The guinea pig for this project is a 2006 model with 11,000 miles on the clock. It has a custom built, cat-delete exhaust with Ferracci pipes, fully mapped PCIII, and K&N filter. It put down a very healthy 106hp (SAE) on the dyno.
The Donor Bike
[image: Posted Image]
[image: Posted Image]
Amazingly, a supercharger will eventually sit in there. Somewhere.
There is no doubt on this one: the 6th-gen has much less space to work with. I'm going to have to get pretty creative just to be able to nestle the Rotrex in there, let alone hide everything behind the fairing. Not only is the radiator 2 rows larger than the 5th-gen, but the side fairing is 2 inches shorter as well. In other words, :beer:
[image: Posted Image]
I found out rather quickly that all 6th-gens come equipped with a (previously only Cali-spec) EVAP system, so I have a feeling this is going to disappear from the bike rather quickly.
[image: Posted Image]
That's a little better. For the first week I had the bike, I did nothing but play with the position of the supercharger -- it is the single most important design aspect of the entire project, so you have to make sure it's right. I desperately tried to fit the Rotrex down in the space occupied by the EVAP system, as the bracketry would be much simpler, the belt drive much shorter, and the radiator undisturbed from its current location, but there is no way to do it. No matter how the blower is clocked, or how it is located, it either hits the fairing or the exhaust (or both at the same time).
I then proceeded to try to find a place for it on the other side of the bike, possibly by driving it off the alternator, but it couldn't be done without the use of complex jackshafts and/or reversing pulleys, so that option was out. There remained only one place to put it...
[image: Posted Image]
The supercharger will have to sit in the same place as it sits on the 5th-gen, right above the front valve cover. This means the horn will have to be relocated, the PAIR valve cover replaced with a block-off plate, and the coil pack rotated out of the way to make clearance for the compressor housing.
I attempted to bolt up the Rotrex using the existing bracketry of the 5th-gen kit, but no dice; not a single hole was even close to lining up. The frame is similar (but not similar enough), the head and valve cover much larger, and the offsets & hole locations are different as well. This is going to be a true clean sheet design.
[image: Posted Image]
Honda couldn't even spare me the throttle body being the same. The cylinder spacing is identical to the 5th-gen, but that's it. I'll have to make adapter plates with the new o-ring groove shape built in, and then have the original throttle body adapters sit on top of that. From the looks of it, the same airbox should fit, but I'm not through counting my blessings just yet, as I need to have the supercharger mounted first to see where the plumbing has to go.
Overall, this is going to be tricky, but not impossible. I definitely have my work cut out for me, but am at least familiar enough with these bikes that I can take it step by step and not be surprised with what's next. Hopefully. Anyway, I'll post new pics of my progress as it comes, so stay tuned, and eventually you'll see a bit more of a power kick than the VTEC currently provides...
You may just possibly, extend the life of these bikes. I just hope the economics work out and at least keep the price the same. Hopefully you'll find at least a few of the 5th gen parts will swap over, saving some costs. Cheaper in bulk, right?
I was reading a Ducati Multistrada review when I decided to check out the VFRD. Lo and behold, the 6th gen SC project. I was like Multi what?
My heart sank a bit when you said this will have to be a clean sheet design, I was hoping many parts would be interchangable, thus shortening the lead time for the completed kit but like others said, if anyone could do it, it would be you. I hope everything goes smoothly.
A question: You are working on a 6.5 gen with revised VTEC engagement, would your work have to be revised for earlier 6th generation bikes (mapping, certain hardware etc.)? It's probably too early for this question but I had to ask...
If you can get the SC bike out of the hole with authority it should be quicker than the 1200. It'll have similar horsepower, torque and will weigh less...the 1200 seems to be around 80ish pounds heavier than the 800.
I noticed you are focusing on the evap cannister area, already there are mounting points there, pipes might be in the way though, too much heat transfer unless you wrap them or something? That is the usual spot where they mount turbos on Hayabusas. Puts the wieght down low and forward should help with handling. )))) oh wait you already tried that area? Thats a mass of crap up by the radiators though? Maybe if worse comes to worse drive it off the flywheel instead through the stator cover?
In any case I am sure this thread will be very popular so I am going to feature it now!
It should be quicker. The 5th gen SC VFR gives around 160-170 HP at the rear wheel or similar numbers to a late liter bike at they same dyno (there was a post here where a member took his SC 5th gen to a dyno shootout). There is no reason a 6th gen would be much less. So we are looking at VFR1200 which is 55 pounds heavier with shaft drive, 145 HP, 120 NM torque against a 160 HP, 100 NM torque from a 6th gen SC...
[image: View Post]tinyminds, on 01 March 2010 - 10:14 PM, said:
A supercharged Vtec engagement... sound fun.
When working around the engagement point is my biggest problem, I'll be a happy man. I'm really not worried about it, though, as the supercharger has a way of smoothing out the entire powerband.
[image: View Post]arrow, on 02 March 2010 - 01:04 AM, said:
My heart sank a bit when you said this will have to be a clean sheet design, I was hoping many parts would be interchangable, thus shortening the lead time for the completed kit but like others said, if anyone could do it, it would be you. I hope everything goes smoothly.
A question: You are working on a 6.5 gen with revised VTEC engagement, would your work have to be revised for earlier 6th generation bikes (mapping, certain hardware etc.)? It's probably too early for this question but I had to ask...
Many parts are interchangeable (pulleys, crank & supercharger adapters, airbox, intake hat, block-off plates, and a lot of the little stuff that was required to make the bike run properly under boost), but the bracketry will be all new. Still, this should take a fraction of the time to complete compared to working on a completely new bike.
As far as I can tell, the only main things changed from '05 to '06 are tuning related -- injectors, fuel mapping, and VTEC engagement. I can still work up a fuel map that will put '02-'05 owners in the ballpark, even without having a bike, but for the best tune, I will eventually need to get my hands on an earlier bike and iron out any tuning issues.
So, to put this out there kinda early on, if anyone in the area with an '02-'05 ends up getting this kit, I will custom tune your bike - free of charge - if you bring it by the shop. You'll end up with a fantastic tune, and I'll end up with a fuel map. Everybody wins!
[image: View Post]Veefer800Canuck, on 02 March 2010 - 01:05 AM, said:
The question is: will the completed product be quicker/faster than a new VFR1200??????
I humbly, without bias, predict a big, fat, YES. :goofy:
I see no reason why the 6th-gen will not put out just as much, if not more, power than the 5th-gen, and I have seen some big numbers come out of those 782ccs. Pretty much every dyno pull I've seen of a modified 6th-gen puts out some killer numbers, more so than a 5th-gen, so I expect the final power number to come in at least 160hp SAE. The 6th-gen also has slightly more potential in the fuel system, so I will be able to use all the air that the Rotrex puts out as it spins away at 130,000rpm.
Couple this power with a significantly lighter weight than that of the 7th-gen and you've got a recipe for a drag race spanking. From low revs, I'm sure the 7th-gen will have more grunt, as it has a 58% displacement advantage and the Rotrex is not yet putting out big boost numbers. So, if you are looking for stump pulling torque in 6th-gear from low revs, a 1200 is what you want -- there's no way this setup can compete there. Having said that, though, my '98 will wheelie on command in the first 3 gears, from pretty much any rpm, so I'd hardly call it lacking.
We shall find out soon enough how well it performs...
[image: View Post]toro1, on 02 March 2010 - 08:50 AM, said:
I see no reason why the 6th-gen will not put out just as much, if not more, power than the 5th-gen, and I have seen some big numbers come out of those 782ccs.
And for those looking for crazy power numbers, the 6 gen, due to its cam chain drive, can more easily be modified for lower compression than the 5gen. (insert evil laff here) :goofy:
[image: View Post]FotoMoto, on 02 March 2010 - 09:37 AM, said:
And for those looking for crazy power numbers, the 6 gen, due to its cam chain drive, can more easily be modified for lower compression than the 5gen. (insert evil laff here) :pissed:
Lower compression so as to run more boost? Or do you mean higher compression?
The only way I can think of lowering compression without changing pistons would be by adding a thicker head gasket. Which you could do on a 6th, but not 5th gen.
Out of curiosity, how much boost does the 5th gen torocharged VFR use?
Like everyone else, I'm reading with great anticipation, even though I'll never be able to afford one. Perhaps with the greater number of 6th gen owners it will be slightly less cost per unit to produce more?
I think you may know this, but '06-'09 use gear selection as an input factor in fuel mapping. The '02-'05 don't seem to do this, at least not to the extent that it shows in '06-'09. On my '06 if you speed-correct the VSS beyond -10 or so, the bike thinks it's in a different gear than what it really is, and the mapping causes to bike to run real bad at low speed. I've had a couple people try this on '05 and older and speed correction doesn't see to affect how it runs.
I'm thinking you might need a PCV for '06-'09 for max benefit.
Count me on for one!!!! just let me know when you are ready to send. Money in hand ready to burn rubber.....er I mean burn a hole in my pocket. Im up at 6500ft and need all the extra power I can muster out of my VFR. OH and I say this in the up-most honest way.... (clearing throat) WHERE ARE ALL THE UTAH RIDERS???????????????????? should the VFR club here have member jackets saying "1 Strong".........sigh....... Guess no one rides here but me......well me and like 100000000000000 Harley guys. Maybe its time to join the dark side. Riding with a group is always better than riding alone.. Is that oil spots all over my garage i see in my future????..... Maybe....NOT!!!!!!!
I'm sure you've already thought of this but why not ditch the existing radiators and see if you can use a radiator from another Japanese sportbike? The radiator would, of course, be located in front of the front headers. With the side radiators gone, you'd have all kinds of room to work with. If there's not enough room in front of the headers, then maybe redesign them?
Maybe none of this is feasible but I'm just throwing it out there as an idea.
[image: View Post]EmeraldVFR, on 03 March 2010 - 12:11 AM, said:
The radiator would, of course, be located in front of the front headers. With the side radiators gone, you'd have all kinds of room to work with.
Honda moved them to the sides to get the motor as far forward as possible to achieve better front weight bias as that is a con of a V4 design and V-twins to a lesser extent. Anyhoo, there isn't enough room to stick enough surface area in front and still have enough room for fork travel without a lot of modding. Some RC51 racers go to extremes to do this but it takes 3 radiators and about $1k.
Besides if you stick a bunch of rads in the front, there would be no room for the supercharger.
[image: View Post]coderighter, on 02 March 2010 - 02:15 PM, said:
Toro-
I think you may know this, but '06-'09 use gear selection as an input factor in fuel mapping. The '02-'05 don't seem to do this, at least not to the extent that it shows in '06-'09. On my '06 if you speed-correct the VSS beyond -10 or so, the bike thinks it's in a different gear than what it really is, and the mapping causes to bike to run real bad at low speed. I've had a couple people try this on '05 and older and speed correction doesn't see to affect how it runs.
I'm thinking you might need a PCV for '06-'09 for max benefit.
I haven't given much thought to that yet, Jon. Are you positive the tuning is gear dependent? Since the bike does not have a gear indicator switch, it would have to determine the current gear from RPM & speed, which would wreak havoc with the tuning if the gearing was ever changed significantly (or, as you mention, the speed signal altered).
I want to see how well the PCIII handles the tuning since the bike currently has one installed, and I'm sure many more 6th-gen owners have the PCIII instead of the PCV. With the wideband datalogger & dyno tuning, I should get a really good idea of what is going on. I am also still kicking around the idea of disabling the VTEC and running in 4-valve mode all the time, but this is all further down the line -- I've got to get it running, first.
[image: View Post]FotoMoto, on 03 March 2010 - 12:25 AM, said:
[image: View Post]EmeraldVFR, on 03 March 2010 - 12:11 AM, said:
The radiator would, of course, be located in front of the front headers. With the side radiators gone, you'd have all kinds of room to work with.
Honda moved them to the sides to get the motor as far forward as possible to achieve better front weight bias as that is a con of a V4 design and V-twins to a lesser extent. Anyhoo, there isn't enough room to stick enough surface area in front and still have enough room for fork travel without a lot of modding. Some RC51 racers go to extremes to do this but it takes 3 radiators and about $1k.
Besides if you stick a bunch of rads in the front, there would be no room for the supercharger.
That's pretty much it. I had a hard time running that 3/4" thick oil cooler up front originally, so mounting a thicker, larger radiator there is pretty much an impossibility. Now, if cost is no object, I would redesign the exhaust and have a custom front-mount radiator(s) made, but short of doing that, there's just no way.
[image: View Post]toro1, on 03 March 2010 - 09:33 AM, said:
[image: View Post]coderighter, on 02 March 2010 - 02:15 PM, said:
Toro-
I think you may know this, but '06-'09 use gear selection as an input factor in fuel mapping. The '02-'05 don't seem to do this, at least not to the extent that it shows in '06-'09. On my '06 if you speed-correct the VSS beyond -10 or so, the bike thinks it's in a different gear than what it really is, and the mapping causes to bike to run real bad at low speed. I've had a couple people try this on '05 and older and speed correction doesn't see to affect how it runs.
I'm thinking you might need a PCV for '06-'09 for max benefit.
I haven't given much thought to that yet, Jon. Are you positive the tuning is gear dependent? Since the bike does not have a gear indicator switch, it would have to determine the current gear from RPM & speed, which would wreak havoc with the tuning if the gearing was ever changed significantly (or, as you mention, the speed signal altered).
I want to see how well the PCIII handles the tuning since the bike currently has one installed, and I'm sure many more 6th-gen owners have the PCIII instead of the PCV. With the wideband datalogger & dyno tuning, I should get a really good idea of what is going on. I am also still kicking around the idea of disabling the VTEC and running in 4-valve mode all the time, but this is all further down the line -- I've got to get it running, first.
Dan,
Yep, about as sure as I can be. Back when we were talking PCIII / fuel pressure, speed correction turned out to be the problem. Since then I've helped about 6-8 people with the same problem, all '06 and newer.
Also, I've posted my latest PCV/Autotune map in downloads, you can see the difference there also.
I believe at full throttle, this isn't going to be a issue but it my effect over drivablity. Separate maps also allows tuning for better fuel ecomony at cruise with out messing up around town drivablity. You can richen up light throttle, 3-6K in lower gears and going a little leaner at light throttle in higher gears for a little more MPG's. With the little bit richer low RPM, light throttle actaully helps economy because it makes 3-4k usable when sneaking around town. Over all, it's just a lot nicer to ride.
[image: View Post]coderighter, on 03 March 2010 - 10:21 AM, said:
Dan,
Yep, about as sure as I can be. Back when we were talking PCIII / fuel pressure, speed correction turned out to be the problem. Since then I've helped about 6-8 people with the same problem, all '06 and newer.
Also, I've posted my latest PCV/Autotune map in downloads, you can see the difference there also.
I believe at full throttle, this isn't going to be a issue but it my effect over drivablity. Separate maps also allows tuning for better fuel ecomony at cruise with out messing up around town drivablity. You can richen up light throttle, 3-6K in lower gears and going a little leaner at light throttle in higher gears for a little more MPG's. With the little bit richer low RPM, light throttle actaully helps economy because it makes 3-4k usable when sneaking around town. Over all, it's just a lot nicer to ride.
Thanks for the info. I'll certainly have to keep an eye on this when it comes time for tuning. I have found things to be a bit more forgiving on a supercharged bike (as you always have enough airflow available to you), but if it proves to be trouble with the PCIII, I'll order up a PCV and go to town on some new maps.
These are the kind of hurdles I like to tackle, though, as it means the hard work is behind me. :cool:
This may have been already mentioned someplace but is there a way to dial in the HP gain at all? Via whatever method, maps, restrictor plates, pulleys etc...
[image: View Post]jasonsmith, on 03 March 2010 - 01:05 PM, said:
This may have been already mentioned someplace but is there a way to dial in the HP gain at all? Via whatever method, maps, restrictor plates, pulleys etc...
Typically, pulley sizes are the easiest way to alter the HP by increasing or decreasing the supercharger speed.
Might need a different sized belt too, depending on the adjustment latitude provided by the tensioner.
And the mapping would need to be changed for the new boost level.
Can't go too high with stock internals, as the C.R. of the VFR is higher than desired for forced induction. (11.6:1)
This limits the amount of boost you can ultimately run.
When building an engine from the ground up for forced induction, lowering the C.R. is the way it's usually done. :fing02:
with the 6th gen having 2 different maps needed (02-05?) and 06+....do you think you will build two maps or will older 6th gen owners have to figure it out on their own? I know it is early, but I have decided to keep my 03 long term, and this might be a nice mod in the near future...
[image: View Post]turtlecreek, on 03 March 2010 - 03:54 PM, said:
Toro,
with the 6th gen having 2 different maps needed (02-05?) and 06+....do you think you will build two maps or will older 6th gen owners have to figure it out on their own? I know it is early, but I have decided to keep my 03 long term, and this might be a nice mod in the near future...
:+1:
Same here. I have an '02, and we know the '06 ECU changed a fair bit.
Also Toro, note that the 2009 model bike has a new ECU again (CBR1000RR derived) and different injectors. We may be looking at a couple of options with the kit, those being PCIII maps for '02-'05, a PCIII map for '06-'08, a PCIII map for '09 and maybe a PCV map for '09.
I would definitely keep going on the notion of disabling VTEC as well - as an engineer by trade, your solution to this will be much more elegant than those tried previously. Modification of the VTEC valve buckets to force permanent valve engagement will probably be the best way forward, but might be too complex. An electrical mod to force engagement of the solenoid is the next answer.
[image: View Post]jasonsmith, on 03 March 2010 - 01:05 PM, said:
This may have been already mentioned someplace but is there a way to dial in the HP gain at all? Via whatever method, maps, restrictor plates, pulleys etc...
Yes, any and all of the methods you mentioned could be used to limit power.
I have toyed with designing an inlet restrictor that would essentially allow you to spin the supercharger faster than normal, bumping up the low & midrange power, but limiting the top end. Since you are restricting the air before the supercharger, you do not suffer pumping losses due to compressing the air (systems that use a wastegate-style bypass valve to vent pressure post-compression suffer from these losses); you do, however, still have to deal with the added heat, as there is a much higher change in pressure ratio than if running the same amount of boost without a restrictor.
You can always richen the mixture and pull timing to significantly cut the power, too. With a centrifugal supercharger, limiting the rpm also cuts the power, as the hp continues to climb to redline.
The pulley ratio is always the determining factor, though, and I set it so that the peak boost I want to see is reached at redline. Spin it faster, and you'll see more power, spin it slower and you get less. Simple. For example, if I were to spin the supercharger at a 1:1 ratio, I estimate you'd see around 190hp (SAE) at the wheel, running 13-14psi. Now, the stock injectors would not be able to cope with this, you'd probably need to run it on race gas (and/or at least employ a good water injection system), and who knows how well the stock components would hold up, but you would be rocking some big-time power. Come to think of it, a serious water injection system can pretty much cancel out the excess heat in the charged air and significantly reduce combustion temps, so it may be possible to run 200hp on the stock internals, on the street. Hmmm...
[image: View Post]turtlecreek, on 03 March 2010 - 03:54 PM, said:
With the 6th gen having 2 different maps needed (02-05?) and 06+....do you think you will build two maps or will older 6th gen owners have to figure it out on their own? I know it is early, but I have decided to keep my 03 long term, and this might be a nice mod in the near future...
I mentioned this earlier in this thread, but while I can create a map that will get '02-'05 owners well in the ballpark tuning-wise, I will need to personally tune a bike to get it optimized. So, if anyone with an '02-'05 installs this kit and is willing to drop their bike off for a few days, I will give you a custom tune free of charge. That way I'll have a really solid map to go off of in the future, and you will have a flawless running bike.
[image: View Post]turtlecreek, on 03 March 2010 - 03:54 PM, said:
Also Toro, note that the 2009 model bike has a new ECU again (CBR1000RR derived) and different injectors. We may be looking at a couple of options with the kit, those being PCIII maps for '02-'05, a PCIII map for '06-'08, a PCIII map for '09 and maybe a PCV map for '09.
