Dyno-tastic results!

Tempest · Post by **Tempest** » Sat Mar 10, 2007 9:49 pm

yellowtrev wrote:Am i right in thinking the earlier models, 1997-2001, had a higher standard BHP than the post 2001 bikes?

Only if they are yellow ;)

LotusSevenMan · Post by **LotusSevenMan** » Sat Mar 10, 2007 10:09 pm

Definitely right Tempest!

alan · Post by **alan** » Tue Mar 13, 2007 9:13 pm

Kitch how much did you pay for your dyno run are you planning on jetting? I'm undecided wether to jet it as a few say its quite difficult to tune with the dynojet kit, since ive had the new pipework and fitted K & N its farting and spluttering alot other than that i may just put a standard filter back in and see how it goes.

Jordans near me charge 25 quid a run

Kitch · Post by **Kitch** » Wed Mar 14, 2007 7:40 am

I got 4 runs for Â£25.

Dyno results showed its sucking too much air and leaning out - and thats on a standard jet and filter set up. Fitting a K&N was regarded as A Bad Idea as the stock filter runs well. Also, a jet kit won't be needed, just a little carb balancing and setting up.

Unless you're tuning it seriously, the standard kit is plenty good enough and the Dyno guy was very impressed with the power curve and fuelling (allbeit a little out) for a carbed bike.

Pete.L · Post by **Pete.L** » Wed Mar 14, 2007 8:21 am

alan wrote:Kitch how much did you pay for your dyno run are you planning on jetting? I'm undecided wether to jet it as a few say its quite difficult to tune with the dynojet kit, since ive had the new pipework and fitted K & N its farting and spluttering alot other than that i may just put a standard filter back in and see how it goes.

Jordans near me charge 25 quid a run

Why don't you try placing a 0.6mm washer under each of your needles. On a std carb with a K&N filter (and std pipes I hasten to add) it's a good mod for mid range flat spots. If your pipes are a bit more free flowing than std it wont do any harm and it might cut down on the banging and fartingand give you a couple of HP to boot.

Pete.l

alan · Post by **alan** » Wed Mar 14, 2007 12:20 pm

Kitch apart from balancing the carbs did he tell you to alter the mixture screw at all?

Pete where will i get 0.6mm washer and what diam will they need to be (obviously something small)

I ran my blueflames with out jetting and standard filter before my conversion and it run very well a little bit more carbon build up on the end of the cans but nothing to worry about.

But now ive altered the headers and link pipes put a k & n in its very sluggish when blipping the throttle so im just wondering if its just the K & n whats causing it or the new pipework, i guess only way to tell is fit a standard filter back in and see whats what . I would prefer not to jet it with all the problems ive heard.
Also Blueflame claim theres no need to jet there cans but!!!!!!!!!!

Pete.L · Post by **Pete.L** » Wed Mar 14, 2007 12:42 pm

Alan,
I'll look up the dimentions of the washers(not sure of the internal diameter off the top of my head).
What might be a better idea is to take the bike for a spin and hit the kill switch whilst holding a steady speed. Pull the plugs out by the side of the road and check their colour.
Sluggishness can either be too rich or too lean. If the bike was fine befor the pipe work was done it maybe having adverse affects on the exhaust flow. What you need to determine is which way do you need to adjust the mixture. Hopefully your plugs will be a bit pale tan to light gray and a washer will do the trick. If they've gone to a rich brown or back it'll take a bit more work.

