Okay, I'm late to the party, and certainly not an engineering exhaust scientist.Originally Posted by srt8-in-largo
But if an exhaust can "suck about 10hp out of a system" couldn't a differently engineered (read as aftermarket) exhaust restore that?
Okay, I'm late to the party, and certainly not an engineering exhaust scientist.
But if an exhaust can "suck about 10hp out of a system" couldn't a differently engineered (read as aftermarket) exhaust restore that?
My girls:
Isleen - 2014 F6BD
Saorla - 1995 FLSTN Heritage Special
"Politeness, n: The most acceptable hypocrisy."
Ambrose Bierce
George I did a little research last night. Cycleworld put a set of monster ovals , so same design on a stock HD. 103 motor. Before and after dyno pulls yielded a 5% increase in HP and a 9% increase in Torque. Granted its not a B but it is an internal combustion engine.
Can I first say that I'm not trying to be obstinate or hard-headed. Really, I'm not!
Skeptical yes; but not arguing for the sake of arguing.
Dyno's can be made to give you whatever information you want. When magazines and retailers dyno, or otherwise test, product that they're receiving advertising money for, there's an incentive to show the product in a favorable light. I won't accuse Cycleworld of skewing results but I will point out this conflict of interest which makes their results non-definitive to me. In the professional world of scientific and engineering testing, such conflicts send the results automatically to the round file.
I'd be much happier to see results like this from a Joe Schmoe user like you or me where no money is exchanging hands.
Let me ask this, how many exhaust design articles can we find where they say it's beneficial to send gases into pressurized chambers?
How many designs like this do we see on race vehicles?
This is an exhaust for sound man, not performance.
I have to agree, when installing a more free flowing exhaust, to get more HP and torque you should add more fuel and possibly tweek timing settings. Also air intake has a lot to do with adding performance. They all work in unison together. More air in, add fuel and expel exhaust faster. This is basically how more power is made. Sometimes dyno results forget to mention other factors that were used to achieve favorable results. Pipes alone could do just the opposite and hinder peformanceCan I first say that I'm not trying to be obstinate or hard-headed. Really, I'm not!
Skeptical yes; but not arguing for the sake of arguing.
Dyno's can be made to give you whatever information you want. When magazines and retailers dyno, or otherwise test, product that they're receiving advertising money for, there's an incentive to show the product in a favorable light. I won't accuse Cycleworld of skewing results but I will point out this conflict of interest which makes their results non-definitive to me. In the professional world of scientific and engineering testing, such conflicts send the results automatically to the round file.
I'd be much happier to see results like this from a Joe Schmoe user like you or me where no money is exchanging hands.
Let me ask this, how many exhaust design articles can we find where they say it's beneficial to send gases into pressurized chambers?
How many designs like this do we see on race vehicles?
This is an exhaust for sound man, not performance.
Video clips and write up on experiences are in the video section
Pretty much narrowed it down to Two Bros or nothing. V & H just too darn expensive, over 1100 $ Cdn. Just waiting for real world on bike reviews from the first buyers.
Can anyone tell me how the stock 2013 pipes sound in comparison to the stock 2015 pipes. Is it a big difference, I heard the 15's are more throatier.
You and I would both like to know! I bet if we post a request in the "Rally" thread someone would be kind enough to idle their 2015 next to a 2013/2014 and get it on video.
C'mon Terry; Shooter gaurantees V&H will turn your bike into a rocketship
EDIT: The above is a joke; Shooter did not really say that.
Posting Permissions
Reply With Quote
