Yoshi Cams ST1
- Thread starter LefterisT
- Start date
Marc Salvisberg
Registered
Megacycle has a set of cams that don't lose any power at low rpm - Same as stock power till 7k, then power jumps up 6-8 TRUE HP till redline.
That's tuned with a TEKA.
We had a Yosh cammed bike and this other bike at the same time.
One was ported and Yosh cammed and the other was Megacycle cam, dropped in, at specified lobe centers with a stock cylinder head.
Same peak power on both but the Megacycle was sig. better on the low and mid rpms.
Cheers!
Marc
<!--EDIT|Marc Salvisberg
Reason for Edit: "can't spell."|1075598096 -->
That's tuned with a TEKA.
We had a Yosh cammed bike and this other bike at the same time.
One was ported and Yosh cammed and the other was Megacycle cam, dropped in, at specified lobe centers with a stock cylinder head.
Same peak power on both but the Megacycle was sig. better on the low and mid rpms.
Cheers!
Marc
<!--EDIT|Marc Salvisberg
Reason for Edit: "can't spell."|1075598096 -->
Johnnycheese
Registered
the Yoshi's are cheaper than the Megs. Yes the megs make more ponies but........if 200.00 for a couple of ponies is worth it then fine.
I guess it depends if you are racing or are you riding.
PS I saw what a Factory Pro dyno shop did with a TEKA on a busa and OMG NO HP!!!!!!!!!!!!
Highly recommend a PC3R for mods!!!!!!
I guess it depends if you are racing or are you riding.
PS I saw what a Factory Pro dyno shop did with a TEKA on a busa and OMG NO HP!!!!!!!!!!!!
Highly recommend a PC3R for mods!!!!!!
Marc Salvisberg
Registered
JC -
That's right - the Megacycle's are more expensive, but, the customer asked us to do the best that we could do without taking the engine apart.
I figured that his buddy spent $2000 for porting + whatever the YRD cams cost and I figure that the extra $200 that the guy spent for the MC's was a better deal - since he only spent $1200 total and made better low and mid and the same topend as the other YRD bike.
I know the markup on the the Megacycle's isn't very high and they aren't the easiest people to deal with at times - but, I'd rather give my best.
In regards to some other shop tuning something, how did you prevent the engine from dipping into the acc. map when you measured the power in an 8 second sweep test???
How did you compensate for the combustion chamber temperature difference (300f to 400f lower) in an 8 second sweep?
By the way - that leaves a bunch of o2 in the exhaust and looks lean..........
One should always try to duplicate load conditions on a dyno and I can't see as how an 8 second sweep through the powerband equates to anything at all in the real world, whereas a test under load is much closer a duplication of loading.
What did you do about the big gulp of air that gets sucked into the exhaust when you whack the throttle on?
Probably read it as 16:1 or 17:1!
If the a/f was really 16-17:1, then, obviously the power would have dropped greatly at that point, yes?
If it didn't drop greatly at that point - then your a/f is wrong.
Simple.
Of course - for some reason - you can't tune a pc if the ECU isn't at zero???
Why is that?
I can keep asking you questions that are difficult to answer - but I'd rather that you wondered about it and learned instead of lashing out with defensive ego.
Yes - I sure that you are good and I'm sure that you also do the best job possible for your customers and the group.
But...... If the only people who argue with our dynos results are guys with dynojet dynos - there must be some problem - They finally made a dyno that skews "optimum" so much that anybody with one is so shocked at tuning to best power done on other dynos with more realistic loading.
I don't have problems with Yoshimura, with Muzzy, with Yamaha, with Suzuki, with American Honda, Belgarda Yamaha, Keith Code, Steve Rapp, Jimmy Moore, Brock, Kevin Cameron, Ken Augustine, Steve McLlaughlin, Mert Lawill, Jim Douer, Lang Hindle, D&D, M4,Hans at HMF, Over exhaust, Rich Oliver, Chuck Sorrenson, Jason DiSalvo, Aaron Yates, Mike Smith, Doug Polen, Colin Edwards, all the Haydens, Jake Zemke, .... and I guess that's enough - so why would I argue with you?
You are just relating what you see with your equipment.
I'll just ask questions and you can tell me what's real from your firsthand experience.
Cheers!
Marc
That's right - the Megacycle's are more expensive, but, the customer asked us to do the best that we could do without taking the engine apart.
