Kawasaki Motorcycle Forums banner

Status
Not open for further replies.
1 - 20 of 22 Posts

·
Registered
Joined
·
206 Posts
Discussion Starter #1
<div align="left">Hey everyone!
Sorry for the long post, but I wanted to share the stuff I learned this weekend. After mounting the Arata system to my 636, I finally got the chance to take it to North Valley Honda (in Phoenix) to have Mark Ledesma do the tuning. Here’s a cool pic of how the exhaust looks after it was burned in. Gotta love those full Ti systems!


My plan was to do cost effective mods to get the best power, without the need to remove the engine from the frame or especially, crack into the cases. Here’s the list of what I’ve done:
Stock 1 & 4 velocity stacks (30mm) in all 4 cylinders
Stock Cams timed at 105 Intake/106 Exhaust
BMC Race air filter
Screen removed from front intake
Arata full exhaust
PCIIIusb
Motul 300V Factory Line 5W40 oil
Emissions removed

On the track, I’ll be using VP Ultimate 4 race gas. At $8 a gal, it is much less than VP MR9 (at $20 a gal!) and is oxygenated, although the word is it makes a little less power than the high dollar MR9. Using the ULT4, Mark made the first map and did a few pulls on the dyno to see what she was making. Needless to say, we were all surprised (more like shocked!) with the results:

(If it’s hard to read- 126.4 SAE hp)
Thanks to good tuning from Mark, some key info from others (Doug Lofgren and Ken Hill), some luck (OK, a bunch of luck!) and the info posted by Dan Kyle
(http://kawiforums.com/forum/topic.asp?TOPIC_ID=8833&SearchTerms=development), the results were better than I could have imagined!

We were also able to a test of the KLEEN Mod, which is similar to the PAIR Mod on GSXR’s. A while ago I posted how to do this Mod, did some testing and got results that showed a gain of next to nothing: http://kawiforums.com/forum/topic.asp?TOPIC_ID=4088 This testing was done with the stock exhaust system and I felt that maybe there was a chance that a free flowing aftermarket exhaust would gain a few hp as some have claimed.

The KLEEN Mod was disconnected (and blocked off) on my 636 while it was being tuned on the dyno to insure the oil-rich crankcase air wouldn’t get into the exhaust and mess with the O2 sensor readings. While being tuned, the crankcase vent was routed to the airbox through a homemade breather box (oil separating baffles and filter material) in the tail, a trick I learned from Ducati’s. Mark did dyno pulls with both breather arrangements and guess what? There was hardly a difference to mention between the two. The above dyno sheet shows the results (126.44) with the KLEEN Mod adding vacuum to the crankcases and without the vacuum (the crankcase connected to the airbox), the best was 126.33 hp. No noticeable difference, but each of the KLEEN Mod runs were in the 126’s and without, the power dropped quickly to the mid 125’s. Although there’s no real power gain to be had, the KLEEN Mod eliminates hot oil-rich air into the airbox (which will build gunk on the intake valves) and doesn’t hurt the power, so it may be worth doing.

After lunch, the ULT4 was swapped out for Pump gas and another map was made. Good ‘ole 91 octane gas made 124 hp, showing a steady 2 hp less throughout the entire rev range. So that’s what ULT4 does, 2-2.5 hp more and if we had the ability to adjust the ignition timing, maybe a bit more hp could have been had.

Here’s a link to some more pics, info and the dyno results:
http://public.fotki.com/garymilcheck/motorcycles/zx-6r/mods/tuning_stage1/
I’ll be adding a write up for each pic when I get the chance.

And, I’d like to thank Mark Ledesma for being cool (as usual!) and working his butt off for me. NVH has the best dyno facility here in the valley and I came away respecting how well Mark knows his stuff. </div id="left">
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
35 Posts
Rrider,
You mention changing the velocity stacks (Stock 1 & 4 velocity stacks (30mm) in all 4 cylinders), I was wondering why the middle stacks were higher to begin with (in stock form) and how much of benefit would you get by changing them?
Also, your stock cams are timed at 105 intake/106 exhaust, what are the stock intake/exhaust values?
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
206 Posts
Discussion Starter #5
Thanks guys, I learned from Doug Lofgren that if more of us did stuff like this- we'd all benifit, even the guys who charge money for tuning/engine building. Keeping secrets hurts everyone!

