Print

Please login or register.
1 Hour 1 Day 1 Week 1 Month Forever
Login with username, password and session length

[glens]

Wow!

The dyno (any dyno) is first and foremost a tool which enables one, who can operate it consistently, to see if adjustments/changes either were for the better or for the worse.  Beyond that, they (especially the inertia dynos) really aren't worth much.  Certainly not to generate portable (as in comparable with other dynos) power output graphs with which to assign hard numbers to the amount of power produced.

The most anybody can say about their inertia dyno graph is "look where my power gets made in the RPM range" and arguably to a lesser extent "how it compares to before whatever changes I made".  I ride my bike solely on the public roads so don't personally understand it, but some folks like more on the right side of the graph.  Some like more on the left.  Some like to split the difference.

Lever, I'm glad you're happy with your results and hope that you continue to be happy as the miles roll on.  The rest of this thread is somewhat fun to read, but also not.

Heatwave, it's evidently easy to duplicate results but it's evidently easy to manipulate them as well.  It wouldn't surprise me for an operator to achieve somewhat "common" results at the start and more "glamorous" results at the end.  A lot of women do similarly when preparing to go out for the evening.

[Unbalanced]

Here you go... (no smoothing) Do you still think they're not comparable showing consistent results? If so you really are just covering your eyes like a little kid that thinks he can't be seen by doing so.

I never said I had 123/123 on a dyno different from Joe's. I said joe got the same results as my earlier dyno when he ran his baseline before tuning.

Heatwave,

I would tend to disagree with you that 104/110 is close to 111/114 especially when the graph only reaches these numbers due to no smoothing then in the middle the dyno graph is well not anywhere close to the original one I reposted above that you had done.   People spend lots of money for that hp number and 7 to 8 hp is not a small significance.   Would figure with smoothing this is 102/108 a far cry different.  The shapes of the curve are way different and the same cam should relinquish similiar curve.  The other thing to note is on the tramontin dyno you are peaking at 4000 rpms with a nice steady upgrade on Joes you are losing ground and peaked at 3500.   My guess is tramontin is probably a good representation for your build and while there maybe a few more in there, but its right in the hunt.   Also note there are no correction factors on Joe's dynosheet. 

[Heatwave]

Wow!

The dyno (any dyno) is first and foremost a tool which enables one, who can operate it consistently, to see if adjustments/changes either were for the better or for the worse.  Beyond that, they (especially the inertia dynos) really aren't worth much.  Certainly not to generate portable (as in comparable with other dynos) power output graphs with which to assign hard numbers to the amount of power produced.

The most anybody can say about their inertia dyno graph is "look where my power gets made in the RPM range" and arguably to a lesser extent "how it compares to before whatever changes I made".  I ride my bike solely on the public roads so don't personally understand it, but some folks like more on the right side of the graph.  Some like more on the left.  Some like to split the difference.

Lever, I'm glad you're happy with your results and hope that you continue to be happy as the miles roll on.  The rest of this thread is somewhat fun to read, but also not.

Heatwave, it's evidently easy to duplicate results but it's evidently easy to manipulate them as well.  It wouldn't surprise me for an operator to achieve somewhat "common" results at the start and more "glamorous" results at the end.  A lot of women do similarly when preparing to go out for the evening.

I suppose that's true for any dyno operator that might be less than scrupulous. But I really don't understand the animosity and skepticism being displayed. Let me see if I understand where you're coming from. I get my bike tuned at another shop a year ago and the results are 111/115 SAE.


The bike runs well but I believe there's more "left on the table". So I take the bike to Joe's and while I"M STANDING THERE he does a baseline dyno run. He has no idea what the bike is capable of. The baseline comes back at 111/114, once again while I'm standing next to Joe on the bike with ear covers watching the screen. Is it that unreasonable to conclude that these 2 dyno runs, made 200 miles and a year apart by 2 different operators can reasonably be interpreted as the dyno's are showing consistent results. What the h*ll other interpretation can there be??

Then I get Joe's final tune and it comes back as 129/129 actual and 123/123 SAE. This is not a complicated story and the results speak for themselves even if other's feel a need to come up with some incredible fantasy to suggest otherwise.

And then on top of everything else, another biker (Lever) has almost the exact same work done and gets dyno results of 121/119 SAE as measured on a different dyno run by a different tuner. Are you kidding me??? Of course this demonstrates a constent outcome of a strong combination of parts that work well together in a 110" tuned by a competent tuner. Any other conclusion is from a mind with an ulterior motive IMO.

[Unbalanced]

Well said, from the words of a gentleman!
Harold,
It would behoove you to take a lesson, in manners, from folks like this.
I will no longer entertain this type of horse-hockey, with you.
Have at it, and go ahead and continue your apparent hate-fueled, cyber smear campaign.
Have already contacted the moderators here, on this message board,(as I have had to to in regards to you, on other boards as well) once again.
I supposed if you were not hammering on us, you'd just find someone/something else.
Carry on.

Scotty ever think maybe it is you and your business practices that cause this on sites and not just this one and not just me.  

For instance
http://www.v-twinforum.com/forums/v-twin-forum-general-harley-talk/153585-hillside-sponsor-info-rule-changes.html    

Ohh thats right you cant read it because your banned for always being in the middle of the controversary.

an excerp for you.