I figured that his buddy spent $2000 for porting + whatever the YRD cams cost and I figure that the extra $200 that the guy spent for the MC's was a better deal - since he only spent $1200 total and made better low and mid and the same topend as the other YRD bike.
I know the markup on the the Megacycle's isn't very high and they aren't the easiest people to deal with at times - but, I'd rather give my best.
In regards to some other shop tuning something, how did you prevent the engine from dipping into the acc. map when you measured the power in an 8 second sweep test???
How did you compensate for the combustion chamber temperature difference (300f to 400f lower) in an 8 second sweep?
By the way - that leaves a bunch of o2 in the exhaust and looks lean..........
One should always try to duplicate load conditions on a dyno and I can't see as how an 8 second sweep through the powerband equates to anything at all in the real world, whereas a test under load is much closer a duplication of loading.
What did you do about the big gulp of air that gets sucked into the exhaust when you whack the throttle on?
Probably read it as 16:1 or 17:1!
If the a/f was really 16-17:1, then, obviously the power would have dropped greatly at that point, yes?
If it didn't drop greatly at that point - then your a/f is wrong.
Simple.
Of course - for some reason - you can't tune a pc if the ECU isn't at zero???
Why is that?
I can keep asking you questions that are difficult to answer - but I'd rather that you wondered about it and learned instead of lashing out with defensive ego.
Yes - I sure that you are good and I'm sure that you also do the best job possible for your customers and the group.
But...... If the only people who argue with our dynos results are guys with dynojet dynos - there must be some problem - They finally made a dyno that skews "optimum" so much that anybody with one is so shocked at tuning to best power done on other dynos with more realistic loading.
I don't have problems with Yoshimura, with Muzzy, with Yamaha, with Suzuki, with American Honda, Belgarda Yamaha, Keith Code, Steve Rapp, Jimmy Moore, Brock, Kevin Cameron, Ken Augustine, Steve McLlaughlin, Mert Lawill, Jim Douer, Lang Hindle, D&D, M4,Hans at HMF, Over exhaust, Rich Oliver, Chuck Sorrenson, Jason DiSalvo, Aaron Yates, Mike Smith, Doug Polen, Colin Edwards, all the Haydens, Jake Zemke, .... and I guess that's enough - so why would I argue with you?
You are just relating what you see with your equipment.
I'll just ask questions and you can tell me what's real from your firsthand experience.
Cheers!
Marc
Johnnycheese
Registered
due to I own a Turbo Busa I learned how to use a Dyno correctly and if you do not load a motor you will never have proper A/F readings I did not only use a pull for the test I also use heavy and light loads.
Also I used something to verify my results that some shops don't .......it is called a track where MPH = HP
his HP was low compared to all the Busas I have done.
PS. Marc I understand what you are saying but their fuel map that they made was leaner everywhere than the stock ECM EXCEPT at Idle.
It could be that the "approved" shop need some lessos on tuning.
And yes my offer still stand anyone who has a TEKA and wants me to map with it I will do it with your TEKA for FREE. I still want to see if it really works.
Also I used something to verify my results that some shops don't .......it is called a track where MPH = HP
his HP was low compared to all the Busas I have done.
PS. Marc I understand what you are saying but their fuel map that they made was leaner everywhere than the stock ECM EXCEPT at Idle.
It could be that the "approved" shop need some lessos on tuning.
And yes my offer still stand anyone who has a TEKA and wants me to map with it I will do it with your TEKA for FREE. I still want to see if it really works.
Marc Salvisberg
Registered
Hi JC -
>due to I own a Turbo Busa I learned how to use a Dyno correctly.
What other dyne systems are you experienced in using for tuning?
> and if you do not load a motor you will never have proper A/F readings
Why is that? Why does motor loading affect the a/f ratio?
You didn't answer the question about the 16:1 - 17:1 a/f ratio -
Did that a/f ratio lean "hole" correspond to a huge power drop "hole"?
> I did not only use a pull for the test I also use heavy and light loads.
<u>What was the difference in power in:
inertia power?
heavy load power?
light load power?</u>
We can measure power under:
Steady state at any rpm and TH position (uncontaminated gas samples - 4 Gas (CO%, HC, CO2, O2% AND 3-5 sec snapsots of the power there)
Inertia only (sort of useless loading)
Controlled Acc. rate between 5fps/s (WAY too long test), 20 fps/s (common acc rate for stock geared bikes) and 35 fps/s
Controlling the Acc Rate allows:
The tuner to measure the power under real world anticipated loads - We could duplicate the road load and wind resistance loading that occurs at the end of the 1/4 mile, for instance.
