The other would be to build a knowledge base to see what works and what doesn't- which I am pretty sure what Mud had in mind for this thread. There is not a lot of activity on it, because most of the folks here are pretty happy with a stage 1 that runs good and doesn't backfire. Dyno operators can "juice" the numbers a little bit- hence why Mud asked the folks to post the sheet, not just numbers- so that atmospheric conditions, smoothing, and the correction factors could be compared as well- so that the dyno operators that inhabit your world can be located as well.

As for the "silly and pointless" thing- spending thousands of dollars purchasing a machine, whose basic construction (three piece crank, etc) has been outdated since the 1940's, is silly and pointless. Spending more money to make that same machine, faster, louder, and ultimately less reliable is also silly and pointless... but here we all are doing just that. "Silly and pointless" is all a matter of perspective, and you may want to keep that in mind before projecting yours onto the folks here to learn something.

 

Umm, I think you may have slightly misunderstood what I think is silly and pointless.

I do not consider dyno tuning and seeking extra performance from these bikes silly and pointless.

What I do think is silly and pointless though is comparing the results with other people's bikes when their results were produced on a different dyno machine, with a different operator and under different conditions.

The usefulness of dynos is to be able to compare what a bike was at before you make some changes with how it is afterwards. This lets you see an incremental increase in power and that is a good thing.

Trouble is that dynos are not reliable machines and their operators are far from reliable people. It is in their interest for the customer to leave thinking that their machine has been tuned better than it would have been anywhere else. The problem being that it is too easy to do that as an operator and there is little regulation to stop it happening.

So, that's why this thread is pretty well useless. Someone will proudly post a picture showing 85HP on a stage-1 dyno and think they must have a pretty special bike. The reality being that the operator frigged the numbers to make it read about 10HP over the real result to massage the ego of the customer and improve the tuner's own rep.

Look at these dyno charts by all means but take them with a big pinch of salt because I'll bet that few of those with silly numbers are actually reproducible on a dyno that is correctly used.

 

I agree - the most important thing from a dyno is a relative measure i.e. how much did it improve from then and now. Also the fuel curve is very important - flat and at the target ratio. Finally the shape of the TQ/HP curves. I want the TQ early and flat as possible. HP should be a nice grade hill. No dips etc.

OK - absolute numbers to compare bike to bike. Yes less accurate, but it is normalized for environment (temp, Air pressure, humidity). The SAE and STD smoothing is the normalization points for this (SAE is more conservative). Of course, if the dyno is not calibrated all holds are off as to comparing dyno outputs to another dyno. Its also possible for the dyno to be non-linear and thart is bad because now you can't trust the curve.

In my world we calibrate back to the National Bureau of Standards (NBS) using equipment that is traceable to NBS. Basically a paper trail to determine the accuracy of the equipment. Each measurement on the cal has its accuracy and they add each time they are applied. NBS tells you how much a pound really is or a volt or foot or a gram etc etc etc.

Dyno's are useful, but they are not really material for pissing contests unless you can prove that is calibrated and its accuracy spec Bet most operators can not show that...


That said my dyno for my 120R in the 2000 FXDX.
Crate 120R with the following mods. SE 51MM carb and intake, R&B Pro-stock Spyders exhaust, TMAX 660 SM cams with SE perfect fit push rods, HP adjustable ignition (forget brand ), SE HP Clutch plates, AIM VPP,. Rest stock with 5-speed. Sorry no 1/4 times...

 

you stated that you think this thread is pointless, and you are illustrating that how? by hijacking it and running it off topic? This is a thread for DYNO RESULTS and TIME SLIPS. If you are so inclined, please start a thread on the pointlessness of dyno results thread- and let this one continue to be a dyno results and time slip thread- thank you.

 

I'll do as I damn well please until a mod tells me otherwise. Thank you for thoughts though.

 

.
.
.
well put.
.
.
.

 

Here is mine fresh from the show. Build details in my sig.

 

Uploaded with ImageShack.us

Axtell 95" jugs (10.5:1 advertised compression)
Heads milled .080"
2.00 intake 1.60 exhaust
Ported by me
1.7 roller rockers
SE adjustable pushrods
doubled base gaskets
thickest head gasket I could find (.045 compressed)
Kuryakyn 4g cams- installed 4* retarded (to cut low rpm cylinder pressure)
Stock oil pump
S&S stock stroke flywheels (lightened)
Carillo rods- stock length
J&E pistons (came with axtell kit, cut for valve clearance)
Daytona twin-tec ignition
Crane coil
SE plugs
Mikuni 42mm carb
SE intake manifold- cleaned up by me
SE race only compensator sprocket
SE clutch spring
Barnette's clutches
Ultima Big growl "up and outs" (no good for low rpm, mid rpm, or top end)
... and probably other stuff I forgot.

 

Wasn't real happy with my previous tune so i got a new one.
runs awesome now.

 

I'd be happy with that torque curve. We're running similar setups, so hopefully mine looks like that when I get around to getting mine on the dyno.