Kawasaki Vulcan Forum banner

1 - 20 of 26 Posts

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,467 Posts
Discussion Starter #1
I've got aftermarket pipes (HK straight something or others). If I put a K&N air filter in my stock air box, will that be enough of a change in air flow to necessitate a fuel management system?

Thanks
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,467 Posts
Discussion Starter #3
That's what I was afraid of. So now, switching will cost me $250 instead of $45. And that's just because I already have some cleaner & oil from before.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
864 Posts
power comander 111... or 5, you might find one on ebay ?
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
186 Posts
when I added my XXX intake and Freedoms, I got a fair amount of decel popping....
I puchased a TFI controller, looking only to control the popping,.
It worked geat, plus it gave me more/faster throttle response.
I run it only rich enough to control the popping..... and fuel mileage is unaffected....
Mosly 2up I average 40.
2up towing our trailer I average 32...( trailer loaded weighs 310lbs..)
When I turn it up, mileage goes down and power goes up a little. but to me, the fuel mileage loss does not off set the power gained....
(more mileage lost then power gained )/..
But all being said, my setup is perfect for me....
 

·
Bike Of The Year Winner, 2012
Joined
·
4,905 Posts
That's what I was afraid of. So now, switching will cost me $250 instead of $45. And that's just because I already have some cleaner & oil from before.
You know, I didn't accurately read your original post.

I thought you meant you was putting a new intake on, not just replacing the filter.

Simply replacing the filter probably won't change the air intake amount enough to force getting a fuel processor.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,467 Posts
Discussion Starter #7
You know, I didn't accurately read your original post.

I thought you meant you was putting a new intake on, not just replacing the filter.

Simply replacing the filter probably won't change the air intake amount enough to force getting a fuel processor.
I guess I could always just put the filter in & see what happens, eh? I'll be able to hear any decel popping right away, maybe check the spark plugs after a couple hundred miles.

I might be the only one here who likes the look of the stock airbox. Not crazy about the cheapish "2000" sticker, but it's not that bad.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
408 Posts
Has anyone installed and air intake without adding any kind of after market exhaust? If so did it require any sort of fuel management changes? I only ask because the stock exhaust on my bike is adequate and I have read more posts about restriction on the intake verses the exhaust.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,467 Posts
Discussion Starter #9
Has anyone installed and air intake without adding any kind of after market exhaust? If so did it require any sort of fuel management changes? I only ask because the stock exhaust on my bike is adequate and I have read more posts about restriction on the intake verses the exhaust.
Rule of thumb is that if you do one or the other (exhaust or intake), no fuel mgt. is necessary. Only if you do both.

Some will tell you that doing just the intake is a waste of time and $. I say, if you want to do it, do it. Doing it just because it looks better is reason enough for me.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
7,620 Posts
Just 'as an add', these bikes could benefit from fuel management bone stock. They run lean to satisfy the EPA. It may run 'okay' without it, even with mods, but you ARE lean. Fuel management will wake her up!

Plus, intake nor pipes will have any real improvement without a processor. They are purely aesthetic until you bring in some fuel to match the air.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
7 Posts
Not real sure but I do computer programming on automobiles and can say that the ECUs have a little wiggle room coded into them, meaning on my FZ6R I built a free flow exhaust, modified the air box and added a K&N filter, with no added controller has 22 thousand on it that way and no ill effects, has plenty of power (actually more), runs fine.
I think if you knew what I know about ECUs you would know that the ECUs are automatically adjustable to a certain extent. And when some ones says lean just what is lean to them? 14.71? 15.1? 16.1?
All the controllers (Power Commander etc...) do is injector pulse width, more fuel, less fuel, when someones says the bike is lean they don't consider that lean actually makes more power, it is a old myth that more fuel makes more power, to much fuel can make something have less power. And most don't know that even gas can be 5% to 10% Ethanol so every time you fill up you may be changing the AFR (leaner, richer).
So a controller gives you 4hp, yep about 4hp ($300 for 4hp). In the old carburetor days it was a fact rejetting was a must, in the ECU age no so much. My $.02
I have been programming GM computers for 8 years now.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
7,620 Posts
Not real sure but I do computer programming on automobiles and can say that the ECUs have a little wiggle room coded into them, meaning on my FZ6R I built a free flow exhaust, modified the air box and added a K&N filter, with no added controller has 22 thousand on it that way and no ill effects, has plenty of power (actually more), runs fine.
I think if you knew what I know about ECUs you would know that the ECUs are automatically adjustable to a certain extent. And when some ones says lean just what is lean to them? 14.71? 15.1? 16.1?
All the controllers (Power Commander etc...) do is injector pulse width, more fuel, less fuel, when someones says the bike is lean they don't consider that lean actually makes more power, it is a old myth that more fuel makes more power, to much fuel can make something have less power. And most don't know that even gas can be 5% to 10% Ethanol so every time you fill up you may be changing the AFR (leaner, richer).
So a controller gives you 4hp, yep about 4hp ($300 for 4hp). In the old carburetor days it was a fact rejetting was a must, in the ECU age no so much. My $.02
I have been programming GM computers for 8 years now.
Unfortunately, these motorcycle computers are not nearly as advanced as the GM computers you are used to. They are lean to begin with, and will be way lean with pipes and intake. Folks have documented the performance drop on dyno's. In addition, the bike runs so lean that it may run hot, idle rough, or hesitate. The GM computers will have some manner of adjusting themselves, whereas these computers will adjust very little.

