Jump to content

DIY Fuel Pressure Regulator Mod


magellan

Recommended Posts

  • Member Contributer

When I picked up my modified regulator...I only live about 20 minutes from Turbo City...out of curiosity I asked Tom how he modified the part. His response was a smile, but he did comment about a proprietary tool he had designed for the modification. I'm sure it's not all that complicated to mod it for more pressure though, but I leave that sort of thing to the experts. Plus Tom is a stand-up guy and took time to explain some of the in and outs of modern fuel injection systems. In fact, I'm thinking of taking my stock regulator to him to also have it modified, so I will have a spare in the event the current one ever fails.

Anyway... Yes, although I have no hard data to back up my claims, I will go on the record and say that just changing out the fuel regulator made a huge improvement in the lower rpm and throttle range. In fact, I would suggest the regulator mod before spending $300-plus on a PCIII and 02 Eliminators.

I've read about syncing the starter valves with the 20mm difference on the Brit web site, but somewhere I also recently read that the VTEC manual misprint claim is not true and the valves should in fact be set equal to #4. Still, I suppose it wouldn't hurt to give it a try and see if it makes a difference.

As far as running with the 02 sensors connected, I can also give that a try. Someone clarify though, as I'm under the impression that if the sensors are connected, that the PCIII must be disconnected? So it's not possible to connect the sensors AND run the PCIII?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Replies 80
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

I can tell you this though, this simple R&R of the regulator made more of a difference than anything else I have tried, as well as all the different PCIII maps I tried and tweaked--
Did you try a zero map with an across the board increase of whatever amount you figure would be the net equivalent fuel increase of Tom?s regulator? Dollars to donuts you have not :beer:
Link to comment
Share on other sites

I've read about syncing the starter valves with the 20mm difference on the Brit web site, but somewhere I also recently read that the VTEC manual misprint claim is not true and the valves should in fact be set equal to #4.  Still, I suppose it wouldn't hurt to give it a try and see if it makes a difference.
The 20mm difference turned out to be not the case, this is confirmed by Wiz et al, if you read the whole thread.
Link to comment
Share on other sites

As far as running with the 02 sensors connected, I can also give that a try.? Someone clarify though, as I'm under the impression that if the sensors are connected, that the PCIII must be disconnected?? So it's not possible to connect the sensors AND run the PCIII?
You will not hurt anything by having both connected, but it rather defeats the purpose of the PCIII, at least in steady state mode, this may or may not be an issue for you, depending on whether or not you have any steady state engine tractability issues.
Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Member Contributer
Did you try a zero map with an across the board increase of whatever amount you figure would be the net equivalent fuel increase of Tom?s regulator?  Dollars to donuts you have not :beer:

Yes, after installing the modified regulator and sync'ing the starter valves, my first riding test was with the PCIII disconnected and the 02 sensors installed. My impression in this configuration was that the regulator cured most of the ridability/tractability issues, but unfortunately there were still a few slow speed problems. And when I say "a few slow speed problems", I mean a slight amount of the on/off symptom was still there, but for the most part it had been almost eliminated. Also, the transition to VTEC was a heck of a lot smoother after installing the new regulator.

Anyway, I was going to have Tom up the fuel pressure a few more psi and see if that helped with the remaining 5-10%, but instead of going that route I reconnected the PCIII, disconnected the 02 sensors, and loaded up a map that was slightly richer than the one I had previously used. So far in this configuration I've been able to take a few rough edges off and smooth out most of the remaining issues, but without the right equipment all I can go on is my gut feeling when it comes to tweaking the maps. Right now I believe my low speed areas might be running too rich. Just wish I had unlimited access to a dyno and exhaust gas analyzer.

I suppose my next step would be to have Tom modify my stock regulator and run it at 50 psi...again without the PCIII and 02 sensors connected...but that will probably be some time down the road. Sounds like a winter project... :P

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Member Contributer

I'm no mechanical engineer... promise. So if this question sounds really stupid... go easy on the "blazing arrows".

In my ill logically thinking mind, it seems the combustion engine system works something similar to this (and this is written in WAY un-technical terms)... we have an air box (that's snorkeled for sound regulation purposes)... we have fuel sprayed into a combustion chamber that is ignited... dropping a piston that in turn creates a draw for more air through the suffocating air box. When the "restricted" air finally fills the piston chamber... the ignition process begins again... BUT that process -because of the restricted air flow- causes some kind of lag. Seems the throttle "blip" is kind of sluggish because of the restricted air flow.

