KZScott
Needs a life
high on speed
Posts: 7235
|
posted May 17, 2010 05:53 PM
i think its for this, and all the other theory threads that had no real world testing. this is the guy that thought a zx14 crank would fit zx12r cases because "the motors are so similar"
supra, i think its great that you are thinking outside the box, but you are trying to come up with tiny little things that make hardly any change if at all when there are countless proven things to do to get better performance. hp isnt everything either
____________
01 ZX-12R 8.84 @ 156.3 no bars, DOT tires. Pump Gas, NA.... turbo 8.47 @ 164.
00 ZX-12R 8.62 @ 165.2 no bars, slicks, Pump Gas, 55 shot.... turbo 8.32 @173
00 ZX-12R Fastest NA Kawasaki in the world 1: 222.046 1.5: 226.390 Loring AFB
00 ZX-12R street turbo 1: 227.9 1.5: 234.1 Loring AFB
00 ZX-12R LSR turbo 1: 263.1 1.5: 266.5 Loring AFB Worlds fastest ZX-12R
CMG Racing RCC Turbos
  
|
2000redrocket
Pro
Posts: 1662
|
posted May 17, 2010 05:58 PM
he needs to learn and he is well on his way to trying things and find out if it was a good thing or not. but the bashing is not needed.
|
supra5677
Pro
Posts: 1279
|
posted May 18, 2010 07:08 AM
Shane are you following the thread? Doug Meyer was talking about the horsepower increase needed for 4 additional mph. Its about 11-12 horsepower. I'm not following why folks are getting mad....
|
Shane661
Needs a life
Posts: 11494
|
posted May 18, 2010 07:15 AM
I'm following the thread. But I don't see why you are fixated on the 11 hp #. The air filter design is not what is holding the bike back. Look at what happens when you change just the exhaust. Like I say, Karl's bike can move enough air to make 235 hp in that box.
I guess it is just mind boggling that you hacked up your frame without a way to test the affect on performance. You have an inquisitive mind, which is good...but you need to do less theorizing, and more actual measuring of data.
If you want a good, inexpensive logger look at the Innovate line of products. A lot of us are using them.
Shane
|
supra5677
Pro
Posts: 1279
|
posted May 18, 2010 08:37 AM
I'm on the logger. In the process of ordering it. As far as hacking up my frame.. to each his own..
|
Phantom13
Zone Head
Posts: 736
|
posted May 18, 2010 06:10 PM
 Edited By: Phantom13 on 19 May 2010 02:18
Oh man, I didn't mean that YOU were retarded. It was the idea that I thought was illogical.. aka "retarded". No biggie, we all get half baked ideas.... but it's best to think it out completely from every angle before you take a dremel to anything that can't be bolted on and replaced with a new one if it doesn't work.
Supra, don't get so fixated on the HP numbers, instead think in REAL WORLD terms. Such as, "Every 1 degree ignition advance/retard is worth "X" amount of speed change (+/-) depending on whether or not it was in was the right direction towards the optimum setting, aka "Sweet Spot".
Same with A/F ratio's....
Do real world testing with back to back runs using the scientific method and review the datalog sessions. You'll see exactly how every little tweek alters performance.
Then you'll stop thinking strictly in terms of HP per MPH. HP is measured on a DYNO and the dyno lies. Gains on the dyno don't always equate to gains in the real world and quite often result in a performance loss. Therefore, going by a HP-to-MPH conversion is not always accurate. This is the point Shane is trying to convey.
Supra, you really want to dig deep into the ZX12R and try to redesign and optimize the bike. Start logging and getting real data in order to measure performance changes.
Otherwise, how do you REALLY know anything? For all you know, it runs worse than a showroom stock ZX-12R right now after all those mods you've done. There's no way you can tell for sure, and the "butt dyno" on the street is heavily influenced by your expectations 9 out of 10 times.
Good luck with the search for speed!
My apologies if you felt insulted by my previous post. Innocent miscommunication due to a poor word choice on my behalf, I assure you.
____________
"The only place Success comes
before Work is inside the Dictionary."
|
Ken 12r
Novice Class
Posts: 86
|
posted May 19, 2010 12:06 PM
To use any "extra" air you need a corresponding amount of fuel and the A model set up is prety much maxed out around 200 bhp.The later B model has a more powerful fuel pump and the last of the B models fitted with the twin butterflies like the ZZR1400 has bigger injectors and throttle bodies.
If you fitted all of the above and the other normal mods like 4 in to 1 and air filters then mapped the bike to suit,firstly on a dyno then in the real world you would find the 11bhp you are looking for or get fairly close but there is no way you will get any more unless you go into the motor.