Not sure where you got the 4 horsepower number, but on these motorcycles that number is SIGNIFICANTLY different. It's been proven time and time again, folks have thrown their bikes on a dyno and seen very big improvements (30~50% sometimes!) once they got a fuel processor on to go with their pipes and intakes.

On cars built right now, they have super high compression (12:1+), variable valve timing, and other technologies in order to help them make more power when lean. Then they are programmed to run lean to improve fuel economy and satisfy the EPA. On our bikes, we didn't get so lucky. They just made it lean, with no real innovations to make the engines perform better lean. People are able to get dyno-proven gains with JUST a fuel processor on a stock bike because of the way these are programmed from the factory (plus the bike itself running cooler, etc.)
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
408 Posts
That's kind of what I was getting at. Does anyone have objective information as to which modifications yield what power and A/F ratio changes? I already have a pretty good butt dyno and I can smell when something is running way rich. That being said, documented result taken by calibrated instruments would be most helpful here. I know there will be variances between to like models, but an approximate beyond speculation would be helpful for anyone trying to prioritize future modifications. I realize given the ability of most motorcycle ECUs, especially the one on the VN2000 that it's beyond unlikely to achieve a stoichiometrically perfect A/F ratio but the closer one can get, the more power and economy will be benefited.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
7,620 Posts
That's kind of what I was getting at. Does anyone have objective information as to which modifications yield what power and A/F ratio changes? I already have a pretty good butt dyno and I can smell when something is running way rich. That being said, documented result taken by calibrated instruments would be most helpful here. I know there will be variances between to like models, but an approximate beyond speculation would be helpful for anyone trying to prioritize future modifications. I realize given the ability of most motorcycle ECUs, especially the one on the VN2000 that it's beyond unlikely to achieve a stoichiometrically perfect A/F ratio but the closer one can get, the more power and economy will be benefited.
For sure. And I like your style! Look for numbers, not opinions! There are some dyno results on this forum if you search around. When I'm not posting from my phone I'll search around a bit, too, and see if I can't dig some old threads up. Many have had their bikes dyno'ed. And I think RACNRAY(?) may have done some Dyno experiments with his 1700 in regards to a stock computer with intake and exhaust mods.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
408 Posts
Yeah, you know the old saying about opinions. I'm just thinking that there has to be someone out there that has done the processor, intake, and exhaust in some order or combination and recorded the power, processor settings and A/F ratio that worked best for each combination tried. I know if I get in a position where I'm ready to perform all three of these, I will be thoroughly documenting everything, not only for my benefit, but for the benefit of others as well. I realize that since the 2000's have been discontinued it's unlikely to see a big boom in people performing new mods as the support from the aftermarket is unlikely to grow from what is at newest a three year old bike.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
7,620 Posts
Yeah, you know the old saying about opinions. I'm just thinking that there has to be someone out there that has done the processor, intake, and exhaust in some order or combination and recorded the power, processor settings and A/F ratio that worked best for each combination tried. I know if I get in a position where I'm ready to perform all three of these, I will be thoroughly documenting everything, not only for my benefit, but for the benefit of others as well. I realize that since the 2000's have been discontinued it's unlikely to see a big boom in people performing new mods as the support from the aftermarket is unlikely to grow from what is at newest a three year old bike.
It's true that they've been discontinuted, but they are also dirt cheap right now (used). So there may be an influx of 'new owners' even if there aren't 'new bikes'. For whatever reason (My theory is, people who have that price range in mind for a new metric bike want bags and a fairing), the bike wouldn't sell at it's price point. But it is selling well in the used market for peanuts. So who knows, there may be hope yet for the aftermarket!
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
3,219 Posts
It's true that they've been discontinuted, but they are also dirt cheap right now (used). So there may be an influx of 'new owners' even if there aren't 'new bikes'. For whatever reason (My theory is, people who have that price range in mind for a new metric bike want bags and a fairing), the bike wouldn't sell at it's price point. But it is selling well in the used market for peanuts. So who knows, there may be hope yet for the aftermarket!
I wish that was the case, but take pipes for example. Just in the last 1.5 years I have had mine. You could get 3 different cobra pipes, V&H, Samson, HardKrome, Freedom Performance pipes, Shogun and I am sure there were others. I don't know if all places quit carrying them but Dennis Kirk only carries the Cobra Pipes, V&H, and Shogun (which are on Closeout Now). But I say companies like Cobra and V&H will hang in there for a while but your selection will be small.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
2,967 Posts
30 to 50% with just intake, exhaust, and PC (et al)? I have to think that's a pretty rare situation on a stock bike.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
3,219 Posts
30 to 50% with just intake, exhaust, and PC (et al)? I have to think that's a pretty rare situation on a stock bike.
That's the fun thing about numbers. Increasing 10 by 50% give you 15 (5 more) but increasing 20 by 50% will give you 30 (10 more). I would say that you get a bigger percentage gain on your lower HP bike to make the percent higher. I feel using percents is just a good way of marketing.

