woody
|
 |
« Reply #40 on: March 29, 2009, 02:40:40 PM » |
|
Hi All; Im baaaakkkkk, Firstly, thanks to all, The fixes and support were and was great. The problem appears to be the Restrictor in the intake in the airbox. I had a look into the airbox intake and found the remnants of a sponge restrictor sitting on top of the vanes in the intake. I inserted a piece of sponge into this area and took the bike for a ride, it went like a bat out of hell until suddenly it choked and ran like a sick snail. I thought I stuffed it and limped home, but when I took off the tank the sponge was gone. It was sitting on top of the air filter, obviously sucked into the airbox and sitting on top of the air filter choked off the air. I found a better way of inserting the sponge and took it for another ride, problem fixed. There is still a little hesitation at full throttle, but its so much better and the little hesitation is minimal. NOW, a question. If there is a restrictor in the Aussie airboxes, is this the same for USA? If not, what size jets do you have in the carbs? (We have .78) Also, do you have the same noise restrictions (exaust noise) as we have in Aussie land, perhaps choking the exaust could be contributory to the issue. Our BIG BROTHER is so ingrained over here that we are regulated in everything and any changes have to be "Approved" or we get fined and treated like criminals. I was thinking that I could have the potential to increase performance by re-jetting and removing the airbox restrictor. Has anyone any suggestions. Thanks to all again, especially Bostonrats, johnny kiwi, but not to forget the rest I'm grateful to you all. The best thing is that I now have a bike running like new, and I know all the bits and pieces are correct, the vacuume hoses really needed replacement, I would never have considered this as a need until you advised me and this was a must.
|
|
|
Logged
|
|
|
|
John U.
|
 |
« Reply #41 on: March 29, 2009, 03:24:15 PM » |
|
Hey Woody, I've been following this thread and have been wondering about this foam piece you and others have mentioned. I sure don't have one of those on my bike, the filter just sits in the airbox and there is no other restriction. I think a lot of us here thought you were talking about a K&N after market filter which has a foam prefilter that can be used to avoid running lean. I believe our OEM main jets are 100s and I know the slow jets are 35s OEM. I changed mine to 38 to reduce the chances of ethanol plugging them up. US bikes are pretty quiet. I have no idea what other differences there may be.
|
|
|
Logged
|
|
|
|
woody
|
 |
« Reply #42 on: March 29, 2009, 05:12:00 PM » |
|
HI John U, With our jets at .78 it makes sense that we would have to run some restriction in the intake otherwise it would run very lean. The sponge restrictor is not immediatly obvious, if you look into the opening at the back of the top cover of the airbox, there are 4 vanes (you may need a torch). On top of these vanes we have a sponge right across the opening going into the airbox about 4 inches and sits about 1/2 inch from the top onto the vanes, effectivly reducing the opening by 1/2 inch (about 40%). If you are running 100 jets you would probably not need this restriction as the extra air would be benificial to the extra fuel. Our slow jets are also .35 by the specs, its just the main jets that are smaller. Our authorities have probably dictated that us Aussies cant handle the power and have made this concession. I was speaking to a friend today who owns a Harley, in Australia his Harley had an intake manafold restrictor and small jets, when he first had the bike serviced, they removed the restrictor and jetted it up, it went much better. Later models now have the restriction cast into the intake manafold to make alterations more difficult. Some Harley shops make a mint "upgrading" bikes by "porting" out these restrictions. In Australia we have freedom............the freedom to pay taxes and be told what is safe for us.
|
|
|
Logged
|
|
|
|
|
MP
Member
    
Posts: 5532
1997 Std Valkyrie and 2001 red/blk I/S w/sidecar
North Dakota
|
 |
« Reply #44 on: March 30, 2009, 05:11:10 AM » |
|
If possible, dyno the bike with the small mains, then change them, and dyno again. It would be very interesting to get actual numbers, vs seat of the pants.
|
|
|
Logged
|
 "Ridin' with Cycho"
|
|
|
woody
|
 |
« Reply #45 on: April 06, 2009, 06:05:20 PM » |
|
Hi again; I have sourced some jets (possibly) and some needles, but it may be a while until I get them and get them in. Im also concerned that My exaust may be a problem as we have what appears to be smaller pipes (Piggies) and even though I cut them off Im not sure what other variable there may be. Ill post a note when Ive done it, but it may be a while. Thanks all, I would have chased my tail for months without your help. The bike now runs as well as it ever has with new plugs, syncronising and new vacuume lines, but now Im getting greedy for more power as I believe that with the right jets and opening up the airbox as it should be it will go even better. As for milage, I only run super and get between 38-42 mpg depending on how I ride, I have had it down near 25 while fanging it though. You guys seem to get the same milage from what I read, either I ride badly (possible) or you guys ride better than I (probable). Stay upright!
|
|
|
Logged
|
|
|
|
Madmike
|
 |
« Reply #46 on: April 06, 2009, 06:30:55 PM » |
|
As for milage, I only run super and get between 38-42 mpg depending on how I ride, I have had it down near 25 while fanging it though. You guys seem to get the same mileage from what I read, either I ride badly (possible) or you guys ride better than I (probable). Stay upright!
Woody - Did you account for the difference in the size of the gallon from US to Imperial when you did your comparison?? US is 128 ounces Imperial is 160, there is a slight difference in the size of the ounce as well - apparently this was all determined by some old winos that are now long since dead. Mileage here in Canada sucks but I always put it off to the gas - it would be interesting to know BTU's per pound on the fuel with the alcohol in it. Somehow I think we are getting screwed - not certain - but it feels that way.
|
|
|
Logged
|
|
|
|
woody
|
 |
« Reply #47 on: April 07, 2009, 12:58:15 AM » |
|
Hi Madmike; You have dissapointed me greatly, from my calculations this means that Im only geting 32 MPG against your 38mpg.............This is probably a conspiricy where the GovCo get more money because we spend more on petrol. NOT HAPPY 
|
|
|
Logged
|
|
|
|
Blackduck
|
 |
« Reply #48 on: April 07, 2009, 09:41:51 AM » |
|
Duh, should read all postings before opening ones mouth. Pulled an earlier reply. The Foam pad acts as a restrictor but I think its purpose is actually a sound deadener. 100 mains will cure the flat spot with the pad out. Been there done that. Be warned though if you think more is better you are right but it will take a lot of playing around to get right. I am currently running 127.5 mains with the air box opened up, Cost a couple of runs on the dyno to get right. Usually get around 15 K to the litre so it has not hurt my mileage, in fact better than I used to get. Cheers from the West Coast. Blackduck
|
|
|
Logged
|
2001 Standard, 78 Goldwing, VRCC 21411
|
|
|
Madmike
|
 |
« Reply #49 on: April 07, 2009, 10:27:44 AM » |
|
Hi Madmike; You have dissapointed me greatly, from my calculations this means that Im only geting 32 MPG against your 38mpg.............This is probably a conspiricy where the GovCo get more money because we spend more on petrol. NOT HAPPY  I'm in Canada and get about the same mileage... I think it has something to do with a conspiracy by the oil companies against any countries that have ties to the Windsor Family.... makes as much sense as anything ....... that relates to oil companies anyways. If I stay right around 60 MPH this is where I get my best mileage - but that seldom happens for some reason. I'm putting on an Interstate tank to get some range and giving up worrying about it.
|
|
|
Logged
|
|
|
|
|