I would definitely keep going on the notion of disabling VTEC as well - as an engineer by trade, your solution to this will be much more elegant than those tried previously. Modification of the VTEC valve buckets to force permanent valve engagement will probably be the best way forward, but might be too complex. An electrical mod to force engagement of the solenoid is the next answer.
I'll worry about the '09 when I get there. Once I know how different the '06-up injectors are from the '02-'05s, I'll have a really good idea of what the '09 injectors are like. As I said about the earlier model 6th-gens, if an '09 owner buys a kit, and I can get my hands on it, I'll do a custom tune for free.
Now as far as VTEC is concerned, I'm still not sure it will even be an issue with the performance of the bike. I have overlaid similar dyno charts on top of one another from the 5th & 6th-gens, and with the exception of the dip right before the VTEC engagement, the 6th-gens put out solid power running in 2-valve mode, many times eclipsing the 5th-gens.
My plan is as follows: I want to tune the bike with the VTEC left intact and see how it performs. All I really care about is a nice, smooth, controllable curve, and if I can get that with the bike as is, I'll leave it alone. Now, if there is a pronounced dip, or if I can tell the 2 valves are choking the power, then I'll start playing with disabling the system. From the research I've done into the matter, electronically bypassing the signal seems like the best way to go (that is, the easiest, most reversible, cheapest, and least intrusive method). The tuning is a wholly different matter, and I expect that could be the biggest stumbling block, as now you are expecting the Power Commander to handle wildly different settings than what is required (especially in the timing department). I don't know, maybe it won't be a big deal to dial it in, but I think there will have to be a noticeably bad hole in the curve for me to undertake this experiment.
[image: View Post]FotoMoto, on 02 March 2010 - 09:37 AM, said:
[image: View Post]toro1, on 02 March 2010 - 08:50 AM, said:
I see no reason why the 6th-gen will not put out just as much, if not more, power than the 5th-gen, and I have seen some big numbers come out of those 782ccs.
And for those looking for crazy power numbers, the 6 gen, due to its cam chain drive, can more easily be modified for lower compression than the 5gen. (insert evil laff here) :cool:
160HP at the rear wheel isn't crazy enough already??
[image: View Post]toro1, on 04 March 2010 - 02:17 PM, said:
Now as far as VTEC is concerned, I'm still not sure it will even be an issue with the performance of the bike. I have overlaid similar dyno charts on top of one another from the 5th & 6th-gens, and with the exception of the dip right before the VTEC engagement, the 6th-gens put out solid power running in 2-valve mode, many times eclipsing the 5th-gens.
My plan is as follows: I want to tune the bike with the VTEC left intact and see how it performs. All I really care about is a nice, smooth, controllable curve, and if I can get that with the bike as is, I'll leave it alone.
Toro, I think I have said it before, but you are a god amongst men! Do you think the kit will be a problem on high mileage engines? (i.e. 70,000+ miles)
Keep up the good work. And I hope those 5th-gen kits are already selling well!
OK gang here goes;
The donor bike belongs to me, Spinrb8r. To the post that wants to see the cat-off true 2 1/8" stainless duals with Ferrachi Forza Carbon Cans I posted them after the fabrication was finished several months ago. The fabricator is also my heavy equipment mechanic who loves a challenge project and "can't" isn't in his dictionary. I had a Ducati 748 prior to the VFR and having had many trouble free Hondas previously I went back to the brand so I could spend money on riding not repairs. Granted the Honda is like carving with a razor knife instead of a scalpel still I have enjoyed my VFR far more than the $140/mile Ducati. Track days are fun either way and I just wanted a little more juice so I followed Dan's 5th Gen buildup and was very impressed. When he posted for a 6th Gen guinea pig I was the lucky respondent. We went to the International Bike Show in DC and saw the new 1200. I like the bike and it's larger displacement but have to say the can has to be the largest detraction. UGLYYYYY! Having more ponies and lighter weight will be the ultimate improvement. We had already shed 40+ pounds by losing the center stand and the factory pipes and much steel mounting hardware. The prior tuning that was accomplished with the PCIII on the dyno was very sucessful and yes the 4 valve boost of the VTEC is exhilerating but not irrational with the proper ratios. The shop that accomplished that had a tech that was a confirmed VTEC guru for bikes as well as Civic Drifters. I'm looking forward to seeing the continued progress that Dan is cataloging for us all. Beyond the the fact that he's a fit and finish genius he's a really great guy.
Will a bike with abs work with this kit also? i suppose it will since the abs unit is on the left side,just wanted to check so i can sell my ass in the local harbour for the cash needed
Accurately positioning the supercharger on the bike, and then being able to measure the mounting points, is a key step in the design process.
[image: Posted Image]
Once I had everything locked in place, I was able to pull the dimensions I needed and start designing the bracket.
[image: Posted Image]
For the initial bracket mock-up, I used plexiglass, as it is quick to machine, easy to hand form, and allows a clear view of any interference between the parts. On this bike, the space between the head and frame has been greatly reduced versus a 5th-gen, so now the blower sits higher in the frame. The top mount is totally different than before, and the wiring harnesses are a major pain to work around, but it does fit.
One plus is that the oil cooler is high up out of the way, and larger to boot, so the oil-to-water cooler will likely not have to be used in this kit.
[image: View Post]FotoMoto, on 03 March 2010 - 12:25 AM, said:
[image: View Post]EmeraldVFR, on 03 March 2010 - 12:11 AM, said:
The radiator would, of course, be located in front of the front headers. With the side radiators gone, you'd have all kinds of room to work with.
Honda moved them to the sides to get the motor as far forward as possible to achieve better front weight bias as that is a con of a V4 design and V-twins to a lesser extent. Anyhoo, there isn't enough room to stick enough surface area in front and still have enough room for fork travel without a lot of modding. Some RC51 racers go to extremes to do this but it takes 3 radiators and about $1k.
Besides if you stick a bunch of rads in the front, there would be no room for the supercharger.
I agree with you. I should have taken a closer look at my bike. On the previous generation R1, the radiator is up in this green area (and not the red area directly in front of the headers.) Maybe Dan can do something up there. You're definitely right about there not being enough room in front of the VFR's front headers, though.
[image: View Post]toro1, on 06 March 2010 - 06:58 PM, said:
[image: Posted Image]
For the initial bracket mock-up, I used plexiglass, as it is quick to machine, easy to hand form, and allows a clear view of any interference between the parts. On this bike, the space between the head and frame has been greatly reduced versus a 5th-gen, so now the blower sits higher in the frame. The top mount is totally different than before, and the wiring harnesses are a major pain to work around, but it does fit.
One plus is that the oil cooler is high up out of the way, and larger to boot, so the oil-to-water cooler will likely not have to be used in this kit.
Dan, are you getting rid of the right radiator? I took a quick glance at some of the previous posts and didn't see anything about that.
Gotta have 2 rads. I had my left rad. spring a leak at the franklin meet. The temps were below 30f and my bike was wanting to overheat. I had to stay moving, if I had to sit for even a few seconds the temp went straight up.
Toro, a lot of us have added the VFRness from Tightwad. This takes even more space on the right side. It was hard to fit all the new wires and connectors without the fairing touching them. I took my rad. off and routed a lot of the harness behind the rad.
Anything a man can conceive and believe, he can achieve.
Seeing your previous work I have no doubt that you will solve all issues and in the end, whenever that may come
you will have a polished, finished product.
When that day comes, I will most likely look for a 'factory' installation - which means riding to you and having
you install the new 6thGen Torocharger on my bike. Timing should be just right for the 2nd VFRD Summer Summit, 2012.
I'll ride down to PA, hand you the Blue (bike) then the green (cash), then proceed to the meet.
[image: View Post]toro1, on 02 March 2010 - 08:50 AM, said:
[image: View Post]tinyminds, on 01 March 2010 - 10:14 PM, said:
A supercharged Vtec engagement... sound fun.
When working around the engagement point is my biggest problem, I'll be a happy man. I'm really not worried about it, though, as the supercharger has a way of smoothing out the entire powerband.
This is how the dyno looked when i installed PC III and had my aftermarket slipon and kn filter,still feelable vtec activation but it feels somewhat smoother after PC III.
will follow this thread closely and see how you solve the problems,im sure it will be a good kit to purchase instead of a overpriced 1200..
Ironic how Honda has priced the new 1200 high enough that you can add a supercharger and farkles in mass quantity to a NOS VTEC800 and STILL have spent less money... :rolleyes:
I'm no expert (compared to you guys). I've had a brain fart. I was wondering if it's possible to install a 2 stage BOV like THIS one along with PCIII dual fuel map function to "switch" between two boost levels?. i.e 7psi and 15psi (15psi with a thicker head gasket of course).
[image: View Post]VifferDude, on 09 March 2010 - 02:39 AM, said:
Hi Guys,
I'm no expert (compared to you guys). I've had a brain fart. I was wondering if it's possible to install a 2 stage BOV
You mean a 2-stage boost controller (wastegate actuator), not a BOV. Blow-off valves (BOV) don't control the boost, they just vent boosted intake air when you close the throttle to avoid compressor surge.
[image: View Post]VifferDude, on 09 March 2010 - 02:39 AM, said:
Hi Guys,
I'm no expert (compared to you guys). I've had a brain fart. I was wondering if it's possible to install a 2 stage BOV like THIS one along with PCIII dual fuel map function to "switch" between two boost levels?. i.e 7psi and 15psi (15psi with a thicker head gasket of course).
Just a thought I'd trhow out there
If the BOV was set up like a wastegate, then yes, that would work. However, it would incredibly inefficient to run it at the low boost setting, as you would have to be spinning the supercharger full tilt all the time and venting (wasting) the excess air (that has already taken power to compress). The better way to do this is to have a variable restrictor on the inlet to limit the amount of air that can enter the supercharger, eliminating wasted pumping. The problem here is that a pressure drop occurs at the inlet, so even though you limit the boost pressure & amount of air leaving the blower, due to the PR difference, the air still leaves as hot as if you were compressing it to 15psi -- and heat is the real killer on pump gas and stock internals.
Not so fast, though. There is only one way to get this setup to fit under the fairing, and that's by using one of these:
[image: Posted Image]
This is a 5th-gen right-side radiator. Unless you like your radiator sticking 1" outside your fairing, there is no way the stock unit will work with the supercharger. It is simply an impossibility. This is one of the reasons why I tried desperately to mount the blower in another spot, as I knew this would end up being an issue.
The only other option to using a 5th-gen radiator is having a unit custom made, but the cost for that is far too prohibitive. I found this mint radiator on ebay for less than $100, and a brand new one can be purchased for about $220; either way, it's far more affordable than having a custom unit built or trying to modify the stocker.
The question of cooling capacity now arises, though. The 5th-gen radiator has 2 fewer rows than the 6th-gen unit, so the total radiating area of the system is reduced by 6%. However, if Water Wetter (or equivalent) is used, and the water/coolant ratio is biased more towards water (60/40, or even 70/30), then this reduction of surface area should not be of concern, and in fact, it will most likely have a higher heat transfer coefficient than normal. I plan on thoroughly testing this out to see what kinds of temps are seen after the install, and if they are negatively affected, then further measures will have to be taken.
So, for anyone considering this kit, just be prepared to find yourself a 5th-gen radiator.
[image: Posted Image]
On the flip side, it is looking pretty good so far. Slight trimming on the big vent will be needed to clear the supercharger pulley, and the small vent will have to be clearanced as well for the belt to fit. The radiator is now so close to the pulley connector that a new outboard bearing support will have to be created, which I'll post some pics of as soon as I get a piece mocked up.
Is there no way to run the pulley through the radiator? (shaft runs through, then pulley bolts on?)
You might only lose two rows from the stock rad, which would leave you with the capacity of the 5th gen unit *but* the rad would be back in place behind the vent, where it should be to exhaust the hot air. I don't see how that rad is going to work well without the ability for air to move into it and then out the fairing.
Edit: You could buy one new rad to experiment, then include it with the kit for a core exchange?
I hope heat wont be an issue since my bike atleast runs kinda hot and a smaller radiator AND supercharger with more horsepower sounds like a bad idea or is it just me? :wheel:
[image: View Post]SEBSPEED, on 10 March 2010 - 10:30 AM, said:
Is there no way to run the pulley through the radiator? (shaft runs through, then pulley bolts on?)
You might only lose two rows from the stock rad, which would leave you with the capacity of the 5th gen unit *but* the rad would be back in place behind the vent, where it should be to exhaust the hot air. I don't see how that rad is going to work well without the ability for air to move into it and then out the fairing.
Edit: You could buy one new rad to experiment, then include it with the kit for a core exchange?
There's no way to do it -- the supercharger drive has to be assembled in house to comply with the Rotrex warranty. The minute a customer installs or removes a pulley onto/from the Rotrex, the warranty is void.
Beyond that issue, I did give it a passing thought, but you'll lose 2 rows at minimum and then you have to worry about sealing everything back up. There is still a decent path for the air to travel with it moved -- if anything, a greater portion of the inside face is now in a more direct path of airflow from the front.
As for the other questions, I refer back to my other post:
Quote
The question of cooling capacity now arises, though. The 5th-gen radiator has 2 fewer rows than the 6th-gen unit, so the total radiating area of the system is reduced by 6%. However, if Water Wetter (or equivalent) is used, and the water/coolant ratio is biased more towards water (60/40, or even 70/30), then this reduction of surface area should not be of concern, and in fact, it will most likely have a higher heat transfer coefficient than normal. I plan on thoroughly testing this out to see what kinds of temps are seen after the install, and if they are negatively affected, then further measures will have to be taken.
Is it possible to re-plumb to make the left rad the primary radiator, with the cap? This might reduce the space needed by quite a bit. Also, are you relocating the R/R or will it be under the assembly?
I'm sure Dan's got it under control. Who knows what he's got up his sleeve? Maybe he's going to install a couple small fans for the right radiator (instead of one big one like on the left.) I would think a couple smaller ones A) wouldn't take up that much room, and B) would cool a larger surface area of the radiator. He might even opt for a larger oil cooler after all. Not only is ours small but it doesn't get direct air flow.
[image: View Post]toro1, on 10 March 2010 - 10:20 AM, said:
The question of cooling capacity now arises, though. The 5th-gen radiator has 2 fewer rows than the 6th-gen unit, so the total radiating area of the system is reduced by 6%. However, if Water Wetter (or equivalent) is used, and the water/coolant ratio is biased more towards water (60/40, or even 70/30), then this reduction of surface area should not be of concern, and in fact, it will most likely have a higher heat transfer coefficient than normal. I plan on thoroughly testing this out to see what kinds of temps are seen after the install, and if they are negatively affected, then further measures will have to be taken.
An option here is to recommend the use of Evans NPG+ coolant. As I understand it allows engines to run hotter without pinking, and does not require a pressurised system. I am unsure if that means it has a higher heat transfer coefficient though?
[image: View Post]kaldek, on 10 March 2010 - 07:18 PM, said:
An option here is to recommend the use of Evans NPG+ coolant. As I understand it allows engines to run hotter without pinking, and does not require a pressurised system. I am unsure if that means it has a higher heat transfer coefficient though?
I tried the NPG+ it's too damn thick to circulate through the VFR's labrynthe cooling system and small water pump. Believe me I tried. And yes, it was burped properly.
The thermostat opens and nothing happens, bike overheats. Drain, flush and replaced with Dex-Cool, no problems.
[image: View Post]Veefer800Canuck, on 10 March 2010 - 08:31 PM, said:
[image: View Post]kaldek, on 10 March 2010 - 07:18 PM, said:
An option here is to recommend the use of Evans NPG+ coolant. As I understand it allows engines to run hotter without pinking, and does not require a pressurised system. I am unsure if that means it has a higher heat transfer coefficient though?
I tried the NPG+ it's too damn thick to circulate through the VFR's labrynthe cooling system and small water pump. Believe me I tried. And yes, it was burped properly.
The thermostat opens and nothing happens, bike overheats. Drain, flush and replaced with Dex-Cool, no problems.
[image: View Post]kaldek, on 10 March 2010 - 07:28 PM, said:
Also, that gap in the air vent looks a little ugly. I suggest it needs a nice little laser-cut bracket which says "Rotrex Supercharged". :biggrin:
suffice it to say that NOTHING on that bike will even HINT at there being a Rotrex hidden in there. at every stop my jacket will hang over that cowling and the hole won't be seen.
spinrb8r
[image: View Post]spinrb8r, on 10 March 2010 - 11:19 PM, said:
[image: View Post]kaldek, on 10 March 2010 - 07:28 PM, said:
Also, that gap in the air vent looks a little ugly. I suggest it needs a nice little laser-cut bracket which says "Rotrex Supercharged". :biggrin:
suffice it to say that NOTHING on that bike will even HINT at there being a Rotrex hidden in there. at every stop my jacket will hang over that cowling and the hole won't be seen.
spinrb8r
[image: View Post]kaldek, on 11 March 2010 - 12:07 AM, said:
[image: View Post]spinrb8r, on 10 March 2010 - 11:19 PM, said:
[image: View Post]kaldek, on 10 March 2010 - 07:28 PM, said:
Also, that gap in the air vent looks a little ugly. I suggest it needs a nice little laser-cut bracket which says "Rotrex Supercharged". :biggrin:
suffice it to say that NOTHING on that bike will even HINT at there being a Rotrex hidden in there. at every stop my jacket will hang over that cowling and the hole won't be seen.
spinrb8r
And the reason for this is.....?
So that when he's sitting at the lights and the Busa guy has finished laughing at him,...he can blow him off and woop his arse over the 1/4 mile :goofy:
[image: View Post]VifferDude, on 11 March 2010 - 12:42 AM, said:
[image: View Post]kaldek, on 11 March 2010 - 12:07 AM, said:
[image: View Post]spinrb8r, on 10 March 2010 - 11:19 PM, said:
[image: View Post]kaldek, on 10 March 2010 - 07:28 PM, said:
Also, that gap in the air vent looks a little ugly. I suggest it needs a nice little laser-cut bracket which says "Rotrex Supercharged". :biggrin:
suffice it to say that NOTHING on that bike will even HINT at there being a Rotrex hidden in there. at every stop my jacket will hang over that cowling and the hole won't be seen.
spinrb8r
And the reason for this is.....?
So that when he's sitting at the lights and the Busa guy has finished laughing at him,...he can blow him off and woop his arse over the 1/4 mile :goofy:
After leaving the streets, and meeting with the Busa owner on a sanctioned race track of course. :rolleyes:
I do wonder if that would actually beat the Busa though... Anyone get any slips with a SC'd 5th yet? I know it'd be close, but that Busa is coming with 190+HP...
[image: View Post]magicman, on 11 March 2010 - 01:25 AM, said:
[image: View Post]VifferDude, on 11 March 2010 - 12:42 AM, said:
[image: View Post]kaldek, on 11 March 2010 - 12:07 AM, said:
[image: View Post]spinrb8r, on 10 March 2010 - 11:19 PM, said:
[image: View Post]kaldek, on 10 March 2010 - 07:28 PM, said:
Also, that gap in the air vent looks a little ugly. I suggest it needs a nice little laser-cut bracket which says "Rotrex Supercharged". :biggrin:
suffice it to say that NOTHING on that bike will even HINT at there being a Rotrex hidden in there. at every stop my jacket will hang over that cowling and the hole won't be seen.
spinrb8r
And the reason for this is.....?
So that when he's sitting at the lights and the Busa guy has finished laughing at him,...he can blow him off and woop his arse over the 1/4 mile :goofy:
After leaving the streets, and meeting with the Busa owner on a sanctioned race track of course. :rolleyes:
I do wonder if that would actually beat the Busa though... Anyone get any slips with a SC'd 5th yet? I know it'd be close, but that Busa is coming with 190+HP...
I just had a quick look through the other SC threads, but I couldn't find it. Someone had a few bikes listed with their HP & Weight listed with their power to weight ratio work out HP/lb
[image: View Post]toro1, on 10 March 2010 - 03:43 PM, said:
[image: View Post]SEBSPEED, on 10 March 2010 - 10:30 AM, said:
Is there no way to run the pulley through the radiator? (shaft runs through, then pulley bolts on?)
You might only lose two rows from the stock rad, which would leave you with the capacity of the 5th gen unit *but* the rad would be back in place behind the vent, where it should be to exhaust the hot air. I don't see how that rad is going to work well without the ability for air to move into it and then out the fairing.
