SOOO went to replace air filter and.....
11-24-2011, 05:51 PM
#61
Senior Member
SuperBike
Join Date: Jul 2004
Posts: 1,015
Glad to hear i am not the only one that favors the K&N. I enjoy the tinkering and tuning.
On that subject, i recently installed a Sudco Racing FCR 41 on my KTM Duke II SM in place of the piece of crap CV carb. The FCR was kicking my A$$, and after four of five remove rejet instances over the past several months i finally got it hooking up great. By seat of pants of course and not by Dyno.
Last edited by Thumper; 11-24-2011 at 05:54 PM.
12-01-2011, 01:04 AM
#62
Banned
MotoGP
Join Date: Aug 2007
Location: Lake View Terrace, CA
Posts: 5,942
"Hi Mike,
I do not have all the details documented from the HRC jet kit but I can
tell you what I remember. I do not recommend running the air bleed
plugs. These were used when running without an air filter. Keep the
stock air filter, use the HRC slides and needles. The kit came with two
sets of needles, use the leaner set to start. Jets were about 175F 180R.
That is what I remember...
Bob Hayashida
BVH Motorsports
Mech Engineering & Race Support
US & Canadian Distributor - Moriwaki Engineering
2225 Market St. Reno, NV 89502
800.311.4284 or 775.322.4311"
I can forward the original message to you, if you think I'm making it up and RCVTR can confirm this was really Bob's contact info.... (RIP)
And he is quite clear on running the stock filter.
Last edited by 8541Hawk; 12-01-2011 at 10:20 AM.
12-01-2011, 08:52 AM
#63
Senior Member
Superstock
Join Date: Jan 2011
Location: Santa Clara, CA
Posts: 258
I didn't realize how much the K&N was snot until I took it out last night and put an OEM back in there after sitting in my shop for... 4 months?
After riding on it I do have to agree with Mike. I spent around 20-30hrs tuning and re-tuning the carbs with the K&N and it never felt good and there was always a problem spot. With the OEM, it took me an hour with a wideband sensor (no dyno
) to have it nearly perfect across the entire rev. range. Seat of pants suggests that's true 
I'm not telling anyone to get rid of the K&N, I have them installed on both of my VF1000F's and love them; I'm suggesting that you go and buy one (I paid $26 inc. shipping) and test it out. If you don't like it, don't buy coffee for a week and you've made your money back right there.
It's a simple, and easy test that doesn't require refuting everything that you know about the bike; this is a community forum about improving/helping everyone with their motorcycles so we should keep it that way and post what we have done in order to attain the best running from your bike. If you disagree with what's been done, then don't do it, but don't go around bashing everyone (not at anyone in specific, just in general terms here) and creating an overall bad mood on the forum.
After riding on it I do have to agree with Mike. I spent around 20-30hrs tuning and re-tuning the carbs with the K&N and it never felt good and there was always a problem spot. With the OEM, it took me an hour with a wideband sensor (no dyno
) to have it nearly perfect across the entire rev. range. Seat of pants suggests that's true I'm not telling anyone to get rid of the K&N, I have them installed on both of my VF1000F's and love them; I'm suggesting that you go and buy one (I paid $26 inc. shipping) and test it out. If you don't like it, don't buy coffee for a week and you've made your money back right there.
It's a simple, and easy test that doesn't require refuting everything that you know about the bike; this is a community forum about improving/helping everyone with their motorcycles so we should keep it that way and post what we have done in order to attain the best running from your bike. If you disagree with what's been done, then don't do it, but don't go around bashing everyone (not at anyone in specific, just in general terms here) and creating an overall bad mood on the forum.
12-01-2011, 03:55 PM
#64
Senior Member
SuperBike
Join Date: Mar 2007
Location: Belgium, WI
Posts: 1,611
If anyone is so inclined to want to prove the a-holes(me included) of the forum wrong, I have a k+n filter with blockoffs, used, ready for you. $25 including shipping, will send it out tomorrow.