An 8 sec inertia Sweep doesn't - so the best power in an 8 second Sweep doesn't mean best power at the end of the the 1/4.
Was the inertia HP lower than the heavy load hp - or was the light load hp better or worse HP?
>Also I used something to verify my results that some shops don't .......it is called a track where MPH = HP
<u>Good!
Now - is a 13.1:1 af ratio best? That's what the AMA dj guys tune to.
Is it best for a turbo? A low compression engine? A high compression engine?</u>
I watched them set Team Suzuki pc to 13.3:1 and the Suz 750 gained 1.5 djhp over 13.1:1 - They weren't concerned.
They put it back to 13.1:1 af and lost the 1.5 djhp - Because "that's the right a/f ratio...."
Sigh...... ( I guess that's OK - we weren't helping them!)
Would it not be a fair assumption that if the engine made more power, it WAS a more correct a/f ratio?
Why all the yack yack about tuning to an "a/f ratios" being the unerversal solution to tuning if best power was obtained with some other fuel value?
I went through this list and picked out quite a few complaints about pc's (I don't know who did the bikes) that were "custom" mapped and were too rich at part throttle. Maybe yours aren't, but the whole concept of using an o2 sensor and setting to a "magic" a/f ratio is pretty simplistic and when actually put to the test, will only get you close at any particular rpm and throttle position and further testing at those rpms will actually get the correct a/f ratio and ignition timing.
So - what's the point of yacking about "optimal a/f ratios" when they aren't the end result? (a $2000 dynojet training course in the desrt of Arizona?)
So, in the upper levels of tuning - it always ends up "get it close" with some exhaust gas reading- then tweak at each spot to make best power.
That's how we did Corona Suzuki's bikes and we were rider's choice and laptime winner every time.
Major fun one?
An 8 mph top speed improvement over "best dynojet dyno" settings on gsxr1000......
Same with 250 GP bikes - We did the tuning for 9 of 10 top USA bikes by the end of last year. Yamaha's, Honda's and factory Aprilia's.
What worked best on our dyne systems also worked best on the track.
Period.
It wasn't me who did all the tuning - I trained 2 people to do the testing at AMA races (and that's certainly NOT a controlled environment!).
What was the total training?
Test it like it's a customer's bike at our little retail shop in San Rafael.
We had to undo the dynojet tuning done at the #1 rider's sponsor - according to the dj dyno they have - the bike wanted tons of ignition advance - but, the track showed that was wrong.
Just another example of optimal under dj loading and not optimal in real world.
Of course - when they brought that bike back and retested it on their local "offical dynojet "tuning" center" 250 - it was down in power....
Oh! Paul W. at Marrietta.... Same deal - Tried to use dj 250 and tune to a/f ratio and tune ignition timing.....
Took a very quick bike and tuned it backwards... Misery until he was told by someone else that you can't tune a 2 stroke on a dj and to put it back to close to the original tuning.\
Power was back and he just went to the track and changed jets till the bike made best power (as we would have done).
So - the gist is -
You should wonder why the test results were so much different on the different dynos when tested under different load conditions and goals from the testing that you did.
And the examples I brought up were just to give a little more food for thought -
<u>Question:
What effect does advanced or retarded ignition timing have on residual o2 (and hence apparent a/f ratio) in the exhaust?</u>
>his HP was low compared to all the Busas I have done.
As we all know, there is a range of hp that a particular model will put out. Some are really good and some are not so good.
I find that the Busa's are generally pretty stable at 135 to 138 TRUE HP when stock and 142 to 144 is pretty good for a race slipon.
http://www.factorypro.com/dyno/true1.html
Take the zx12, though - and I get a 10 TRUE HP range - from slightly better than the Busa HP range to a lot worse (hence the zx12/Busa who's stronger internet blather).
I heard 145.3 TRUE HP and that was very good for the mods done.
>PS. Marc I understand what you are saying but their fuel map that they made was leaner everywhere than the stock ECM EXCEPT at Idle.
Could it be that the bike ran properly and tuned nicely and lord almighty - that an o2 sensor said it was wrong - but it ran right?
Dynojet heresy?
>It could be that the "approved" shop need some lessons on tuning.