Edit: You could buy one new rad to experiment, then include it with the kit for a core exchange?
There's no way to do it -- the supercharger drive has to be assembled in house to comply with the Rotrex warranty. The minute a customer installs or removes a pulley onto/from the Rotrex, the warranty is void.
Beyond that issue, I did give it a passing thought, but you'll lose 2 rows at minimum and then you have to worry about sealing everything back up. There is still a decent path for the air to travel with it moved -- if anything, a greater portion of the inside face is now in a more direct path of airflow from the front.
As for the other questions, I refer back to my other post:
Quote
The question of cooling capacity now arises, though. The 5th-gen radiator has 2 fewer rows than the 6th-gen unit, so the total radiating area of the system is reduced by 6%. However, if Water Wetter (or equivalent) is used, and the water/coolant ratio is biased more towards water (60/40, or even 70/30), then this reduction of surface area should not be of concern, and in fact, it will most likely have a higher heat transfer coefficient than normal. I plan on thoroughly testing this out to see what kinds of temps are seen after the install, and if they are negatively affected, then further measures will have to be taken.
Perhaps you could also use the Laminova oil cooler to compensate for the loss of cooling capacity? You said it wasn't needed since the 6th gen had a larger oil cooler but, now that the installation dictates a smaller radiator on the right hand side, may be it could be useful...
[image: View Post]magicman, on 11 March 2010 - 01:25 AM, said:
[image: View Post]VifferDude, on 11 March 2010 - 12:42 AM, said:
[image: View Post]kaldek, on 11 March 2010 - 12:07 AM, said:
[image: View Post]spinrb8r, on 10 March 2010 - 11:19 PM, said:
[image: View Post]kaldek, on 10 March 2010 - 07:28 PM, said:
Also, that gap in the air vent looks a little ugly. I suggest it needs a nice little laser-cut bracket which says "Rotrex Supercharged". :biggrin:
suffice it to say that NOTHING on that bike will even HINT at there being a Rotrex hidden in there. at every stop my jacket will hang over that cowling and the hole won't be seen.
spinrb8r
And the reason for this is.....?
So that when he's sitting at the lights and the Busa guy has finished laughing at him,...he can blow him off and woop his arse over the 1/4 mile :goofy:
After leaving the streets, and meeting with the Busa owner on a sanctioned race track of course. :rolleyes:
I do wonder if that would actually beat the Busa though... Anyone get any slips with a SC'd 5th yet? I know it'd be close, but that Busa is coming with 190+HP...
Here are those power to weight figures I was talking about Post Link
[image: View Post]toro1, on 10 March 2010 - 03:43 PM, said:
[image: View Post]SEBSPEED, on 10 March 2010 - 10:30 AM, said:
Is there no way to run the pulley through the radiator? (shaft runs through, then pulley bolts on?)
You might only lose two rows from the stock rad, which would leave you with the capacity of the 5th gen unit *but* the rad would be back in place behind the vent, where it should be to exhaust the hot air. I don't see how that rad is going to work well without the ability for air to move into it and then out the fairing.
Edit: You could buy one new rad to experiment, then include it with the kit for a core exchange?
There's no way to do it -- the supercharger drive has to be assembled in house to comply with the Rotrex warranty. The minute a customer installs or removes a pulley onto/from the Rotrex, the warranty is void.
Beyond that issue, I did give it a passing thought, but you'll lose 2 rows at minimum and then you have to worry about sealing everything back up. There is still a decent path for the air to travel with it moved -- if anything, a greater portion of the inside face is now in a more direct path of airflow from the front.
As for the other questions, I refer back to my other post:
Quote
The question of cooling capacity now arises, though. The 5th-gen radiator has 2 fewer rows than the 6th-gen unit, so the total radiating area of the system is reduced by 6%. However, if Water Wetter (or equivalent) is used, and the water/coolant ratio is biased more towards water (60/40, or even 70/30), then this reduction of surface area should not be of concern, and in fact, it will most likely have a higher heat transfer coefficient than normal. I plan on thoroughly testing this out to see what kinds of temps are seen after the install, and if they are negatively affected, then further measures will have to be taken.
The RC51 (sp1/2) had oem radiator on side like the RC46 VFR, but for racing it was change to this: [image: Posted Image]
[image: View Post]VifferDude, on 11 March 2010 - 04:21 AM, said:
[image: View Post]magicman, on 11 March 2010 - 01:25 AM, said:
[image: View Post]VifferDude, on 11 March 2010 - 12:42 AM, said:
[image: View Post]kaldek, on 11 March 2010 - 12:07 AM, said:
[image: View Post]spinrb8r, on 10 March 2010 - 11:19 PM, said:
[image: View Post]kaldek, on 10 March 2010 - 07:28 PM, said:
Also, that gap in the air vent looks a little ugly. I suggest it needs a nice little laser-cut bracket which says "Rotrex Supercharged". :biggrin:
suffice it to say that NOTHING on that bike will even HINT at there being a Rotrex hidden in there. at every stop my jacket will hang over that cowling and the hole won't be seen.
spinrb8r
And the reason for this is.....?
So that when he's sitting at the lights and the Busa guy has finished laughing at him,...he can blow him off and woop his arse over the 1/4 mile :goofy:
After leaving the streets, and meeting with the Busa owner on a sanctioned race track of course. :rolleyes:
I do wonder if that would actually beat the Busa though... Anyone get any slips with a SC'd 5th yet? I know it'd be close, but that Busa is coming with 190+HP...
Here are those power to weight figures I was talking about Post Link
Here's the numbers. They are all backwards:
01 VFR: 458.6/140=3.275 Horses per pound
08 Busa: 485/172=2.82 Horses per pound.
01 VFR Torque 458.6/60=7.64
08 Busa Torque 485/102=4.75
Should read:
01 VFR: 458.6/140=3.275 pounds per Horse
08 Busa: 485/172=2.82 pounds per Horse
01 VFR Torque 458.6/60=7.64 pounds per ft.lb.
08 Busa Torque 485/102=4.75 pounds per ft.lb.
Busa is still going to pull on one of these. And fairly convincingly.
[image: View Post]keny, on 11 March 2010 - 04:43 AM, said:
The RC51 (sp1/2) had oem radiator on side like the RC46 VFR, but for racing it was change to this:
The RC also only has a single header tube up front and does not have to worry about taking up the space on the top of the head. The race radiator setup is around $2k -- if a customer wants such a setup for their VFR, I'll be glad to design one for you, but don't expect it to be anywhere near cheap.
I'm still not too worried about this whole situation. I have personally not seen any higher temps on my bike compared to stock, and the 6th-gens have increased cooling capacity over the 5th-gens. Let me get this thing running first before we start stressing over the operating temperatures.
[image: View Post]Brown81, on 11 March 2010 - 02:03 PM, said:
01 VFR: 458.6/140=3.275 pounds per Horse
08 Busa: 485/172=2.82 pounds per Horse
01 VFR Torque 458.6/60=7.64 pounds per ft.lb.
08 Busa Torque 485/102=4.75 pounds per ft.lb.
Busa is still going to pull on one of these. And fairly convincingly.
Not to toot my own horn here, but a blown VFR puts out a little more than 140hp & 60lb-ft @ the wheel.
When I compare dyno charts, the most realistic & accurate source I've found online for late model bikes are the charts provided by Area P. They use a Dynojet dyno and only show runs with SAE correction, thus their numbers are almost identical to the numbers I get for the same bikes on our dyno.
Having said that, here's a more accurate comparison of the bikes mentioned (using wet weights & slip-on power numbers):
There is no doubt that the Busa will roll on the VFR at higher speeds -- the viffer just doesn't have the torque that the Busa does (depending on the generation, the Busa has a 66%-71% displacement advantage!). From a pure numbers perspective, if you could keep the front end down, a 1/4-mile drag race would be a very interesting event between the two bikes. Note that I could also have included the 170hp dyno run from a customer in England in the calculations, but I wanted to display what I am advertising.
As I have said before, if you are looking for huge torque at 3000rpm, then a Busa, ZX-14, K1300, or VFR1200 is the bike you want. A blown 800 is still very much the same bike as before (there is, after all, only so much you can do with 782cc and a centrifugal supercharger), but from the midrange on up its a monster. Around town, the acceleration is better than a new literbike due to the gearing, and when you're used to having 100hp @ the wheel, that is quite a jump.
Dan is right about everything he's saying. He's not building a supercharged VFR for purposes of beating a Busa in the 1/4 mile. A supercharged VFR with the right rider will probably run a low 10 in the quarter and a Busa will still run high 9's. Like he said, there's only so much you can do with 781 cc's. The fact of the matter is the Busa has a significant displacement advantage that clearly works in its favor.
He's putting together a supercharger kit for VFR's because there are a lot of people who want more power but aren't willing to give up their VFR. Many people wouldn't give up their VFR for a Busa or any other bike for that matter. Although I personally am not a die-hard Interceptor fan nor am I a V4 purist, I still like the bike. One of things I really admire about the VFR is its loyal following. Most metric bikes can't compete in that regard.
[image: View Post]toro1, on 11 March 2010 - 03:59 PM, said:
As I have said before, if you are looking for huge torque at 3000rpm, then a Busa, ZX-14, K1300, or VFR1200 is the bike you want. A blown 800 is still very much the same bike as before (there is, after all, only so much you can do with 782cc and a centrifugal supercharger), but from the midrange on up its a monster. Around town, the acceleration is better than a new literbike due to the gearing, and when you're used to having 100hp @ the wheel, that is quite a jump.
I have to keep telling myself: "I can't afford it.... I don't need that much power.... I can't afford it... I'm happy with my '02...."
[image: View Post]toro1, on 11 March 2010 - 03:59 PM, said:
[image: View Post]keny, on 11 March 2010 - 04:43 AM, said:
The RC51 (sp1/2) had oem radiator on side like the RC46 VFR, but for racing it was change to this:
The RC also only has a single header tube up front and does not have to worry about taking up the space on the top of the head. The race radiator setup is around $2k -- if a customer wants such a setup for their VFR, I'll be glad to design one for you, but don't expect it to be anywhere near cheap.
I'm still not too worried about this whole situation. I have personally not seen any higher temps on my bike compared to stock, and the 6th-gens have increased cooling capacity over the 5th-gens. Let me get this thing running first before we start stressing over the operating temperatures.
[image: View Post]Brown81, on 11 March 2010 - 02:03 PM, said:
01 VFR: 458.6/140=3.275 pounds per Horse
08 Busa: 485/172=2.82 pounds per Horse
01 VFR Torque 458.6/60=7.64 pounds per ft.lb.
08 Busa Torque 485/102=4.75 pounds per ft.lb.
Busa is still going to pull on one of these. And fairly convincingly.
Not to toot my own horn here, but a blown VFR puts out a little more than 140hp & 60lb-ft @ the wheel.
When I compare dyno charts, the most realistic & accurate source I've found online for late model bikes are the charts provided by Area P. They use a Dynojet dyno and only show runs with SAE correction, thus their numbers are almost identical to the numbers I get for the same bikes on our dyno.
Having said that, here's a more accurate comparison of the bikes mentioned (using wet weights & slip-on power numbers):
There is no doubt that the Busa will roll on the VFR at higher speeds -- the viffer just doesn't have the torque that the Busa does (depending on the generation, the Busa has a 66%-71% displacement advantage!). From a pure numbers perspective, if you could keep the front end down, a 1/4-mile drag race would be a very interesting event between the two bikes. Note that I could also have included the 170hp dyno run from a customer in England in the calculations, but I wanted to display what I am advertising.
As I have said before, if you are looking for huge torque at 3000rpm, then a Busa, ZX-14, K1300, or VFR1200 is the bike you want. A blown 800 is still very much the same bike as before (there is, after all, only so much you can do with 782cc and a centrifugal supercharger), but from the midrange on up its a monster. Around town, the acceleration is better than a new literbike due to the gearing, and when you're used to having 100hp @ the wheel, that is quite a jump.
That's more like it! Pretty astounding numbers.
For the record, I was not trying to rain on the parade. Simply correcting numbers that were backwards. And I do realize a Busa killer is not the goal here. I'd rather have a blown VFR fwiw.
I think I'd take the 80lbs weight difference versus having 10hp and 27ft-lb. How often do you really approach 'Busa top speed? Or even stock VFR top speed for that matter?
VTEC Changeover is gonna either Wheelie or rap the chain really good, I know the Honda Prelude H22A Motors with Turbo's jolt really hard when they hit VTEC (changeover).
That dyno is gonna be insane though, can't wait. Good luck!!
[image: View Post]BASFjon, on 13 March 2010 - 02:31 AM, said:
VTEC Changeover is gonna either Wheelie or rap the chain really good, I know the Honda Prelude H22A Motors with Turbo's jolt really hard when they hit VTEC (changeover).
That dyno is gonna be insane though, can't wait. Good luck!!
Perhaps, but superchargers are more linear than Turbos.
I await the dyno graph with interest and who knows how it will look?
I hope the horrible hole below VTEC engagement is gone.
Now, what if someone was able to fool the VTEC system into engaging about 1000 RPM lower........ :beatdeadhorse:
We're now going to take a quick detour into EFI land...
[image: Posted Image]
Adapter plates will seal against the throttle body by incorporating a mating o-ring groove on the underside of the plate. In order to use the throttle body connectors of the 5th-gen kit on this bike, additional tapped holes need to be added to the plates, as the bolt pattern on the 6th-gen throttle body does not match the the bolt pattern of the airbox. Provisions also have to be made to the plates to ensure the starting circuit still works -- if the plates completely sealed around the bores, no air would be able to get in at startup, which is not what we want. I've already ensured the system can withstand positive boost pressure, so no need to worry about that.
[image: Posted Image]
The injectors on top were used in '02-'05 bikes, and the ones on the bottom came out of this bike. Very similar, but not exact. The newer injectors have noticeably finer holes in the end disc, which I'm sure lead to better fuel atomization. They are also within 10cc/min of one another (the newer ones flow less).
BTW, despite the fact that these injectors came out of a bike that is only 4 years old, and has only been run with premium, high-quality fuel, 2 of the injectors had poor spray patterns and there was 10% variance from the highest flowing to the lowest flowing injector. This perfectly illustrates why I highly, highly stress having your injectors cleaned before installing a supercharger kit -- you do not want your fueling compromised in any way.
[image: Posted Image]
This is as far as the throttle body will need to be broken down. Luckily, the fuel rail unbolts from the top, so there's no need to go spelunking (with a long Philips screwdriver) in the crevasse of the engine to loosen the TB clamps.
The fuel pressure regulator will be replaced with a modified unit set to a higher psi. Because of the slightly different design of the FPR on the 6th-gen, the pressure can be raised higher than the 5th-gen, and the stock injectors should now be able to handle well over 200 crank hp.
[image: View Post]toro1, on 15 March 2010 - 08:24 PM, said:
BTW, despite the fact that these injectors came out of a bike that is only 4 years old, and has only been run with premium, high-quality fuel, 2 of the injectors had poor spray patterns and there was 10% variance from the highest flowing to the lowest flowing injector. This perfectly illustrates why I highly, highly stress having your injectors cleaned before installing a supercharger kit -- you do not want your fueling compromised in any way.
Hmmm. My '02 has done a LOT of miles. I've never cleaned injectors before - you're going to tell me I have to remove them from the engine to do this, aren't you?
Please say "no, just run some injector cleaner through the bike"....please? :(
Edit: I'm going to book into have my injectors cleaned. $132 Australian for all four cleaned and provided with flow reports on-site is a good deal.
Magic & Kaldek -- I've yet to see any of the newer style injectors come back from testing without needing cleaning. Interestingly enough, my 98's were in better shape than the 6th-gen & the ZX-10R injectors, despite being much older (I believe this is due to the single pindtle design of the 5th-gen injectors less prone to getting dirtied up). I do not know if injector cleaner can get anywhere near the results of a professional service, as Marren (who I use) tries to match the injector flow rates as close as possible, and includes new o-rings, filters, and a printout of the results. If you are looking for the highest possible performance (tuning, power, and gas mileage), then you owe it to yourself to have your injectors cleaned.
[image: View Post]toro1, on 16 March 2010 - 07:28 AM, said:
Magic & Kaldek -- I've yet to see any of the newer style injectors come back from testing without needing cleaning. Interestingly enough, my 98's were in better shape than the 6th-gen & the ZX-10R injectors, despite being much older (I believe this is due to the single pindtle design of the 5th-gen injectors less prone to getting dirtied up). I do not know if injector cleaner can get anywhere near the results of a professional service, as Marren (who I use) tries to match the injector flow rates as close as possible, and includes new o-rings, filters, and a printout of the results. If you are looking for the highest possible performance (tuning, power, and gas mileage), then you owe it to yourself to have your injectors cleaned.
Well yes, I took the cleaning as a needed step. I was more concerned about the rest of the motor... Any other key pieces (that aren't just regular maintenance) that you thing might need to be addressed for this kit to work reliably on a high mileage motor?
[image: View Post]toro1, on 16 March 2010 - 07:28 AM, said:
Magic & Kaldek -- I've yet to see any of the newer style injectors come back from testing without needing cleaning. Interestingly enough, my 98's were in better shape than the 6th-gen & the ZX-10R injectors, despite being much older (I believe this is due to the single pindtle design of the 5th-gen injectors less prone to getting dirtied up). I do not know if injector cleaner can get anywhere near the results of a professional service, as Marren (who I use) tries to match the injector flow rates as close as possible, and includes new o-rings, filters, and a printout of the results. If you are looking for the highest possible performance (tuning, power, and gas mileage), then you owe it to yourself to have your injectors cleaned.
Ah, so your guys keep cleaning the the injector until it meets its rated flow rate. Yeah, that's pretty hardcore. I'm going to be fretting about my injectors now! LOL
A 'proper' injector clean involves placing the injectors in a cleaning solution and pulsing them with ultrasonic waves; no way can a bottle off the shelf replicate that.
Factory Pro does an exchange service with two levels - one is with the set of four injectors matched to within 2% tolerance ($120 exch.) and the other has the injectors matched to within 1% tolerance ($180 exch.). See the table at the link below.
They claim that you can make some additional power by having the injectors matched as closely as possible - makes sense to me.
[image: View Post]The Phantom, on 16 March 2010 - 05:17 PM, said:
A 'proper' injector clean involves placing the injectors in a cleaning solution and pulsing them with ultrasonic waves; no way can a bottle off the shelf replicate that.
Factory Pro does an exchange service with two levels - one is with the set of four injectors matched to within 2% tolerance ($120 exch.) and the other has the injectors matched to within 1% tolerance ($180 exch.). See the table at the link below.
They claim that you can make some additional power by having the injectors matched as closely as possible - makes sense to me.
Wow. Just got a quote from a guy who does mobile injector cleaning. $33 per injector, and he does ultrasonic cleaning, flow testing and also provides flow reports! He also uses ASNU cleaning & diagnostics equipment, which is top-notch gear.
And he's based in my city, which is super-awesome.
EDIT: I'll be buggered - apparently ultrasonic cleaning was invented in Australia and the system this guy uses is from the company that owns the original ultrasonic cleaning patents.
[image: View Post]toro1, on 10 March 2010 - 10:20 AM, said:
A step closer to reality...
[image: Posted Image]
I'm somewhat concerned at the amount of plastic that will need to be chopped to run the belt. How will it look?
Not so fast, though. There is only one way to get this setup to fit under the fairing, and that's by using one of these:
[image: Posted Image]
This is a 5th-gen right-side radiator. Unless you like your radiator sticking 1" outside your fairing, there is no way the stock unit will work with the supercharger. It is simply an impossibility. This is one of the reasons why I tried desperately to mount the blower in another spot, as I knew this would end up being an issue.
The only other option to using a 5th-gen radiator is having a unit custom made, but the cost for that is far too prohibitive. I found this mint radiator on ebay for less than $100, and a brand new one can be purchased for about $220; either way, it's far more affordable than having a custom unit built or trying to modify the stocker.