12-02-2011, 05:11 PM
#66
Senior Member
SuperBike
Join Date: Mar 2007
Location: Belgium, WI
Posts: 1,611
I am guessing if they are in the US, it probably is the same price as coming from Sweden. But, anyone who wants one can pretty much have them for free plus shipping. That's how good they are.
12-02-2011, 05:57 PM
#67
Connie Demico does toad?
Superstock
Join Date: Oct 2011
Location: Lakeway
Posts: 383
So answer me this, if my bike runs damn well with the kn would it run better with the stock filter dropped back in, or will I have to retune for the stock filter. I did none of the tuning btw, bought it this way and it does not run bad.
12-02-2011, 06:10 PM
#68
Senior Member
SuperBike
Join Date: Mar 2007
Location: Belgium, WI
Posts: 1,611
You would have to tune it, but would likely get it right within the 2nd or 3rd try, and it typically would run better, get better fuel economy, and enlarge many aspects of your life...one being your wallet.
12-02-2011, 06:38 PM
#69
Senior Member
SuperBike
Join Date: Mar 2007
Location: Belgium, WI
Posts: 1,611
See, I know that the information that we collectively have on jetting is good enough that we can, with knowing the pipes and mods, put a person within a jet size. The information is just that good for the stock filter, or maybe, just maybe, the stock filter is just that good. I am confident that if you were incapable of it yourself, you could use recommendations here and with a good local shop, have it back in a state that would make you considerably more happy. Obviously this would go without saying that you aren't going to be anymore happy with HP numbers, as there just isn't a lick of difference to speak of. It has to do with the overall running of the vehicle, the fuel economy, and the fairly linear life of the stock filter which is not mirrored by a K+N.
I understand RK1's advice, though. Some people couldn't feel a dick in their **** if they had a dick in their ****. So, a good running bike versus a bad one feel remarkably the same, leaving said person with a "did I just loose a portion of my life?". I changed my filter and jetting on a good running bike, and I am happy that I did it.
I understand RK1's advice, though. Some people couldn't feel a dick in their **** if they had a dick in their ****. So, a good running bike versus a bad one feel remarkably the same, leaving said person with a "did I just loose a portion of my life?". I changed my filter and jetting on a good running bike, and I am happy that I did it.
12-02-2011, 07:04 PM
#70
Senior Member
SuperBike
Join Date: Mar 2007
Location: Belgium, WI
Posts: 1,611
Yeah, I tend to think that after cleaning and servicing, which I believe must be done more often than standard filter changes, buying the spray, the filter, and jet kit, you would be better off staying stock and never touching the pieces of crap. I do get that there are bikes that might benefit, but my 78 KZ750B was not one of them and required me to RTV some of the pleats to block it off and get it to run properly. I used duct tape as a tuning device to figure out how many pleats to go. That is what happens when you cant get needles. Now, some people wouldnt have even known what I was tuning out of the bike by doing so just because they would never notice the problem in the first place.
Last edited by autoteach; 12-03-2011 at 08:55 AM.
12-02-2011, 09:34 PM
#72
Senior Member
SuperBike
Join Date: Mar 2007
Location: Belgium, WI
Posts: 1,611
Well, disregarding my qualifiers and context, sure you are right. But I can do that too. But, you are one of the lucky ones to have a perfectly tuned bike using the filter that will remain nameless, some wont be so lucky. As for cleaning, the average person (Which I am not) will have to clean their, um er, filter more often than necessary from dirt due to the natural drying of the filter material. Now, I don't work on bikes that often, and I have only worked on 1 or 2 different models, of which maybe .25 of them had a , er, um, filter...so I am sort of a dipshift when it comes to this. Actually, I only work on lawnmowers. By lawnmowers I mean I read books. By books I mean I listen to them on tape. By tape I mean I watch the movie. Anywho, I don't know what I am talking about, which hopefully brings new value to this, er, um, filter that I am just too dumb to get "perfect". How does $25 including shipping sound?