Originally posted by
Rrider,
You mention changing the velocity stacks (Stock 1 & 4 velocity stacks (30mm) in all 4 cylinders), I was wondering why the middle stacks were higher to begin with (in stock form) and how much of benefit would you get by changing them?
Also, your stock cams are timed at 105 intake/106 exhaust, what are the stock intake/exhaust values?
hansel023, good questions!
Here's my guess why the center velocity stacks are longer. The center 2 cylinders run hotter and center air gets heated more, especially when running at lower rpms. This hotter air would cause the peak torque to shift higher and to compensate, the longer velocity stacks would shift the peak torque back lower to match the colder air in the outer cylinders. At higher rpms, the air doesn't have as much time to get hot, so using 4 equal length velocity stacks would increase high rpm power at the expense of lower power.

Ken Hill posted on the WERA race board that he tested every comination of velocity stack lengths and found the 4X30mm combo did best with a gain of 3-4 hp up top allowing the 636 to pull almost to redline. This is what I was looking for, to change the nature of the 636 and not wasting the top 2K rpm like it is in stock form. Of couse, the bike would need to be tuned every time after changing the velocity stacks to see what the real results are.

The stock cam settings are 102/104 for the 636 and 105/104 for the kit cams, with the intake kit cam having the same duration but the exhuast kit cam having two degrees more duration. To match when the intake valve closes and exhaust valve opens to the kit cams, I went with 105/106.

A lot more of this stuff is posted on my pic site. to find it, click on each picture.
http://public.fotki.com/garymilcheck/motorcycles/zx-6r/mods/tuning_stage1/
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
207 Posts
Is the hp number before or after the SAE correction factor (1.072)?
126hp is a huge figure for the elevation of Phoenix. That's awesome!
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
206 Posts
Discussion Starter #7
Originally posted by want2race
Is the hp number before or after the SAE correction factor (1.072)?
126hp is a huge figure for the elevation of Phoenix. That's awesome!
The numbers include SAE correction factor. I asked Mark how well his MJP dyno accounted for atmospheric changes and he showed me the huge weather station that was connected. He also said the weather station did such a good job at correcting that he didn't see any variances between power numbers in the winter or summer.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
35 Posts
Rrider[/i] Thanks guys said:
Rrider,
You mention changing the velocity stacks (Stock 1 & 4 velocity stacks (30mm) in all 4 cylinders), I was wondering why the middle stacks were higher to begin with (in stock form) and how much of benefit would you get by changing them?
Also, your stock cams are timed at 105 intake/106 exhaust, what are the stock intake/exhaust values?
hansel023, good questions!
Here's my guess why the center velocity stacks are longer. The center 2 cylinders run hotter and center air gets heated more, especially when running at lower rpms. This hotter air would cause the peak torque to shift higher and to compensate, the longer velocity stacks would shift the peak torque back lower to match the colder air in the outer cylinders. At higher rpms, the air doesn't have as much time to get hot, so using 4 equal length velocity stacks would increase high rpm power at the expense of lower power.

Ken Hill posted on the WERA race board that he tested every comination of velocity stack lengths and found the 4X30mm combo did best with a gain of 3-4 hp up top allowing the 636 to pull almost to redline. This is what I was looking for, to change the nature of the 636 and not wasting the top 2K rpm like it is in stock form. Of couse, the bike would need to be tuned every time after changing the velocity stacks to see what the real results are.

The stock cam settings are 102/104 for the 636 and 105/104 for the kit cams, with the intake kit cam having the same duration but the exhuast kit cam having two degrees more duration. To match when the intake valve closes and exhaust valve opens to the kit cams, I went with 105/106.

A lot more of this stuff is posted on my pic site. to find it, click on each picture.
http://public.fotki.com/garymilcheck/motorcycles/zx-6r/mods/tuning_stage1/[/quote]

Rrider
Thank you very much for the info and hopefully (cash permitting) I will try some of those mods in the spring time.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
207 Posts
Wow, so that power was actual at the wheel, at elevation power?

I'm impressed. I think I need to visit that shop, it's only a 6 hour drive.
More like drop off bike for the winter....

That torque curve is awesome after 85mph.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
206 Posts
Discussion Starter #10
Instead of this being my test of how my bike did with the changes, it turned into a crazy test of dynos and different methods of tuning. I just wanted a good dyno run to compare to Dan Kyle's results!!! Not too much to ask, is it?

Did you all think the 126hp was a crazy number? I’m hoping someone out there will appreciate this info so, here's the rest of the story.