The question of cooling capacity now arises, though. The 5th-gen radiator has 2 fewer rows than the 6th-gen unit, so the total radiating area of the system is reduced by 6%. However, if Water Wetter (or equivalent) is used, and the water/coolant ratio is biased more towards water (60/40, or even 70/30), then this reduction of surface area should not be of concern, and in fact, it will most likely have a higher heat transfer coefficient than normal. I plan on thoroughly testing this out to see what kinds of temps are seen after the install, and if they are negatively affected, then further measures will have to be taken.
So, for anyone considering this kit, just be prepared to find yourself a 5th-gen radiator.
[image: Posted Image]
On the flip side, it is looking pretty good so far. Slight trimming on the big vent will be needed to clear the supercharger pulley, and the small vent will have to be clearanced as well for the belt to fit. The radiator is now so close to the pulley connector that a new outboard bearing support will have to be created, which I'll post some pics of as soon as I get a piece mocked up.
[image: View Post]toro1, on 16 March 2010 - 07:28 AM, said:
Magic & Kaldek -- I've yet to see any of the newer style injectors come back from testing without needing cleaning. Interestingly enough, my 98's were in better shape than the 6th-gen & the ZX-10R injectors, despite being much older (I believe this is due to the single pindtle design of the 5th-gen injectors less prone to getting dirtied up). I do not know if injector cleaner can get anywhere near the results of a professional service, as Marren (who I use) tries to match the injector flow rates as close as possible, and includes new o-rings, filters, and a printout of the results. If you are looking for the highest possible performance (tuning, power, and gas mileage), then you owe it to yourself to have your injectors cleaned.
Folks! I had my injectors cleaned today! $154 Australian, including some replacement grommets.
I have videos I will upload to Youtube later, but here are the facts:
After 128,000 kilometres, the flow pattern was still really good. All injectors were within 1 millilitre of each other on the flow report - either 51mil or 52mil at 50psi. Amazing!
However, after cleaning all my injectors showed a 7% increase in flow. All were now either 56mil or 55mils at 50psi!
This means that my bike was categorically running very lean. Before cleaning the injectors I fitted a a PCV running Cozye's map (my Autotune hasn't arrived yet).
It begs a lot of questions, such as:
How well were Cozye's injectors flowing when he made his map?
Were my injectors running richer or leaner than his?
Could his map be totally wrong for my bike now?
Are those turbo city Fuel Pressure regulators only masking a problem with injectors?
I think the answer to the above questions is two things. One, get the Autotune fitted with good target AFR numbers. Two, get a custom tune to make it even more accurate.
I'm rather sick today with an inner ear infection, so I won't be going for a ride yet. But I'll post my flow report and my videos as soon as I can!
Because of the fairing design on this bike, the radiator had to be moved up as far as possible to fit inside the bodywork. This created a problem, as the existing outboard bearing design would interfere with the radiator. So, in the effort of making an even better kit, I came up with a new idea for the bearing support and decided to mock it up in nylon first to check things out.
[image: Posted Image]
I started with a solid bar, 3.25" in diameter, and proceeded to punch a 1" hole through the center of it. I then bored out the inside with the proper contours to fit the snout of the Rotrex, and after completing that, stuck it on a mandrel, and went to town on the OD contours. Nylon can be turned with huge depth of cuts, so it didn't take all that long to get to this point.
[image: Posted Image]
The second phase of the creation involved placing the turned portion in the mill and contouring the flange down to the proper size and shape -- this flange is where the extension arm will attach, extending from a main engine mounting bolt and providing an extra plane of support and rigidity to the bearing support. Also, a pocket was milled into the side of the wall that will allow the radiator to be shifted up as close as possible to the adapter shaft that runs from the Rotrex to the pulley.
[image: Posted Image]
This pic shows how tightly the radiator can now sit to the adapter shaft without interfering in any way. This new style of outboard support makes sure the secondary bearing is perfectly concentric to the output shaft of the supercharger, completely eliminating any misalignment. I plan on adapting this support style to the 5th-gen kit as well.
[image: Posted Image]
Everything still fits. At this point it's now just a matter of finalizing the drawings, ordering some material in, programming the parts, and running the prototypes.
In an attempt to reduce cost & complexity, I am doing away with the splined connections of the pulleys and shafts, and instead going to the face friction fit design implemented by the Rotrex (and also used in the ZX-10R kit -- if it works with on that kit, it will definitely work on this one). Also, the new pulleys will not feature the bolt-on flange design used previously in the 5th-gen kit, but instead will utilize a one-piece flange integral with the pulley (and also used on the ZX-10R kit). Essentially, instead of the stainless look shown in the previous pictues, the actual pulleys will look more like this:
I've come to the decision that if I'm going to drop any more money on a new bike, it'll just be an overhaul of the VTEC, and the installation of the SC. I can't wait to see some videos of it in operation. :fing02:
People just a reminder the more you keep asking questions that toro does spend time answering the less time he has to spend on the development, if his 5th gen kit is anything to go by you don't need to ask questions because he already is on top of it.
[image: View Post]zRoYz, on 25 March 2010 - 11:27 PM, said:
People just a reminder the more you keep asking questions that toro does spend time answering the less time he has to spend on the development, if his 5th gen kit is anything to go by you don't need to ask questions because he already is on top of it.
Yup. I fitted a set of his PAIR blockoff plates to my '02 yesterday. Those things are artwork in aluminium and you can tell he's put in all the needed effort to get them to that quality.
[image: View Post]VifferDude, on 28 March 2010 - 01:05 PM, said:
Where are we up to Mr Toro. I'm hangin' out for an update. How much plastic are we going to have to chop off the right fairing?
Not much at all will need to be trimmed from the fairing, though the inner panel will need a good deal removed to clear the radiator.
Right now, I basically have all the parts designed and am just waiting on quotes to come back for material & turning work, so until I'm making chips, there probably won't be too many updates (though I'm sure I can squeeze a few in). This build has gone pretty smoothly so far -- let's hope it stays that way.
Yes, any and all of the methods you mentioned could be used to limit power.
I have toyed with designing an inlet restrictor that would essentially allow you to spin the supercharger faster than normal, bumping up the low & midrange power, but limiting the top end. Since you are restricting the air before the supercharger, you do not suffer pumping losses due to compressing the air (systems that use a wastegate-style bypass valve to vent pressure post-compression suffer from these losses); you do, however, still have to deal with the added heat, as there is a much higher change in pressure ratio than if running the same amount of boost without a restrictor.
you could use something like this to restrict the boost levels.
I use this one on my nissan maxima to limit the boost PSI to 10#'s. I installed the pulley that allows 16#'s of boost and then limited the max pressure through this valve. it allow me to get in the boost much much faster and the boost also builds faster then stays a steady 10#'s all the way to redline, but now I dont have to worry about over boosting and blowing the motor or changing the fuel system to cope with the extra boost. one possible problem is heat and if you get the supercharger over it's RPM limit and out of it effective range. BTW I'm also running a bov to prevent compressor surge I think it would be a need item if over boosting
[image: View Post]Buttonhook, on 13 April 2010 - 09:03 AM, said:
Quote
Yes, any and all of the methods you mentioned could be used to limit power.
I have toyed with designing an inlet restrictor that would essentially allow you to spin the supercharger faster than normal, bumping up the low & midrange power, but limiting the top end. Since you are restricting the air before the supercharger, you do not suffer pumping losses due to compressing the air (systems that use a wastegate-style bypass valve to vent pressure post-compression suffer from these losses); you do, however, still have to deal with the added heat, as there is a much higher change in pressure ratio than if running the same amount of boost without a restrictor.
you could use something like this to restrict the boost levels.
I use this one on my nissan maxima to limit the boost PSI to 10#'s. I installed the pulley that allows 16#'s of boost and then limited the max pressure through this valve. it allow me to get in the boost much much faster and the boost also builds faster then stays a steady 10#'s all the way to redline, but now I dont have to worry about over boosting and blowing the motor or changing the fuel system to cope with the extra boost. one possible problem is heat and if you get the supercharger over it's RPM limit and out of it effective range. BTW I'm also running a bov to prevent compressor surge I think it would be a need item if over boosting
This is exactly what I was thinking of. Start Boost at 4000rpm and have it reach max boost at 8000rpm and hold it to 12000rpm so you have more HP down low. Too bad you can't make it a 2 stage controller, so you can have the best of both worlds, fuel economy when you want it, and all out power when you want it.
If the BLV goes between the air filter and the air intake on the blower, how does it limit the air going in?. It's hard to see how it works in the photos?.
[image: View Post]VifferDude, on 13 April 2010 - 08:54 PM, said:
[image: View Post]Buttonhook, on 13 April 2010 - 09:03 AM, said:
Quote
Yes, any and all of the methods you mentioned could be used to limit power.
I have toyed with designing an inlet restrictor that would essentially allow you to spin the supercharger faster than normal, bumping up the low & midrange power, but limiting the top end. Since you are restricting the air before the supercharger, you do not suffer pumping losses due to compressing the air (systems that use a wastegate-style bypass valve to vent pressure post-compression suffer from these losses); you do, however, still have to deal with the added heat, as there is a much higher change in pressure ratio than if running the same amount of boost without a restrictor.
you could use something like this to restrict the boost levels.
I use this one on my nissan maxima to limit the boost PSI to 10#'s. I installed the pulley that allows 16#'s of boost and then limited the max pressure through this valve. it allow me to get in the boost much much faster and the boost also builds faster then stays a steady 10#'s all the way to redline, but now I dont have to worry about over boosting and blowing the motor or changing the fuel system to cope with the extra boost. one possible problem is heat and if you get the supercharger over it's RPM limit and out of it effective range. BTW I'm also running a bov to prevent compressor surge I think it would be a need item if over boosting
This is exactly what I was thinking of. Start Boost at 4000rpm and have it reach max boost at 8000rpm and hold it to 12000rpm so you have more HP down low. Too bad you can't make it a 2 stage controller, so you can have the best of both worlds, fuel economy when you want it, and all out power when you want it.
If the BLV goes between the air filter and the air intake on the blower, how does it limit the air going in?. It's hard to see how it works in the photos?.
no it goes between the the blower and the intake(tb's). It opens when the PSI's increases to the preset limit and closes once the psis fall below it so it limits the max. pressure that enters into the TB's
I mentioned before that I don't like using wastegate-style pressure relief valves to limit boost, as you're wasting energy (power used to compress the air) and, as you mentioned, a bunch more heat is generated. The inlet restrictor ultimately accomplishes the same task, but you do not suffer from pumping losses. You do, however, still have to deal with the added heat, which on a pump-gas engine without an intercooler/water-injection, is the biggest killer of pistons & rings. I really try to set these systems up to offer a good trade-off on power delivery & reliability, and running them unrestricted (with peak boost at redline) is by far the safest way to go.
Now, if someone wants to go all out, there is plenty of power left in this supercharger -- you'd just have to be willing to add the necessary components to deal with the added heat.
BTW, this system does use a BOV. It is set up to open anytime vacuum is present, thus during part-throttle situations, extra air is bypassed from the intake & the load on both the engine and supercharger is decreased.
[image: View Post]toro1, on 15 April 2010 - 09:02 AM, said:
I mentioned before that I don't like using wastegate-style pressure relief valves to limit boost, as you're wasting energy (power used to compress the air) and, as you mentioned, a bunch more heat is generated. The inlet restrictor ultimately accomplishes the same task, but you do not suffer from pumping losses. You do, however, still have to deal with the added heat, which on a pump-gas engine without an intercooler/water-injection, is the biggest killer of pistons & rings. I really try to set these systems up to offer a good trade-off on power delivery & reliability, and running them unrestricted (with peak boost at redline) is by far the safest way to go.
Now, if someone wants to go all out, there is plenty of power left in this supercharger -- you'd just have to be willing to add the necessary components to deal with the added heat.
BTW, this system does use a BOV. It is set up to open anytime vacuum is present, thus during part-throttle situations, extra air is bypassed from the intake & the load on both the engine and supercharger is decreased.
A Very small water to air heat exchanger would be perfect for that application since you are right there at the cooling system and it could be much smaller than an intercooler and would help even with the basic kit(might be able to option it like a stage 2 kit or something). The main advantage that I gained from the wastegate style valve was the fact that I gained a very fast rising boost curve that reaches it's max. boost very quicky and it holds the max boost I program. The wasted energy that I bleed off is not a problem since I start building the boost SO much faster the gains out weight the losses. Plus I can adjust the max. boost pressure I'm using very easy without taking the belts and pulley off which in my case is a real PITA.
I'm running 11:1 compression with no knocking or pinging and no intercooler @ 10psi with a max of 16psi on pump 93 gas. At 16 psi I just turn up my Adj. fuel pressure reg.(too a set dyno tested number) and I'm good to go at 16psi. The heat generated at max rpms is alot, however it doesn't see max rpms all day long only very short bursts which I'm sure would be the same with this kit as well. So heat has not really been a factor since superchargers don't build as much heat as a turbo the car has made 164,000+ miles and no problems yet. just a thought. Also I'm running plugs which are at least 2 steps colder and the gaps are much smaller than normal to prevent blow out.
Question do our bike use a knock sensor to retard timing? If not that could be a problem that I've not had to solve as my car does use a knock sensor and will automatically retard the timing if it ever does knock due to bad fuel or too much heat.
[image: View Post]Buttonhook, on 15 April 2010 - 01:56 PM, said:
A Very small water to air heat exchanger would be perfect for that application since you are right there at the cooling system and it could be much smaller than an intercooler and would help even with the basic kit(might be able to option it like a stage 2 kit or something).
Question do our bike use a knock sensor to retard timing? If not that could be a problem that I've not had to solve as my car does use a knock sensor and will automatically retard the timing if it ever does knock due to bad fuel or too much heat.
Button, that was actually the reason why I went with the modular airbox design in the first place. I had planned on sandwiching a Laminova-based air/water intercooler beneath the carbon hat for anyone who wanted a Stage 2 kit, but after testing & riding the bike for a while, I figured very few people would want to drop another $1500 for the intercooler setup and higher boost. Plus, with all the research I've done into water injection over the last few months, that seems like a better way to go all around for anyone who's really looking for even more boost/power.
The bike does not have a knock sensor, and no (affordable plug-and-play) timing control exists for it, so I have to be very careful with the tune. The 5th-gen engine takes to boost very well, and I see no reason why the 6th-gen won't too.
At the end of the day, it all comes down to economics. If I had people willing to spend $10k on a kit, I'd be pulling out all the stops to wring every last pony out of these bikes, but that isn't going to happen, so compromises have to be made. BTW, for those of you interested in possibly buying this kit, I'm hoping (fingers crossed) to launch the production version with a price tag under $5k (and might throw in a nice pre-order bonus, as well).
Good things are worth waiting for, and I hope to get my hands on the 6th gen S/C kit (not that I really need the extra power for the way I ride most of the time.)
Absolute power corrupts absolutely. And it ROCKS absolutely, too!
I'm glad that you are striving to the KISS principle (Keep It Simple, Stupid) for the design of the 6th gen kit. Simple, smaller packaging, cheaper will sell more kits in the long run. Like you said, I wouldn't think that many people would buy the Stage 2, so why design in the extra complexity if it isn't gonna be used by 90% of the folks out there.
Sounds like the 6th gen might be a slightly simpler, cheaper kit than the 5th gen. Hope it works out that way. I would love to be your guinea pig for the earlier 6th gen, but I doubt it is practical for me, so I leave it to someone else. But I hope to be one of the first 6th gen customers. This year I am not going to have much time for anything other than work, so it should be fairly easy to squirrel away for the S/C kit. Will start saving now.....
Keep up the good work and please keep us in the loop!
P.S: I'm still interested in a possible belt drive conversion kit, hint hint. Anyone else? Dan said it might be possible to do a low volume run if we can get enough interest. Won't be cheap but will be quality, I'm sure of that. If I could get rid of the chain and go to a low maintenance belt drive, I doubt I would ever buy a 7th gen when the 6th gen could be everything I ever need.
I'm getting all excited with this one :cheerleader: So last week my local Honda dealer just got the new VFR in & I took my wife to look at it... She likes it and says go ahead and get it :laughing6-hehe: WTF am I suppose to do, is she serious... Yep. So I tell her that I can have the same power with mine and save a lot of money. you all know where I'm going with this...? Bingo, plus I already have my VFR setup the way I want it right now.
Can't wait :bliss:
[image: View Post]spinrb8r, on 10 March 2010 - 11:19 PM, said:
[image: View Post]kaldek, on 10 March 2010 - 07:28 PM, said:
Also, that gap in the air vent looks a little ugly. I suggest it needs a nice little laser-cut bracket which says "Rotrex Supercharged". :biggrin:
suffice it to say that NOTHING on that bike will even HINT at there being a Rotrex hidden in there. at every stop my jacket will hang over that cowling and the hole won't be seen.
spinrb8r
If you had the pulley hard anodized black to make it blend in, would that void the warranty?
[image: View Post]crazybrother, on 21 April 2010 - 05:51 PM, said:
I'm getting all excited with this one :cheerleader: So last week my local Honda dealer just got the new VFR in & I took my wife to look at it... She likes it and says go ahead and get it :laughing6-hehe: WTF am I suppose to do, is she serious... Yep. So I tell her that I can have the same power with mine and save a lot of money. you all know where I'm going with this...? Bingo, plus I already have my VFR setup the way I want it right now.
Can't wait :bliss:
Do it!!
Then at least there will be someone local that has one.
Dude, you obviously know how to use a lathe and cnc machinery. How do you find the time, because most times guys are like, Well, they're really cracking down on us...
[image: View Post]fastbroshi, on 22 April 2010 - 06:52 PM, said:
Dude, you obviously know how to use a lathe and cnc machinery. How do you find the time, because most times guys are like, Well, they're really cracking down on us...
When your Father owns the gear and machine company, then........
[image: View Post]HorribleHutter, on 22 April 2010 - 02:40 AM, said:
If you had the pulley hard anodized black to make it blend in, would that void the warranty?
The pulleys are currently hard anodized black, but the stainless flanges are what makes them stand out. However, the new pulleys will be one piece and look just like ZX10R pulleys shown at the top of this page.
[image: View Post]number9, on 22 April 2010 - 04:09 PM, said:
What kind of a person buys a ZX-10R and says "You know what this needs? More power."?
The kind of person that buys a ZX10R in the first place. Believe it or not, the owner of that bike wants to add a tooth to the front sprocket and turn up the boost. I figure we can get another 15whp out of it (a lot more can be gained, too, if we grind a set of custom cams). He said right now it reaches 186mph far too quickly, and Texas has some big roads... :rolleyes:
[image: View Post]fastbroshi, on 22 April 2010 - 06:52 PM, said:
Dude, you obviously know how to use a lathe and cnc machinery. How do you find the time, because most times guys are like, Well, they're really cracking down on us...
I find the time because this is my full-time gig. I really want this business to take off, and I try to do things the right way all the time. Plus, as Rob said, it doesn't hurt that I have most of the equipment at my disposal.
About that ZX-10, if that's the case I think he's got a Bonneville candidate on his hands. How cool would that be? Definiely some good exposure for you if he did...
[image: View Post]fastbroshi, on 27 April 2010 - 05:01 PM, said:
About that ZX-10, if that's the case I think he's got a Bonneville candidate on his hands. How cool would that be? Definiely some good exposure for you if he did...
Lower it and toss on an extended swingarm, and ZOOM, away he goes! :fing02:
In it's current chassis configuration, I would say that the Texas Mile would be a good venue to run.
Ya know how the length of the TB intake Velocity Stacks on normally aspirated engines change the torque characteristics of the engine?. Would Velocity Stacks between the air intake "Top Hat" and the TB adaptors make a diference in a Turbo/Supercharged engine?.
[image: View Post]VifferDude, on 28 April 2010 - 12:15 AM, said:
Toro,
Ya know how the length of the TB intake Velocity Stacks on normally aspirated engines change the torque characteristics of the engine?. Would Velocity Stacks between the air intake "Top Hat" and the TB adaptors make a diference in a Turbo/Supercharged engine?.
I think the answer to that question is "only when there is little or no boost". My turbocharged car has a plenum chamber which is shared with a natrally aspirated version of the same car. The N/A version has a computer controlled butterfly which changes the intake length; on mine, they just removed all this stuff because once boost kicks in all that stuff is irrelevant.
