Any feed back !!!

 

I'm not very good at reading dyno charts but it looks like those who were saying the stacks would make your bike run rich were wrong. With just the velocity stacks and no other changes your engine appears to running slightly leaner. Are you able to get a torque graph or a comparison the 2006 runs to now on one graph?

 

Well, after 28 runs on the dyno with tuning the carbs in between to get that resulting graph, I'd say the proof either way is about as inconclusive as you can likely get it... Lemme se the one's in between and I'll ceede the argument...

Nicely smoothed out graph though... The classic K&N dip is almost gone, so that means you have a few hp available at the top untapped, as that's the compromise for the K&N... I'd be happy with that setup if I where you...

 

i hope thats not the final run. looks like the needle needs adjusted.
tim

 

Ya I got the torque one just been getting some stuff done and this is the first time that I seen anyone left anything on this. the reason for all the work was bushings worn in the carb so the tech said have not looked at them yet as the gf got a used car and I have to make it safe before her dad gets the van this weekend. thought it was nice that she wanted to give it to him. nice to see her give and not take if you know what I mean maybe there is hope in the word after all.

 

Dont have a lot of time so here they are quick will talk more in a few days ok one is the addition of the ignition advance the other two are the addition the the stacks

 

Just wondering what your thoughts are on this.

 

I guess I am a bit dense - I am really interested, as I have stacks and a +4 advancer too, but I am not used to looking at dyno slips and I am having a hard time distinguishing the changes from one sheet to another.
Above you said one is the addition of the advancer but both of the second two attachments mention the advancer, the second showing both advancer and intake. What are each of these compared to? stock advancer and stock intake?
I really don't get the third - why did the additiion of a +4 advancer cause such a torque dip at 4K rpm? Why is there no dip on the stock set up on this one yet there is on the 2nd attachment?
What I really want to know is how do i get that 4K rpm torque bump that is indicated in the 2nd attachment? Seems like there is something else going on...

 

post #36 charts are useless to us as far as the stacks go. pic#1 is the current dyno run but has huge jetting issues, pic #2 / #3 are from too long ago.


one of these days i may get to the dyno shop but for now i put in new plugs and did a 500 mile weekend ride... i'll pull the plugs today to get an idea on the a/f.

tim

 

So your bike is tuned with the VS's to give higher than stock torque and HP below around 6000 rpm and less than stock above? What is the ideal air fuel mixture for these engines? It almost looks like with the velocity stacks, jetting changes, or combination you have detuned your engine to produce more low and midrange power at the expense of top end (not necessarily a bad thing...but certainly unusual compared to most performance parts)

Tweety I was referring to the first dyno charts which show two runs with the carbs set up the same way where the only change was the addition of the VSs. I guess we would need another chart with the original jetting with stock and dr honda velocity stacks to be sure on this particular bike.

 

reading the plugs... it looks like mine is running a little rich in the front & just about perfect in the rear. i will adjust the needle 1 clip position up front and see how that works out, hate pulling carbs in the summer.

tim

 

Okay, I'm bringing this one back to life because I'm actually on land (!) and the weather is getting slightly better. I'm going to install the stacks and would like to know actual carb settings that you guys are using. FWIW, I've got a K&N, Jardines, and +4 advancer. Really what I'm looking for is before/after settings to see what changed and by what degree.

Good to be back with you guys. I'm scheduled to leave again soon but I'm going to make the most of this time I have.

 

Well I stated my findings and opinions in this thread:
https://www.superhawkforum.com/forum...light=carb+set

Oh and good to have you back

 

Yeah, I read your thread. Great info but not really what I'm looking for. I was hoping for something like, "+1 on mains, drop one notch on the needles and you'll be good to go"!

Heh, I might just have to experiment with these on my own?

Oh, and thanks. Glad to be back for a while. With the **** in Libya who knows how long I'll be here.

Oh, forgot to mention I'm using the Factory Pro 1.1 Ti kit as well.

 

Well the HRC slide mod was made for those type of stacks and that was the part I was referring to. I have not used it with the factory pro kit but it "should" work with that kit also.

Just wish we had all this info back in the "Sports-Twin" list days

 

Yeah, I know. Heh, back then we had that module that you'd plug into the harness, I think in place of the TPS. What was it called? Turned out it did absolutely nothing but that was a hot topic for quite some time!

 

You mean the infamous "Grunt Master".......lol

At least we don't have to deal with Winders anymore.....

 

Ha! Yeah, the Gruntmaster. Ah, Winders. You know, in a strange sort of way, I kinda miss him...

 

Well, I installed the stacks today. No jetting changes at all. I think I was running a tad rich beforehand. My impressions....

I likey!!! Nice strong, consistent pull throughout the rev range. Midrange is beefed up a little. Not a lot of change on top end. Wheelies are different - quicker, a little more unpredictable than what I'm used to. Must get used to the newly found torque!

Discovered the foam in the rubber snorkel had mostly disintegrated after 13 years, with some in the filter. I scraped it all out and replaced with similar foam, double sticky, insulating type. Probably made no difference at all.