If you increase the HP of my daughters 5hp go cart by 50% you have a whopping 7.5 hp. What sounds better "gained 50%" or "gained 2.5 hp".
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
7 Posts
Unfortunately, these motorcycle computers are not nearly as advanced as the GM computers you are used to. They are lean to begin with, and will be way lean with pipes and intake. Folks have documented the performance drop on dyno's. In addition, the bike runs so lean that it may run hot, idle rough, or hesitate. The GM computers will have some manner of adjusting themselves, whereas these computers will adjust very little. AIR FUEL SPARK 3 basic components for a engine to run, all have that in common, an air pump. GM's ECUs may have more due to the fact they have a STFT and LTFT but even the most rudimentary controller will have some kind of adjustment you can't just hope all engines run exactly the same, which they don't and not to mention fuel form pump to pump there has to be a sliding scale to adjust for such.

Not sure where you got the 4 horsepower number, but on these motorcycles that number is SIGNIFICANTLY different. It's been proven time and time again, folks have thrown their bikes on a dyno and seen very big improvements (30~50% sometimes!) once they got a fuel processor on to go with their pipes and intakes. In dealing with controllers, Diesels will yield the most with a tune, gas at best in a 400hp engine will yield 10 to 20hp increase. In a bike it is like 4hp with a controller and maybe 10-12 with filter, pipes and controller if that. Now if you put a different cam grind in and tune for that, different story or boost.

On cars built right now, they have super high compression (12:1+), variable valve timing, and other technologies in order to help them make more power when lean. Then they are programmed to run lean to improve fuel economy and satisfy the EPA. On our bikes, we didn't get so lucky. They just made it lean, with no real innovations to make the engines perform better lean. People are able to get dyno-proven gains with JUST a fuel processor on a stock bike because of the way these are programmed from the factory (plus the bike itself running cooler, etc.)
14.71 is stoichiometric, best possible power you can have, so when you say lean, again just what is lean? I run at cruise 16.1 and never run hot or knock some even run 17.1 or more in Australia where lean cruise is legal (higher number in AFR is leaner). Dumping fuel to make a NA (naturally aspirated) cooler is bad practice, boosted yes, you need richer to keep from knocking.
I will address in comment above with retort.
 
1 - 20 of 26 Posts
Top