My 950 Refresh or Mission Creep...

[Dr LC8]

Very impressed!

Nic

[sakurama]

Originally Posted by jonnykilo

Flanny, sorry I missed the ride, sounds like a great weekend of general NYC and moto awesomeness. I woulda just slowed you down on the pokey old /5 anyway I guess. Looking forward to the complete return ride debrief!

jak

Johnny you were sorely missed. Whenever Flanny and Gino get together you need others (adults?) around to temper the juvenile antics. Seriously, those two are something else. Friends and motorcycles for a day of experimentation will always be a great time. Next time. Dirt bikes in the spring?

Gregor

[snowhawk jockey]

With the stacks config sorted out, will they now be integrated into a unified airbox/filter design? Are you satisfied with your exhaust or will there be some variations on the flange/inlet diameters with the use of inserts. I wonder if some cosworth "D" profiled exhaust inserts would speed up the exit flow?

[sakurama]

Originally Posted by snowhawk jockey

With the stacks config sorted out, will they now be integrated into a unified airbox/filter design? Are you satisfied with your exhaust or will there be some variations on the flange/inlet diameters with the use of inserts. I wonder if some cosworth "D" profiled exhaust inserts would speed up the exit flow?

We looked at an airbox but I think that the complication of the carbs being at an angle makes it more difficult/expensive to accomplish. It might be something Chris will look at later on down the road.

As for my exhaust - no, I'm pretty happy. I came out the big torque winner on the dyno (hear that Flanny?) and if there's a change to make it will most likely be on the intake side. Well, that and certainly I'll remake the H pipe to be neater and better. My quick version was not my best work but did pass the test.

For me I'll test out a set of 41's and see how it effects my midrange compared to the top end. I suspect that the roll off I'm getting is due to the smaller size of the carb. I might actually try to get tricky and taper bore them but then again I might not. Seeing as it's getting cold and the my chances for riding the bike home are slim I'll just sort it out a bit until I move my shop. Right now I'm excited to have Chris on board to help solve the nagging problems of the FCR's so my bike is going to be a mule for the next while.

Gregor

[DRjoe]

With the exhaust have you thought about doing a 2-1-2
I've been doing alot of research to see if the advantages of a 2-1 can be kept using twin mufflers.
There isnt a lot of info out there on it but from what i can gather if you create a propper merge colector you can then split it again to the two mufflers and still keep the pulling efect of the 2-1
What I couldnt figure out is how short the pipe after the merge colector can be before it can be split again.
Would sure love a dyno to be able to test these things.

[mousitsas]

Originally Posted by sakurama

As for my exhaust - no, I'm pretty happy. I came out the big torque winner on the dyno (hear that Flanny?) and if there's a change to make it will most likely be on the intake side. Well, that and certainly I'll remake the H pipe to be neater and better. My quick version was not my best work but did pass the test.

Since my head is spinning a bit due to all that information, could you please Gregor tell us if you have any input on your original exhaust X-over and what exhaust setup gave you the best results so far?

[sakurama]

The exhaust I made really wasn't much different than stock except in layout which was minor. My system used a heavier gauge stainless over the stock system's thin gauge plated steel. I did that because I went through two front headers and three rear headers - the stock system is just not very hardy which can be seen by the fact that Flanny's rear header cracked as well.

Anyway, I had seen and wanted to try an "X" pipe crossover positioned where the stock system's crossover was. I made a nice one and when things weren't working I began to suspect it might be a problem. I thought the tubing I was using was a bit larger but I failed to take into account the thickness of the 16ga stainless compared to the stock tube and in the end it was only barely larger. My problems were a header flange leak and the TPS not being set.

Anyway, the X pipe was fine - didn't hurt much. Replacing it with two separate pipes (2 into 2) completely killed the top end - it knocked something like 5hp off. I made an H pipe and tried that and it made a very clean 1hp gain over the entire range. It was the same with torque. It's not much but the point of testing and tuning was to find improvements so I'm now using the H pipe. The more I read on the subject the more that it seems that an H type crossover is favored over an X pipe type crossover.

DrJoe; I didn't really consider a 2 into 1 into 2 because of space. I know Ned got good torque gains from his 2 into 1 but I really love the look of the twin pipes and I don't think there's much room but it might be worth an experiment. One I don't think I'm interested in doing.