Now THAT should make you wonder, rather than accuse and assume that there aren't complaints (with or without merit) about your work by others about how perfect your test equipment and procedures are.
As it is - all you did was scare some poor rider who doesn't know any better and maybe will make $200 to tune it so that his "a/f ratio" is "right".....
If you acted a bit more open minded, you would be wondering as to how they got better power with whatever settings they arrived at and also wonder what in your testing, makes their settings so wrong from your optimimum testing procedures.
An open mind is a terrible thing to waste.
I didn't start designing dynos and test routines until we ran into constant dj dyno vs. real world quandaries - What worked best on the dyno def. didn't work best on track -
1990 - Road Atlanta WERA Final - all top 5 used the same carb kit - not dynojet - even though, on the dj dyno, with their loading, their kit worked best - it comparatively paled on the track.
Starting the concept that "what works best on an inertia dyno doesn't necessarily work best in the real world".
Hence the question that you didn't answer - What does an 8 second sweep test for power have to do with conditions in the real world?
>And yes my offer still stand anyone who has a TEKA and wants me to map with it I will do it with your TEKA for FREE. I still want to see if it really works.
When you can do power testing at a single rpm point in 3-5 seconds so you don't overheat the engine I suppose that you'll have the equipment required to do a meaningful test -
Otherwise, you'll just get frustrated and not be able to tune it and loudly proclaim the the TEKA (regardless of the teams who use it (#1 Endurance and Sprint WERA Vesrah Racing, #2 Robert Jenson, etc...) "doesn't work".
<u>Hey!
Why didn't you just sell the guy a pc and map over the TEKA settings so that the owner could just unplug the pc and compare. There's no physical reason why that can't be done.</u>
But even dj guys at AMA races stopped tuning pc's if they knew that the rider would also have us do a map, too......
I'm not saying that the dj dynos are not a good piece of equipment, it's just that dynojet's insistance to tuning to an a/f ratio and their lack of ability to controll acceleration rate when testing power in a sweep def. skews dyno optimum as referemced to real world optimum.
Open mind, good, flexible equipment and knowing that there's always more to learn about tuning out there - life is good when you go for it!
The tools for success.
Cheers!
Marc
<!--EDIT|Marc Salvisberg
Reason for Edit: None given...|1075674932 -->
>due to I own a Turbo Busa I learned how to use a Dyno correctly.
What other dyne systems are you experienced in using for tuning?
> and if you do not load a motor you will never have proper A/F readings
Why is that? Why does motor loading affect the a/f ratio?
You didn't answer the question about the 16:1 - 17:1 a/f ratio -
Did that a/f ratio lean "hole" correspond to a huge power drop "hole"?
> I did not only use a pull for the test I also use heavy and light loads.
<u>What was the difference in power in:
inertia power?
heavy load power?
light load power?</u>
We can measure power under:
Steady state at any rpm and TH position (uncontaminated gas samples - 4 Gas (CO%, HC, CO2, O2% AND 3-5 sec snapsots of the power there)
Inertia only (sort of useless loading)
Controlled Acc. rate between 5fps/s (WAY too long test), 20 fps/s (common acc rate for stock geared bikes) and 35 fps/s
Controlling the Acc Rate allows:
The tuner to measure the power under real world anticipated loads - We could duplicate the road load and wind resistance loading that occurs at the end of the 1/4 mile, for instance.
An 8 sec inertia Sweep doesn't - so the best power in an 8 second Sweep doesn't mean best power at the end of the the 1/4.
Was the inertia HP lower than the heavy load hp - or was the light load hp better or worse HP?
>Also I used something to verify my results that some shops don't .......it is called a track where MPH = HP
<u>Good!
Now - is a 13.1:1 af ratio best? That's what the AMA dj guys tune to.
Is it best for a turbo? A low compression engine? A high compression engine?</u>
I watched them set Team Suzuki pc to 13.3:1 and the Suz 750 gained 1.5 djhp over 13.1:1 - They weren't concerned.
They put it back to 13.1:1 af and lost the 1.5 djhp - Because "that's the right a/f ratio...."
Sigh...... ( I guess that's OK - we weren't helping them!)
Would it not be a fair assumption that if the engine made more power, it WAS a more correct a/f ratio?
Why all the yack yack about tuning to an "a/f ratios" being the unerversal solution to tuning if best power was obtained with some other fuel value?
