My new SMS 630 is being delivered next week......gonna be a long week. Regardless, it's coming PU'd so I figure I might just order a new exhaust and have it waiting for when the bike gets here. Obviously there's a huge price difference between the full Leo vs. slip-ons, but is the oem header that bad? I have only my GSXR to compare to, which comes from the factory with a pretty well crafted Ti header to begin with, so gains from a full system are sometimes negligible. Not having a 630 around (or any other Husky, for that matter) to look at leaves me clueless as to whether it's worth the cost for a full system.
There is not (and cannot be) any performance difference with the Leo header. It's about weight only. The main diff with all these aftermarket cans is that they do not have cat converters in them. Weight gains are nice, but were secondary for me. I wanted cans without cats so the bike would not melt my side bags. Weight savings for slipons are a confirmed 6lbs 1oz (I weighed them and the stockers today). For another $600-700, you can save another (claimed) 11 lbs. I opted for the cheaper route. Plus, I think the duals are kinda cool.
Yeah, I keep reading where people are spending a lot of money on aftermarket cans and only getting an increase of 1hp. Doesn't seem there is much you can do to gain more hp. Don't mean to be a bummer but I'm pretty dissapointed with my 630sms. Seems like the bike has no balls. Wish I would have gotten a 610 instead.
Wait till people find out what drilling holes in the airbox does for power. (Hint -- the stock snorkel and airbox openings can supply more airflow than the motor can use. The size/shape of the airbox+snorkel is designed to resonate at a particular frequency in order to help the motor over a natural weak spot in its torque curve. Messing with it is only going to lead to other issues.) But -- it does make it louder and "louder" is interpreted by lots of folks as "more powerful." (Also -- motor engineers call the airbox/snorkel an "intake muffler" -- because that's what it actually is. How would a motor perform if you drilled holes in the sides of the mufflers and headers?)
my bike rips, too. I spent about $1350. I installed everything but the front sprocket myself, so that saved money. pu kit leo vince single sided ti pipe JD power surge 14t front sprocket drilled holes in airbox I definitely felt the difference with each mod. It is a totally different bike than what it was stock! The eddy seel bike has lots of holes drilled in the airbox, so my guess is the extra airflow must help performance. And to me, modding the bikes and feeling the changes is one of the best parts of motorcycling. Yes it is a pain in the butt to install a new exhaust but boy was it fun to ride it afterwards!
You must be on a different planet. My 630 out of the box was certainly a disappointment (as I knew it would be). And the twin Arrows were not what turned it into the bike it was designed as. But the Arrows together with the ECU they came with definitely did what was expected. And it´s not all that difficult to get even more out of it: JD Jetting and opening up the air box can work wonders. And if you want to, you can reduce the weight further by getting rid of the passenger pegs, installing a Shorai battery etc. I took the 610 for a trial ride some years back and can assure you, my 630 is much better in every respect. If you´ve not done it yet, you´ll be surprised at the difference just by fitting the p/u plug.
Not on a different planet, different country though, and have the p/u kit done when I bought it. I have ridden a 610sm and it would kill my 630sms, felt a huge difference. The 630sms is a good bike, just dont think its meant to be a high performance machine. I would love to see a shootout comparing the two, guarantee you the 610sm would outperform it easily. Seems I'm not the only one feeling this way, read this thread and others are saying the same thing. http://www.cafehusky.com/threads/decided-not-to-buy-the-630sm.17520/page-4#post-155158
Know the thread. It would seem some (few) people are unhappy. Most are not. You could come and meet several 610 riders in my neck of the woods who started out by being critical (weight, pre- power up performance etc) and have since experienced how wrong they were. I grant you, I (or any other normal rider) could out perform my 630 on a Husky 449 (a lot more agile) but it´s just not street legal over here (Germany). Looking around the market, there´s no competition. the nearest could be the 570 Berg but I just don´t trust its reliability.
There is no such thing as a "high performance" street-legal thumper! It's an oxymoron. High performance singles are MX race bikes. High performance street bikes have 2 or more cylinders. The 630 is what it is...a niche bike. Anybody expecting this thing to dart around like a race bike, or like a Street Triple, is missing the point.
Not true. The Leo Ti header is a different length than the stock header and may be different ID diameter too. It flows differently than the stock header to mate with the single can. If you review the LEO site and view the HP and Torque curves for their twin cans vs the full TI single can system you will see where the torque and HP curves differ. Also you will save over 17lbs by using the single TI leo over the stock boat anchors and if you do a search on this site you can obtain a name/number to contact for obtaining the entire TI system at a much reduced cost which is less than the dual arrows and not much more than slip ons.
Never, ever trust dyno charts on the websites of muffler sellers. I've seen that header in person. Thin walled and brittle titanium...does not belong on an enduro bike, IMO. On a SM, sure. But a TE that will be ridden offroad or taken on an adventure trip? You'd have to be crazy. When I do the TAT next summer, I will be taking my Leos off and riding with the stockers, which are vastly more robust at the mounting points and have nice heavy-duty steel guards.
