GSXR HP Clutch switch dyno

Very interesting topic and needs to be resolved for once and for all in this thread . I have read bits and pieces in the past about the R6 and R1 having a similar situation with the clutch switch . Are the Yamahas also like this ?

 

I cannot find those runfiles, they must be on the shop computer. As i said, that is a graph a posted up years ago on another forum and it just happened to be what i found on my webspace to illustrate the rpm loss from the clutch switch.
Besides, your later questions about my dyno methods bear no relevance to the question of rpm limits with the clutch switch.
BUT, here are 2 runs from the k5 1000 and k2 1000 that i found earlier and have just pasted into my paint package and then put on my webspace for you to look at. They are in the format you have requested.
If this does not satisfy you then i really don't care. I'm offering help and there will be some that will listen and some that will not. Makes no difference to me either way what you all do with what i post.

 

2006-onwards R6, NO. Can't answer for the R1, never noticed it. The yamahas do not have a gear position sensor, they run a speed trigger and calculate gear so have no locked neutral indication to the ecu.

 

so tell me why you have changed your correction factor from Sae to Din or from Din to Sae? I have a 05 gsxr 1000 in 6th gear, with peak hp at 160 with a cf of Sae, then change to Din i get 166.0, that alone validates the question of how you tune bikes. so why do you change the Cf. People complain of dyno hp numbers for that exact reason.

 

im lost on this one, are you saying this bike made peak hp after 2 runs. Then after 39 runs, and you've disconnected the clutch switch and picked up a whole .68 hp

don't worry i didn't miss the mph difference

 

Must be something regional because the 06 USA I tested definitely suffered a rev drop with the switch disabled. About 500rpm. (and obviously the 12hp drop) I don't deal with a lot of GSX-R's because I'm mainly a Twin tuner, so it took me a bit to figure out/remember WTF was going on, why was the power so low with the A/F looking pretty good? Then I remembered reading Ed's original post some time back, did a search here, corrected the problem and shazam, fixed it. So thanks to Ed for posting originally. Tim, glad to have you aboard. I've checked out your website many times, lots of good stuff on there. :up:

 

Validation of how i tune my bikes - relates to a discussion on rpm limits - HOW?????
Whether its DIN or SAE or whatever air-fuel or whatever tuning methods or lack of dyno driving ability, once again, bears no relevance to the rpm limit from the clutch switch. You seem to now try and turn this into questioning my abilities.
The k5 shows no horsepower loss or gain IMO. Look at the AF and factor in 30 odd runs of extra heat. The k2 shows a power gain. If you look back to my earlier posts on this thread you will see i stated some gained power some did not. I thought i was quite clear then and now.
I've not just rolled the bike on the dyno cold and got to run 2 is a matter of seconds. I've already mentioned tire slip graph, if you know what you are doing then that should have been enough of a clue that i am no muppet.

 

Thanks. Its not been updated much for about 3 years. I'm hoping to get on it next year and bring some really good new info to it. A lot has happened in that time and a load of developments i can share now

 

+1 Appreciate your insights and information you've provided in the past via email.

 

I asked you to change the settin to speed only to see what gear you were using since you didn't know yourself. Also i can show a all gear run with the setting to rpm and it look exactly like a 4th or 5th gear pull.

It's not a question of your abilities, I was just asking why your tuning and dyno methods aren't consistent. one time you use cr ase then din. that's all.

It's perception my friend, to pick the 2nd run and then show the 30th run, would lead one to believe that run 2 is your starting point and run 30 is the final out put.

you still haven't said why the 1st graph you posted shows run 3 performing better than run 103. If you would shed some light on that please.

 

I think i've already answered questions and provided solid information. If you want to create a pointless argument then look elsewhere.
Remember, your assumptions may not match other thoughts.
And to say my tuning and dyno methods are not consistent when you don't know me or how i test is just plain rude.

 

handicapped racer if you have data that backs up what your calling BS on, you should post it. you probably shouldnt find fault with a guy who was just trying to show the beeb some data that backed up what he had provided. So he had one run with din and one with sae? That makes him an incompetent tuner or something?

Hell, the guy built and raced his own big bang gixxer. He might actually know what hes doing.

 

Actually you haven't answered the ? I have yet to read where you've explained why run 3, is a cleaner, albeit lower hp than run 103. I thought that after 103 runs there would be some improvement.

[/QUOTE]

Correction Factor: SAE


Correction Factorin

Correction Factor: Din

So as a potential customer who doesn't know how to interpert a dyno graph, i see this thread and say, hey, this guy has a dyno, he must know what he's doing.
So he walks in, plops down his money, leaves. You say hey i got 6 more hp out of your bike, the customer is ecstatic and just freakin thrilled.