Here in this thread, we're trying to inject more fuel to get a quicker response, or more draw from the combustion chamber,... so that the restricted air box will have more air volume faster for a quicker response.

I'm scratching my head. :joystick:

I remember as a kid, we'd flip the air filter lid on our carburetor cars so that it would "breath" easier (plus we thought it sounded cool). I know about the "louder sound causes me to think I'm going faster" logic. We see where the Australians are creating a BFI - Big Freakin' Intake - mod for their Toyota Soarers (Lexus SC400), to bypass the completely restricting snorkel on this car's air box, and they swear by the increased "breathe-ability" of this mod. I've read the threads here in VFRd about the snorkel mod, as well as read where some guys added a few more holes in the top of the air box with seemingly good results.

So,... I'm scratching my head again. :joystick:

I did the "snorkel mod" as posted here on VFRd, and I had what seemed like good results. So... I go back and drink several more beers, and ponder these thoughts.

Here's my question,... if we don't care about the sound dampening features of the Honda designed air box,... why the heck can't we just cut the top hump off our air boxes so this bad boy can breathe???

Now... I have zero doubts someone on this Forum will inform me that I've screwed up big time,... or that this will cause some kind of fouling complications,... or will burn the engine,... or something I have no clue about... BUT after several more beers... I took my handy "Miracle Blade" (I'm a bachelor and I ain't using it for anything else), and cut that top hump right off the air box.

Riding experience??? Sha-freakin-ZAMM. This was the only mod done at the time, so I can say this experience is directly related to the bike being able to BREATHE. I can raise the front wheel in 3rd gear by just slamming the throttle. It seems like the bike screams. I get to the redline in an instant. I always wear earplugs... so the sound is not boggling my mind, but the roar from the velocity stacks is up there.

It seems to have thrown the thrill in "thrillzilla". :beer:

OK... there's the mod... done by someone that doesn't know squat about all the pitfalls... so fire away.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Member Contributer
cut that top hump right off the air box.

Sounds like a topic that needs a whole new thread, and certainly raises my eyebrows. I personally have a de-flappered and de-snorkled airbox with a K&N filter. With a filter that actually fills the available space (BMC), and no cover above it, you'd move a hell of a lot of air. The only downsides might involve areas of negative pressure above the filter and the necessity of more frequent cleaning of bugs and crap out of the filter. Intriguing idea; I may have to cut out at least the whole front portion of the airbox lid (assuring that entering air has the advantage of the positive pressure above the front valve cover).

As for what we're trying to do with the fuel pressure regulator, it has nothing to do with 'creating more air draw in the combustion chamber'. It has everything to do with making sure the available air has enough fuel mixed with it to achieve a ratio providing the most power under every load.

With that in mind, cutting the top off of the airbox only makes a lean bike leaner. A modified FPR just became even more important than ever for your bike. I'm sure you're now running very lean at some points in the rev range. :o

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Here's my question,... if we don't care about the sound dampening features of the Honda designed air box,... why the heck can't we just cut the top hump off our air boxes so this bad boy can breathe???

I took my handy "Miracle Blade" (I'm a bachelor and I ain't using it for anything else), and cut that top hump right off the air box.

Riding experience???  Sha-freakin-ZAMM.  This was the only mod done at the time, so I can say this experience is directly related to the bike being able to BREATHE.  I can raise the front wheel in 3rd gear by just slamming the throttle. 

Well, the 4 throttle bodies are 36mm in diameter each. The square area of each throttle body is 1017 square millimeters (Pi x r squared).

Times by 4 cylinders/intakes is 4069 square millimeters or 40.69 square centimeters.

I would think that you would AT LEAST want the total airbox intake opening to be equal to, or preferably larger than, the size of the 4 throttle bodies. Any smaller and you're creating a restriction. I'm assuming a brand new air filter here, no plugging or dirt.

40.69 square centimeters equates to one hole (for simplicty's sake), measuring 6.38cm by 6.38cm, or ~2.5 x 2.5 inches.

Removing the snorkel, pulling the flapper valve and the flapper actuator surely offers more surface area than one hole measuring 2.5 x 2.5 inches. Probably more than double that, so anything beyond that is probably not necessary.

