Jump to content
RVFR

5th & 6th VFR 800 Header build

Recommended Posts

1 hour ago, thtanner said:

 

More proof of the UK numbering. This is for pre-cat converter 5th gens, notice how it starts at 97

...

 

Well I remember first seeing the VFR800 as a new model at the UK Motorcycle Show that is traditionally held in Nov/Dec and that must have been '97. They usually show new models slated for release and availability the following year, but it is possible some bikes made it to the UK and were sold actually in '97. But they would have been '98 model bikes so despite some early sales, the VFR800 did really start from '98 year model.

 

BTW, don't rely on Haynes for ANYTHING. 😁

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites



 
 
BTW, don't rely on Haynes for ANYTHING. 


This is just 100% correct sir!!!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
25 minutes ago, BiKenG said:

 

Well I remember first seeing the VFR800 as a new model at the UK Motorcycle Show that is traditionally held in Nov/Dec and that must have been '97. They usually show new models slated for release and availability the following year, but it is possible some bikes made it to the UK and were sold actually in '97. But they would have been '98 model bikes so despite some early sales, the VFR800 did really start from '98 year model.

 

BTW, don't rely on Haynes for ANYTHING. 😁

 

Pretty sure that people here (in Oz), have 1997-plated bikes. I'm almost certain that, like you, I saw a 1997-plated bike (a silver one) at the end of 1997.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
11 hours ago, EX-XX said:

For those wanting Sandy Bike Spares/Black Widow dyno numbers, I'm going to paste an excerpt from an emailed response I had from them on this topic.

 

" We do not release Dyno results on any of our exhausts as these can vary due to the age, mileage and set up of the bike, we are happy to post owners results as these are specific to their bike and are unbiased. Please see our Facebook page for owners results from some of our other designs, they are excellent. "

 

Sorry, but that's crap.

 

For the record, I asked for dyno comparisons between a stock, "catless" header, and their design. They refuse to provide this info.

 

Also, not sure how relevant "seeing a Facebook page for owners results from some our other designs" actually helps one form an opinion as to the gains/design eficiency of this new header...

 

Maybe I'm missing something...?

 

Or not.

 

No. I won't be purchasing either of these until I see empirical, back-to-back dyno testing. Same bike, same dyno, "catless" headers vs these new ones (obviously with the same slip-on fitted to both headers).

 

Pretty simple, really. They either provide them, or they don't.

 

I cannot disagree with you but I think getting that info presents something of a problem. BW apparently refuse to provide any such thing which is disappointing and makes me think they're hiding something and although the Lextek is soon to be on the dyno, they do not have a catless header to compare.

 

Indeed, when I spoke to Jeff (Lextek supplier) he tried to convince me that a one-off dyno run of his system was all that was required as dyno results are corrected for atmospheric conditions etc so can be compared with any other results from other bikes on other dynos. But although correction factors are applied, as we know results can vary significantly and the only way to get a true understanding of the effect of changing an exhaust is same bike, same dyno on same day and only the exhaust swapped. Sadly, I don't think we're going to get that with either of these systems.

 

Having said that, an independent dyno run with just the exhaust change should give us some idea of how well they work or not and let's face it, we're not talking race track fine tuning here.

 

I have to say though that I am still suspicious of how similar the 2 systems are. Same bore size change, done in the same way, same sensor positioning etc. and then there's the merge scheme. Previous (performance) systems have used the same scheme as Honda, now 2 systems appear that take a different approach and while that may indeed work ok for the road, it is surprising that 2 manufacturers simultaneously (and supposedly independently) both decide to go against accepted (and Honda's) wisdom and opt for this alternative merge scheme. Coincidence? As someone once said, "there's no such thing as coincidence".

 

In any case, changing the merging from Honda;s original VFR800 scheme (Lefts and Rights) to the alternative Fronts and Rears is even more reason to want to see a dyno comparison of the new system against the Honda original. So we're back to that problem again.

 

Still, I suppose this is a better problem to have than "who can we get to make a system". 😀

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
20 hours ago, thtanner said:

 

More proof of the UK numbering. This is for pre-cat converter 5th gens, notice how it starts at 97

 

No automatic alt text available.

 

It's still wrong.  Motorcycle models change with "Model Years", as reflected in the bike's VIN, not calendar years, so the fact that some MY 1998 bikes were sold in late 1997 has nothing to do with the specification of the motorcyle, which is tied to the Model Year, and reflected in the bike's VIN.  But you can rest assured, that isn't the only error in the Haynes manual...