The same thing applies to a supercharged motorcycle. Positive airbox pressure means the air wants to go wherever it can, which is down the intake tract.
[image: View Post]VifferDude, on 28 April 2010 - 12:15 AM, said:
Toro,
Ya know how the length of the TB intake Velocity Stacks on normally aspirated engines change the torque characteristics of the engine?. Would Velocity Stacks between the air intake "Top Hat" and the TB adaptors make a diference in a Turbo/Supercharged engine?.
Well, essentially the connectors are velocity stacks. There is a big radius on entry to the cylinders, and the overall length is very close to stock. However, the whole function of a velocity stack in the first place is to supercharge a specific region of the powerband via reflecting intake pulses -- in our case, there is always more air available than the engine needs, so the shorter the runner, the greater the power (to a certain extent).
For example, my original airbox had very long runners that fed into a central plenum chamber. The revised airbox had much shorter runners that fed into a broader plenum chamber. By regular logic, the longer runner intake would trounce the short runner intake on the bottom end but give up some power on top. In reality, the short runner intake outperformed the long runner intake everywhere, especially on top, where I picked up an extra 15hp. Around town the bike feels just like stock -- until you don't want it to, that is.
The biggest key is eliminating flow losses. Anything that causes air to be restricted entering or leaving the engine reduces the power, and I try to make things as efficient as possible.
[image: View Post]toro1, on 28 April 2010 - 07:53 AM, said:
[image: View Post]VifferDude, on 28 April 2010 - 12:15 AM, said:
Toro,
Ya know how the length of the TB intake Velocity Stacks on normally aspirated engines change the torque characteristics of the engine?. Would Velocity Stacks between the air intake "Top Hat" and the TB adaptors make a diference in a Turbo/Supercharged engine?.
Well, essentially the connectors are velocity stacks. There is a big radius on entry to the cylinders, and the overall length is very close to stock. However, the whole function of a velocity stack in the first place is to supercharge a specific region of the powerband via reflecting intake pulses -- in our case, there is always more air available than the engine needs, so the shorter the runner, the greater the power (to a certain extent).
For example, my original airbox had very long runners that fed into a central plenum chamber. The revised airbox had much shorter runners that fed into a broader plenum chamber. By regular logic, the longer runner intake would trounce the short runner intake on the bottom end but give up some power on top. In reality, the short runner intake outperformed the long runner intake everywhere, especially on top, where I picked up an extra 15hp. Around town the bike feels just like stock -- until you don't want it to, that is.
The biggest key is eliminating flow losses. Anything that causes air to be restricted entering or leaving the engine reduces the power, and I try to make things as efficient as possible.
Would having the heads port and polished be benificial? or just a waste of money?
[image: View Post]VifferDude, on 28 April 2010 - 11:37 PM, said:
Would having the heads port and polished be benificial? or just a waste of money?
To a certain extent, yes, if you know what you are doing, and it would be better to work on the exhaust side of things rather than the intake. I have been playing around with cams specs, and since the VFR has a very conservative cam setup with little overlap, the stock cams actually work pretty well with a supercharger. However, if a different exhaust cam could be fitted with more duration, then power gains would be made across the entire powerband, with a considerable amount coming up top (I figure at least 10hp, maybe more). If outright peak power were the main goal, a very aggressive exhaust cam profile could increase the power to nearly 190hp @ the wheel, on the same amount of boost the bike is currently running (this is at the expense of power down low, though).
At this point, I'm waiting on the CNC turning to come in (which probably won't be for ~2 weeks), and in the meantime, I'll be turning whatever components I can handle in house. The newly machined parts fit beautifully and have nestled the Rotrex in exactly the right spot necessary to clear the frame and engine.
There are still a bunch of parts that have to get ordered and a never-ending list of little details that need to be taken care of, but all in all, I can see the light at the end of the tunnel.
Oh man, I've got a hard on for this. I still reckon you should have A&A Performance and the Bull Logo etched into it somewhere. I'm dieing to see the Dyno results.
you need someone who knows how to run autodesk inventor or solid works and a 3D rapid prototype printer. That way you could mock up the parts really fast and cheap before you start cutting in metal and when your done designing you just hit print and the CNC will cut them out for you. Quick and painless.
[image: View Post]Buttonhook, on 10 May 2010 - 02:10 PM, said:
you need someone who knows how to run autodesk inventor or solid works and a 3D rapid prototype printer. That way you could mock up the parts really fast and cheap before you start cutting in metal and when your done designing you just hit print and the CNC will cut them out for you. Quick and painless.
Hey Button, might be worth your while to read back through this and the 5th Gen SC build-up topics... :fing02:
I'd like to know if Toro has worked out a price yet, and wiether or not he will accept deposits or pre-orders?. He stated in a post about a month ago that the machined parts should be in in around 2 weeks. It's been a month now so we should be getting an update soon!
[image: View Post]Buttonhook, on 10 May 2010 - 02:10 PM, said:
you need someone who knows how to run autodesk inventor or solid works and a 3D rapid prototype printer. That way you could mock up the parts really fast and cheap before you start cutting in metal and when your done designing you just hit print and the CNC will cut them out for you. Quick and painless.
I can do any solidworks models/drawings that might be wanted. Nothing expected in return.
[image: View Post]The Phantom, on 10 May 2010 - 05:34 PM, said:
Hey Button, might be worth your while to read back through this and the 5th Gen SC build-up topics... :fing02:
Maybe I missed something and if I did I'm sorry however...I saw where he was using AutoCAD to draw everything up and CNC cutting....But that is not really the same thing as Inventor http://download.auto...nv11ovw-pglk--- (soildworks, Pro-e, etc). Inventor is made by Autodesk and thats really about the only thing that is the same. I would think using a parmetric modeling software would make the design and fitting process much easier. I teach Parametric modeling (among many things) to my engineering students and with it you can even do the stress testing, cost, parts lists, and even check for problems during installation and operation before any parts are made by makeing full working assemblies on the computer.
I dont think any versions of Autocad can do that??(I could be wrong but I've not seen it) Also with the addition of a 3d printer (like the Dimension printers) http://www.dimension...rint-video.aspx or this http://www.dimension...tions-main.aspx he would be able to print in cheap ABS plastic for final fitment and do it all with just the touch of a button. If changes need to be made you change them and push the button again ...a new part comes out. Repeat as needed. I would think that this would make designing any new product faster to develop and cheaper to produce ...... :fing02:
BTW AutoCAD is great (all around) software I use it almost everyday but the new stuff is much better for specilized use. best thing about Inventor is it talks to AutoCAD directly without most conversion problems. So any files he now has woould be easily converted to Inventor.
I own, and regularly use, both SolidWorks and ProE, and do CFD modeling for the intakes and such, but for most 2.5D part design I stick to AutoCAD, mainly due to my CAM software and its limitations (as well as the limitations of most shops I deal with). Plus, I've gotten really fast, and really comfortable, with using AutoCAD in 2D mode, so it's more of just a personal preference. I agree with you though, for mocking up entire systems, you can't beat a solid modeling package.
I'd also love to get my hands on/have access to a rapid prototype machine, but the cost is way too prohibitive at this point in the game, and most of the time it's easier to fit components by hand and then translate them into the digital world as opposed to vice versa. What I really want, though, is a portable CMM arm to touch off on the castings/frame, as that would cut development time significantly. Again, if I had the $$$, that's the way I'd do it.
For the most part, the limiting factor time-wise, and what I'm waiting for right now, is for outside machine work (CNC turning/carbon fiber work) to get done. The more companies that get involved, the longer the wait.
If anything, it would be worthwhile to learn mastercam. But it all comes down to what your machines can handle. At our machine shop, we still use bobcad dos and bobcad 14 for windows. Our machines are nowhere near new, and this software works very well for it. Plus it takes almost no time at all to draw up a toolpath. Everything is dead simple.
[image: View Post]toro1, on 11 May 2010 - 02:34 PM, said:
Hey Button,
I own, and regularly use, both SolidWorks and ProE, and do CFD modeling for the intakes and such, but for most 2.5D part design I stick to AutoCAD, mainly due to my CAM software and its limitations (as well as the limitations of most shops I deal with). Plus, I've gotten really fast, and really comfortable, with using AutoCAD in 2D mode, so it's more of just a personal preference. I agree with you though, for mocking up entire systems, you can't beat a solid modeling package.
I'd also love to get my hands on/have access to a rapid prototype machine, but the cost is way too prohibitive at this point in the game, and most of the time it's easier to fit components by hand and then translate them into the digital world as opposed to vice versa. What I really want, though, is a portable CMM arm to touch off on the castings/frame, as that would cut development time significantly. Again, if I had the $$$, that's the way I'd do it.
For the most part, the limiting factor time-wise, and what I'm waiting for right now, is for outside machine work (CNC turning/carbon fiber work) to get done. The more companies that get involved, the longer the wait.
You can download the new inventor as a free trial you should look at it. It is much more user freidly than even Autocad most of my student are faster drawing 3D in inventor than they are 2D in AutoCAD after about a month. It will automatically turn the 3d drawings into 2d which you could use with your Cam software. As far as the rapid prototype machine if you have a (technical) college near you most have them(around here anyway)and will do printing for just the cost of the plastic and a very small donation to the program. They also have a portable 3d scanner on the market now as well. You could just scan the bike and insert it into the 3d program then work around it in a digital world....too cool
YoshiHNS, I believe the new inventor will do any tool paths as well
[image: View Post]YoshiHNS, on 11 May 2010 - 03:21 PM, said:
If anything, it would be worthwhile to learn mastercam. But it all comes down to what your machines can handle. At our machine shop, we still use bobcad dos and bobcad 14 for windows. Our machines are nowhere near new, and this software works very well for it. Plus it takes almost no time at all to draw up a toolpath. Everything is dead simple.
I know Mastercam -- just can't afford it (I was really spoiled back at PSU). I'm running Bobcad 21 now, which is hard to beat for the price (once you figure out its little idiosyncrasies, that is).
[image: View Post]Buttonhook, on 11 May 2010 - 03:55 PM, said:
You can download the new inventor as a free trial you should look at it. It is much more user freidly than even Autocad most of my student are faster drawing 3D in inventor than they are 2D in AutoCAD after about a month. It will automatically turn the 3d drawings into 2d which you could use with your Cam software. As far as the rapid prototype machine if you have a (technical) college near you most have them(around here anyway)and will do printing for just the cost of the plastic and a very small donation to the program. They also have a portable 3d scanner on the market now as well. You could just scan the bike and insert it into the 3d program then work around it in a digital world....too cool
I'll have to give the trial version of Inventor a whirl, as it sounds like a nice package. Unless I start moving a lot more supercharger kits, though, I don't think it will be cost effective for me.
If I had NC capabilities in either Solidworks or ProE, I'd go that way and do the whole process, down to the code, right there. It's easy to make 2D drawings in ProE, but most of the time it's just another step in the chain, and ProE likes to make splines out of arcs occasionally...
[image: View Post]Buttonhook, on 11 May 2010 - 03:55 PM, said:
They also have a portable 3d scanner on the market now as well. You could just scan the bike and insert it into the 3d program then work around it in a digital world....too cool
Now that sounds like it would make life easy! More so than a FARO arm anyway. We just got a FARO arm here at work for the portability, we're using it to measure assembly fixtures, master models, and also to create data that will help us bring our older 5 axis waterjet tooling into Catia/SurfCAM.
There is a place close to me that does 3D scanning, but they are an architectural firm and when we inquired about their services, they said they wouldn't be comfortable dealing with our tight tolerances. One big advantage to the arm vs. the scanner though, is you get a hard, physical touch point instead of a scan. I can see where the scanner may misconstrue a surface or feature due to material type and reflective properties - we use a Virtek LaserQC scanner here for 2D flat pattern production inspection, and it's only accurate to +/- .005" or so.
[image: View Post]SEBSPEED, on 12 May 2010 - 06:16 AM, said:
[image: View Post]Buttonhook, on 11 May 2010 - 03:55 PM, said:
They also have a portable 3d scanner on the market now as well. You could just scan the bike and insert it into the 3d program then work around it in a digital world....too cool
Now that sounds like it would make life easy! More so than a FARO arm anyway. We just got a FARO arm here at work for the portability, we're using it to measure assembly fixtures, master models, and also to create data that will help us bring our older 5 axis waterjet tooling into Catia/SurfCAM.
There is a place close to me that does 3D scanning, but they are an architectural firm and when we inquired about their services, they said they wouldn't be comfortable dealing with our tight tolerances. One big advantage to the arm vs. the scanner though, is you get a hard, physical touch point instead of a scan. I can see where the scanner may misconstrue a surface or feature due to material type and reflective properties - we use a Virtek LaserQC scanner here for 2D flat pattern production inspection, and it's only accurate to +/- .005" or so.
for the really tight tolerances you would want to have it mounted perm. I'm sure but most are pretty good.
A few more major parts completed and some odds and ends to report on...
First up is the little stuff. The stock horn location does not jive with the supercharger, so I had to find a new home for it. Luckily the front brake line mount has an unused hole that places the horn in a perfect location, and the only thing left to do is create a wiring harness extension.
[image: Posted Image]
The 6th-gen uses much stiffer stock clutch springs than the 5th-gen does, but they're still not as strong as the Barnett springs that I use, so out goes the stockers and in goes the Barnetts. Also of note is the beefier clutch basket of the 6th-gen compared to the 5th.
[image: Posted Image]
The PAIR system is disabled for tuning and clearance purposes using A&A Performance block-off plates (available for purchase, btw :fing02: )
[image: Posted Image]
I'm trying out a new design on both the crank and supercharger pulley adapters that eliminates the splines of the current design (and basically mimics the Rotrex mounting configuration). This not only makes things easier and cheaper to manufacture on a large scale, but is actually a better design in the long run, too.
For the prototype bike, the adapters are made out of 4140...
[image: Posted Image]
The crank connector will no longer be a 1-piece threaded design, but it still has to be square, concentric, and perfectly sized to work effectively.
[image: Posted Image]
After turning was complete, the ODs of the parts were precision ground (held to tenths -- 0.0001"). It's not easy to build these kits the right way, but it's the only way to do it.
[image: Posted Image]
Here's a shot of the completed adapters. The hardware used to hold the pulleys/connectors onto the bike will all be ultra-strength ARP stuff, which will ensure proper holding force regardless of the load or temp.
[image: Posted Image]
While you're in there, you should put in a Stebel horn. The trick being they're much larger then the stocker. Mine is mounted to the original mounting location of the stocker, but with a custom bracket and a little grinding on the horn to get it to clear the front fender. I don't have a pic handy, or I'd post one.
[image: View Post]tx_vfr, on 20 May 2010 - 11:29 AM, said:
While you're in there, you should put in a Stebel horn. The trick being they're much larger then the stocker. Mine is mounted to the original mounting location of the stocker, but with a custom bracket and a little grinding on the horn to get it to clear the front fender. I don't have a pic handy, or I'd post one.
[image: View Post]tx_vfr, on 20 May 2010 - 11:29 AM, said:
While you're in there, you should put in a Stebel horn. The trick being they're much larger then the stocker. Mine is mounted to the original mounting location of the stocker, but with a custom bracket and a little grinding on the horn to get it to clear the front fender. I don't have a pic handy, or I'd post one.
[image: View Post]tx_vfr, on 20 May 2010 - 11:29 AM, said:
While you're in there, you should put in a Stebel horn. The trick being they're much larger then the stocker. Mine is mounted to the original mounting location of the stocker, but with a custom bracket and a little grinding on the horn to get it to clear the front fender. I don't have a pic handy, or I'd post one.
Excellent looking work. :fing02:
It is mine though and we're putting a 'Bad Boy' air horn in there,
spinrb8r
I hope everyhing's going smoothly. When I read about WackenSS' 183 HP VFR, I was blown away. I can't wait to hear more about the 6th gen SC project. I realize Toro has better things to do than post messages in forums but I became somewhat obsessed with the 6th gen SC thread, I check it a couple of times a day so I hope a new update comes soon for my mental health's sake : :blush: ...
First up is a shot of the new Walbro fuel pump all mounted up -- it slides in just as easily as it does on the 5th-gen.
[image: Posted Image]
Got the pulley blanks in yesterday from turning and wasted no time in getting them cut.
[image: Posted Image]
I test fit the pulleys with the connectors and idler. While I do need to modify the idler bracket and still have to make the adjuster rods, everything fits pretty well. As soon as I make these new parts, everything will be sent out to anodize.
That'd be right,...you get close to finishing right after the arse end falls out of the Aussie dollar. It was at .93 US now its down to .80 US :pissed:
[image: View Post]VifferDude, on 10 June 2010 - 11:41 PM, said:
That'd be right,...you get close to finishing right after the arse end falls out of the Aussie dollar. It was at .93 US now its down to .80 US :pissed:
Yea tell me about it, I've been following this build so I can buy one for my 02... maybe then I can keep up my my mates gixxers
[image: View Post]toro1, on 04 March 2010 - 02:17 PM, said:
Now as far as VTEC is concerned, I'm still not sure it will even be an issue with the performance of the bike. I have overlaid similar dyno charts on top of one another from the 5th & 6th-gens, and with the exception of the dip right before the VTEC engagement, the 6th-gens put out solid power running in 2-valve mode, many times eclipsing the 5th-gens.
My plan is as follows: I want to tune the bike with the VTEC left intact and see how it performs. All I really care about is a nice, smooth, controllable curve, and if I can get that with the bike as is, I'll leave it alone. Now, if there is a pronounced dip, or if I can tell the 2 valves are choking the power, then I'll start playing with disabling the system. From the research I've done into the matter, electronically bypassing the signal seems like the best way to go (that is, the easiest, most reversible, cheapest, and least intrusive method). The tuning is a wholly different matter, and I expect that could be the biggest stumbling block, as now you are expecting the Power Commander to handle wildly different settings than what is required (especially in the timing department). I don't know, maybe it won't be a big deal to dial it in, but I think there will have to be a noticeably bad hole in the curve for me to undertake this experiment.
Hy there,
i'm also waiting for this kit since I've first seen the kit for 5th gen(more than a year ago). I'm happy that the idea is rolling now.
Concerning the VTEC engagement, I don't think it can be done electrically / electronically. At least not for lower revs because the VTEC spring is moved due to oil pressure. You need at least to know the minimum oil pressure needed for moving the VTEC pin. So the idea of going with the project without changing the way that VTEC valves work is better.
I will be one of the customers for my 2003 VFR (Euro version)! :bliss:
[image: View Post]ciprinakos, on 15 June 2010 - 05:09 PM, said:
[image: View Post]toro1, on 04 March 2010 - 02:17 PM, said:
Now as far as VTEC is concerned, I'm still not sure it will even be an issue with the performance of the bike. I have overlaid similar dyno charts on top of one another from the 5th & 6th-gens, and with the exception of the dip right before the VTEC engagement, the 6th-gens put out solid power running in 2-valve mode, many times eclipsing the 5th-gens.
My plan is as follows: I want to tune the bike with the VTEC left intact and see how it performs. All I really care about is a nice, smooth, controllable curve, and if I can get that with the bike as is, I'll leave it alone. Now, if there is a pronounced dip, or if I can tell the 2 valves are choking the power, then I'll start playing with disabling the system. From the research I've done into the matter, electronically bypassing the signal seems like the best way to go (that is, the easiest, most reversible, cheapest, and least intrusive method). The tuning is a wholly different matter, and I expect that could be the biggest stumbling block, as now you are expecting the Power Commander to handle wildly different settings than what is required (especially in the timing department). I don't know, maybe it won't be a big deal to dial it in, but I think there will have to be a noticeably bad hole in the curve for me to undertake this experiment.
Hy there,
i'm also waiting for this kit since I've first seen the kit for 5th gen(more than a year ago). I'm happy that the idea is rolling now.
Concerning the VTEC engagement, I don't think it can be done electrically / electronically. At least not for lower revs because the VTEC spring is moved due to oil pressure. You need at least to know the minimum oil pressure needed for moving the VTEC pin. So the idea of going with the project without changing the way that VTEC valves work is better.