I went through this list and picked out quite a few complaints about pc's (I don't know who did the bikes) that were "custom" mapped and were too rich at part throttle. Maybe yours aren't, but the whole concept of using an o2 sensor and setting to a "magic" a/f ratio is pretty simplistic and when actually put to the test, will only get you close at any particular rpm and throttle position and further testing at those rpms will actually get the correct a/f ratio and ignition timing.
So - what's the point of yacking about "optimal a/f ratios" when they aren't the end result? (a $2000 dynojet training course in the desrt of Arizona?)
So, in the upper levels of tuning - it always ends up "get it close" with some exhaust gas reading- then tweak at each spot to make best power.
That's how we did Corona Suzuki's bikes and we were rider's choice and laptime winner every time.
Major fun one?
An 8 mph top speed improvement over "best dynojet dyno" settings on gsxr1000......
Same with 250 GP bikes - We did the tuning for 9 of 10 top USA bikes by the end of last year. Yamaha's, Honda's and factory Aprilia's.
What worked best on our dyne systems also worked best on the track.
Period.
It wasn't me who did all the tuning - I trained 2 people to do the testing at AMA races (and that's certainly NOT a controlled environment!).
What was the total training?
Test it like it's a customer's bike at our little retail shop in San Rafael.
We had to undo the dynojet tuning done at the #1 rider's sponsor - according to the dj dyno they have - the bike wanted tons of ignition advance - but, the track showed that was wrong.
Just another example of optimal under dj loading and not optimal in real world.
Of course - when they brought that bike back and retested it on their local "offical dynojet "tuning" center" 250 - it was down in power....
Oh! Paul W. at Marrietta.... Same deal - Tried to use dj 250 and tune to a/f ratio and tune ignition timing.....
Took a very quick bike and tuned it backwards... Misery until he was told by someone else that you can't tune a 2 stroke on a dj and to put it back to close to the original tuning.\
Power was back and he just went to the track and changed jets till the bike made best power (as we would have done).
So - the gist is -
You should wonder why the test results were so much different on the different dynos when tested under different load conditions and goals from the testing that you did.
And the examples I brought up were just to give a little more food for thought -
<u>Question:
What effect does advanced or retarded ignition timing have on residual o2 (and hence apparent a/f ratio) in the exhaust?</u>
>his HP was low compared to all the Busas I have done.
As we all know, there is a range of hp that a particular model will put out. Some are really good and some are not so good.
I find that the Busa's are generally pretty stable at 135 to 138 TRUE HP when stock and 142 to 144 is pretty good for a race slipon.
http://www.factorypro.com/dyno/true1.html
Take the zx12, though - and I get a 10 TRUE HP range - from slightly better than the Busa HP range to a lot worse (hence the zx12/Busa who's stronger internet blather).
I heard 145.3 TRUE HP and that was very good for the mods done.
>PS. Marc I understand what you are saying but their fuel map that they made was leaner everywhere than the stock ECM EXCEPT at Idle.
Could it be that the bike ran properly and tuned nicely and lord almighty - that an o2 sensor said it was wrong - but it ran right?
Dynojet heresy?
>It could be that the "approved" shop need some lessons on tuning.
Now THAT should make you wonder, rather than accuse and assume that there aren't complaints (with or without merit) about your work by others about how perfect your test equipment and procedures are.
As it is - all you did was scare some poor rider who doesn't know any better and maybe will make $200 to tune it so that his "a/f ratio" is "right".....
If you acted a bit more open minded, you would be wondering as to how they got better power with whatever settings they arrived at and also wonder what in your testing, makes their settings so wrong from your optimimum testing procedures.
An open mind is a terrible thing to waste.
I didn't start designing dynos and test routines until we ran into constant dj dyno vs. real world quandaries - What worked best on the dyno def. didn't work best on track -
1990 - Road Atlanta WERA Final - all top 5 used the same carb kit - not dynojet - even though, on the dj dyno, with their loading, their kit worked best - it comparatively paled on the track.
Starting the concept that "what works best on an inertia dyno doesn't necessarily work best in the real world".
Hence the question that you didn't answer - What does an 8 second sweep test for power have to do with conditions in the real world?
>And yes my offer still stand anyone who has a TEKA and wants me to map with it I will do it with your TEKA for FREE. I still want to see if it really works.