Don't trust some manufactures sites sure.. not all though. You entirely missed my point about the Leo site and that was of comparing the two Leo systems to each other not to the stocker. I find the header very robust and well engineered and actually if you have seen one installed you will know that it sits closer to the frame than the stocker and doesn't hang out as far waiting to get dinged. "brittle titanium" Maybe you should read this and don't miss this statement "The two most useful properties of the metal form are corrosion resistance and the highest strength-to-weight ratio of any metal" http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Titanium I even took down part of my skid plate for clearance You certainly aren't serious about the TAT.. thats a road ride. Plus you can take photos of your melted luggage from those two charcoal grills on each side of your bike. The single can also sits in much closer to the frame than the stockers and is protected with the Husky rear tail rack.
Go to a CCS or WERA race does anybody race a street bike with stock cans? Why do the Club Racers the AMA make you use a stock airbox in the Supersport classes
OK...let's not go running off a cliff with things I did NOT say. I did not say mufflers can't be improved -- they can. The cat converter is what kills stock bike mufflers. Some bikes have cats in the headers -- new cans don't help! You have to replace the header. Why does AMA require stock airbox in a particular class? Probably because cone filters and straight intakes are too friggin loud. A brief primer on air box and exhaust design -- and why race bikes do custom mods. Hint: They are looking for max torque at a particular RPM...usually a high one. The stock bike is tuned to produce a fine riding experience across the rev range -- and usually to get higher torque/HP at lower revs. That makes people like the bike more. Air doesn't "flow" through an air box and into the motor. This is where people get it wrong and think that bigger openings are always better. An airbox is not a garden hose. The air goes into the motor in discreet pulses. Valves are opening and slamming shut, creating pressure waves back through the air system. Those waves come bouncing back at the valves. In a perfect world, the returning pressure front hits the valve while it's open, helping air push rapidly into the chamber. A perfectly tuned airbox resonates at the exact frequency where the motor designer/crew chief wants a little boost to the torque. It is a choice. An airbox bigger or smaller than needed, or with holes drilled in it that muck up the frequency, is suboptimal. Bigger is not better. The correct airbox is better, and it might be smaller. It might need holes; it might need a longer snorkel. Who knows if it's not on a dyno? Similarly with exhaust. Exhaust doesn't flow -- it pulses. If "freer flowing" were best, try running your motor on a dyno with no header at all -- just open ports out the front. Your power would plummet. The outgoing exhaust pulse sends a sound wave down the header and to the muffler. At some point, it bounces back toward the port. In a perfect world, it arrives while the valve is shut, and bounces away just as the valve opens, leaving a low-pressure void in its wake. Exhaust comes screaming out of the port into that void and "rides the wave" out the back. But, as with air flow, it's only perfect at a single RPM. Just "opening up" the exhaust system might help; might not. It has to be tuned to exactly what the engineer/crew chief want. What they want (torque peaking at the highest RPMs) might not be what a normal rider wants. So, they use different stuff. Doesn't mean it is good on a street or trail bike that spends its days <4000 rpm. All of this is why you chronically read about people being bummed out when they put their bike with the expensive new exhaust on a dyno and find no improvement, especially when the cat is in the header. Only after they re-tune it and do all sorts of stuff do they then love the new exhaust. But it's all that other stuff that is really improving the bike in many cases.
I think I understand what you are saying, but if what you say is correct, isn't it the distance that the waves travel that is important, not the size of the hole that they travel to for this resonance effect? If I follow you correcty: If you drill your airbox, it makes sense to me that you would get more torque at high RPMs. On our airbox, the stock hole is at the very end of the airbox. If you drill new holes, chances are you are drilling a hole that is closer to the intake, so these pulses of air have less distance to travel than before. Valves open and close at a higher frequency at higher RPMs therefore the resonance of the airbox would be in sync with the opening and closing of the valves at higher RPMs. Also, you should then be able to tune your airbox at will by drilling a few holes that are equivalent in size to the stock hole. Each hole will resonate properly at a certain RPM. You would tape up all but one hole at a time. You would then get a boost at a given RPM. So if one day you want a boost at high RPM you use hole A, mid range use hole B, etc. Of course, the biggest boost would be obtained at the RPM where the exhaust is resonating in harmony with the airbox. I wish I had a dyno to test all this out! You must be an engineer.
What he said. If the intake were just about airflow you could pull the whole airbox off and stick a cone filter right on the throttlebody. I'm actually surprised no one has tried it, I would think it would be stupid loud on this motor.
I guess I should have quoted, I'm agreeing with Contra. The stuff above sounds fine, but unless you are running something on a dyno you won't have any idea what you're doing.
I'd rather hear more about your TAT road ride and how you need the stock exhaust system so you don't have any problems. Then you can go on about your claims of the brittle titanium Leo Vince header that shouldn't be on a dirt bike... You switch subjects as fast as a politician hoping you can move the subject away from obvious blunders.