I thought it would be a good idea to take the bike to ECS Dyno for a comparison with a Dynojet Dyno. Walter threw the bike on the dyno, did a few runs and with pump gas in the tank- here's the result:

Mark's map (NVH) made 113.5 SAE hp (on Mark's MJP dyno, it made 124 SAE hp with pump gas)
After a little fiddling with the map, Walter (ECS) got 115.6 SAE hp
Walter, also an excellent tuner, claimed Mark's map was too rich and by leaning it out, he was able to pick up some power. In fairness to Mark, with my permission he intentionally made the pump gas quickly, keeping it on the rich side. This was OK with me since I was more concerned about the Ultimate 4 race map and this saved me a few bucks on the tuning fee.

Walter’s Dynojet numbers got me and quite a few others around town here thinking! A good friend with good connections, Matt Hartlieb was scratching his head as much as me. After talking for a while, he came up with an excellent way to compare the results from ECS. A quick phone call later, Matt and I decided to take a day trip to Dynojet in Las Vegas to see Dusty who does dyno development and AMA team tuning. If you've never heard of Dusty, he's an awesome tuner and a great guy who was more than helpful. With Ultimate 4 gas, here's the result after tuning by Dusty:

119.1 SAE hp (this wasn't the best run, one was 120.1 and the rest in the mid 119's)

After tuning, Dusty's map made a good 2hp more than Mark's across the entire rev range on the Dynojet 250i and had the same impression of Mark's map showing too rich.

That evening, Matt ran into Mark and gave him the news. I spoke to him and he asked me to bring the bike with all the dyno info up to his shop the following afternoon to hear the story. After doing some testing, Mark's Ultimate 4 map did make 1hp peak less than Dusty's but the mid range was about 1 hp more with Mark's map. After a long talk, a bunch of testing and more talking with Mark, I have to say I'm more than happy to have spent my money with Mark. He did an excellent job and I'm sure his race map will work great.

Confused yet? Here's the breif version.
Walter at ECS says Mark's map was too rich using his Dynojet 250. Using his tuning method, Walter was able to get a few more hp everywhere by leaning it out.

Dusty said the same as Walter about being too rich and got a few more hp everywhere by leaning it out using a Dynojet 250i, Tuning Link software and his tuning method. Dusty also said he could get another hp or so by leaning it out further, but it wouldn't help me on the track- it would be too lean for the real world.

Mark gets a little stronger midrange using his map compared with Dusty's map on his MJP dyno. Using his own tuning method, he ends up with a richer map when compared by a Dynojet, tested the Dynojet way but it's not too rich on his MJP equipment. Also, Marks's MJP hp numbers are way too high to compare to Dynojet.

Here’s what I got out of this. No one is right and no one is wrong, all three of these guys are excellent tuners. Dynojet teaches a method to tuning and it makes good results when measured by a Dynojet Dyno. Their way is not necessarily the best way, but it is a great way to tune a bike and end up with a happy customer. One thing is for sure, all the dyno runs in the world won't do squat for me. Riding will the only way for me to tell which map I like best- it'll be the one that gets me around the track the fastest. I’m happy for what I learned from Mark, Walter and Dusty. I can't wait for next month to get on the track to find out how well Mark’s and Dusty’s maps work!

And, if you want to compare my results with Dan Kyle’s-
Dan’s bike made 6hp more than mine by cracking into the motor to skim the head and deck the cylinder, adding race kit cams and velocity stacks, and using high dollar race gas. My bike pick up maybe one or two hp over a stock bike by adjusting the cams, buying a BMC airfilter, picking up 2 stock velocity stacks and using much cheaper Ultimate 4. It’s nice to have a 120hp 636!
There it is, nice and simple.

If you want all the info, just click here:
http://public.fotki.com/garymilcheck/motorcycles/zx-6r/mods/tuning_stage1/

Later!
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
37 Posts
Damm I feel smart don't worry I'm sure it will wear off
One of the best posts to date this is what makes us come here to read
not just because of hp but the how and why
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
3,190 Posts
Yep, thanks very much. That was very informative and those are some impressive gains for not too much money.
Very nice.[:p]
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
206 Posts
Discussion Starter #17
Thanks! I don't know much, but I do know I'd know a lot less if it wasn't for others typing up stuff like this on the net. It's all about helping each other out. Know what I mean? ;)
Anyone have an Akrapovic full system in Phoenix on their 636? I'd love to see the results of an Akra vs. Arata battle for power!
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
53 Posts
Nice! Right now I'm doing some research on where to get a custom map made. So that when I get my PC and exhaust, I'll know where to go.

Does anyone out there know of a good shop in the Los Angeles area? How much would it cost to get a custom map done?

Thanks.
 
1 - 20 of 22 Posts
Status
Not open for further replies.
Top