When you can do power testing at a single rpm point in 3-5 seconds so you don't overheat the engine I suppose that you'll have the equipment required to do a meaningful test -
Otherwise, you'll just get frustrated and not be able to tune it and loudly proclaim the the TEKA (regardless of the teams who use it (#1 Endurance and Sprint WERA Vesrah Racing, #2 Robert Jenson, etc...) "doesn't work".
<u>Hey!
Why didn't you just sell the guy a pc and map over the TEKA settings so that the owner could just unplug the pc and compare. There's no physical reason why that can't be done.</u>
But even dj guys at AMA races stopped tuning pc's if they knew that the rider would also have us do a map, too......
I'm not saying that the dj dynos are not a good piece of equipment, it's just that dynojet's insistance to tuning to an a/f ratio and their lack of ability to controll acceleration rate when testing power in a sweep def. skews dyno optimum as referemced to real world optimum.
Open mind, good, flexible equipment and knowing that there's always more to learn about tuning out there - life is good when you go for it!
The tools for success.
Cheers!
Marc
<!--EDIT|Marc Salvisberg
Reason for Edit: None given...|1075674932 -->
Hey Marc,
If your so sure your TEKA is so superior - why don't you lend/send one to Johnny and let him check it out and tune a bike with one.
If you convert him the whole board will know and be impressed and it will put the issue to rest! All the typing your doing is just that - typing. Put one out there and lets see what happens!
Go For It
Kent
If your so sure your TEKA is so superior - why don't you lend/send one to Johnny and let him check it out and tune a bike with one.
If you convert him the whole board will know and be impressed and it will put the issue to rest! All the typing your doing is just that - typing. Put one out there and lets see what happens!
Go For It
Kent
Marc Salvisberg
Registered
Hi Kent -
<If your so sure your TEKA is so superior - why don't you lend/send one to Johnny and let him check it out and tune a bike with one.>
Ha!!
Was there some religious ferver that escaped MY fingers???
I'm not part of a TEKA or PC religion and will never be that close minded as to excluding the best solutions for each problem for customers.
If you wanted a technical discussion of the pro's and cons of each device, that's a whole different subject that will probably glaze over the eyes of 99% of the people who trudged through the post.
Go read my previous post again.
I never said anything about the functional or conceptual issues of either of the devices being better or worse than the other.
JC did.
If you read the post and didn't get lost in the technical stuff, I pretty much talked about, being open minded and always being curious about why dyno test results are so much different.
I gave a bunch of verifiable examples.
It's not just talk.
If you are motivated, give me a call at work and I'll get some numbers for you to call. I can supply you with telephone numbers and you can call the people and ask them about it - otherwise - you can just point out that "it's just talk" in an internet post and that you could have checked, but wouldn't and let that be your only point.
Whether a pc is better or worse might depend on what you have - As is choice of dynos.
Flexibility is the key. Awareness is the byword.
Hey!
You are only 45 minutes away from here - Why don't you come over and I'll test your bike. Better yet - I won't tell them, but, why don't you call the shop (415) 472-4962 and have them schedule an appointment.
You can have your choice - Teka, PC tuned to best power or what you have now.
Maybe we could even blueprint your injectors at our other location.
You won't know what map or ?? is installed when you ride it.
No charge.
I get $775 to custom tune devices with full control over fuel and ignition on each cylinder - $400 to do fuel and ignition on a pc or other device and $275 to do TEKA.
I'd probably do the TEKA first and then retune the PC over it and also, you'll have the map that you have now.
You can stay there and watch.
If I win - I want a testimonial letter..........
...................
As far as your offer to have JC test a TEKA -
Giving someone with a vested interest in selling power commanders (justification for tuning to an a/f ratio in an 8 sec sweep test, rather than best power under load), who already has indicated that he is sure that the pc is the answer to all tuning is kinda silly?
Aside from that - JC can't isolate and tune for best power every 500 rpm.... So that's a little limiting, even being open minded.
Yes?
So - When will we see you?
Cheers!
Marc
800 869-0497
Wow! OK. Most all of that was way over my head. Both Johnny and Marc have a far better grasp on this tuning technology than I do. Heck, they probably know more than most all of us. Which can certainly make both of them a great resource to have around. I hope they both continue offering tuning advice.
But I'd hate to see some sort of flame war get started between the two of them. Especially if what set it off was a misunderstanding of tone and not genuine animosity. I'll admit to having a less than full understanding of the technical points Johnny and Marc were making. But it did seem to me that they have indicated that (if properly set-up and tested) both methods of tuning can work and work well.