 

Ciao,

 

JZH

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Seems like there's no absolutes. You can have 1998 year models, sold and licensed in 1997. Models are usually introduced in the fall, so there's no reason

for that not to happen. So you can have a 1997 VFR800 that is a model year 1998, just like you can have a 2010 VFR800 that is a model year 2008. It's all a

question of semantics. Licensing is much different than actual model years.

  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, JZH said:

 

It's still wrong.  Motorcycle models change with "Model Years", as reflected in the bike's VIN, not calendar years, so the fact that some MY 1998 bikes were sold in late 1997 has nothing to do with the specification of the motorcyle, which is tied to the Model Year, and reflected in the bike's VIN.  But you can rest assured, that isn't the only error in the Haynes manual...

 

Ciao,

 

JZH

 

It's not wrong, it's just the way it was sometimes labeled in the UK and some other countries. Yes, I lived in the UK too I'm not just some dumb American, and it is NOT the first instance of this I've seen. The real model year is ofc 1998-2001 but bikes were sold late 1997, to early 2002. Some companies chose to base the dates on the first/last year reg, not the "model" years.

 

To say that the company is stupid or didn't do their research because they chose to use the year scheme many others have in the region is a bit disingenuous. 

 

It's been like that since.. well 1997 and nobody complained then 😉

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 12/7/2018 at 6:43 AM, Stray said:

Latest update: 

 

Jeff’s tuner mate, Keith, just snapped three front head studs off the VFR! 

 

Keith will drill them out no problem but this will cause some delay. He’s going to cut the rest of the original system off. 

 

Situation is slightly more  complicated as either Keith or Jeff has just become a grandfather to a baby boy. Message is s bit confusing so I’m not sure who the new grandfather is: Jeff or Keith...

 

Needless to say the next couple of days will be chaotic and the lads will crack on with the job ASAP. 

 

Stray 

 

Hopefully Keith did the baseline dyno run with the stock, albeit catted exhaust before attacking the exhaust fixing stud nuts to remove said stock exhaust.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4 hours ago, sfdownhill said:

 

Hopefully Keith did the baseline dyno run with the stock, albeit catted exhaust before attacking the exhaust fixing stud nuts to remove said stock exhaust.

I really hope he did. Jeff didn’t give me too many details on Friday. Was more focused on the new grandchild, understandably. 

 

Let’s see what next week brings. 

 

Sorry i can’t offer any more details guys. I know this is nerve wracking. 

 

Stray

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
16 hours ago, thtanner said:

 

It's not wrong, it's just the way it was sometimes labeled in the UK and some other countries. Yes, I lived in the UK too I'm not just some dumb American, and it is NOT the first instance of this I've seen. The real model year is ofc 1998-2001 but bikes were sold late 1997, to early 2002. Some companies chose to base the dates on the first/last year reg, not the "model" years.

...

 

Well I don't think this has anything to do with Honda. They manufacture a certain design and spec of bike and it gets labelled as an 'J' or 'L' etc which is a simple code to denote its 'Model year'. When it actually gets sold and registered is largely nothing to do with them. It may creep in before the end of the previous year (during which it was actually introduced) or it may sit in a dealer's showroom for years so the date of first registration is not necessarily equivalent to the 'Model Year'. This is something a lot of people seem to find hard to understand, or use to deliberately misrepresent the age of a bike - even dealers sadly. But in reality it's not that complicated.

 

The '98 model year was 'W' which to the best of my knowledge was applied to the very first VFR800. As far as I know there was NO VFR800FI-V. Ergo, the first VFR800 was a '98, even if sold at the back end of '97.

 

I have to take issue with the statement that it was labelled as a '97 in the UK. So who labelled it? The press? Maybe and some dealers possibly and certainly Haynes, but the reality is it was never labelled by Honda as a '97 - anywhere. Not at the time, although younger employees with less concern for accuracy (as is the trend these days) may have subsequently implied otherwise.

 

Back when I worked at Honda UK these actual age questions did not seem so important as it was all a lot newer and fresher in the mind. Now we're talking many, many years ago and memories fade and get distorted over time. But unless anyone can provide any evidence of there being a VFR800FI-V, we can all settle on the first VFR800 being '98-'99, then with added HISS (not USA) and Cat. '00-'01 and then V-Tec from '02. Please, don't get sidetracked by press and/or Haynes into believing anything different.

 

There is one glaring anomaly to the above. The CBX1000. Back when it was introduced, Honda didn't have such a structured annual model naming system. 1980 was to introduce 'A' as the model year and although the CBX was actually introduced in '78, it carried the 'Z' designation which was used as a 'catch-up' to bring all models into line. So continuing with the 'Z' through '79 means 'Z' was actually used for 2 years. Once everything was in sync, they changed to 'A' for '80, 'B' in '81 etc and have carried that on until today, although running out of letters caused a swap to numeric code '1' in '01 which continues to this day.

