valve adjustment and throttle body sinc @ ZX10R ZONE.com

HOME

ARTICLES

JOIN

BIKELAND > FORUMS > ZX10R ZONE.com > Thread: valve adjustment and throttle body sinc

NEW TOPIC NEW POLL POST REPLY

supra5677

Pro
Posts: 1279

posted November 16, 2005 12:28 PM

valve adjustment and throttle body sinc

How much horsepower can I get from a valve adjustment and a throttle body sinc..?

Does anybody know.. I read some posting and the guy said 12 horsepower..
supra5677

trenace

Needs a job
Posts: 3056

posted November 16, 2005 03:12 PM

Edited By: trenace on 16 Nov 2005 15:44

If not wrong to start with, then 0.

I don't have example dyno figures, but it's hard for me to believe that even when valve adjustment is needed (assuming not horribly needed) the difference is going to be anything but subtle. If anything loosening it up, as it's more likely to need, could reduce top end power a touch.

I don't know if the TB's not being synced results in any of them failing to fully open... interesting question, but even if so hard to believe it could be anything but subtle for hp.

12 hp sounds completely out of the question except for an engine WAY in need of service.

c7assassin

Parking Attendant
Posts: 6

posted November 16, 2005 03:37 PM

About the only thing u'll notice (if its out of spec) is better throttle response and generally a smoother running bike.

trenace

Needs a job
Posts: 3056

posted November 16, 2005 03:53 PM

Oddly enough, btw, it's reported in today's issue of MCN that the Yamaha MotoGP bike's motor works with much of the time absolutely totally unsynchronized TB's (well, at least not synchronized between the different pairs.)

Rossi's hand directly controls one pair of throttles.

The computer directly controls the other.

Much of the time, the computer is either giving "its" pair of cylinders less throttle for the sake of traction control, or is giving "its" pair more throttle for the sake of limiting engine braking or blipping for downshifts, and maybe other reasons (perhaps filling in a momentary known dip in the power curve as one possibility.)

I also had thought before this that there could be a lot to such an approach instead of (rather than, in the M1's case, in addition to) the "big bang" approach. I mean, really why have a major if any part of the 720° rotation that actually is suffering engine BRAKING? How does that help the rear wheel's traction, to be rapidly alternating between driving and braking forces? Maybe having a relief from peak driving force to no or little driving force could be a good thing, but actually having a major number of degrees where one cylinder is having to be compressed but none anywhere are delivering power, doesn't seem optimal.

And usually when fully leaned over full power can't be taken anyway.

So why not just limit throttle to one or two cylinders, so there are strong pulses within the 720° cycle and weaker ones, but never any actual reversals?

That also, I suppose, may be part of what the M1 system does -- the computer could generally reduce throttle openings to "its" pair of cylinders when lean angle is high, the moreso the more the lean angle -- but if so and for that reason, the MCN article didn't discuss.

All this of course has nothing to do with supra5677's exact question but is interesting stuff related to the general matter.

Big Daddy