<!--EDIT|FLCN72
Reason for Edit: None given...|1075698369 -->
But I'd hate to see some sort of flame war get started between the two of them. Especially if what set it off was a misunderstanding of tone and not genuine animosity. I'll admit to having a less than full understanding of the technical points Johnny and Marc were making. But it did seem to me that they have indicated that (if properly set-up and tested) both methods of tuning can work and work well.
<!--EDIT|FLCN72
Reason for Edit: None given...|1075698369 -->
SLEEPERBUSA
Registered
My attention span is way to short , to read all of that!
Well...I managed to read it all...Just wish I understood it. Something called a TEKA.... Wait, Whats a TRE again?
Interesting though...I think I might accidentally learn something...
<!--EDIT|Revlis
Reason for Edit: None given...|1075726071 -->
Interesting though...I think I might accidentally learn something...
<!--EDIT|Revlis
Reason for Edit: None given...|1075726071 -->
Johnnycheese
Registered
Marc I understand it fully.
and yes it was down on HP at those RPM's I checked.
I only brought up the center due to I had to call almost all my customers that I had done at first and remap their bikes due to I have found better ways to tune ie..loading the bike more as for real world conditions.
The reason I wanted someone to let me try the TEKA it is a neat idea just like the yosh box was and still is for certain applications.
not for a marketing tool. if it works then it works.
Just like a TFI unit works and for some applications it is what you might need but if you have a rich condition it is not what you need.
I am not close minded I saw your post and saw the customers face just hours before.
This is why I posted and I like the info you link to
and yes it was down on HP at those RPM's I checked.
I only brought up the center due to I had to call almost all my customers that I had done at first and remap their bikes due to I have found better ways to tune ie..loading the bike more as for real world conditions.
The reason I wanted someone to let me try the TEKA it is a neat idea just like the yosh box was and still is for certain applications.
not for a marketing tool. if it works then it works.
Just like a TFI unit works and for some applications it is what you might need but if you have a rich condition it is not what you need.
I am not close minded I saw your post and saw the customers face just hours before.
This is why I posted and I like the info you link to
Marc Salvisberg
"Open mind, good, flexible equipment and knowing that there's always more to learn about tuning out there - life is good when you go for it!"
Excellent comment Marc, that everyone is always interested in. Nover a matter of not being open minded. Things that add to and open mind, is the cost per HP ration and for sure safty of an engine for an AVERAGE RIDER, especially on a turbo. I have seen to many Turbos go lean and melt including mine years ago. So I am always interested in what you can get out of an engine, but also what will work with out a lot of trouble an monitor the engine with out being on the very edge everytimne the bike is started.
As Johhny said he and most here will keep an open mind also, only good can come out of discussion, and it looks like some already has. I hope you guys have further discussions and learn a little about each other. Putting together ideas from many open minds is fantastic.
Glad to see the discussion.
Thanks
Ninja Eater.
"Open mind, good, flexible equipment and knowing that there's always more to learn about tuning out there - life is good when you go for it!"
Excellent comment Marc, that everyone is always interested in. Nover a matter of not being open minded. Things that add to and open mind, is the cost per HP ration and for sure safty of an engine for an AVERAGE RIDER, especially on a turbo. I have seen to many Turbos go lean and melt including mine years ago. So I am always interested in what you can get out of an engine, but also what will work with out a lot of trouble an monitor the engine with out being on the very edge everytimne the bike is started.
As Johhny said he and most here will keep an open mind also, only good can come out of discussion, and it looks like some already has. I hope you guys have further discussions and learn a little about each other. Putting together ideas from many open minds is fantastic.
Glad to see the discussion.
Thanks
Ninja Eater.
I'm slowly learning the physics and technicals behind fine tuning. That's the reason I decided to buy the PC. Knowing that I will never be able to tune a bike myself, it just brings a tear to my eye when I read over material like this. With all that being said, I would like to personally thank Johnnycheese and Marc S. for all that valuable insight. "YOU GO BOYS!!..."
Brian
Brian
I got a killer deal from a friend that owns his own speed shop. I also had him put them in along with the yoshi race pipe and the yoshi ems-box and a few accessories that go along with the ems. I would try a local bike shop first then do a search on google to find the best price.
The Oracle
Registered
what the??
Similar threads
