posted September 09, 2006 04:51 PM
Dynoed today. After installing the Brock Gen 3, my bike was running REALLY RICH down low.
Final # was 173, 101tq. Yes, they are low, but I'm also about 4000ft, 87 degrees, very high humidity. I don't know what kind of Dynojet it was, and I'm not sure if the #'s are SAE or whatever. I don't even have a copy of the graph. I did check out the curve...it has a beautiful steep slope. Smooth all the way thru. I don't know shit about dynos, when he sends me the map and info on monday, I'll post it up.
Mods:
Brock Gen3
PCUSB
5-30? Mobil Full Synthetic
Flies removed
posted September 09, 2006 05:16 PM
Edited By: lietoome on 9 Sep 2006 18:18
Looks good SWFT. Best part of the day was finally getting to meet Hells Dark Lord(Jim)...one helluva nice guy.
posted September 09, 2006 05:39 PM
Cool! Bet she pulls like hell now! Do you have any popping on decel and did you block off the hose yet? Dyno numbers look really nice! I take it the red lines are the before mapping numbers?
____________
FYYFF!!!
posted September 09, 2006 05:52 PM
Yes, very rich. I was affraid to smoke in my garage last night. It was even a bit high in the mid. Up top, he said he didn't adjust much because it was damn near right on.
posted September 09, 2006 05:55 PM
I want to lean mine out...I feel it's rich after the map I got from Brock was installed...tail pipe gets very black very fast...and it stinks of rich...
____________
FYYFF!!!
posted September 09, 2006 07:08 PM
The Brock no-fly map is what I was running. It was definitely fat down low. It actually acted 'flooded' twice at the strip last night. Wouldn't start, I was actually kinda pissed. all fixed now though. I'm very happy with the results.
FYI--Gixxer 600 with akro dynoed before me @ 115. Owner was stoked.
posted September 09, 2006 07:14 PM
So now...if feels different after you had it Dyno'd. I noticed that at WOT in higher gears...it's not as responsive as part throttle...it feels way too rich...did you also see that before you mapped?
____________
FYYFF!!!
posted September 09, 2006 07:59 PM
any chance that could the 'extra' fuel factored in for the 'ram-effect'? Someone mentioned the other day that "good dyno techs will factor in for the ram air effect by adding a bit more fuel on the top end". Can't remember who said it, but is there a chance that too much was factored into the map? Maybe an overzealous expectation from the ram-air???
quote:any chance that could the 'extra' fuel factored in for the 'ram-effect'? Someone mentioned the other day that "good dyno techs will factor in for the ram air effect by adding a bit more fuel on the top end". Can't remember who said it, but is there a chance that too much was factored into the map? Maybe an overzealous expectation from the ram-air???
effectiveness would be reliant on air density... temp or altitude.
____________
natural selection.....
destiny will overcome intervention.
Some are not worthy of the effort.
posted September 09, 2006 08:24 PM
The intake on the front of the bike is no bigger than your hand and even at high speed it ain't gonna do much for intake pressure - not enough for me to worry about fuel there.
I got my 2Bros CF slips on and I love the popping :-) Won't hurt nothin' - can't wait to dyno again and then the juice goes on :-)
____________
2006 Turbo ZX-14.
2005 V-max 20th Anniv.
posted September 09, 2006 08:42 PM
I'm a newfound believer in dynoing your bike. On the 12 I ran a borrowed map. I guess I got lucky or had cheated myself out of some good power on the 12. I'll never know.
My 12 dynoed 156 on this same dyno 2 years ago. Not tuned, just a peak hp run. It had +2.5 degrees, full regular hindle, BMC filters. (and all the other free tweaks we do to 12s).
So as far as I'm concerned, I'm still at least 17 hp ahead of my 12, and thats wihout any timing, airfilters, and a thorough breakin.
I also agree with the amount of ram-air effect too, at best, its minimal on the 14.
quote:any chance that could the 'extra' fuel factored in for the 'ram-effect'? Someone mentioned the other day that "good dyno techs will factor in for the ram air effect by adding a bit more fuel on the top end". Can't remember who said it, but is there a chance that too much was factored into the map? Maybe an overzealous expectation from the ram-air???
There is no need to add exrta fuel for the Ram-Air. The FI system does that for you. Thats what intake air pressure, atmospheric sensor (in the tail section) combined with other sensor information is for. Even if you add a PC, it will still compensate. The PC just adds or takes away X amount % of fuel depending on the signal comming from the ECU.
____________
You say PSYCHO like it's a BAD thing!!
quote:
There is no need to add exrta fuel for the Ram-Air. The FI system does that for you. Thats what intake air pressure, atmospheric sensor (in the tail section) combined with other sensor information is for. Even if you add a PC, it will still compensate. The PC just adds or takes away X amount % of fuel depending on the signal comming from the ECU.
Yes - but the sensor is up by the throttle bodies........
____________
2006 Turbo ZX-14.
2005 V-max 20th Anniv.
posted September 13, 2006 05:42 AM
The sensor on the throttle bodies & in the tail are interchangable so you're both correct as to their impact on the air fuel mixture.
quote:I want to lean mine out...I feel it's rich after the map I got from Brock was installed...tail pipe gets very black very fast...and it stinks of rich...
Brock maps are very rich but they also MPH better than most others in the 1/4 so they are some of the best maps out there for higher RPM stuff..
____________
02 Busa...Turbo...
09 YZF-R6S...
HOME
NEW TOPIC
posted September 09, 2006 04:51 PM
Edited By: 