I will be one of the customers for my 2003 VFR (Euro version)! :bliss:
The oil preassure that activates the VTEC pin is controlled by a solanoid which is "electronic". I've been waiting forever and a day!. The timing of this kit needs to be right for me, the aussie dollar needs to be strong, and it has to happen before 9 Sept 2011. I'll be married then and have to beg for the money, and explain why 105 rwhp aint enough, and why I need 190rwhp.
I'd like to know what the cost of port and polishing the heads along with after market headers would cost, against Horse power gains?. If I'm going to go to the expence of taking the heads of, can I throw a thicker head gasket in there?. If I'm prepared to run Premium gas (95 RON) all the time, how much boost can I run, and what would the estimated hp gains?.
[image: View Post]VifferDude, on 16 June 2010 - 12:42 AM, said:
The oil preassure that activates the VTEC pin is controlled by a solanoid which is "electronic". I've been waiting forever and a day!. The timing of this kit needs to be right for me, the aussie dollar needs to be strong, and it has to happen before 9 Sept 2011. I'll be married then and have to beg for the money, and explain why 105 rwhp aint enough, and why I need 190rwhp.
I'd like to know what the cost of port and polishing the heads along with after market headers would cost, against Horse power gains?. If I'm going to go to the expence of taking the heads of, can I throw a thicker head gasket in there?. If I'm prepared to run Premium gas (95 RON) all the time, how much boost can I run, and what would the estimated hp gains?.
Yes, it is controlled by a solenoid, but you still need a certain amount of oil pressure which you can get at from a certain RPM. The solenoid only open and/or close the oil flow to the VTEC valves angaging pins.
Peace!
[image: View Post]ciprinakos, on 15 June 2010 - 05:09 PM, said:
Hy there,
i'm also waiting for this kit since I've first seen the kit for 5th gen(more than a year ago). I'm happy that the idea is rolling now.
Concerning the VTEC engagement, I don't think it can be done electrically / electronically. At least not for lower revs because the VTEC spring is moved due to oil pressure. You need at least to know the minimum oil pressure needed for moving the VTEC pin. So the idea of going with the project without changing the way that VTEC valves work is better.
I will be one of the customers for my 2003 VFR (Euro version)! :bliss:
I'm going to find out very soon whether or not the VTEC will be a problem -- I don't think it will be. I'm working on an '06, though, so I'd like to get my hands a local owner's pre-'06 to iron out the tuning on those bikes, too. Again, the only way I'll start messing with VTEC engagement is if there are serious problems in the powerband once supercharged.
[image: View Post]VifferDude, on 16 June 2010 - 12:42 AM, said:
I'd like to know what the cost of port and polishing the heads along with after market headers would cost, against Horse power gains?. If I'm going to go to the expence of taking the heads of, can I throw a thicker head gasket in there?. If I'm prepared to run Premium gas (95 RON) all the time, how much boost can I run, and what would the estimated hp gains?.
With a centrifugal supercharger, the biggest gains come with good exhaust flow, via cams or porting. I've played with cam specs on my engine modeler and the stock cams are pretty well suited for a supercharger -- very little overlap and identical lift and duration on the intake and exhaust. In this case porting will probably help, but too much removed material can hurt the flow at low rpms, in turn hurting power during most of your riding. At this power level it's not worth it. An aftermarket or '98-'99 catless header design with a decent slip-on will free up power, so that might be something you want to look into.
I wouldn't even bother with changing the compression as these engines work very well with boost and do not encounter detonation at the boost level the kit runs at. Lowering the compression will just cause the power to drop across the board, and unless you counter with increased boost, the bike will feel more sluggish overall. If you install this kit, you will need to run Premium all the time with the stock pulley ratio (unless you never plan on hitting boost, which is impossible -- trust me :wheel: ).
IF someone ever wanted to get some serious power out of one of these bikes (200+whp), here's what I'd do: aftermarket forged pistons, 1/2 point lower compression, possibly rods, possibly beef up the clutch, larger injectors, water/alcohol injection, lots and lots of boost. For even more power, I'd start looking at head porting, custom cams, and multiple sets of clean underwear.
[image: View Post]toro1, on 16 June 2010 - 10:17 AM, said:
[image: View Post]ciprinakos, on 15 June 2010 - 05:09 PM, said:
Hy there,
i'm also waiting for this kit since I've first seen the kit for 5th gen(more than a year ago). I'm happy that the idea is rolling now.
Concerning the VTEC engagement, I don't think it can be done electrically / electronically. At least not for lower revs because the VTEC spring is moved due to oil pressure. You need at least to know the minimum oil pressure needed for moving the VTEC pin. So the idea of going with the project without changing the way that VTEC valves work is better.
I will be one of the customers for my 2003 VFR (Euro version)! :bliss:
I'm going to find out very soon whether or not the VTEC will be a problem -- I don't think it will be. I'm working on an '06, though, so I'd like to get my hands a local owner's pre-'06 to iron out the tuning on those bikes, too. Again, the only way I'll start messing with VTEC engagement is if there are serious problems in the powerband once supercharged.
[image: View Post]VifferDude, on 16 June 2010 - 12:42 AM, said:
I'd like to know what the cost of port and polishing the heads along with after market headers would cost, against Horse power gains?. If I'm going to go to the expence of taking the heads of, can I throw a thicker head gasket in there?. If I'm prepared to run Premium gas (95 RON) all the time, how much boost can I run, and what would the estimated hp gains?.
With a centrifugal supercharger, the biggest gains come with good exhaust flow, via cams or porting. I've played with cam specs on my engine modeler and the stock cams are pretty well suited for a supercharger -- very little overlap and identical lift and duration on the intake and exhaust. In this case porting will probably help, but too much removed material can hurt the flow at low rpms, in turn hurting power during most of your riding. At this power level it's not worth it. An aftermarket or '98-'99 catless header design with a decent slip-on will free up power, so that might be something you want to look into.
I wouldn't even bother with changing the compression as these engines work very well with boost and do not encounter detonation at the boost level the kit runs at. Lowering the compression will just cause the power to drop across the board, and unless you counter with increased boost, the bike will feel more sluggish overall. If you install this kit, you will need to run Premium all the time with the stock pulley ratio (unless you never plan on hitting boost, which is impossible -- trust me :wheel: ).
IF someone ever wanted to get some serious power out of one of these bikes (200+whp), here's what I'd do: aftermarket forged pistons, 1/2 point lower compression, possibly rods, possibly beef up the clutch, larger injectors, water/alcohol injection, lots and lots of boost. For even more power, I'd start looking at head porting, custom cams, and multiple sets of clean underwear.
I am SOOOOOOO glad I saw the end of your last post. I have been wondering why I do not have enough power on ANY of my bikes. I will have to test out this idea of "clean underwear" and see how much of a boost I get.
[image: View Post]Terminex, on 16 June 2010 - 10:32 AM, said:
I am SOOOOOOO glad I saw the end of your last post. I have been wondering why I do not have enough power on ANY of my bikes. I will have to test out this idea of "clean underwear" and see how much of a boost I get.
Yep, if your current bike does not elicit at least one change in shorts, you're not running enough boost.
[image: View Post]Gimpyz, on 06 July 2010 - 02:40 PM, said:
WELL..... How's it comming along?? I am currently saving my pennys.
From what I've heard ( :rolleyes: ) , you guys might see something nice by the end of this week. There were some major supplier delays, so while I'm not promising anything, I will say just hold on a little bit longer...
I've been rubbing my hands together for a long time waiting for this kit to finally be available, but it didn't make it to production quite soon enough. Instead I pulled the trigger on the 1200 to satisfy my need for for speed.
I will still watch with great interest though. This is a very impressive project you've got under way. I can't wait to see the final results!
[image: View Post]toro1, on 06 July 2010 - 03:12 PM, said:
[image: View Post]Gimpyz, on 06 July 2010 - 02:40 PM, said:
WELL..... How's it comming along?? I am currently saving my pennys.
From what I've heard ( :rolleyes: ) , you guys might see something nice by the end of this week. There were some major supplier delays, so while I'm not promising anything, I will say just hold on a little bit longer...
This just in: 6th-gens like boost.
After a couple small setbacks, the bike roared to life a few days ago. No drama, no broken parts, just things working together like they were designed to do.
I took it out for a nice long test & tune today (and datalogged the whole trip). The fuel map is rich, but very smooth. For anyone wondering how the VTEC transition would respond to boost, the only thing I can say is, what VTEC transition? Seriously, if I did not know that this bike switched from 2 valves to 4, there would be no way of telling it from just riding the bike. Even using my initial fuel map, it is completely, totally rideable. I tried hovering right around the transition point to make things more noticeable, but it didn't matter -- the overabundance of air and fuel seems to have eliminated any lean spots associated with the transition.
So, how does it go, you say? Well, I haven't ridden a stock VFR in such a long time that I forget what the normal powerband feels like; however, I can try to reiterate what I've found so far. First off, until I get a few more miles on the bike, I have to keep the revs down around 7000rpm to break in the Rotrex -- unless you're just cruising, this is a very, very hard thing to do, as once you get past 6000rpm, the bike wants to pull really hard. As the tach sweeps past 8 (like I said, it's very hard to keep it under 7k ), the bike feels like it wants to take flight. If you nail it in the first couple gears with the revs anywhere near 6 grand, just hold on, because the surge of power launches the bike forward and upward at the same time with incredible authority -- you've really got to be ready for it.
At lower rpms there is decent oomph, but don't expect 1200-like torque. Big throttle openings in 6th-gear at less than 4000rpm still results in a vibey pull, but the bike will go, and once you're in the 4-5k range, all is well. I did not have the fairings on, but on this very hot and muggy day, temps hovered at 185�F while riding the back roads, and would creep up to 210-220 in stop & go.
Overall I am very happy in the way this build turned out. It was tight, for sure, with all the wire harnesses and hoses near the supercharger, but the brackets and drive itself are rock solid and the belt tracks perfectly true. It will take a few more days of riding to fine tune the fuel map (which will include full throttle blasts), and then it will go on the dyno for some power pulls. I expect to see some nice fat numbers, as this setup is actually pulling 1/2psi more than the 5th-gen setup for some reason, so combine more boost with a bigger starting hp number (106whp) and well, you get the idea. Stay tuned for more fun stuff to come...
It's really nice, just wish that at this level of cost, there was some crash protection for those expensive parts. Not looking forward to a (potential) multiple-thousand dollar driveway tipover, nor to engineering something myself around all the work you've already done.
[image: View Post]toro1, on 15 July 2010 - 09:07 PM, said:
[image: Posted Image]
Artwork. Absolute artwork. A perfect expression of form following function. Somebody needs to fabricate a transparent fuel tank to showcase this jewel.
Just wanted to let you know how much your 'crisp' photography is helping drive interest in this product. :fing02: I followed your 5th and 6th gen build, and both times the clarity and cleanliness of your shots helped me understand what you were doing, and appreciate your attention to detail.
[image: View Post]SEBSPEED, on 16 July 2010 - 05:35 AM, said:
It's really nice, just wish that at this level of cost, there was some crash protection for those expensive parts. Not looking forward to a (potential) multiple-thousand dollar driveway tipover, nor to engineering something myself around all the work you've already done.
The first thing I think of when seeing these torochargers: "Wow. Truly Awesome."
The second thing I think is: "It's going to make fairings seem cheap when it falls over".
[image: View Post]symbiotix, on 17 July 2010 - 07:13 AM, said:
Just wanted to let you know how much your 'crisp' photography is helping drive interest in this product. :fing02: I followed your 5th and 6th gen build, and both times the clarity and cleanliness of your shots helped me understand what you were doing, and appreciate your attention to detail.
Absolutely. What camera/lense are you using? Amazingly sharp photos.
[image: View Post]Brown81, on 17 July 2010 - 01:38 PM, said:
[image: View Post]SEBSPEED, on 16 July 2010 - 05:35 AM, said:
It's really nice, just wish that at this level of cost, there was some crash protection for those expensive parts. Not looking forward to a (potential) multiple-thousand dollar driveway tipover, nor to engineering something myself around all the work you've already done.
The first thing I think of when seeing these torochargers: "Wow. Truly Awesome."
The second thing I think is: "It's going to make fairings seem cheap when it falls over".
Depending on the design, frame sliders should be able to bolt up with the supercharger on there, especially if you get the kind that locates off the main frame bolt (where I currently have the idler bracket bolting up to). Otherwise, make sure you get the parts insured and/or don't crash :wink: .
[image: View Post]RED RUNNER, on 17 July 2010 - 01:54 PM, said:
[image: View Post]symbiotix, on 17 July 2010 - 07:13 AM, said:
Just wanted to let you know how much your 'crisp' photography is helping drive interest in this product. :fing02: I followed your 5th and 6th gen build, and both times the clarity and cleanliness of your shots helped me understand what you were doing, and appreciate your attention to detail.
Absolutely. What camera/lense are you using? Amazingly sharp photos.
Thanks, I certainly strive to take the best pictures I can. My main camera is an old Fuji S7000, and for the shots where I need more resolution & control (like the kit parts layout), I'll borrow my sister's Nikon D200. I post-process every one of my pics in Photoshop, use a tripod for the indoor (and most outdoor) shots, and when necessary, I'll use supplemental lighting. Also, unless absolutely necessary, I never use flash, and I take a ton of pictures at a bunch of different angles.
I just found a supercharged Blackbird on Youtube. The charger is only providing an extra 65hp, which isn't a lot compared to what the Torocharger produces on an 800?
[image: View Post]VifferDude, on 19 July 2010 - 07:28 AM, said:
I just found a supercharged Blackbird on Youtube. The charger is only providing an extra 65hp, which isn't a lot compared to what the Torocharger produces on an 800?
The final power output depends on many variables -- if we knew the pulley ratio of the supercharger & boost pressure the engine is seeing, we could surmise a thing or two about the design, but without that, it's hard to say. Unless the airbox and inlet tubing is really inefficient, my guess is that this bike is running less boost than my VFR kits. Judging from the before and after power, I'd say he's pulling about 6.5-7.5 peak psi, whereas the VFR sees 9-10 peak psi. Also, the small C15-60 is less efficient on bigger motors (as it starts to run out of air) -- this (along with cam design) is why the ZX-10R we did produced less hp per psi than the VFR.
Shortly after embarking on my test and tune ride yesterday, the bike hit the 65 mile mark on the trip meter. For those of you who don't know, this is the broken-in point of the Rotrex, aka, WOT time! The sensation of engine smoothness once the boost really starts kicking in is hard to describe unless you've driven/ridden a forced induction vehicle before -- a massive rush of air feels like it has been substituted for the normal combustion process, and the engine spins to redline so quick that before you know it, it's time to shift.
Overall, it feels identical to a blown 5th-gen (minus the gear whine), and is every bit as fast. As I've mentioned before, the VTEC transition point is unnoticeable, even under part throttle. This thing carries the front wheel so easily through second gear that even if you've never ridden a wheelie before, you'd look like a pro on this thing without even trying. Peak boost is higher than the 5th-gen by ~1psi (10-10.5 peak), which is probably due to the slightly more aggressive pulley ratio (26/30 vs 25/29 on the 5th) and a slightly higher redline (I datalogged a max of 12000rpm, vs 11700 on my '98).
The hardest thing to do on this bike is not wind it out. Seriously, the powerband is so inviting to be opened up that you have to restrain yourself from indulging every time you start out. Cruising in 5th and 6th is another matter, and can easily lull you away from the fact that some monster power is waiting to be tapped into, but going through the gears, forget about it. The biggest challenge becomes shifting right before the rev limiter, as quickly as you can, while simultaneously trying to keep the front end planted (in the first couple gears, anyway). If you like a rush of power that you can feel, that lets you know you've got 160+ at the wheel, this is where it's at.
I'm hoping to get the bike on the dyno later this week for some power pulls, when we can really see what this baby is doing.
[image: View Post]toro1, on 20 July 2010 - 09:21 AM, said:
Shortly after embarking on my test and tune ride yesterday, the bike hit the 65 mile mark on the trip meter. For those of you who don't know, this is the broken-in point of the Rotrex, aka, WOT time! The sensation of engine smoothness once the boost really starts kicking in is hard to describe unless you've driven/ridden a forced induction vehicle before -- a massive rush of air feels like it has been substituted for the normal combustion process, and the engine spins to redline so quick that before you know it, it's time to shift.
Overall, it feels identical to a blown 5th-gen (minus the gear whine), and is every bit as fast. As I've mentioned before, the VTEC transition point is unnoticeable, even under part throttle. This thing carries the front wheel so easily through second gear that even if you've never ridden a wheelie before, you'd look like a pro on this thing without even trying. Peak boost is higher than the 5th-gen by ~1psi (10-10.5 peak), which is probably due to the slightly more aggressive pulley ratio (26/30 vs 25/29 on the 5th) and a slightly higher redline (I datalogged a max of 12000rpm, vs 11700 on my '98).
The hardest thing to do on this bike is not wind it out. Seriously, the powerband is so inviting to be opened up that you have to restrain yourself from indulging every time you start out. Cruising in 5th and 6th is another matter, and can easily lull you away from the fact that some monster power is waiting to be tapped into, but going through the gears, forget about it. The biggest challenge becomes shifting right before the rev limiter, as quickly as you can, while simultaneously trying to keep the front end planted (in the first couple gears, anyway). If you like a rush of power that you can feel, that lets you know you've got 160+ at the wheel, this is where it's at.
I'm hoping to get the bike on the dyno later this week for some power pulls, when we can really see what this baby is doing.
Well i just wet my pants :lurk: :beer: Sounds like it is a very sweet set up. That sort of ponies out of the VFR is AWESOME"ME :fing02: Can i ask how long till these kits are available? The biggest issue will be...can you ship to Australia?
[image: View Post]Ripper, on 23 July 2010 - 06:50 AM, said:
Can't wait to see some Dyno Charts (not that numbers really mean much).
Oh, the numbers mean everything. Speaking of which...
Remember all the talk of surging problems, 2-valve vs 4-valve, 5th-gen vs. 6th-gen, PCIII vs. PCV, etc. etc., yadda yadda yadda? Well, in addition to the ride reports, I now have some hard evidence to back it all up...
[image: Posted Image]
SAE correction factor, no BS. I could have leaned it out up top to make a bit more power, but the tune was safe and the bike was starting to suffer from heat soak (it was 95�F in the dyno room -- who knows what it could have made with some 60�F air). Notice how small the VTEC transition dip is -- as I've said before, while riding the bike, you cannot even feel it. 173whp equates to about 195hp @ the crank for anyone trying to compare factory power numbers.
Compared to the 5th-gen, you can see it gives up no power (with the exception of the VTEC dip) and has a considerably stronger pull from mid on up. Even down low, the 2-valves have an advantage over 4 until ~6k. This bike also has a 400rpm advantage up top, which in this case means an additional 10hp. However, once you factor in the greater weight of the 6th-gen, the overall acceleration is almost identical between the two.
[image: Posted Image]
This bike was a strong runner before the supercharger, and it's a strong runner after it, too. Notice how much more pronounced the VTEC dip is in the N/A run, and even that is better than many of the 6th-gens I've seen. That big, beefy midrange is the reason this bike feels like it wants to just take off after 7k.
All these runs were performed using 93-octane pump gas on the same Dynojet dyno I use in all my pulls. Using higher fuel pressure on the 6th-gen, I was able to keep the A/F mixture nice and fat, and there is still plenty of fueling left if anyone ever wants to run a different pulley combo and pump up the boost -- if the internals will allow, I'm sure 200whp is possible.
[image: View Post]Ripper, on 23 July 2010 - 10:41 AM, said:
Dyno Charts + Forums = Pissing match
This is true...except when the pulls are all done on the same brand of dyno using the same correction factor, then there's no argument (or at least shouldn't be, hence your original comment).
[image: View Post]Ripper, on 23 July 2010 - 12:43 PM, said:
Just to clarify, this is going to be a kit?
If so, what's the price range your shooting for? Not to put you on the spot, so if your not sure yet just say so.
This will most definitely be a kit. I do not have a number yet, but I can say it will be cheaper than the 5th-gen kit; this system has fewer parts, does not require the Laminova oil cooler, and shares a number of parts with the 5th-gen kit. I was also able to consolidate the pulley/crank connector design across the board, so I can now amortize the cost over a greater number of items.
