Victory Motorcycle Forum banner

1 - 15 of 15 Posts

·
Registered
Joined
·
80 Posts
Discussion Starter #1
Well I got my bike back from being dynoed and wanted to share the results with you all.
First off all before you ask, there is no before. I just couldn't justify the $$ you know. So this is FYI only.
I have: cams, Bassani 2 into 1, IAC, and a reworked ECU (Lloyds) .

Steve
Max Power= 107.32
Max Torque= 109.62
 

Attachments

·
Registered
Joined
·
236 Posts
i thought with cams it should pull to 7k? isnt that one of the reasons the ecu is reprogramed?

Well I got my bike back from being dynoed and wanted to share the results with you all.
First off all before you ask, there is no before. I just couldn't justify the $$ you know. So this is FYI only.
I have: cams, Bassani 2 into 1, IAC, and a reworked ECU (Lloyds) .

Steve
Max Power= 107.32
Max Torque= 109.62
 

·
Premium Member
Joined
·
4,875 Posts
i thought with cams it should pull to 7k? isnt that one of the reasons the ecu is reprogramed?
About the highest you can take the rev limit is 6400 on the late model bikes if I'm not mistaken. I have a 6700 rpm rev limit and even with the VM-1 HP cams it's all done by 6300-ish.

It's probably not good for longevity to spin these long stroke motors past 6000 because piston speeds are getting ridiculously high.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
236 Posts
I spoke a fair amount with Matt at Moms and he was telling me that his bike would spin to 7k all day long with zero issues....this is the reason for me asking the question.


About the highest you can take the rev limit is 6400 on the late model bikes if I'm not mistaken. I have a 6700 rpm rev limit and even with the VM-1 HP cams it's all done by 6300-ish.

It's probably not good for longevity to spin these long stroke motors past 6000 because piston speeds are getting ridiculously high.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
236 Posts
not really...std is 2% higher than SAE so figure 2-3 rwhp tq and hp less..


RPMs ? it is what it is[/QUOTE]
 

·
Premium Member
Joined
·
4,875 Posts
I spoke a fair amount with Matt at Moms and he was telling me that his bike would spin to 7k all day long with zero issues....this is the reason for me asking the question.
Even with the 102mm stroke of the Freedom 100 crank, you're pushin' your luck at 7 grand. Spinning a 108mm stroke to 7000+ "all day long" isn't going to last. Piston speeds are so high that stopping and changing direction every 180 degrees is major stress. Unless it has seriously ported big valve heads, VM-2 or VM-3 cams, and big ol' throttle bodies it can't make power out 7000 rpm anyway...

I'll use my favorite expression here. Talk is cheap.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
236 Posts
even with a CF of 0.0 STD vs SAE is 2.0% difference...this is why SAE is considered the US standard and other countries use STD...a dyno operator can switch between the two and "show" a gain and in reality there is zero gain from tuning....do a google search sae vs std and you will see CF has zero to do with the difference


If you look at the bottom of the graph it says the correction is x 1.01
That means uncorrected would be 1% less power.
 

·
Premium Member
Joined
·
4,875 Posts
even with a CF of 0.0 STD vs SAE is 2.0% difference...this is why SAE is considered the US standard and other countries use STD...a dyno operator can switch between the two and "show" a gain and in reality there is zero gain from tuning....do a google search sae vs std and you will see CF has zero to do with the difference
I didn't say a freakin' thing about SAE, did I? Puleeeeeze do not presume to school me, OK? All i was pointing out is that the correction factor was only 1%.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
236 Posts
Oh, I forgot you seem to think you know everything...one of those people. All c/f does is to create a similar standard of perfect conditions so one can compare apples to apples...but you know that...and of course STD is 2% higher with a c/f of zero as compared to SAE with a c/f of zero...but you know that...somewhere in here your dodging the point I made which was this dyno print out was done std not sae so the numbers are going to read 2% higher with or with out any c/f


I didn't say a freakin' thing about SAE, did I? Puleeeeeze do not presume to school me, OK? All i was pointing out is that the correction factor was only 1%.
 

·
Premium Member
Joined
·
4,875 Posts
Again, the point I was making, and I'm sure you'll agree, is that with a correction of only 1%... the conditions were pretty good/pretty close to sea level. Sometimes we'll see CF of 24% (like 5200' up and high humidity).

And one more thing that I am sure you will agree with as well... The shape of the curves and the area below them is more important than the numbers up the sides of the chart. Red or blue? Both graphs peak at the same place...



Lastly, after reading the thread again... it seems that you are the one reading between the lines and asserting his knowledge, not me.
 
1 - 15 of 15 Posts
Top