 

It's a bit like part numbers. Honda don't just throw out random numbers for all parts. There is a carefully structured system for naming of parts - even more important now than when first introduced with the number of parts growing year by year. Model Codes also follow a structured scheme. The RC46 is the 46th model of that type (road sports) in that capacity range (I forget the limits, something like 600 - 900cc). It is not some randomly cool code that the use of RC30 seemed to suggest. Likewise the model years. There is a system to all this that Honda do. They have to have a system or soon they wouldn't know what they were doing. Well they know in theory anyway. 😀

  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

how are you people arguing that these headers are any different from one another?

they both have the same seams and expanded joints in the same places,  when no other header before does that.

they both had the same idea at the same time and posted their "different" headers months apart from one another eh?  Hmm.

They both have concurrent/faulty dual o2 sensor placement in the same spot in the merges, .... nah.

same manufacturer.  they're just resellers for this.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I ordered my RC36-2 (VFR750F) in August? 1997 while on assignment in Finland. My dutch dealer imported it from France since no red ones were available anymore.

Then the RC46 VFR800fi  got introduced and it took me all but 15 seconds to realise I didnot want to cancel my order... :tongue:

Registered my redslut on 9 september 1997.

 

So I assume it was possible to buy and register a '98 in '97 :tongue:

 

For me, the RC36-2 is 1994-1997. The RC46-1 is 1998-2001

 

RIP redslut...

IMAG1166_1-640x598_1.jpg.4072e6fc277632195b88009a3119cadf.jpg

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Airisom,  you think that makes it inherantly different?
There is so much more like with these two headers than different.

no header has had these things since ever, and your refute is a dent?
 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, Voided76 said:

how are you people arguing that these headers are any different from one another?

they both have the same seams and expanded joints in the same places,  when no other header before does that.

they both had the same idea at the same time and posted their "different" headers months apart from one another eh?  Hmm.

They both have concurrent/faulty dual o2 sensor placement in the same spot in the merges, .... nah.

...

 

Yup. That's what I said. And both at roughly the same price. It is kinda suspicious.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
31 minutes ago, Dutchy said:

I ordered my RC36-2 (VFR750F) in August? 1997 while on assignment in Finland. My dutch dealer imported it from France since no red ones were available anymore.

Then the RC46 VFR800fi  got introduced and it took me all but 15 seconds to realise I didnot want to cancel my order... :tongue:

Registered my redslut on 9 september 1997.

 

So I assume it was possible to buy and register a '98 in '97 :tongue:

 

For me, the RC36-2 is 1994-1997. The RC46-1 is 1998-2001

 

Yes, as I think we can agree, the first VFR800 was a '98 year model, but first ones were sold at the end of '97. Still a '98 bike though. It's the Model Year that crucially defines the bike, not when it was first sold and/or registered.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Voided76 said:

Airisom,  you think that makes it inherantly different?
There is so much more like with these two headers than different.

no header has had these things since ever, and your refute is a dent?
 

No, I'm just asking a question. Calm down. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, MBrane said:

It must be winter.

 

 

My 96 "identifies" as a 2015... I don't dare ask its gender... we just leave it at "sexy b!tch"... lol

  • Like 2
  • Haha 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Airisom: Don't misunderstand my position,  I'm not trying to heckle or flame you,  I'm questioning your thought process in case you had examined both headers sets of sales pictures as I have.  if I seem hot under the collar it's because we've once again been purposefully lied to.

black widow didn't develop shit.  both headers obviously were designed in the same house.  Any differences are exceptionally minor when you consider the way they are welded together,  the steps of the primary tubes lining up as if the same thought process brought them about,  and the same two o2 bungs in the same (wrong) spot on the main collector all point to the same house slapping them together.

And while it's not a bad design all in all,  it's disingenuous as fuck telling VFR owners for an entire year that you're designing a racing header and get handed something that is 98 spec primaries and nothing more.

Even after we gave them the data.  even after they'd seen the dyno curves laid out.  

it's disingenuous pretending you have a pulse on what a bike needs and then deliver a stock ass header.  

I haven't asked BW about their ID's but I'm 99% certain I don't have to.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The good news is:  
That's two EU and one USA sources
Might be able to find it on aliexpress and haggle a bigger bore setup from them directly.  

resellers and pretenders never do anything about their products.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Nah, it's all good. My thought process was simple: Does the Lextek also have the indention on the rear downpipe? Nothing more than that. Two generally equal systems should perform generally equally to each other. Bashing headers to fit V8s in some cars doesn't do anything to horsepower, so one small cave-in on one pipe shouldn't do much as well.

