Leaderboard

The way exhaust pulses are combined can have a very significant effect on the power of the engine. For the 2000 FireBlade (CBR929RR) Honda used a (cast Titanium) combiner valve that joined 1+4 and 2+3, or 1+2 and 3+4 under different conditions specifically because to maximise power under all conditions required the different merge styles. It was their first exhaust 'power valve'. So the way the pulses are combined can make a big difference and the pulses from a 180° and a 360° V4 occur in a different pattern which Honda (and other exhaust engineers) have found require the different merging for each of the crank designs in order to maximise power. Let's face it, the way they merge Lefts and Rights on the 800 is much more complicated than Fronts and Rears, with more pipework required etc. They wouldn't do that if they didn't think it necessary. Using the wrong merge style isn't going to make the bike unrideable, or even be particularly noticeable to some riders, but on a dyno it would be very noticeable and with the main thrust of this topic being to source a good high quality, high power replacement to the TBR system, going the other way to something that makes less power than stock is probably not what people here want. This exhaust tuning should not be dismissed. When Honda were racing their multi cylinder 4 strokes back in the 60s, current thinking was that a separate pipe for each cylinder allowed freest gas flow and gave the most power. It has since been discovered that combining the pulses in the right way means one cylinder's pulse can help scavenge the exhaust of the other(s). This is one of the main reasons for the huge increase in specific power output of modern race engines. I cannot help but think that anyone who tries to tell you that a Fronts and Rears merged system works well on a 180° crank 90° V4 is trying to sell such a system that they made because it was the cheapest way to do it and I'd need to see dyno comparison charts to convince me otherwise.

I paid $115 for a Yuasa on Amazon. Pricey and perhaps I could have found it cheaper elsewhere, but it seems to balance out in the end. At least I didn't buy it from Cycle Gear.

Just to note for everyone the price of £1000-1500 was for the initial development and the jig production. We aim to be able to produce them for approx £900 or less if we can. 900 GBP 1150 USD 1620 AUD Basically without making a set we don't know what time and materials are involved to give an accurate price so please do take everything at this stage as guess work and approximations.

It's often disguised as "Liquid Paraffin"... often sold in garden sections or hardware stores as lamp oil, wick lantern fuel or fire starter... (read the contents as they do differ)

Thanks for jumping on this, Louis. Your company makes good gear. I’m based over 2 hours from you but the bike (1998 5th Gen) is in bits and not roadworthy. It won’t be finished for another two months. If someone on here has a van/flatbed and willing to drive the bike from Loughborough to Pocklington I’m willing to lend it to CSK. Failing that, I’ve just bought a spare engine (that I could drive up myself) but I feel CSK would prefer the bike for routing/clearance purposes. Also have my rusty old 1998 OEM headers (still attached to the bike, but I could remove them for this project). Just to be clear I cannot afford a header like this - not even close. But I’m happy to lend my bike as a jig so others with deeper pockets can purchase. Louis, when you say a better price can be had via group buy (10+ deposits etc), what sort of money are you talking? What’s the price differential between stainless (304-316), inconel and titanium? What are the benefits of clamps vs springs or the various metals? Finally, is there a performance difference between mandrel bent vs welded segment headers? The system is not visible with fairings so bling doesn’t really matter. Whatever is cheaper would probably be best. Best, Stray

Shoulda stuck with CHINESIUM. Oh no I mean OEM.