If you do plan on going into the motor it would be sensible to do all of the above first to give you a better platform to start from.
____________
www.uklandspeedracingassociation.co.uk
|
sohel
Parking Attendant
Posts: 16
|
posted May 19, 2010 12:23 PM
Edited By: sohel on 19 May 2010 20:43
It could be that the center piece was put in there so that all 4 cylinders would get the same amount of air. In fluid dynamics, the center of the cross section of the fluid flow (in this case Air) would have the highest velocity and as you move away from the center, velocity of fluid decreases. So maybe without the center piece, the middle cylinders would have got more air than #1 and 4.
with the center piece, the air flow kind of divides into 2 flows with 2 identical maximum velocities , and further each divides into to two going to each stack.
without the center piece, # 1 and 4 might be too far from the center of the air flow and get less air than the 2 in the middle. cause now you only have 1 flow and the max velocity of that flow is pointing at the middle of #2 and 3 stacks
just a theory
|
gsxrassassin
Expert Class
Posts: 225
|
posted May 20, 2010 01:18 PM
God I hope there's a better reason for the center piece between the filters than dulling power. Could you imagine if the reason really was to cut performance? Wow!!
I doubt that's the reason for the center piece but I would be mega-disappointed in Kawasaki's engineering group if it turned out that's exactly why they did it.
GSXR
____________
Over the hump, back up and running again!!
|
deathpulse
Pro
Posts: 1688
|
posted May 21, 2010 06:26 PM
What are the results of testing? I wish a Kawi engineer would come clean already -its been 10 years for f#$ sake.
|
dougmeyer
Needs a job
moderated
Posts: 2713
|
posted May 23, 2010 01:05 PM
Edited By: dougmeyer on 24 May 2010 03:45
All very interesting, but I think pretty far off the mark. I would be VERY surprised to learn that the design of the airbox portion of the frame was due to anything other than torsional stiffness requirements. I'll remind y'all that the ZX-12 utilizes a monocoque frame design. Monocoque ("one box" or "one shell") is a design where the loads of the structure are carried by the skin itself without internal bracing between the surfaces.
From a pure frame design standpoint, without air filters or inlet stack installation clouding the issue, there probably did not need to be ANY vertical members in the frame box. But, when the needs of the practicality of having air filters and serviceability needed to be considered, they had to cut a hole in the top surface of the frame. That surface is critical to the stiffness of the overall structure, so after cutting the two access holes in the top and the slot for the filter(s), I would expect that the stiffness was considerably changed. My guess is that the vertical member in the filter housing contributes to restoring the necessary frame stiffness for proper handling. This would have been determined first from FEA (Finite Element Analysis) and maybe even from test rider input. I think there are some FEA pictures of the frame in The Silver Book.
I realize that's not as much fun as exploring some conspiracy to slow the ZX-12 for a mysterious agenda of political correctness, but I'm going with frame stiffness.
Doug
____________
It's not that I think you're dumb, it's just that so much of what you know isn't true....
|
Ken 12r
Novice Class
Posts: 86
|
posted May 25, 2010 06:40 AM
Someone over here put a saw cut through the top of a Zx12 frame thinking of fitting an intercooler in there but they neglected to remove the motor first.
The frame buckled under the load which just confirms what Doug Meyer has to say above about "structural integrity"
I am glad is was not mine,dont try this at home folks.
____________
www.uklandspeedracingassociation.co.uk
|
KZScott
Needs a life
high on speed
Posts: 7235
|
posted May 25, 2010 01:27 PM
quote:
Someone over here put a saw cut through the top of a Zx12 frame thinking of fitting an intercooler in there but they neglected to remove the motor first.
The frame buckled under the load which just confirms what Doug Meyer has to say above about "structural integrity"
I am glad is was not mine,dont try this at home folks.
good to know..... i have plans for liquid to air in a couple yrs
____________
01 ZX-12R 8.84 @ 156.3 no bars, DOT tires. Pump Gas, NA.... turbo 8.47 @ 164.
00 ZX-12R 8.62 @ 165.2 no bars, slicks, Pump Gas, 55 shot.... turbo 8.32 @173
00 ZX-12R Fastest NA Kawasaki in the world 1: 222.046 1.5: 226.390 Loring AFB
00 ZX-12R street turbo 1: 227.9 1.5: 234.1 Loring AFB
00 ZX-12R LSR turbo 1: 263.1 1.5: 266.5 Loring AFB Worlds fastest ZX-12R
CMG Racing RCC Turbos
|
|
|
HOME
NEW TOPIC