Here's my airbox lid, but I haven't measured the size of the holes. Maybe I will, next time the tank is up.

gallery_554_564_41062.jpg border='0' alt='user posted image' />

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Member Contributer

Without doing the math, my thinking was similar, I don't think removing the whole top will do much to increase airflow beyond removing the snorkel and flapper, but who knows? It might make a small difference due to better equalization of air pressure and less turbulence above the velocity stacks (or the opposite! Who can guess without research in a wind tunnel?).

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Engine tractability / performance is way more complex than simple volumetric considerations. Resonance, vacuum, velocity and turbulence all play important roles in optimizing air flow characteristics for a street motorcycle engine that must operate under a variety of conditions & regulations. Disclaimer no doubt there are many other considerations as well and I?m not a motorcycle engine designer by any means.

In some sense it?s easier to optimize for a smaller set of parameters such as maximum HP irrelative of how else the motor might perform.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Member Contributer
Engine tractability / performance is way more complex than simple volumetric considerations.  Resonance, vacuum, velocity and turbulence all play important roles in optimizing air flow characteristics for a street motorcycle engine that must operate under a variety of conditions & regulations.  Disclaimer no doubt there are many other considerations as well and I?m not a motorcycle engine designer by any means.

In some sense it?s easier to optimize for a smaller set of parameters such as maximum HP irrelative of how else the motor might perform.

I agree. I'm not a designer either by any means but in my shop I've dealt with some bizarre air supply issues.

However, in the case of removing pieces above the air filter, my instinct says the filter itself will smooth airflow enough to mask an otherwise ill-advised modification. No doubt a great deal of the VFR's airbox design has to do with meeting noise and emissions regulations, so as long as you don't care about such things, there's no doubt a fair bit of latitude with which to effectively modify the box for more flow. Still, it would be a good idea to be ready to modify the air/fuel ratio after making that much more air available over the stock setup.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Well, I'm still keen to do the "quick'n'dirty" FPR mod. After four days of running with O2 sensor eliminators, and three days of trying out a borrowed PCII, I've removed the PCII, because the VifFerraRi starting running like crap: stuttering in mid-range, idling at 1000, and feeling rather unhappy. It's now running as it was before. Curiously, with the O2 eliminators, it runs hotter than when they're not there and it's able to run in SuperDuperlyLeanSavingThePlanet mode. This is rather counter-intuitive, surely? If the sensors are present, the ECU doesn't bother with closed-loop, and the bike is easier to ride because it behaves like a carbed bike all the way through the rev range, not assuming whenever the throttle is closed that it's time to sip Diet Gas.

So anyway, it appears to be running a bit lean, and a bit hot, so I'm hoping the FPR mod will richen things up just a tad (metric, of course) and stop the bike overheating.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Good points magellan,

I wonder how smart the EFI is in sensing and accommodating for changes in air flow? I guess without all the coolest toys hooked up we?ll never know. But I?d bet some of the old school tuners could do well without some of the high tech toys. Me I would probably not be able to know for sure if I was making overall air flow parameters better, but I would probably notice when I made them worse! So given today?s high state of tune bike engines I tend to leave well enough alone unless there is something about an engine that really bugs me.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Curiously, with the O2 eliminators, it runs hotter than when they're not there and it's able to run in SuperDuperlyLeanSavingThePlanet mode.
Weird & does not compute, how did you measure it's running hotter?
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Weird & does not compute, how did you measure it's running hotter?

It's not accurate, of course, but it went like this:

1. ECU/EFI 'normal': temperature gauge gets to 104C, fan comes on, but only after 10 minutes or so of slow-speed running in traffic.

2. O2 sensor eliminators: Temperature gauge is up in normal traffic, and fan comes on even when bike isn't at slow speed.

3. PCII fitted: as for (1). After two days, bike starts running badly (poor connection? Map not loaded properly??)

4. PCII removed (O2 sensor eliminators fitted): Bike is running at 106C in normal traffic condition.

I ride the same route to work and home every day, so I've got a pretty good feel for what the bike does. Last night (4) and this morning, it was running significantly hotter than the previous couple of days. Yeah, it's sort of "seat of the pants" measurement, but it's obvious enough to make me sit up and take note of it.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Try a zero map with the PC and the 02 sensors back in. If you have engine problems with this setup then you know it's likely something to do with either the PC and/or the installation/reinstallation of the 02 sensors, and/or some other connection accidentally whacked.

