07 25th DYNO

Agree again...don't need to do another dyno unless you want to compare results of mods or if you need your bike remapped. Definitely money well spent if you have to fix poor fuel delivery.

 

It will be worth the money to be vindicated if it comes out that way!

 

I'm trying to figure out how without the PCIII R.W.'s bike ran 10 more hp than every mag test I've read for the 5th gen? maybe that's at the crank instead of the rear wheel? maybe R.W. just got really really lucky? who knows.

 

It was done on the rear wheel, my bike had a Staintune and the K&N on the first run before he mapped the PClll.

 

would you mind sharing the map?

Hey MyVfr25th,

would you mind sharing the map? If you dont mind could you send it to me at james_dewar@hotmail.com

thanks a bunch!!!

 

top end speed?

Another thing, what kinda top end speed do you get now?

Can you give me an indicated number you can crank up on the top end?

thanks again.

 

This is a very good FYI, answers the questions about inaccurate and varying dyno runs, and is taken directly from Factory Pro's site at http://www.factorypro.com/

<snip>

Problem:

Today, the entire world's hp values are a mess of dynojet "hp", dynojet clone's rough approximations of dynojet horsepower , some brake dyno mfgr's "dynojet channel" that's "+/- 10% of a dj number" , some dynos that out exaggerate the dj numbers and imply that they know what the transmission hp and crank hp is, and even other dynos with the most expensive brochure that read whatever the user wants them to read, True, Real, SF and DJ..... (sigh...)

All because some guy thought that a 1985 prerelease version V Max made 145 crank hp according to the marketing dept. and he couldn't have his "new" inertia dyno read 90 hp on a stock dealership V-Max. Well, he WAS right at 85-90, but he made it read 120 to sell more people on his dynos. And that's where the chassis dyno hp mess started.

Simple Solution:

True HP.
Every dyno company can all do it.


DEF:
Corrected True HP is the:
Actual power under Steady State or Sweep with CORRECT inertial mass value at 20 f/ps
delivered to the drive roller of a chassis dyno
to which is ONLY added the dyne coast down parasitics and then
corrected to existing atmospheric test conditions.


Factory Pro has confidentially refused to exaggerate measured and corrected horsepower figures to sell more dynos.

Since Factory Pro hasn't rescaled horsepower for the last 20 year and our software reads the same files the same from the very first EC997 dyne system.

Some Dynamometer companies add to measured rear wheel power readings a factor that is based on ESTIMATED rear wheel power losses (under what power conditions? 125cc? 1200cc? under coasting conditions? with a 3.00x17 bias ply tire? a 190x17 radial tire? New heavy radial tire vs. worn old, light, stock bias ply tire? Who knows?)

In short, there is NO meaningful "average" tire to get a correct rear tire power transmission loss measurement for all bikes - so obviously, unless they actually measure the power lost in the rear tire, under driven load conditions, NO dyno company should BE ADDING incorrect power figures into the measured power. It's simply wrong.

The fact that they add varying amounts of power to the actual, "true" amount of power delivered and measured to the surface of the drive roller creates a situation that makes it an onerous task to compare power figures from different brands of dynamometer systems.

On simple inertial dynamometers, some (most, actually, all that I know of in the MC market) companies use an average for the inertial mass value of the engine, transmission, rear wheel, sprocket and chain on every bike - as if a YZ125 has the same rear wheel or internal rotating mass as a 1340cc Harley Davidson. Needless to say, if the software thinks that the YZ125 had a HD rear wheel on it, it would look like the 125 makes more HP at the rear wheel than it does at the crankshaft. It's simply wrong.
And - that's why you hear of 125cc Karts that make 43 hp at the rear wheels!!!!!

It's expensive to measure frictional losses in the engine and drivetrain, requiring the dyno to be able to drive the vehicle with engine off. Add the cost of a 50+hp electric motor, controlled power supply, etc. It's just not likely that $20,000 dyno will be equipped with that equipment.

It is also common for dynamometer companies to add to the power readings by adding transmission and primary gear/chain losses back into the measured power readings. Some companies make a concerted effort try to measure frictional losses and, optionally, add the power to the measured readings. Other companies - some that would surprise you - say that it's not important and give a blanket, single factor for frictional losses in every engine. That includes some $25,000-$35,000 dynes.

Some simply say that there is a meaningful "average" for every motorcycle,(2 stroke, 4 stroke, 1 cylinder/1 transmission, 4 cylinder/1 transmission) and apply it to every bike and that it is not a significant difference.

Blanket estimates of "average" losses and corrections are, quite simply, incorrect. At the upper levels of the industry, (we are talking about $150,000 - $500,000 AC or DC 4 quadrant dynamometers) it is not tolerated - shouldn't be - and needn't be.

There is a dyno company that actually has different versions of software that displays their own identical data files as different amounts of power depending on whether you use the DOS version or the Windows version of their software!!

True Rear Wheel Horsepower (tm) is Factory Pro's standard of measuring the power that is actually delivered to the rear wheel. It is honest, true, fair and duplicable. It is the ONLY standard that can be duplicated by the entire industry - regardless of the dyno manufacturer.