12-03-2011, 09:01 AM
#75
Senior Member
SuperBike
Join Date: Mar 2007
Location: Belgium, WI
Posts: 1,611
The thing is that you have just accused me of selectively quoting, which was my accusation of you. My demonstration of what you do was innocuous. You continue to selectively quote to support yourself and your opinion. Meanwhile, I have represented almost everything I have said by qualifying it as an opinion. The only thing that you have qualified is yourself as an ***. Maybe we can get the moderators to shut this thread down too.
Brilliant filter for sale, $25 to your door.
Brilliant filter for sale, $25 to your door.
12-05-2011, 06:31 PM
#76
Member
Squid
Join Date: Mar 2010
Location: Poulsbo, WA
Posts: 48
+1 with Thumper on the K&N filter. I have used both the stock and the K&N. I have also toyed around with a couple of airbox mods. When all was done I have retained the stock airbox configuration (including the stacks) and the K&N air filter. I have rejetted and tuned to maximize the current set-up. I was blessed with the advise of Mr. Mike Velasco who now resides here on the Kitsap Peninsula of Washington state. He knows a thing or two about tuning :-) He ran the DynoJet dyno at Brothers Powersports here in Bremerton, WA and my Superchicken gets 107.47 HP with 67.60 ft/lbs of torque. The fuel/air ratio is very nice starting around 14 at idle, dipping to just above 12:1 between 4 - 7K rpm and staying very close to 13:1 from 7 - 9.5K rpm. The bike runs just fine with the K&N installed.
12-05-2011, 06:54 PM
#77
Senior Member
SuperBike
Join Date: Jul 2004
Posts: 1,015
The thing is that you have just accused me of selectively quoting, which was my accusation of you. My demonstration of what you do was innocuous. You continue to selectively quote to support yourself and your opinion. Meanwhile, I have represented almost everything I have said by qualifying it as an opinion. The only thing that you have qualified is yourself as an ***. Maybe we can get the moderators to shut this thread down too.
Brilliant filter for sale, $25 to your door
Brilliant filter for sale, $25 to your door
Edited for you so as to be sure to not selectively " u
Last edited by Thumper; 12-05-2011 at 07:20 PM.
12-05-2011, 07:05 PM
#79
Senior Member
SuperBike
Join Date: Jul 2004
Posts: 1,015
12-05-2011, 08:40 PM
#80
Senior Member
SuperSport
Join Date: Jan 2005
Location: Nooksack WA
Posts: 834
12-05-2011, 08:56 PM
#81
Banned
MotoGP
Join Date: Aug 2007
Location: Lake View Terrace, CA
Posts: 5,942
Moriwaki did extensive tests and so did Honda USA (AKA Erion Racing) so between Dan Kyle and Bob H. (R.I.P.) I think they might have an idea on which one works the best.
I posted a e-mail I got from Bob, in which he does say to run the stock filter (in direct response to asking about a K&N filter, among other things) and talking with Dan, he has said the same thing.
Though I only have the e-mail (which yeah I could have made up myself but I did think I had a little bit more credibility than that) and the conversation with Dan wasn't recorded, which I guess means that doesn't count either.
So I guess I'm in the same boat as Tweety, As there is no concrete "proof" to post.
Which then leads to the final answer which is, if you really want to run one, go right ahead.
Also as there is only one dyno chart posted (which shows a grand total of a peak 2.4 hp gain with around $1K worth of parts and dyno time) and also just happens to leave off the torque curve. It also shows (it would be nice if the chart listed RPM and gear instead of just speed) that below 40-45 mph the bike makes less power than stock.
The rest are just guys saying "It runs great"
About all I can say is I would think I have a touch of credibility in setting up the carbs on this bike. The carb set up thread, I wrote, does seem to have a few hits and a bit of a following..... And I gave my K&N away because even with the amount of work, testing and research I have done on this set up, I could never get the thing to run without a hole in the power band somewhere with that filter.
With that, I'm done with the topic, you guys argue as to why it works so well for you.
12-06-2011, 04:42 PM
#82
Senior Member
Back Marker
Join Date: Jun 2011
Location: Saint Paul, MN
Posts: 231
Finally -- my dyno printout
I hope you guys can see this -- I've linked to a scanned copy of the dyno run for my 98 Superhawk. You might recall that I bought it with a K&N installed. It's all there to see (hopefully). The blue lines are the "after" readings, the red, the "before." There's still a dip in torque right after 4000 rpm. If you look at the red torque line, you can see how messed up it was with the K&N before it got tuned.