BTW, unless you are really uncomfortable using a wrench, anyone can install this kit. The part I look forward to the least during an install is draining the fluids -- the rest is truly just unbolting some stock parts and bolting on the new ones.
[image: View Post]toro1, on 17 July 2010 - 08:07 PM, said:
[image: View Post]Brown81, on 17 July 2010 - 01:38 PM, said:
[image: View Post]SEBSPEED, on 16 July 2010 - 05:35 AM, said:
It's really nice, just wish that at this level of cost, there was some crash protection for those expensive parts. Not looking forward to a (potential) multiple-thousand dollar driveway tipover, nor to engineering something myself around all the work you've already done.
The first thing I think of when seeing these torochargers: "Wow. Truly Awesome."
The second thing I think is: "It's going to make fairings seem cheap when it falls over".
Depending on the design, frame sliders should be able to bolt up with the supercharger on there, especially if you get the kind that locates off the main frame bolt (where I currently have the idler bracket bolting up to). Otherwise, make sure you get the parts insured and/or don't crash :wink: .
[image: View Post]RED RUNNER, on 17 July 2010 - 01:54 PM, said:
[image: View Post]symbiotix, on 17 July 2010 - 07:13 AM, said:
Just wanted to let you know how much your 'crisp' photography is helping drive interest in this product. :fing02: I followed your 5th and 6th gen build, and both times the clarity and cleanliness of your shots helped me understand what you were doing, and appreciate your attention to detail.
Absolutely. What camera/lense are you using? Amazingly sharp photos.
Thanks, I certainly strive to take the best pictures I can. My main camera is an old Fuji S7000, and for the shots where I need more resolution & control (like the kit parts layout), I'll borrow my sister's Nikon D200. I post-process every one of my pics in Photoshop, use a tripod for the indoor (and most outdoor) shots, and when necessary, I'll use supplemental lighting. Also, unless absolutely necessary, I never use flash, and I take a ton of pictures at a bunch of different angles.
All for your pleasure...
I don't think I want to call my insurance agent and ask if my after market supercharger is covered,...... that might not go good. :laughing6-hehe:
I always find it strange but it's the 2nd question my insurance company asks me right after the engine size: "Is the bike turbo'd or supercharged?"... I mean, really is it that common? 8-Ball says no... they're just looking for any reason to cancel your policy come accident time, dem bastads!
[image: View Post]coderighter, on 23 July 2010 - 09:25 PM, said:
I don't think I want to call mine insurance agent and ask if my after market supercharger is covered,...... that might not go good. :laughing6-hehe:
Especially because of history and the fact they only cover $2000 of accessories - yeah, they might go higher but so will the rate!
And I seem to remember a comment about how the warranty on the blower is instantly null and void the second anyone other than the seller disturbs the mounting of the pulley on it's shaft? Can't imagine that Rotrex would be open to hearing about a driveway drop then.
[image: View Post]symbiotix, on 23 July 2010 - 09:58 PM, said:
I always find it strange but it's the 2nd question my insurance company asks me right after the engine size: "Is the bike turbo'd or supercharged?"
The question on my policy asked whether or not the bike had a turbo or nitrous, so, technically speaking...
If you lay the bike down, chances are the most that could happen is you end up needing a new radiator and some new pulleys. Unless the bike absorbs a hard front end impact or goes for a serious, serious tumble, the Rotrex will probably be fine as it sits inboard by quite a bit, is held securely onto the frame and engine, and is a pretty tough little unit.
[image: View Post]RustyA, on 23 July 2010 - 11:58 PM, said:
Toro, what PC you using for this?
PCIII USB. I've had no noticeable issues with gear related mapping thus far.
[image: View Post]toro1, on 24 July 2010 - 08:49 AM, said:
[image: View Post]symbiotix, on 23 July 2010 - 09:58 PM, said:
I always find it strange but it's the 2nd question my insurance company asks me right after the engine size: "Is the bike turbo'd or supercharged?"
The question on my policy asked whether or not the bike had a turbo or nitrous, so, technically speaking...
If you lay the bike down, chances are the most that could happen is you end up needing a new radiator and some new pulleys. Unless the bike absorbs a hard front end impact or goes for a serious, serious tumble, the Rotrex will probably be fine as it sits inboard by quite a bit, is held securely onto the frame and engine, and is a pretty tough little unit.
[image: View Post]RustyA, on 23 July 2010 - 11:58 PM, said:
Toro, what PC you using for this?
PCIII USB. I've had no noticeable issues with gear related mapping thus far.
While I realize the goal here is not fuel economy, won't a PCV open up the possibilities of setting up some 6th (and / or 5th) gear 'cruise' mapping while maintaining smooth, performance mapping in the lower gears? You could actually set up an Autotune to work in throttle windows below 40%, maybe between 4-6k RPM in 6th, maybe 5th gear, after 170 degrees. Best of both worlds?
[image: View Post]coderighter, on 24 July 2010 - 11:27 AM, said:
While I realize the goal here is not fuel economy, won't a PCV open up the possibilities of setting up some 6th (and / or 5th) gear 'cruise' mapping while maintaining smooth, performance mapping in the lower gears? You could actually set up an Autotune to work in throttle windows below 40%, maybe between 4-6k RPM in 6th, maybe 5th gear, after 170 degrees. Best of both worlds?
That's what I've done, and have not noticed any problems in the lower gears. I always try out lean out the cruising situations for gas mileage, and at least with this bike, there seems to be no adverse effects elsewhere. Since we are always supplying the engine with more air than it would normally receive, there's a bit of a buffer when it comes to tuning.
Now, if you wanted to tune this with a PCV, I'm sure you could have even greater control, but more than anything else, I wanted to see if a PCIII can handle the tuning duties, and I've found out that it certainly can.
Ultimately what I would like to have is more power all around from the 0 revs to about 7k. My riding puts me 95% below 7k with only the remainder above.
Are there any pulley mods or anything that I can do to shift the brunt of the power lower in the powerband. I wouldn't mind sacrificing some top end. Would a smaller pulley bring in the power sooner?
Those are some awesome numbers on the dyno charts. Have you fitted the fairing over the right side yet? I am curious how the fairing will have to be modified.
[image: View Post]jasonsmith, on 24 July 2010 - 12:29 PM, said:
Ultimately what I would like to have is more power all around from the 0 revs to about 7k. My riding puts me 95% below 7k with only the remainder above.
Are there any pulley mods or anything that I can do to shift the brunt of the power lower in the powerband. I wouldn't mind sacrificing some top end. Would a smaller pulley bring in the power sooner?
A smaller pulley would bump up the power down low, but then you'd have to either vent the pressure up top or add an inlet restrictor to keep boost levels in check -- either way is a poor solution thermodynamically. If we were running an intercooler, the restrictor could work well, but otherwise it would heat up the intake charge to ridiculously high levels.
If you don't think you'd be happy with the gains shown on the comparison dyno chart, then this kit is not for you. The only way to get appreciable gains way down low is to add a positive displacement supercharger (which will not fit on this bike without major reconstructive surgery) or bump up the displacement (a big bore kit, or more realistically, the new 1200, are your only choices here). The only other option is to use the power you have available in a more efficient manner through gearing, but I'm sure you don't want to be pulling too high of r's on the highway.
I found back when I had -1/+2 gearing that the bottom end punch was too much -- wheelies on command in the first 3 gears. I then went back to the stock gearing and found it way too sluggish. Right now I'm at -1 up front with the stock sprocket out back, and I like the combination -- still enough grunt to loft the front end when I want, but relaxed cruising on the highway and the ability to go through the gears with the front end on the ground. These bikes do not have the right weight distribution/wheelbase for big time power down low without yanking the front wheel off the ground. Trust me.
Having said all that, I thought it would be interesting to compare the output of this '06 to the new 1200. I pulled a dyno chart off of motorcycle-usa.com (as I know they use a Dynojet dyno) and overlaid it on top of the dyno chart for this bike, matching rpms and hp perfectly:
[image: Posted Image]
At first glance, it appears that the 1200 wallops the supercharged '06 until 10k rpm, and it does when comparing output to rpm. This is only part of the story, though. Like I said, when you have more power and rpms available, you can use gearing to your advantage.
Below are charts of the two bikes' Power vs Speed (mph) in 2nd-gear and 5th-gear. In both cases, the stock gearing is used (though the 1200 can't be changed, anyway).
The 800 completely outpowers the 1200 throughout 2nd gear, and nearly matches it down low in 5th until eclipsing it @ 90mph. Due to the gearing, the 1200 will hold each gear longer than the 800, but as long as the 800 rider can shift quickly, this shouldn't be much of a race. Also note that the lighter weight of the 6th-gen (nor the much lighter weight of the 5th-gen) is taken into account here.
[image: View Post]vanion2, on 24 July 2010 - 02:59 PM, said:
Those are some awesome numbers on the dyno charts. Have you fitted the fairing over the right side yet? I am curious how the fairing will have to be modified.
I'll get to it next week. It shouldn't require too much modification, though.
I hope he sells a lot of them too. I hope he sells 1 to me and that I can afford it.
I've been drooling over the Torocharger since well before the 5th gen version was ready for sale. :goofy:
If a buyer doesnt have a dyno in their city but say there's one 200 miles away or so. How much of the kit can be installed and still be able to ride the bike?
[image: View Post]rangerscott69, on 24 July 2010 - 09:44 PM, said:
If a buyer doesnt have a dyno in their city but say there's one 200 miles away or so. How much of the kit can be installed and still be able to ride the bike?
You should be good to install 100% of the kit, load Toro's map in the Power Commander, then ride it to the dyno for further tuning.
One could always trailer it if one were concerned. But Toro's base map should get you real close.
Other alternative is to install all the kit save for the drive belt, run a Zero map in the power commander, then ride it to the dyno with the supercharger belt in your tankbag.
[image: View Post]Veefer800Canuck, on 25 July 2010 - 01:01 AM, said:
[image: View Post]rangerscott69, on 24 July 2010 - 09:44 PM, said:
If a buyer doesnt have a dyno in their city but say there's one 200 miles away or so. How much of the kit can be installed and still be able to ride the bike?
You should be good to install 100% of the kit, load Toro's map in the Power Commander, then ride it to the dyno for further tuning.
One could always trailer it if one were concerned. But Toro's base map should get you real close.
Other alternative is to install all the kit save for the drive belt, run a Zero map in the power commander, then ride it to the dyno with the supercharger belt in your tankbag.
Would that actually be a good idea?
With the extra fuel pressure, even with a zero PC map, arent you going to be getting a lot more fuel?
I would think it's best to load up Toro's S/C map on the PC and drive or trailer to the dyno session. I think he has put more than enough effort into the mapping to get it pretty close so that one doesn't have to worry about being lean to the point of detonation or too rich to foul plugs. Just drive it easy initially until it gets dialed in at the dyno, and all should be well.
When I installed a S/C kit on my truck (much more inferior to Toro's design BTW) the supplied map was OK for cruising around, but could use some tweaking to get rid of a few fueling issues. Still it is adequate as a starting point and it isn't harning my truck to drive at the moment. Toro's map WILL be closer than the one supplied for the S/C on my truck: I am 100% confident in saying that because I know Toro went the extra mile and made a map, while my truck mostly relies on a rising rate, boost referenced fuel pressure regulator, which can bounce around a bit if you lift off the throttle and then hammer it on again.....
BTW Dan, great work and another great build. I am starting to set aside some sheckels already for this kit; I expect to purchase one in a few months time as I am busy with renovations and landscaping on a new home this summer / fall, but fully intend on buying one when I have a little more change in the piggy bank........
Thanks for all the updates. Please let us know once you are ready for mass production and have your pricing figured out, but I am setting aside money just the same until I have enough for this beauty of a S/C kit.
I could just stare at that airbox set-up all day. It truly looks to be a work of art and its kind of a shame that the gas tank sits on top of it and hides it so much.
[image: View Post]toro1, on 24 July 2010 - 03:26 PM, said:
[image: View Post]jasonsmith, on 24 July 2010 - 12:29 PM, said:
Ultimately what I would like to have is more power all around from the 0 revs to about 7k. My riding puts me 95% below 7k with only the remainder above.
Are there any pulley mods or anything that I can do to shift the brunt of the power lower in the powerband. I wouldn't mind sacrificing some top end. Would a smaller pulley bring in the power sooner?
A smaller pulley would bump up the power down low, but then you'd have to either vent the pressure up top or add an inlet restrictor to keep boost levels in check -- either way is a poor solution thermodynamically. If we were running an intercooler, the restrictor could work well, but otherwise it would heat up the intake charge to ridiculously high levels.....
Having said all that, I thought it would be interesting to compare the output of this '06 to the new 1200. I pulled a dyno chart off of motorcycle-usa.com (as I know they use a Dynojet dyno) and overlaid it on top of the dyno chart for this bike, matching rpms and hp perfectly:
Thanks for all that toro, appreciate the education. I'll take a good look at the charts again.
Honda says the 1200 motor is physically smaller than the 800. Maybe that leaves you you more room for a... :biggrin:
Any thoughts of tackling it in the future?
[image: View Post]Veefer800Canuck, on 25 July 2010 - 01:01 AM, said:
[image: View Post]rangerscott69, on 24 July 2010 - 09:44 PM, said:
If a buyer doesnt have a dyno in their city but say there's one 200 miles away or so. How much of the kit can be installed and still be able to ride the bike?
You should be good to install 100% of the kit, load Toro's map in the Power Commander, then ride it to the dyno for further tuning.
One could always trailer it if one were concerned. But Toro's base map should get you real close.
Other alternative is to install all the kit save for the drive belt, run a Zero map in the power commander, then ride it to the dyno with the supercharger belt in your tankbag.
Um, didn't Toro say the blower needs a 65 mile "break-in" period? Which would mean installing the kit, riding around a bit below a threshold, then getting it tuned.
[image: View Post]magicman, on 24 July 2010 - 09:41 PM, said:
No dyno vids? :mellow:
That'll be coming, but I've got to get some things sorted out first.
[image: View Post]rangerscott69, on 24 July 2010 - 09:44 PM, said:
If a buyer doesnt have a dyno in their city but say there's one 200 miles away or so. How much of the kit can be installed and still be able to ride the bike?
The fuel maps I provide should be a pretty good starting point for any 6th-gen. In fact, if you have a custom map already made, I can build you a map based on that for an even closer match. The Rotrex does need to be broken in for 65 miles before full throttle runs can be made, and if anything, the provided maps will be on the rich side rather than the lean, so you should be plenty safe. Also, I use Iridium plugs and have yet to foul one out on any of the blown bikes I've done (even with A/F mixtures dipping into the 9s at times).
[image: View Post]horwitzs, on 25 July 2010 - 08:47 PM, said:
Alright Toro, since you brought up the 1200...
Honda says the 1200 motor is physically smaller than the 800. Maybe that leaves you you more room for a... :biggrin:
Any thoughts of tackling it in the future?
I don't know. From the pictures I've seen, there appears to be no room at all to fit a blower under the stock bodywork, and I'm sure the 7th-gen guys don't want to go hacking up their beautiful paintwork. However, I am fully confident that a reliable 220whp could be reached with ~8 peak psi.
Woo Hoo the aussie dollar is back up and over .90US! I wonder if it will climb much higher?. It's a bit of a gamble to know when to exchange from $Au to $US
Rock on Toro, beautiful work and write up! Looking forward to someone local to where I live bolting one of these up, I would love to see the construction in person. Keep up the hard work, I'm sure you will sell quite a few kits.
Can anyone answer what this does to the reliability of the bike? I have an '07 that I tour with, and as much as I would love to have more power, I don't want to be 1000 miles from home with a blown engine or transmission.
[image: View Post]Boris, on 31 July 2010 - 09:13 AM, said:
Can anyone answer what this does to the reliability of the bike? I have an '07 that I tour with, and as much as I would love to have more power, I don't want to be 1000 miles from home with a blown engine or transmission.
Any time you use forced induction you will reduce the longevity of any engine. Now with that said, Toro's kit is only adding 10 lbs of boost, is very linear, and is using a supercharger versus a turbo. Combine that with the notoriously robust and tough VFR engine and if you perform all maintenance at the appropriate intervals I seriously doubt you will be in danger of being stranded from a blown engine. In fact, I would be more worried about the Honda defects (wiring issues, R/R, etc) than I would Toro's kit. :rolleyes:
Reliability won't be your issue here. How much you abuse the power would be the bigger issue. :491:
[image: View Post]vanion2, on 31 July 2010 - 10:46 AM, said:
[image: View Post]Boris, on 31 July 2010 - 09:13 AM, said:
Can anyone answer what this does to the reliability of the bike? I have an '07 that I tour with, and as much as I would love to have more power, I don't want to be 1000 miles from home with a blown engine or transmission.
Any time you use forced induction you will reduce the longevity of any engine. Now with that said, Toro's kit is only adding 10 lbs of boost, is very linear, and is using a supercharger versus a turbo. Combine that with the notoriously robust and tough VFR engine and if you perform all maintenance at the appropriate intervals I seriously doubt you will be in danger of being stranded from a blown engine. In fact, I would be more worried about the Honda defects (wiring issues, R/R, etc) than I would Toro's kit. :rolleyes:
Reliability won't be your issue here. How much you abuse the power would be the bigger issue. :491:
And realistically, how much (percentage-wise) of the engine's new life is going to be "on boost"? :wheel:
I think the "off-boost" percentage would be the large majority of the time.
Super nice job Toro! That black bike looks super sharp. I'm kinda head scratchn though whether some kind of cover should go over the open pulley area. Dont want some foole (or me) sticking a finger in there.
[image: View Post]jasonsmith, on 04 August 2010 - 08:30 PM, said:
Sorry if I missed it but will this fit on an ABS bike?
Yes. I believe the donor bike was an ABS model anyway, but regardless the only difference in terms of space consumed between the non-ABS and ABS models is in places where the supercharger kit does not intrude.
ABS models have an ABS controller under the left-front fairing, and some more valving equipment located under the seat on the right-hand side (opposite the battery). Neither of these places are used by the Supercharger kit.
[image: View Post]mello dude, on 04 August 2010 - 07:37 PM, said:
Super nice job Toro! That black bike looks super sharp. I'm kinda head scratchn though whether some kind of cover should go over the open pulley area. Dont want some foole (or me) sticking a finger in there.
I see your point, but it sure would be a shame to cover that up!
[image: View Post]kaldek, on 04 August 2010 - 09:26 PM, said:
[image: View Post]jasonsmith, on 04 August 2010 - 08:30 PM, said:
Sorry if I missed it but will this fit on an ABS bike?
Yes. I believe the donor bike was an ABS model anyway, but regardless the only difference in terms of space consumed between the non-ABS and ABS models is in places where the supercharger kit does not intrude.
ABS models have an ABS controller under the left-front fairing, and some more valving equipment located under the seat on the right-hand side (opposite the battery). Neither of these places are used by the Supercharger kit.
Ya, the donor bike is a non-abs and I know on mine I have some fuse boxes on the right side which on non-abs bikes live on the left. Just curious if it's actually be thought of or not.
[image: View Post]mello dude, on 04 August 2010 - 07:37 PM, said:
I'm kinda head scratchn though whether some kind of cover should go over the open pulley area. Dont want some foole (or me) sticking a finger in there.
Well, I'm sure some kind of mesh or grating could be placed over the vent if you want to be extra careful, but the best piece of preventative advice I can give is "Keep your fingers out of there when the bike is running!" Maybe I should make up some of those warning stickers that show some poor guy's fingersgetting forcefully removed...
[image: View Post]SEBSPEED, on 04 August 2010 - 07:51 PM, said:
Fairing modifications?
Pretty minor. The center inner fairing had to be cut to work with the radiator, and the rightside panel had to have some material removed from the backside and the main vent opened up by ~3/8" - 1/2". It was also spaced out by 5/8". Other than that, it was left untouched. A Dremel, a file, some masking tape, and a utility knife are all that's needed to do the job (well, you'll need some patience, too).
[image: View Post]jasonsmith, on 04 August 2010 - 08:30 PM, said:
Sorry if I missed it but will this fit on an ABS bike?