I can?t believe the O2 elims will make the engine run hotter. The increased temperature condition is likely related to the installing/reinstalling of various components. A more accurate way to see if the engine is running hotter might be to get a hand held IR temp sensor. I would be looking at such coincidences as faulty thermostat, fan engagement bimetallic thermal gizmo, loose vacuum connections, buggered EFI connections.

It?s amazing how a series of seemingly related events can draw one to erroneous conclusions. The brain is always trying to tie things together to make sense of the world.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I wonder how smart the EFI is in sensing and accommodating for changes in air flow?

Our engines are NOT smart in that regard. They have no idea of the "amount" of air, and instead use data such as Mainfold Absolute Pressure, Atmospheric Pressure, Air Temp, engine temps, RPM, O2 data and such stuff to take a shot at the fuel needs at a given load and RPM. The engine in my Vette has a Mass Airflow Sensor that, well, measures mass airfow and tweaks the mix via that KEY device and all the other billions of sensors that car has to make big power and still get 27 mpg and STILL blow daisies out the tailpipe for the Earth First folks.

A dumb old carbed engine is much "smarter" than our Viffer engines, in that a carb is a flow compensating device--the more air sucked through it via the engine, the more fuel it meters into the airstream. The ratio of this metering is changed by changing jets, as we know, to get richer or leaner. But that's where it becomes dumb again, as this ratio is unchanging for most of the engine's operating spectrum. Thus, limited mileage and limited pollution control. Detroit tried to help those inherent problems with a number of carburetor Band-Aids in the 70s and early 80s, as they had nowhere else to go. Fuel injection was mechanical, only, and it was REALLY dumb. Squirt. Squirt. Squirt. There were no little electronical brains to control the timing and "squirt" of an electronical injector. Tweaked and strangled carbs it was, and they ran terrible.

Then it was the throttle body and single injector. Remember those? Easy to control with the limited brainpower available, and generally ran like crap. I think it only used a MAP sensor and maybe O2s, maybe. And a temp, prolly. Forget, now. Dunno.

Anyway, back to our engines. With our somewhat "dumb" FI system, I'd venture to say that it's fairly easy to upset the balance that the designers had in mind, as there's little or no compensation built in for typical hotrodder mods. Yeah, a pipe is prolly fine, as the mix is likely rich except in closed-loop fuel sipping mode. And airbox mods reduce pumping loss also, but could upset the mix by any radical changes. But it's likely that the box is already very good, so no amount of "radical changes" in the inlet side will upset the applecart. As I've said before, I just don't see Father Honda leaving any easy horsepower on the designer's table, within the restrictions of noise, driveability, mileage, etc. Has anyone REMOVED the lid top and their air filter and gone for a litle spin? Don't worry...unless you are going down a dirt road behind a lumber truck, you won't hurt anything. I might do that thise weekend, just to see if the bike wheelies in 5th gear. :P As for turbulence and the air induction stacks....you're trying to see the wind. But, as I've also said before...anything upstream of the filter, short of putting a blower on the bike, won't make any diff to the stacks or the FI stuff. It doesn't care. It's gonna inject fuel into the manifold, well away from the stacks, in accordance with all the sensors, period. But, anything you can do to lessen pumping loss--to a point--can't hurt power possibilities. It's that "to a point" that we should focus on. Honda didn't leave much power on the table. No matter how much you hack the airbox, it won't make your Viffer into a 'busa.

So, that brings up PC stuff. I believe that small changes in exhaust/intake passages (because that's all we ever do...obsess on our pipes and airboxes!!) will require FI tweaking because the system is NOT smart. It can get out of kilter.

Thus I also believe that the only power that Honda left on the table is that of overly lean or overly rich points in the FI map. Those bad spots, wherever they're hiding, coupled with airbox and exhaust mods could really hurt performance. Getting the maps right, with or without airflow passsage mods, without regard to mileage or pollution control nonsense, will show power gains. This we have all seen with the various dyno graphs vs. PC tweaks. And, as we know, most situations are solved with an available map (Staintune, headers, etc etc). From there, it takes either lots of testing or the use of A/F sniffers along with dyno graphs to finalize the perfect map. And we haven't even talked about ingnition timing yet!!

It's all in the map, for better or worse.