I don't suspect this proves anything one way or the other, especially since both the before and after are with the K&N in.
However, I don't feel that dip in torque just after 4k rpm. Yeah, maybe my senses are dulled, but I've ridden and raced quite a few bikes and it doesn't bother me. Nevertheless, the dip is there.
Just thought it would be of interest -- not trying to add any more fuel to the fire.
98 Superhawk dyno run from 2000 | Flickr - Photo Sharing!
I don't suspect this proves anything one way or the other, especially since both the before and after are with the K&N in.
However, I don't feel that dip in torque just after 4k rpm. Yeah, maybe my senses are dulled, but I've ridden and raced quite a few bikes and it doesn't bother me. Nevertheless, the dip is there.
Just thought it would be of interest -- not trying to add any more fuel to the fire.
98 Superhawk dyno run from 2000 | Flickr - Photo Sharing!
12-06-2011, 08:54 PM
#84
Retired- but not tired!
SuperBike
Join Date: Aug 2010
Location: Pittsburgh
Posts: 1,478
I hope you guys can see this -- I've linked to a scanned copy of the dyno run for my 98 Superhawk. You might recall that I bought it with a K&N installed. It's all there to see (hopefully). The blue lines are the "after" readings, the red, the "before." There's still a dip in torque right after 4000 rpm. If you look at the red torque line, you can see how messed up it was with the K&N before it got tuned.
I don't suspect this proves anything one way or the other, especially since both the before and after are with the K&N in.
However, I don't feel that dip in torque just after 4k rpm. Yeah, maybe my senses are dulled, but I've ridden and raced quite a few bikes and it doesn't bother me. Nevertheless, the dip is there.
Just thought it would be of interest -- not trying to add any more fuel to the fire.
98 Superhawk dyno run from 2000 | Flickr - Photo Sharing!
I don't suspect this proves anything one way or the other, especially since both the before and after are with the K&N in.
However, I don't feel that dip in torque just after 4k rpm. Yeah, maybe my senses are dulled, but I've ridden and raced quite a few bikes and it doesn't bother me. Nevertheless, the dip is there.
Just thought it would be of interest -- not trying to add any more fuel to the fire.
98 Superhawk dyno run from 2000 | Flickr - Photo Sharing!
12-07-2011, 06:21 AM
#87
Senior Member
Back Marker
Join Date: Jun 2011
Location: Saint Paul, MN
Posts: 231
12-07-2011, 06:24 AM
#88
Senior Member
Back Marker
Join Date: Jun 2011
Location: Saint Paul, MN
Posts: 231
12-07-2011, 05:49 PM
#89
Connie Demico does toad?
Superstock
Join Date: Oct 2011
Location: Lakeway
Posts: 383
Well I ordered a HiFlo Filtro air filter, I hope that is stock enough. For fun I will drop it in on this tune and see what happens. If I get the expected result I will remove and wait until I get some time to pull the carbs, do Mikes Mod, and try it then. After my best efforts I will post up on all my findings.
My bike runs well enough with the kn that I shouldn't screw with it but come on, if it could run better without that slightly flat spot in the low end then I am all for it.
I have Dunlops and a kn, I will try Continentals and HiFlo. What do yall like for oil?
HiFlo Filtro
My bike runs well enough with the kn that I shouldn't screw with it but come on, if it could run better without that slightly flat spot in the low end then I am all for it.
I have Dunlops and a kn, I will try Continentals and HiFlo. What do yall like for oil?
HiFlo Filtro
12-09-2011, 03:42 PM
#90
Senior Member
SuperBike
Join Date: Jul 2004
Posts: 1,015
I guess there could always be some additional tweaking, but I am still satisfied all these years and miles later. This run was after mods and dialing in setup by feel and seat of pants. Best I recall from way back then is was a hot day, only run I ever made on this bike.