 

Looking at the pics, the primary indicator the BW is a BW is the indention, but since the pipes are turned around the other side in the Lextek pictures, I was wondering if there was a chance the Lextek had it as  well. Regardless, they're of the same design, so performance is going to be within margin of craftsmanship anyway. 

 

The Lextek is cheaper, comes with a mid-pipe, soon to come dyno results, and a seller is willing to hook us up on a group buy, so I'm just waiting to see how this unfolds.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
18 hours ago, Voided76 said:

Airisom: Don't misunderstand my position,  I'm not trying to heckle or flame you,  I'm questioning your thought process in case you had examined both headers sets of sales pictures as I have.  if I seem hot under the collar it's because we've once again been purposefully lied to.

black widow didn't develop shit.  both headers obviously were designed in the same house.  Any differences are exceptionally minor when you consider the way they are welded together,  the steps of the primary tubes lining up as if the same thought process brought them about,  and the same two o2 bungs in the same (wrong) spot on the main collector all point to the same house slapping them together.

And while it's not a bad design all in all,  it's disingenuous as fuck telling VFR owners for an entire year that you're designing a racing header and get handed something that is 98 spec primaries and nothing more.

Even after we gave them the data.  even after they'd seen the dyno curves laid out.  

it's disingenuous pretending you have a pulse on what a bike needs and then deliver a stock ass header.  

I haven't asked BW about their ID's but I'm 99% certain I don't have to.

 

Probably why they're coy about releasing dyno data.

 

In the email I posted an excerpt from, the BW salesperson was waxing lyrical about "how much better their new system would be than my old '99 one."

 

Really?

 

Prove it (with empirical evidence) and I'll consider a purchase. Genuinely not fussed one way or the other. My ceramic-coated headers will probably last the life of the bike, given that I live in an environment that doesn't experience heavy snowfalls/salt on the roads etc.

 

So, for me to consider changing them out with something else...well, I'd need to be convinced that the "something else" was demonstrably better, wouldn't I?

 

So...who on the forum is going to be first to grab a set of these things and "back-to-back" dyno test them against a control set of '99 headers?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
10 hours ago, EX-XX said:

 

Probably why they're coy about releasing dyno data.

 

In the email I posted an excerpt from, the BW salesperson was waxing lyrical about "how much better their new system would be than my old '99 one."

 

Really?

 

Prove it (with empirical evidence) and I'll consider a purchase. Genuinely not fussed one way or the other. My ceramic-coated headers will probably last the life of the bike, given that I live in an environment that doesn't experience heavy snowfalls/salt on the roads etc.

 

So, for me to consider changing them out with something else...well, I'd need to be convinced that the "something else" was demonstrably better, wouldn't I?

 

So...who on the forum is going to be first to grab a set of these things and "back-to-back" dyno test them against a control set of '99 headers?

 

With the greatest respect gentlemen, have you considered that our public forum might be frequented by Lextek (and BW and others) and that this general “venting of spleen” is not really endearing us to them? 

 

For a start we need to put a few very important things in perspective:

 

1. We ride 20 year old bikes with rotting headers for which there is no real market as a parts supplier

 

2. The Lextek is a Chinese made header cheaper than three full tanks of petrol. It’s not a BSB race system and NEVER CLAIMED TO BE! 

 

3. Jeff from Lextek has gone considerably out of his way to provide info and test a system for us - as a courtesy. He even bought a VFR motorcycle specifically for the purpose. That’s nothing short of heroic in my book! 

 

Now as Jeff stares in despair at the three snapped exhaust studs on his bike I wonder how motivated to help us he feels with all this negative clamour in his ears. I’d have downed tools a long time ago. Hopefully Jeff is a more patient man than me. 

 

This is not a race header designed to win the TT. It’s a nice mass-produced item designed to serve our ageing fleet of bikes. Despite this it boasts a lot of advantages:

 

a. Stainless steel construction

b. 5th gen diameters

c. Neat welds (see pics)

d. Catless

e. Probably lighter than stock

f. IT IS REALLY CHEAP!!!

 

Did I mention that it’s CHEAP? Oh, and steeply discounted for us too. That, just in case anyone missed it, makes it REALLY CHEAP! 

 

In light of all this can we please stop beating on those who have chosen to help us, while they’re helping us? Lextek (and BW) have endured a thrashing for even daring to offer us a system. No one else is offering us any alternatives. 

 

Let’s manage our expectations, show a modicum of courtesy and pray Jeff follows through with his project for us. 

 

Stray

  • Like 6

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now

×

Important Information

By using this site, you agree to our Privacy Policy.