Over the years during their sponsorship, a majority of all the controversy on this forum has revolved around Hillside in some way. It was Hillside and GMR. It was Hillside and Joe's dyno. It was Hillside and Hyperformance. It was Hillside and dyno sheets. It was Hillside and R&R. It came down to one common denominator, Hillside. Regardless of fault, they seem to always be in the thick of it. This wears on everyone. Many do not realize but since Hillside became a sponsor here we have received more complaints about them than any other sponsor or member - not complaints about the work they do or their integrity, but their posting habits, their comments and the controversy that surrounds them. I know the Admin gave a lot of consideration to all of this before deciding to drop Hillside as a sponsor. Contrary to popular belief, it is not always about money and certainly wasn't in this case.

[Unbalanced]

I suppose that's true for any dyno operator that might be less than scrupulous. But I really don't understand the animosity and skepticism being displayed. Let me see if I understand where you're coming from. I get my bike tuned at another shop a year ago and the results are 111/115 SAE.


The bike runs well but I believe there's more "left on the table". So I take the bike to Joe's and while I"M STANDING THERE he does a baseline dyno run. He has no idea what the bike is capable of. The baseline comes back at 111/114, once again while I'm standing next to Joe on the bike with ear covers watching the screen. Is it that unreasonable to conclude that these 2 dyno runs, made 200 miles and a year apart by 2 different operators can reasonably be interpreted as the dyno's are showing consistent results. What the h*ll other interpretation can there be??

Then I get Joe's final tune abd it comes back as 129/129 actual and 123/123 SAE. This is not a complicated story and the results speak for themselves even if other's feel a need to come up with some incredible fantasy to suggest otherwise.

And then on top of everything else, another biker (Lever) has almost the exact same work done and gets dyno results of 121/119 SAE as measured on a different dyno run by a different tuner. Are you kidding me??? Of course this demonstrates a constent outcome of a strong combination of parts that work with with a 110" tuned by a competent tuner. Any other conclusion is from a mind with an ulterior motive IMO.

Heatwave,

Where do you see a base line of 111/114 ....   its not there.   I blew the dynosheet up its 104/110   please point it out to me you posted it and that is unsmoothed giving you some extra.

[Heatwave]

Heatwave,

I would tend to disagree with you that 104/110 is close to 111/114 especially when the graph only reaches these numbers due to no smoothing then in the middle the dyno graph is well not anywhere close to the original one I reposted above that you had done.   People spend lots of money for that hp number and 7 to 8 hp is not a small significance.   Would figure with smoothing this is 102/108 a far cry different.  The shapes of the curve are way different and the same cam should relinquish similiar curve.  The other thing to note is on the tramontin dyno you are peaking at 4000 rpms with a nice steady upgrade on Joes you are losing ground and peaked at 3500.   My guess is tramontin is probably a good representation for your build and while there maybe a few more in there, but its right in the hunt.   Also note there are no correction factors on Joe's dynosheet.  

To be honest I wanted the graph without "smoothing". Too many dyno operators try to mask a poor tune with smoothing. I'm not suggesting that about Tramontin but as I learned more, I would always want my dyno results printed without "smoothing". O smoothing will "really" tell you the quality of the overall engine performance with a particular tuning map.

And the riding difference between the much older Tramontin tune and my latest tune from Joe is like night & day. They simply aren't even remotely close to the same performance. It is not an exaggeration in the least to suggest the performance after Joe's tuning is superior in every way imagineable. Take off, top end, low rpm acceleration, parking lot maneuvaribility, sheer wicked acceleration. The tramontin dyno is from a map that always felt like the bike had a sock stuck in the TB. The bike runs now like it is always ready to stand up and bite when asked to. Suggesting the Tramontin map represents the true performance is simply ridiculous. Forget about the graphs they are irrelevant when compared with the saddle performance differences.

There's not a rider worth his "salt" that wouldn't feel the difference and more importantly be shocked by the difference.

[naitram]

give it a rest guys. this thread is supposed to be about levers upgrade.

[Unbalanced]

Heatwave,

I am not contesting any of what you just said about how you feel the bike runs, just the numbers you represented as close to the same which they aren't.   You compare smoothing 5 with smoothing 0 and numbers that are off as well as a curve that is off.  I believe you will find that while you like the way the bike runs that Joe's tune, that numbers on a more reputible dyno will be closer to the numbers from the HD dealer.  

[Unbalanced]

Sure Neal np.

[Heatwave]

Heatwave,

Where do you see a base line of 111/114 ....   its not there.   I blew the dynosheet up its 104/110   please point it out to me you posted it and that is unsmoothed giving you some extra.

I have no clue what you're talking about. The dyno shows the max performance before Tramontin's tune at 104/108 and after their tune 111/115.

[Unbalanced]

Joe's dyno and baseline as compared to your original.

[PASN YU]

Bench racing is great! Makes me laugh.   

[Unbalanced]

Heatwave,

Here is the link where you posted your dynosheet from tramontins.   All I did was copy it forward.

You should report yourself to the moderators for posting it if you didnt want your name posted.

http://www.cvoharley.com/smf/index.php?topic=56035.msg805838#msg805838

you can use this one to replace the others where your name still resides.

[Mr. Warlock]

I am in no way dis-ing anyones build nor am I trying to jump on Levers thread..... I hope everyone is enjoying there builds!! I know I am.

Pert. information to the discussion though......... Levers bike has a 30T front and was done in 6th gear.

[Eagle Eye]

Lever...hope it runs like a bat outta hell for you.