Following is a reference table so that, if you are used to rather inflated HP figures, you can see what your vehicle would generally make on the True HP Scale.

<snip>

Again, check it out yourself at Factory Pro's site at http://www.factorypro.com/

 

Unless you got a secret World Superbike VFR800 engine by mistake, 113 HP is a tad on the high side.

My '99 with a Micron pipe and derestricted airbox made 100.6 HP. I was happy to break 100 and thought it was a reasonable number, based on the previous charts I have seen.

And from 1998 to 2008 the VFR800 hasn't had any horsepower gain overall. It's about the same.

 

Oh Really.....................

 

Always the same question. How has the biggest penis....

My bike did not pull the way I wanted so I went to my garage, opened a beer and digged in. After cleaning carbs and the K&N airfilter balance-adjusting the carbs and retiming the ignition it is far better and I´m happyer... But I dont know how many HP it gifs and I don´t mind. ;o)

 

Regardless of calibration, the curves show loss of torque and horsepower around 6800rpm. Smooth curves require experimental work to mapping/spark timing/fuel mix/ air box mods, etc. to improve performance around that rpm.

 

Yeah, around 100hp peak give or take.

Post from the Big VFR Mailing List circa 1998:

https://www-auth.cs.wisc.edu/lists/vfr/1998-May/msg02262.shtml

2005 VFR800 dyno chart:




98.8, 99.3, different bikes, different dynos, different operators, and 7 years apart. About 100 hp, give or take.

 

I love my bike, it has more than enough guts for me, but it does puzzle me that you can swap the exhaust, intake, add a chip, and do a host of other things to a car engine and make huge gains in HP, what is it that keeps this engine from comperable (obviously to scale and so on) gains? Why is it not possible to tack on 10 HP if you change the whole exhaust, intake, and add a chip? Im not upset, just wondering (im new to the motobike mod world).

 

Don't feel bad or let them bother you 25th. Last Sept. a buddy and I went to a Harley shop dyno drags contest put on by Hot Bike Magazine. My VFR and his Speed Triple were not met with smiling faces. I know that my VFR is not fast compared to alot of bikes but I knew I could beat some Harleys. When we got there we signed up and started watching. There were full dress Road Kings that the dyno said were making 140 hp and running 10.20 in the 1/4 We were very impressed. I was actually nervous. Then my buddy ran his speed triple against a bad ass Big Dog with a huge V twin- The dyno said the speed triple maid 161 hp and ran a 9.01 1/4 and the Big Dog made 170hp and ran a 10 flat. Then we knew the truth- The dyno lies. Hell it said my VFR made 152 hp and I ran a 9.4 1/4- Later they had a bone stock Hayabusa that the dyno said maid around 220hp and ran around a 8 flat. What was funny was most of the Harley guys thought it was all accurate. I wish, but it was a good experience to learn about some of the mobile dynos and dyno drags.

 

All the data shows that mean HP is 100, with a small standard deviation, Honda's publicly stated targeted mean HP was 100 hp; the "process" (power output) is on target with small variation around the process mean. Speaks volumes to Honda's quality and design prowess with respect to (Taguchi-based) robust design.

All the run-to-run, bike to bike dyno variability possibilities are easily dealt with by doing a statistically valid Gage R&R. :wink:

 

Because car engines aren't typically sold w/ high performance parts for $ and gas mileage reasons- there's alot of room to add hp. Performance bike manufacturers put much more R&D and $ into extracting HP out of the engines.
When I added a $100 aftermarket cam to my '68 Chevelle I gained like 40 hp! I wish it was that easy w/ bikes.

 

Oh it is pretty easy, just add a coupla zero's to $100.00 and your done. Pretty easy really, LOL!

 

Comparbly speaking the gains you see from a bike to a car is actually quite close when you consider the hp to weight ratio of each. 5 hp gain on a car that weighs 3200 lbs. is not that significant, but take that same 5 hp gain on a 450 lb. bike, well you do the math.

Plus the fact that Honda has worked with this motor for, well 25 years and has figured out how to extract just about as much horse power out of it and still maintain strict emission standards. The exhaust on the VFR is really quite amazing, it really is not as restrictive as most believe. That is why I am not installing a PCIII on my bike since installing an exhaust. The exhaust itself may free up some restriction at high rpm but not enough to make the bike go lean. So, there really is nothing to gain by adding a PCIII, unless, you are experiencing drivability issues (such as a slight dip in the hp curve at right around 6400 rpm range) then the PCIII can be used to tune that out. There really is not much gain in the use of the PCIII and my bike is performing quite well with no drivability issues. I will add an O2 eliminator to it just so the ECM will not go into closed loop operation, which when the bike is fully warm uses the O2 to maintain emission output shich can and will cause hesitation and stumbels at certain rpm's.

Key really is to be happy with what you got, there is not much else to get out of the V4 without spending a ton of money. Do the exhaust, if anything for the sound, the PCIII if you must and just ride the thing. If you want horsepower purchase another bike.