Try a zero map with the PC and the 02 sensors back in.? If you have engine problems with this setup then you know it's likely something to do with either the PC and/or the installation/reinstallation of the 02 sensors, and/or some other? connection accidentally whacked.?

Yeah, I agree.

It?s amazing how a series of seemingly related events can draw one to erroneous conclusions.? The brain is always trying to tie things together to make sense of the world.

Yup, yup, yup. Yup.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

But, as I've also said before...anything upstream of the filter, short of putting a blower on the bike, won't make any diff to the stacks or the FI stuff. 

That's probably generally true, but I'm not convinced it's absolutely true. Why do I say that? A year browsing Superhawk/Firestorm forums showed that modifications to the airbox of those beasties was generally counter-productive, due to some cunning design by Honda to utilise Helmholtz resonance and other esoteric physics to maximise cylinder filling. F'rinstance, the airbox has a 'spoiler' just downstream of the snorkel that seems to serve no obvious purpose, yet aids the aerodynamics of two thirsty great crabs (?!?) CARBS (that's better) sucking in air. Remove the spoiler and/or snorkel, and things gets messy from an airflow point of view.

Yes, the VFR is not a VTR, and probably 4 stacks make for a more homogenous airflow than 2. Yet there are possibly some minor effects happening. Maybe we can discount these as being insignificant. Certainly anecdotal evidence (has it been quantified?) suggests that removing flapper valves, snorkels and the like is at least not detrimental to performance.

Anyway, getting back to the PCII thing: The weird thing is that the bike was running OK on the PCII, then it wasn't. It's now running (relatively) OK with no PC, and because my accountant will never approve purchasing one unless it was at the $35 it cost my friend for this one, it's no big deal for me to leave it off. In fact, refitting it and getting the VFR running wonderfully well could be viewed as a bad thing, because that would be snatched away from me when I return the PC.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Trace,

That was a phucking phantastic, one of the best I have read, I learned some things :beer:

Well, you asked a good question!! :thumbsup:

And if you recall a prior rant of mine about turbulence and flappers and snorkles and filters and stacks.....I begged everybody to quit trying to guess what's going on in their intake tracts, as it's futile. Might as well guess about your digestive tracks, and if the morning's eggs and toast are properly mixing with lunch..or did the eggs get ahead of that sandwich, somehow.

Tune for what you know. Stay away from what you don't have a tinker's clue about! And again....turbulence in air...pure, normal air that your bike is sniffing as it goes down the road and sucks into its deflapped, desnorkled nostrils....makes no difference. Okay....if it's bad, it makes a 1/16th HP loss, mebbe. But ya see, that air has no fuel in it. So...turbulence is a moot point. Some guys WANT turbulence, because they think it swirls into the engine like a firggin' corkscrew. Some guys HATE turbulence, because they remember what it did to airflow that had carburetor fuel in it. Other guys remember tunnel-ram motors that tried real hard for laminar flow to get a ramming effect from the inertial of the air/fuel mix that was in the long runners. We ain't got long runners. And we ain't got carbs. Some guys HATE, some guys WANT...meaning....what I've been trying to say...is nobody knows except Father Honda, and he ain't talking! Face it...once that air enters the stacks, it's very much out of our hands. Down it goes, pulsing and dancing with what the intake valve and piston tells it to do.

Having said all that, I do believe that de-flapping/snorkeling is a good thing, as those were added for sound control, NOT for any performance or low-speed torque thing. Nonsense. Would additional hacking the box make more power. Wellllll.....I doubt it, as there's plenty of intake area available. So, let's take our lids and air filters off and see. Or leave the filter on and go for a ride. Put a strap of duct tape across it if it worries ya, but I'll bet it will stay in position. Time yourself in 3rd gear with a stopwatch, 5000 to 11000 RPM. Better? Worse? Same? Dunno. Let's ALLLLLL try it, average the data, and get a good answer to the good question!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I can?t believe the O2 elims will make the engine run hotter.  The increased temperature condition is likely related to the installing/reinstalling of various components.  A more accurate way to see if the engine is running hotter might be to get a hand held  IR temp sensor.  I would be looking at such coincidences as faulty thermostat, fan engagement bimetallic thermal gizmo, loose vacuum connections, buggered EFI connections.

Yeah, neither can I, but the evidence seems to point to that.

But what "various components" were installed/reinstalled?

When it first ran hot, I thought, "Nah - that can't be right!?!" and considered other options: Had I done something to the cooling system (I had to move the coolant overflow tank)?