He goes out wants to race his buddy who barely beat him last time "which is really the reason why he came to you on the dl". They race, and the same thing happens,again.
Poor guy is lost, scratching his head, then tells he friend, man I just got this thing tuned and dude told me he got 6 more hp out of it, but i still got my ass waxed the same as before. His trusty friend say lets go to my dyno guy.

He goes to the shop, they dyno the bike, it comes up with 6 less hp, the guy asked if he has a print out,......sure...... can i see it... sure......here ya go. then come to find out you've changed the correction factor to show more hp. the other tuner wonders who you are, looks at your site and you have those three runs on the page and they show 2 different correction factors, then points this out to his customer, and you don't see any type of inconsistency. 6 hp msy not mean much to you but as far as the street guy is concerned 166 look a hell of a lot better than 160. In their mind, hell i with ram Air i may have 170

Tuning a bike in 4th in one instance, then 5th another cause the wheels slips, doesn't give you accurate repeatable info, not unless you only refer to the bikes only run in 5th gear. which could be 10 in 5th gear and then you have 60 in 4th. Why not just get the rear wheel up to temp so it sticks. So any customer who's bikes been tuned in 5th, you now only have 10 bikes that you can compare the gain or losses with. Please don't tell me you can't understand that!

I remember in 04 Muzzy posted on their site a slip on for the zx-10 that showed 175 hp almost a 10 hp gain from a slip on. After looking at the print out's on his site, the base line runs were set to sae. then the slip on runs were set to std. This was lying to customers and potential customers. So the key is to be consistent at all times. To prevent people from spreading rumors your shyt reads high or low!

 

Clutch switch, no clutch switch. 2006 GSXR 600.
Run what ya wanna run. Believe what you wanna believe.
My customers appreciate me.

 

No worries Digger i plan on it. wouldn't engage the gentle man if i didn't. I welcome hard facts and admire him for posting it. Unlike most people that come into the tech section and spew shyt they've heard.
I went in an performed back to back runs on a 05 1000 using a switch i made to engage and dis-engage the clutch with at will. I ran out of gas lol so im not done. tomorrow i will finish the 05 1k and then go to the 01 600, then i will post the results.

I can tell you from experience, not sure how it is in the Uk but here in DC people fixate on hp peak hp not, A/F and not torque. So trying to give a customer accurate info is imperative where I'm located. I never said he was incompitent, i just said it is inconsistent.


But just to prove my point explain why run 39 179.38 and 82.67lbs of torque
then run 50 which is after 39 makes 165.03 and 80.74.


http://www.racedevelopments.co.uk/dyno/graphs/gsxr1000k6.htm

 

Um that's been determined already, If you read what i asked, you'll notice it said post runs from a 01-03 gsxr 600 not a 06!:up:
and thanks for showing us what Cf you use also, as i said b4 not everyone does it the same.

 

You make it sound like I bought a 1000 and tried to find a way to make it slower.....That'd be pretty dumb. Maybe you just like to stir shit up?
I didnt say that I unhooked the switch JUST SO i could go slower. Re-Read it. I said that as a side effect to having unhooked it so I could install more comfortable handlebars for a 15 hr ride to Indy (from a CBR 954), I found the power loss as a result of it....and I don't see better or worse fuel economy. The same as before. Mind you I street ride it, so WOT fuel economy I can't really say as there simply aren't streets where riding like that is safe or possible.

I haven't a dyno sheet that proves my bike lost power, I was just happy that someone had hard evidence to what I can feel by seat of the pants ever since I disabled the switch on my bike. Like I said, others had told me that it was impossible for my bike to have lost power from disabling the switch but I swear it feels somewhat lazier now than it did before Sept 10th (day I left for Indy)

As for the bike running like crap with switch shorted, mine doesn't. Runs smooth and pulls cleanly, just softer, not unlike an 07 with the B map switched on. It is my intention to install convertibars this winter so there will again be room for the clutch switch on the handlebar, so all will be back to normal

 

T.....
You rufflin' feathers again....?

 

Ok i re-read your post, but tell me why did you by pass the switch when it sits on the clutch perch and since the bars are 2 inches higher what did you do with the highbeam/horn assembly, is it attached to the bar also or did you have to bypas that too!

 

Yeah dude doens't know me I like the unconventional way. Kinda like people proving their point V passing along info they've read.:up:

LOL! There are some thing i don't understand but hey it's his dyno not mine!

what you been up to?