I sure hope so. The donor was a standard model, so as long as there's not an additional mass of wires where the supercharger sits, you should be okay.
[image: View Post]CandyRedRC46, on 27 July 2010 - 10:53 PM, said:
[image: View Post]vfrcapn, on 26 July 2010 - 10:35 PM, said:
Awesome, congrats Toro on more amazing work. If I only had a new '07 RWB in the garage I'd be putting a deposit down now. :fing02:
why not slap one on your 5th gen?
I'm not putting $$ down on anything anytime soon but I'd like to have a RWB and the Toro kit would make it that much better. My 5G has a ton of miles on it anyway.
So I take it you are done with it, or are you still testing? Any dyno sheets you'd like to share :happy: ?
Are you going to include the description for the fairing modifications done to 6th gen in your installation manual by any chance? Might make life easier for some of us (cough cough me actually)
Looks great both the bike & the charts. I'll have 2 start stack up the $ & by autumn to get one kit 4 myself :bliss:
I don't think the ABS's electric wires/harness will be a problem.
I'm just chiming in cause something just hit my brain. I remember people asking about the kit getting damaged when wrecking. When I went down on the right side which is where the SC stuff would be, the fairing did a good job acting like a skid plate. Now I know its just abs plastic, BUT my engine did shut off as soon as the bike's side touched the pavement. Now my slide was at slow speed. Of course if your vfr is sliding 70mph down the road and smacks something, ya I'm sure something is gonna break.
[image: View Post]ciprinakos, on 30 August 2010 - 01:39 AM, said:
I've just crashed my VFR :wacko: so i will delay the charger kit. I was so looking forward for it... :pissed:
I hope you're OK, the bike can always be fixed, don't worry about it. I think it will be some time before Toro makes the 6th gen kit available so you might buy replacement parts from E-bay for cheap and still have some money left when the kit is finally offered to the public...
Thanks! It's actually not a very big deal. I need to replace the front suspension tubes and the headlights. I was running with some cheap fiber glass faring & I have the originals intact. Otherwise, wearing a full equipment, I have no injuries. By the way, a neck brace can make miracles. My head stayed in place, without even touching the ground, thanks to it - the cheapest Leat neck brace.
I'm still waiting for Toro to make a quote for the kit.
Ride safe & wear protections!
[image: View Post]ciprinakos, on 31 August 2010 - 01:49 AM, said:
Thanks! It's actually not a very big deal. I need to replace the front suspension tubes and the headlights. I was running with some cheap fiber glass faring & I have the originals intact. Otherwise, wearing a full equipment, I have no injuries. By the way, a neck brace can make miracles. My head stayed in place, without even touching the ground, thanks to it - the cheapest Leat neck brace.
I'm still waiting for Toro to make a quote for the kit.
Ride safe & wear protections!
Bummer on the bike, but glad to hear you're safe. I'm finalizing the pricing now, so for the guys waiting on this kit, it should only be a few more days before some good info can be shared.
[image: View Post]chvymtl, on 31 August 2010 - 10:29 AM, said:
Ive only put 1000k on my 09. How much more of a break in do you recommend before thinking of putting a supercharger on?
1000 miles (1600 km) should be plenty for break-in. Nothing wrong with starting with a fresh, properly broken-in engine.
Well Gentlemen,
As you've seen throughout the thread Dan is a genius, and a very personable guy. I've been working alot of long hours so I haven't been on the bike as much as I'd like but the SC is AMAZING!
Fit and finish as you can see in all the photos is truly top notch. Dan has successfully put 5 gallons into a quart jar and fit it very nicely. For those of you that are concerned about the VTec manageability you're way off. The powerband is far more predictable now than before and sooo much smoother. That sensation of being hit in the butt with a 75lb tennis racket when you crack 6800rpm's is a forgotten memory. The torque that comes in at 3+ grand and doesn't quit til 12+grand now has my cheeks cramping from smiling so much. I know there are others who wanted to compare the performance of a Busa to my VFR and having a close friend who has one that I have ridden (until his most recent addition of a bottle under the tail section that looks just like a 3rd can) I'll go with mine hands down. Sometime in the near future we'll line 'em up and give you a report but I'm certain he'll have his hands full trying to get ahead. As Dan pointed out the bike can be ridden lazily just as if no mods were ever done and it behaves well and the fuel economy is good and the only noticable difference is that pulley spinning inside the cowling hole...........who am I kidding here. There's 173 PURE dynoed ponies in there waiting to run, Granny Gert I am not. I probably will not give you guys a track opinion this season cuz I need to get a good break in and I'm working too much to get there but I'll write a review for you the first time I go. Thanx again Dan for the excellent work you've done and the professional way you conduct business.
Tim
[image: View Post]spinrb8r, on 05 September 2010 - 01:38 AM, said:
Well Gentlemen,
As you've seen throughout the thread Dan is a genius, and a very personable guy. I've been working alot of long hours so I haven't been on the bike as much as I'd like but the SC is AMAZING!
Fit and finish as you can see in all the photos is truly top notch. Dan has successfully put 5 gallons into a quart jar and fit it very nicely. For those of you that are concerned about the VTec manageability you're way off. The powerband is far more predictable now than before and sooo much smoother. That sensation of being hit in the butt with a 75lb tennis racket when you crack 6800rpm's is a forgotten memory. The torque that comes in at 3+ grand and doesn't quit til 12+grand now has my cheeks cramping from smiling so much. I know there are others who wanted to compare the performance of a Busa to my VFR and having a close friend who has one that I have ridden (until his most recent addition of a bottle under the tail section that looks just like a 3rd can) I'll go with mine hands down. Sometime in the near future we'll line 'em up and give you a report but I'm certain he'll have his hands full trying to get ahead. As Dan pointed out the bike can be ridden lazily just as if no mods were ever done and it behaves well and the fuel economy is good and the only noticable difference is that pulley spinning inside the cowling hole...........who am I kidding here. There's 173 PURE dynoed ponies in there waiting to run, Granny Gert I am not. I probably will not give you guys a track opinion this season cuz I need to get a good break in and I'm working too much to get there but I'll write a review for you the first time I go. Thanx again Dan for the excellent work you've done and the professional way you conduct business.
Tim
Thanks for the preliminary report Tim. I hope to hear more from you soon, since I figure the SC is now broken in and you are able to use the 173 horsies every now and then :491: . Can you post a shot of your cockpit area? I am wondering about the dial placement for the 6th gen, and would love to see how you placed your boost, oil pressure etc dials.
:fing02:
I cant believe its 10% off. Is he trying to break up marriages lol. :lobby:
Can anyone tell me if i should get a PCIII or V??? Ive heard about altering PCIII maps to work with PCV, all sounds too hard. This kit comes with a map for PCIII, would it be easier to get a III or just as easy either way. Been thinking about the choice a lot, ease of PCIII vs features of PCV
[image: View Post]arrow, on 15 September 2010 - 08:29 AM, said:
Guys, all I see at the web site is the old material. I can not see any prices, where did you see it? Am I looking at the wrong page or something?
The link works for me. Pricing is at the bottom of the page as well as pictures of the complete kit and the VFR he did the work on. Perhaps you need to refresh your browser?
[image: View Post]6thGenNewbie, on 15 September 2010 - 06:15 AM, said:
Can anyone tell me if i should get a PCIII or V??? Ive heard about altering PCIII maps to work with PCV, all sounds too hard. This kit comes with a map for PCIII, would it be easier to get a III or just as easy either way. Been thinking about the choice a lot, ease of PCIII vs features of PCV
The PCIII was fine for tuning the '06 I developed the kit on. If you want to go with the PCV, you certainly can, as the PCV has the same fuel map increments as the PCIII. The PCV has a few extra features that the PCIII doesn't, such as gear-specific fuel maps, so if the price is negligible, I guess go with the PCV, but a PCIII should be just as good for most people.
-----
I've started up a new thread dedicated to the production kit, which can be found here. For any comments or questions about the kit, be sure to check out that thread.
[image: View Post]toro1, on 15 September 2010 - 09:32 AM, said:
[image: View Post]6thGenNewbie, on 15 September 2010 - 06:15 AM, said:
Can anyone tell me if i should get a PCIII or V??? Ive heard about altering PCIII maps to work with PCV, all sounds too hard. This kit comes with a map for PCIII, would it be easier to get a III or just as easy either way. Been thinking about the choice a lot, ease of PCIII vs features of PCV
The PCIII was fine for tuning the '06 I developed the kit on. If you want to go with the PCV, you certainly can, as the PCV has the same fuel map increments as the PCIII. The PCV has a few extra features that the PCIII doesn't, such as gear-specific fuel maps, so if the price is negligible, I guess go with the PCV, but a PCIII should be just as good for most people.
-----
I've started up a new thread dedicated to the production kit, which can be found here. For any comments or questions about the kit, be sure to check out that thread.
From what i can see price is the same (PCIII and V) which is odd. I dont think ill make full use of the PCV features but autotune sounds like a good thing.
Thanks.
I asked Dynoverks if they'd be willing to let us video the dyno run. They said yeah, sorta, maybe, but it would have to be an employee doing the video work, or just a camera on a tripod they click "record" on.
They may even change their mind. Not that it matters to you much, but I thought it would be nice to put a better dyno video on the 'net than the ones that are out there.
I can't remember who you said would be installing the kit? Getting that on video would be great too, but I understand most mechanics would balk at that idea.
I asked Dynoverks if they'd be willing to let us video the dyno run. They said yeah, sorta, maybe, but it would have to be an employee doing the video work, or just a camera on a tripod they click "record" on.
They may even change their mind. Not that it matters to you much, but I thought it would be nice to put a better dyno video on the 'net than the ones that are out there.
I can't remember who you said would be installing the kit? Getting that on video would be great too, but I understand most mechanics would balk at that idea.
"Apparently" its designed for the average Joe with a basic mechanical aptitude to be able to install. Sounds like it comes with a good manual.
I know Ill be more passionate about getting it right than anyone I could pay to do it. So Ill have a go and if its beyond me Dynoverks is the best lead Ive got.
Was hoping someone else would do an install thread, Im that fussy (and pretty green around engines) that it will take me long enough to install without taking photos and doing write ups.
If you have the skills necessary to change a spark plug and drain your oil, you should be capable of installing a supercharger kit. Step-by-step instructions are provided and the kits are as complete as possible.
In some cases non-standard tools may be required and fairings may have to be cut, but these kits were designed to be bolted together by anyone with a modicum of mechanical ability. Grab a friend to help and the actual install process can be accomplished in a day's time.
[image: View Post]Westn, on 10 July 2011 - 03:03 AM, said:
Anyone else with a kit on the way planning on taking the DIY route?
Kits should have started rolling out now for all interested. :fing02:
I'm hoping my kit is here shortly. :biggrin: I'm doing to do it myself. With my past experience, it shouldn't be that hard for me. I just got to find time to do it. With my mom dying in March, and my wife dying in May. :sad: My life is upset down right now. :sad:
[image: View Post]RustyA, on 10 July 2011 - 11:56 PM, said:
[image: View Post]Westn, on 10 July 2011 - 03:03 AM, said:
Anyone else with a kit on the way planning on taking the DIY route?
Kits should have started rolling out now for all interested. :fing02:
I'm hoping my kit is here shortly. :biggrin: I'm doing to do it myself. With my past experience, it shouldn't be that hard for me. I just got to find time to do it. With my mom dying in March, and my wife dying in May. :sad: My life is upset down right now. :sad:
Hey Rusty, very sorry to hear of your personal upheaval. :mellow:
Just think of what your Mom and Wife would like for you to be doing right now. I'm sure, if asked, that they would wish for you to be pursuing the things in life that make you happy going forward. :cheerleader:
So don't feel like you can't do anything nice for yourself. :fing02:
[image: View Post]RustyA, on 10 July 2011 - 11:56 PM, said:
I'm hoping my kit is here shortly. :biggrin: I'm doing to do it myself. With my past experience, it shouldn't be that hard for me. I just got to find time to do it. With my mom dying in March, and my wife dying in May. :sad: My life is upset down right now. :sad:
Rusty, the tank of sadness never truly runs dry, but what pours out of it does eventually go from a high pressure flow to a trickle and then a drip.
Also if there is one thing I know about myself, it's that getting my hands dirty has always helped me get past tough times. There's something about turning a wrench that I can't really describe, but maybe the best one I can come up with is that it is an act of bringing order from chaos.
Are there extra kits being manufactured, or are they only manufactured to order?
They were made to order but I dont know if he got an extra one for the shelf.
Any enquiries send Dan an email, hes always quick to reply, Ive picked his brain a lot.
Anyone else with a kit on the way planning on taking the DIY route?
Kits should have started rolling out now for all interested. :fing02:
Dammit I wish I could be there when you fit it!!!
Yeh would probably be best for all 3 of us. :fing02:
If its as easy as it sounds Ill be fine. Im good with tools, just not familiar with engines. But the more I wrench (and research), the more I learn, Im looking forward to having a go.
Anyone else with a kit on the way planning on taking the DIY route?
Kits should have started rolling out now for all interested. :fing02:
I'm hoping my kit is here shortly. :biggrin: I'm doing to do it myself. With my past experience, it shouldn't be that hard for me. I just got to find time to do it. With my mom dying in March, and my wife dying in May. :sad: My life is upset down right now. :sad:
Are there extra kits being manufactured, or are they only manufactured to order?
They were made to order but I dont know if he got an extra one for the shelf.
Any enquiries send Dan an email, hes always quick to reply, Ive picked his brain a lot.
I'll get my bike running first have so many other things to do first when all the parts arrive to turn into a frankenviffer mk2 now I've bought another vtec. I have been corrupted with the power of my CBR1000RR so buying one of these kits is very appealing especially with the Australian $$ so high & also have a friend who can ship through his company in US so duty/GST won't sting me, but I have a problem with waiting large time frames for things I want, my limit is about 6 weeks then I lose interest. Will send Dan a email & ask the question.
Thanks guys.
I'm looking forward to the kit. It will keep me busy, and keep my mind off of stuff. :biggrin: It's when I'm not busy, that's when I start to feel everything piling up. :sad:
[image: View Post]RustyA, on 10 July 2011 - 11:56 PM, said:
I'm hoping my kit is here shortly. :biggrin: I'm doing to do it myself. With my past experience, it shouldn't be that hard for me. I just got to find time to do it. With my mom dying in March, and my wife dying in May. :sad: My life is upset down right now. :sad:
I am very sorry hear about your losses Rusty, please accept my condolonces
[image: View Post]RustyA, on 12 July 2011 - 11:30 PM, said:
My Supercharger kit should be here Thursday. :cheerleader: :cheerleader: :cheerleader: :cheerleader: :cheerleader: :cheerleader:
That's great news! I hope you can document your installation and your first ride impressions as well. I'll be travelling to Holland where I'm having Dan ship my kit (I also asked him to include a boost gauge and a knock sensor+warning light at additional cost; I'm very paronoid about any engine damage, being way too cautious actually). That way my buddy (whom Dan is shipping the kit) will sell it to me, receiving back the customs fees and when I get back to Turkey I'll pay no customs fee whatever :fing02: . My buddy will be helping me install it. I'll be watching you very closely for tips. And I definitely want to hear about your first ride (please please take videos)...
[image: View Post]Dutchy, on 13 July 2011 - 06:57 AM, said:
[image: View Post]arrow, on 13 July 2011 - 05:25 AM, said:
l. I'll be travelling to Holland where I'm having Dan ship my kit
got a date planned yet?
Nothing set yet, but late August to early September is the period. I'll be in Apeldoorn, I'll definitely give you a call so that you can come and visit us...
On top of the triple clamp, right where the handlebars attach to the suspension tubes. I replied to your post earlier and actually put Dan's cockpit picture within the message, but my reply somehow got lost. I tried to attach that picture here as well, but I couldn't figure out how since I'm using my I-Phone. I'll do it from my laptop once I get home...
No he hasn't. It'll be up to us to get the brackets done... I can get something done here in Turkey I think. I'll let you know how they turn out and if you like send you one (assuming you choose the same diameter that I chose) .. .
A couple of quick pic's before I head off to work. :biggrin:
[image: Attached Image: 003.JPG]
[image: Attached Image: 005.JPG]
[image: Attached Image: 006.JPG]
[image: Attached Image: 007.JPG]
[image: Attached Image: 009.JPG]
[image: View Post]Westn, on 09 March 2012 - 08:59 PM, said:
Finally made the 5 odd hour trek to Dynoverks in Boronia for my dyno tune.
Dean (the mechanic) loved it, he commented on the quality of the kit and the job I did installing it.
He suggested I get in contact with Rapid Bike because they may be inserested in featuring it. I sent off an enquiry with some pictures attached, to which the editor replied "looks perfect", so I have a photographer coming around at 1pm tommorrow.
In the spec sheet I had the opportunity to send out special thanks so I gave a mention to VFRD, hopefully it comes through.
FYI 173hp
Nice work getting to Dean in the end. Wish you'd told me I would have come round! Dynoverks is about 20 minutes from here.
Anyway what did Dean say about the tune, and how are you finding driveability? Is it smooth, etc?
[image: View Post]kaldek, on 13 March 2012 - 07:09 AM, said:
[image: View Post]Westn, on 09 March 2012 - 08:59 PM, said:
Finally made the 5 odd hour trek to Dynoverks in Boronia for my dyno tune.
Dean (the mechanic) loved it, he commented on the quality of the kit and the job I did installing it.
He suggested I get in contact with Rapid Bike because they may be inserested in featuring it. I sent off an enquiry with some pictures attached, to which the editor replied "looks perfect", so I have a photographer coming around at 1pm tommorrow.
In the spec sheet I had the opportunity to send out special thanks so I gave a mention to VFRD, hopefully it comes through.
FYI 173hp
Nice work getting to Dean in the end. Wish you'd told me I would have come round! Dynoverks is about 20 minutes from here.
Anyway what did Dean say about the tune, and how are you finding driveability? Is it smooth, etc?
Yeh, sorry mate.
Dean loved it, he even commented on how well I did putting it together.
He did say it was a PITA to tune, he tried to explain why but Im definately no mechanic so I didnt understand, something about having to do things 3 times and having to let it cool down each time. It sounded like that was because of the bike its self not because of the supercharger.
Its great to ride, everyday cruising is unchanged until you get a little heavy with the throttle and it GOES!!
![[image: Posted Image]](http://i113.photobucket.com/albums/n206/Dutchy_748/My%20VFR/HPIM2731.jpg){kind=link}
![[image: Posted Image]](http://i250.photobucket.com/albums/gg262/redrider826/R1radiator.jpg){kind=link}
![[image: Posted Image]](http://img90.imageshack.us/img90/6080/dsc01622rq1.jpg){kind=link}
![[image: Posted Image]](http://i159.photobucket.com/albums/t150/Stebene/homerdrool.gif){kind=link}
![[image: Posted Image]](http://tdi-plc.com/blog/wp-content/uploads/2008/09/snc11352-small.jpg){kind=link}
![[image: Posted Image]](http://3.bp.blogspot.com/_IpV86ZyXqlA/Swotc0djuDI/AAAAAAAABIE/QSFVhmYh8Ug/s400/spongebob-1.jpg){kind=link}
![[image: Posted Image]](http://i77.photobucket.com/albums/j51/bratboy_2006/doeswant.jpg?t=1279625749){kind=link}
![[image: Posted Image]](http://i74.photobucket.com/albums/i277/russandler/VFR%20General/DSCN1194.jpg){kind=link}
![[image: Posted Image]](http://i284.photobucket.com/albums/ll23/rangerscott/Honda%20VFR800/Wrecks/Wreck6-12-0949Large.jpg){kind=link}
![[image: Posted Image]](http://i284.photobucket.com/albums/ll23/rangerscott/Honda%20VFR800/Wrecks/Wreck6-12-0919Large.jpg){kind=link}
![[image: Posted Image]](http://i284.photobucket.com/albums/ll23/rangerscott/Honda%20VFR800/Wrecks/Wreck6-12-091Large.jpg){kind=link}
![[image: Posted Image]](http://i284.photobucket.com/albums/ll23/rangerscott/Honda%20VFR800/Wrecks/Wreck6-12-0948Large.jpg){kind=link}