at X.X:X is complete combustion, and is up to you to determin how much richer or leaner you need to be to keep from melting stuff.
 
Wow, I love how you come on this board to stick your foot in your mouth. This is not the first time. You actually told someone your new plenum makes more hp than the RCC billet plenum. You put your foot in
it then, also. I won't debate with you over nonsense. All of a sudden you are a scientist, nice. Do what you do (lol), and I will continue to do what I do. I will stay out of your business and your threads, please consider doing the same. Have fun with your new business, I hope you do well and find some work to do, really.
 
No need to get salty frank.

And yes it actually does make more power on back to back pulls, and with only 4.8lbs of boost vs 5.5. Change can be scary but embracing new technology and trying different things is the only way to improve on the wheel, not trying to reinvent it.
 
Back
Top