Perhaps the brakes were dragging (new pads fitted)?

The fan works OK, cuts in when it should. The bike's radiators don't cool as well as I'd like (I have some cunning ideas on that front), but seem to be functioning as intended. Nothing has been touched since the O2 sensor eliminators were fitted except the ECU.

It?s amazing how a series of seemingly related events can draw one to erroneous conclusions.  The brain is always trying to tie things together to make sense of the world.

Yes, that's true, but there's something weird going on here. Whether I've made an erroneous conclusion or not remains to be seen. I'm tempted to plug the O2 sensors back in, but I don't want to return to the jerkiness and awkward transition between closed-loop and 'normal' mode that I had before.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

That's probably generally true, but I'm not convinced it's absolutely true. Why do I say that? A year browsing Superhawk/Firestorm forums showed that modifications to the airbox of those beasties was generally counter-productive, due to some cunning design by Honda to utilise Helmholtz resonance and other esoteric physics to maximise cylinder filling. F'rinstance, the airbox has a 'spoiler' just downstream of the snorkel that seems to serve no obvious purpose, yet aids the aerodynamics of two thirsty great crabs (?!?) CARBS (that's better) sucking in? air. Remove the spoiler and/or snorkel, and things gets messy from an airflow point of view.

I fully believe that is true. Obviously, those aero tweaks were bigtime science at work trying to correct a "wrong", just like all bigtime racing R&D work. Yup, yup. With ya 100% on that one! What are the wrongs in our airbox? Anybody wanna take a guess? Can you see the wind? MAYBE the box is already optimized with science! Anyone know? Anyone want to take a hacksaw to it, being as we now know that Honda did some serious research on these SuperhawkStorm airboxes? Isn't our bike a technology leader? Afer all, it's not a CB 450 runabout...it's a Flagship bike!! Chop away, fellers!

Yet there are possibly some minor effects happening. Maybe we can discount these as being insignificant. Certainly anecdotal evidence (has it been quantified?) suggests that removing flapper valves, snorkels and the like is at least not detrimental to performance.

You beat me to it with your flying little fingers! As I said in post #2, above, I believe that the snorkel/flappy are a restriction to airflow to the area above the filter, and restriction is not good. How much restriction? Dunno, but the motor runs pretty damn good with those horible restrictions in place, doesn't it!?!?! Chopping your airbox to flinders? Methinks you've just crossed the line of diminishing returns. And that's what it's all about, isnt' it? Spend lots of money and chop things all to hell for a scant few HP (maybe)? But looks who's talking--I've spent a bunch of money and time to gut my cat and have the thing JetHot coated!! :beer: I'm a dummy, but I know that cats are not good, either, because they've been added and so I'll gut and PC map accordingly. So....how much did our Father leave on the table? Snorkles, flaps and cats? Methinks so.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Oh dear.

It seems that having my posts either side of yours has snorkeled and/or flapped your brain, Trace. You've gone from sounding all scientific and knowledgeable to sounding as mentalised as I am.

:beer:

Anyway, my red herring / blue cod about the Superstorm's lunchbox missed the obvious point, that you made mention of: it's carbed, and a tidy, well-organised airflow is more important to it functioning well than our injected beasties.

BTW: would it have been easier to have some connector pipe thingos (technical term) made than gutting the cat? Or did you want it to look standard?

Edited by enzed_viffer
Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Member Contributer

I always learn something when Trace posts up. :beer:

I'd read your earlier post about the "air turbulence - scientific research" stuff, and agree -logically- about once the air passes the filter,... our mods (right or wrong) are insignificant. My thinking is pretty basic... open it up to allow zero restrictions against engine draw... and if it's a mistake heck I'll just buy a air box top to replace the hack job.

But... it did make a change of some sorts. I ride mine for sport only. I get my kit on... fire her up... get her out of the basement... head to the tight twisties... 15 minutes later I'm in heaven haulin' ass. This happens 2... sometimes 3 times a week. And it just might be my mind, but before the hack... the front tire was no where as light as it seems after the mod. It just pulls harder out of the corners. That's all.

I keep coming back to this thread -and excellent Web site- to get a far better understanding of what this bike can do, and I have to thank you guys for your very knowledgeable and scientific approach to the process. Thanks for not saying, "TW, you're a dumb a** for hacking that air box!".

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.


×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

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