Here's a little tidbit for all you though. Both Flanny and I made runs pulling our dB killers thinking it might just be worth a small gain to piss off our neighbors but it turns out that the dB killers did absolutely nothing to the power or the torque. Zilch, zip, nada. We thought we'd see something somewhere but there was absolutely no advantage to pulling them so we both put them back in.

Gregor

[DRjoe]

Thats interesting about the db killers but i supose that with the two mufflers they would never be close to restricting the pipe maybe if it was just one muufler it would be a different story.

I realy want to do a 2-1 but the owner of the bike i'm doing the exhaust for likesthe twin mufflers and so do I.
Some how i need to work out a 2-1-2 but like you pointed out the space realy doesnt allow it so some creative plumbing is in order.

[Spark01]

Originally Posted by sakurama

Finally, and here's the one that I think might actually get some people to start pulling FI systems off their 990's, is the chart that compares Gino's 990R and Flanny's bike and my bike.



Gregor

Would be a nice compare if you add a 990 EFI with a CPR box, then you really would have a good compare of a power gain with FCR+K&N or EFI + CPR (or MH ) box.

But anyway nice job/post

[Pyndon]

Originally Posted by sakurama

Man, a year and a half ago I started work on my bike with the idea that I'd make it into a special carburated 990 and it was a crazy amount of work. About a month ago I was pretty bummed as you might remember - I was making 68rwhp and frankly almost ready to just throw in the towel. Thanks to encouragement here, help from Peter and Chris and the ability to tap into the pretty phenomenal resources of my friends my bike is a freaking 990R eating monster. Complete success!

So, Gregor, please just confirm that you are happy with the engine I sold you? That's been playing on my mind for 18 months now!!

Nice report, thoroughly enjoyed reading through it. Now, got any advice on getting a bit more tensile strength out of a recovering metatarsal 5 to increase capability under increased bending force?

[Pete640]

When I started this whole velocity stack project I proposed it to Chris as something he might be able to sell if it worked out. Well it certainly has worked out. Chris will rework the stacks for clearance (it was tight on Flanny's bike) and finalize the design and I've suggested that he also try to address the numerous other issues that people have with the FCR's like the lack of a choke, the lack of a TPS bracket and the heavy spring. Chris is going to keep my bike to work on these things and once he's figured out a fair price he's going to set up a site and go into production. I'll help him out (he's helped me for sure) and he'll get a thread going in the vendor's section and I'll link to it when he's ready. He might even look into becoming a Sudco distributor and just offer a complete turnkey package which would be nice. The FCR's have some amazing promise but they need a lot of help to be their best. I'll keep you posted.

A turn key package would be great - all jetted up and ready to go. A product that has actually been tested and has the proof to back it up. Well done guys for sticking it out..

[Deadly99]

Impressive as always

[sakurama]

Hi Pyn!

Before Chris decided to become a mechanical engineer he specialized his studies in prosthetics and biomechanical stuff. Once he's done working on the FCR project you're more than welcome to see if he can work on your leg.

But yeah, the engine seems to be working pretty well.

I know a lot of you with FI engines want to see a more "fair" comparison so you'll be happy to know that Gino has already ordered a new CPR air intake and when he's got it we'll fit it up. I'm sure a tweaked FI system can be made to run much better and Gino is very interested in getting his tweaked so we'll do another comparison. I think the interesting thing about it was that a set of FCR's have the potential to offer a carbureted 950 a new lease on life and even give some advantages over a stock FI bike (which is supposed to have a 15 horse advantage in the case of the R). My goal was was to improve my normally aspirated engine and it worked out really well.

On the dyno the difference was immediately apparent so I'm looking forward to hearing what Flanny thought on his ride back. Umm, Flanny? Maybe he decided not to stop?

Gregor

[sakurama]

Originally Posted by Deadly99

Impressive as always

Hey man, when are we getting you back in the saddle? Funny story: I ran into your exhaust at the Bend rally. The Flanny/Deadly (deadly Flanny?) legacy lives on.

G

[Keith]

I wonder how the formula found in this article works out with the height of the stacks and extensions that you found to work the best.

http://www.hotrod.com/techarticles/e...e/viewall.html


"...N x L = 84,000, where N represents the desired engine rpm to tune for and L is the length in inches from the opening of the ram tube to the valve head..."