Exactly, when you recalibrate your TPS it does more than just set the on/off throttle settings. It calibrate all steps of the throttle which interact with ECU and sensors. FYI, my throttle has always recorded over 101% at WOT. 101.x, can't remember exact number. This was even before first calibrating my TPS also. _
Just got iBeat and a FMF Powercore 4 so I did some more pulls. Looks like the FMF single flows pretty much the same as the stock duals. Still makes 48hp & 36 ft/lbs. I used the iBeat to adjust fueling up and down 5% and lost power both ways. The Dynojet map is still king! My TPS also reads 101.8% at WOT. This bike has turned out to be everything I hoped. Tons of tractable power, 350lbs w/ luggage racks, can comfortably do a day of gravel two up, runs 70mph all day long. Riding a '12 ktm 990r off road over the weekend further confirmed the 630 is the right bike for me. View: http://youtu.be/I7cCzDKmFvg?hd=1 View: http://youtu.be/HHIGioqJ2ME?hd=1
Husky_Ferracci.pdf The 630 should have more than 35-40 hp. Click on the Ferracci.pdf and scroll down to see the dyno sheet.
If two different dynos can't be compared why even bother. There's got to be a standard to measure by. I'm sure if I took my bike to two different shops/dynos, they would measure pretty close. The two bikes would certainly be different.
No ... I tried it. Took my other bike (CCM644) to two different dynos (both expensive). That´s when I gave up on having a dyno done. Don´t even know whether the official German transport testing facilities (TÜV) have calibrated power testbeds (was told they are NOT calibrated). So it´s all pretty useless. When asked, I just make up a horsepower for my bike. Now I only use my "seat of pants" testing equipment (which is always dead accurate).
That's good to hear. I have the Q4 with 100% ibeat settings and although I can feel the weight loss vs. stock cans, the bike seems to run about the same. That's what I wanted anyway. Shorai battery next.
Unless they're the same model and dyno, calibrated at the same time, with identical conditions, you would be surprised how off it can be. The only real use of most dynos is to find the best setup/tune for your vehicle. You can't accurately compare results from two different dynos. That's why you always take big or small numbers with a grain of salt.
100% correct. There's a lot of misunderstanding out there about dynos. They are really just a tuning aid. Once you find the settings that your bike makes best power on one dyno it will be the same settings on any dyno. The absolute number is not really important. What matters to me is that when I twist it w/ my buddies ktm 990 I'm not leaving 10-20% of my power on the table . Furthermore, a bike running at its best settings is running clean and efficient. Google some reading about long term effects on an engine running rich. Larry, Looks like your bike just had cams, piston, and head work. What did it make before they did the work? If you don't know, than you don't know if you got what you paid for. Also, the dyno sheet says it was 90 deg F at 9:26am? That seems unlikely and affects the dyno correction factor up. I'm not saying FBF did anything wrong, they're a reputable outfit that know how to find hp, but all I'd care about is what did my bike make before and after. Because I've had my setup for 17 years I have lots of anecdotal evidence on whether my dyno makes good numbers. Brock of "Brocks Performance" has been an acquaintance for years. He got the latest greatest Dynojet dyno 4 yrs ago (I built his dyno room). He knew that the new S1000RR's were making less power on his dyno than everybody else's. Dynojet however will not adjust your software just because you say your dyno reads low. So he came and borrowed my rig and took it to his shop. Whatever the results showed convinced Dynojet to make adjustments and now his dyno gets similar numbers to everyone else around the country. Another example, my bone stock 09 Klx 250 makes 20 hp. That is a little strong for a stock KLX. So on the same day I had a Kaw making more than I expected and a Husky making less. One forum saying "no way your bike makes that much hp", one saying "no way it makes that little hp". The dyno is just a dumb hunk of metal and wires, it don't know whats up there. That being said, I still don't get too wrapped up in absolute dyno numbers. Many don't realize it but there are things a dyno owner can do w/ correction factors to make numbers look better, and I can tell you for certain that the guy that just built your new motor/polished your head is never going to hand you a dyno sheet that says he built you a dog... A good friend once took his CBR in for port/polish/head mill job. Bike made less hp afterwards than before, same bike, same dyno. He would never have known w/o the dyno.
How much different is your fuel metering settings in comparison to stock power up settings with the FMF? If different, what rpms did you increase/decrease fuel and by what percent of change? What elevation did you test at?
When will people understand that a mirror finish on your intake ports is a horrible idea? A rough surface provides more surface area for better fuel atomization, which means a faster, more consistent burn. And due to edge conditions, you're not going to gain any airflow without increasing the port and valve size. For the best atomization, you inject as the valve closes, so your fuel hits the hot port wall and the back of the hot valve and vaporizes in the intake chamber, ready to be drawn in with the next cycle.
Dyno set to 1000', actual here is 969' alt. I removed the Husky PU plug and install the one that came w/ the PC-V. Sometime I'm going to measure the resistor in both to see how they compare. This is the Dynojet map I'm running. Interesting that they lean it down in some areas but richen it on the big end. Probably accounts for why I still get good mpg (avg 48) in normal riding. For ex. 15% throttle@4000rpm is -9% fuel value.
DYNOBOB, thx for the great info. I almost bought a 630, but ended up buying the 610. I think a stock 610 is supposed to have 53 hp. I find it hard to believe that the 630 is only pushing 40 hp, but I've read a lot of stories about the 630 being corked up & underpowered.
Properly fueled my stock 630 made 48 rear wheel hp. That equates to 55hp at the crank (crank hp is the number all manufacturers advertise). My only (small) disappointment w/ this bike is I had to buy a $300 Power Commander to make it fuel right.
my 610 makes almost the exact same numbers as dynobob's bike. also using a powercommander and full system. a 610 dyno'd at the place i had mine tuned did make around 53 hp mark but not sure if that was a carbed or injected bike. it certainly wasn't stock though as that was after a load of tuning work etc. that ferraci pdf shows the dyno chart of a bike that's had porting and an aftermarket piston fitted?
that ferraci pdf shows the dyno chart of a bike that's had porting and an aftermarket piston fitted?[/quote] That's my 06 610 carbed, rejetted and Barrett Carbon Fiber exhaust pipe. Dynoed at 56 hp.
Larry, We're confused, do you realize your dyno sheet says it has Ferracci cams, piston, head work and belongs to Donald Cooper?