Pete.l

KarlosVTR · Post by **KarlosVTR** » Wed Mar 14, 2007 12:45 pm

mine feels sluggish to blip but i blame that on barometric conditions at times that it is sluggish on not being right for the set up

cans and k&n is all i have too

the 'ex dave heal full micron race system' doesnt FKn fit!!

alan · Post by **alan** » Wed Mar 14, 2007 2:58 pm

Thanks Pete just took plugs out there black so its running rich i believe.

sparrowlegs · Post by **sparrowlegs** » Wed Mar 14, 2007 4:08 pm

Mines booked in for next Thursday....having front CCT reaplced..carbs balanced and a run on the Dyno.....oohh i am soooooooo looking forward to it..if its less than 100BHP its goin up for sale lol

Post by **sirch345** » Thu Mar 15, 2007 12:15 pm

bluesman wrote:
The road tests carried out by motorcycle magazines, if they are anything to go by, always showed less BHP for the later models, the ones with the bigger fuel tank (the earlier ones had a 16ltr and the later ones 19ltr) the reason for this was said to be down to the different sizes of the airbox. It meant that too be able to accommodate the bigger fuel tank a smaller airbox was used
Pre-1999 (not pre-2001) models output a bit higher for fact, and all dyno tests printouts that I saw (not from bike mags) did prove it, ibut we know how much bike mags riders really know
Airbox on post- 2001 is exactly same as on 1997, and I do know it for fact because I have installed tank from 2004 Storm on my 1997, and even more sure because later I bought 2002 airbox off eBay to play with cutouts etc. Tank made bigger by extending fron-top part a bit and by using completely different petcock addembly - on post-2001 bikes petcock is different and bolted to frame, so that bottom of the tank in rear part is lower than on 1997.
The reason 1997 model was most powerful possibly because they did not care about emissions at all... and as consequence - I heard few versions, one about ignition map and one about very slight change of camshafts profiles. Story about camshafts is something that I tend to believe more.

Bluesman,
Is your bike a genuine UK version

bluesman · Post by **bluesman** » Thu Mar 15, 2007 1:02 pm

Nope, mine is genuine Belgian

or I think even German or Dutch. Difficult to say because confortmity certificate for my bike issued in Honda center in Aalst (Belgium, actually HRC center).

Pete.L · Post by **Pete.L** » Fri Mar 16, 2007 10:02 am

alan wrote:Thanks Pete just took plugs out there black so its running rich i believe.

Has the mixture screw or anything else been played with? If not I can only think the new pipe configuration might be upsetting the flow and richening it up. Also check the choke cable is sitting properly in the carbs at the carb end. I take it both the plugs are sooty and not just one of them.

Pete.l

Jbrebel · Post by **Jbrebel** » Fri Mar 16, 2007 11:10 am

beckster wrote:Haven't run mine on the dyno but it pulls clean to the red line,hope to get it on in the next few weeks.

My set up - 180 main jets
needle on notch 4
k&n panel filter
fuel slip ons

She's a '97 with 30 000 on the clock so i'm hoping for about 105bhp

Mines roughly the same beckster, although its 2001 (but with 16ltr tank, just before they swapped em)

Im running the 180 jets, not sure what notch the needles on , K&N panel and carbon can co slip ons. Had mine dynoed last year. Without finding the print out I couldnt tell you the torque figures, but it is making 106.8BHP

Fueling was spot on too.

Was quite happy with that. The guy at the place I went to said the average for standard storms he'd run on the dyno, around 20 or so, was 98BHP.

Post by **sirch345** » Fri Mar 16, 2007 8:45 pm

bluesman wrote:Nope, mine is genuine Belgian or I think even German or Dutch. Difficult to say because confortmity certificate for my bike issued in Honda center in Aalst (Belgium, actually HRC center).

Well perhaps I should have stated that I was referring to a genuine UK version, the reason being is that one of our local guy's had a 19ltr tank fitted to his 16ltr model and according to him he did have to have the airbox changed as well because the later ones are smaller

I can't say any more than that because I personally don't know

I'm only Surmising here

Have you considered the fact that your bike (not being a genuine UK model) perhaps due to more stringent emission regulations than the UK at the time, it could be that your bike was fitted with a smaller airbox in the first place, thats why the 19ltr tank fitted on without changing the airbox. Also if your bike was fitted with the smaller airbox in the first place that would explain why the airbox you purchased from a 2002 bike off ebay was the same size