Exhaust dyno testing

Right then ladies,
At long last mine and my dyno mans calendars aligned. I have 1/2 day booked tomorrow. Plan is to test as follows:
1. Stock 1 3/8 headers and peashooters
2. Balance pipe system and peashooters (thanks Sam)
3. 1 1/2 system and peashooters
4. Above with anti reversion washers
5. Above with megaphones
6. Full Maney system (thanks Chris)
Should make some noise.
Hope the motor stays together!
Will post results tomorrow...

Looking forward to reading the results. Will you be tweaking the carbs & ignition for each set up. Also, what type of Peashooters are you using, perf. of fluted? I would love to know if one type is better than the other. The only difference I can detect on the road is the fluted baffles sound so much better.

Martyn.

Fast Eddie said:

Right then ladies,
At long last mine and my dyno mans calendars aligned. I have 1/2 day booked tomorrow. Plan is to test as follows:
1. Stock 1 3/8 headers and peashooters
2. Balance pipe system and peashooters (thanks Sam)
3. 1 1/2 system and peashooters
4. Above with anti reversion washers
5. Above with megaphones
6. Full Maney system (thanks Chris)
Should make some noise.
Hope the motor stays together!
Will post results tomorrow...

Click to expand...

It's been a long time a comin' (but well worth the wait), and we're all eagerly awaiting "Fast Eddie's Speed Shop Exhausting Tour 2015" results. You have carved out an incredibly ambitious 1/2 day schedule for you and the boys (especially if you are jetting for each EX system)! Keep the insulated gloves handy, work like dogs, and we'll keep our fingers crossed that you can get through it all in 1/2 a day.

I saw in the anti-reversion thread that you fabricated a removable stepped insert for the EX port, and that you plan to employ it in the tests (if I understood the experimental description correctly, all the tests, or maybe only with points 3, 4, and 5?). On this subject I have the following question.

Reversion Question - as it presently sits, does your bike exhibit any stutter/blubber when transitioning from low speed to "on the pipe/cam" in higher gears, or will it pull through from 2500-5500 rpm cleanly if the throttle is slowly rolled on in top gear?

Dyno Question - are you seeking only maximum HP out of the dyno runs or will you be attempting to do some lower speed work, i.e., quantify lower and mid-range torque performance as well?

I'm sure your motor will hang in there just fine. The dyno runs are still gentle relative to the real road.

Matchless said:

Looking forward to reading the results. Will you be tweaking the carbs & ignition for each set up. Also, what type of Peashooters are you using, perf. of fluted? I would love to know if one type is better than the other. The only difference I can detect on the road is the fluted baffles sound so much better.

Martyn.

Click to expand...

Both my stock 1 3/8 and new RGM 1 1/2 peashooters are fluted I'm afraid.

Testing and adjusting will be 'pragmatic' ... Meaning that I will certainly fiddle to find the best overall set up, but I ain't gonna waste time optimising a set up that is clearly not going to be up there with the best. If a set up looks promising, I'll fiddle. If not, I'll reject and move on.

I my own humble experience with old Brit bikes, small variations in ign timing seldom make much difference. Ditto changing advance curves. But they are hugely responsive to having big, fat, high quality sparks! I'm hoping my Tri-Spark, Crane coil and iridium plugs fit the bill there.

WZ507 said:

Fast Eddie said:

Right then ladies,
At long last mine and my dyno mans calendars aligned. I have 1/2 day booked tomorrow. Plan is to test as follows:
1. Stock 1 3/8 headers and peashooters
2. Balance pipe system and peashooters (thanks Sam)
3. 1 1/2 system and peashooters
4. Above with anti reversion washers
5. Above with megaphones
6. Full Maney system (thanks Chris)
Should make some noise.
Hope the motor stays together!
Will post results tomorrow...

Click to expand...

It's been a long time a comin' (but well worth the wait), and we're all eagerly awaiting "Fast Eddie's Speed Shop Exhausting Tour 2015" results. You have carved out an incredibly ambitious 1/2 day schedule for you and the boys (especially if you are jetting for each EX system)! Keep the insulated gloves handy, work like dogs, and we'll keep our fingers crossed that you can get through it all in 1/2 a day.

I saw in the anti-reversion thread that you fabricated a removable stepped insert for the EX port, and that you plan to employ it in the tests (if I understood the experimental description correctly, all the tests, or maybe only with points 3, 4, and 5?). On this subject I have the following question.

Reversion Question - as it presently sits, does your bike exhibit any stutter/blubber when transitioning from low speed to "on the pipe/cam" in higher gears, or will it pull through from 2500-5500 rpm cleanly if the throttle is slowly rolled on in top gear?

Dyno Question - are you seeking only maximum HP out of the dyno runs or will you be attempting to do some lower speed work, i.e., quantify lower and mid-range torque performance as well?

I'm sure your motor will hang in there just fine. The dyno runs are still gentle relative to the real road.

Click to expand...

Reversion: I'm inspired by the FA head design of course. My bike pulls clean on its 1 3/8 set up, so no plan to try them there. The megaphones I want to try gave an improvement above 4500 (when tested on the A34) but were awful below 4000. The 1 1/2 system also felt very promising on the A34, pulling stronger from naught to 4500 and from 6000 to 7000, but with flat-ish spot between 4500 & 5-and-a-bit, which is smack bang where I land when changing up a gear! This is all based on seat of the pants feeling, so the dyno based anti reversion experiment is primarily aimed at those two. I may also try with the Maney system, but was kinda hoping that such a well designed system shouldn't need that kind of intervention.

I am very interested in general performance figures ie torque and power curves, peak figures and at what revs. I have FCR carbs that previously showed weak on the needle area, which is dangerous as this is where one spends a lot of time on the road, when cruising on a motorway for example. So I will be disconnecting the accelerator pump and checking AF ratio at steady throttle positions as well. I do only have a limited selection of very expensive FCR jets though!

As I said to Matchless, I am not going to try and optimise every possible permutation, I intend to identify the most promising permutations and then optimise those and see which comes out on top.

Once I have a very precise baseline. I can decide on next steps of development. Current thinking is either a thorough re-work of the RH10 head or replacement with FA. Then possibly a 'healthier' cam over the planned winter tear down. As I am already using a JS1 with BSA lifters, a JS2 seems a logical next step as I think JS3 may be a tad too much.

Unless I fit a 920 block!

Or sell the kids and go for broke with a 1007!!

All good fun tho innit?!

if ya could sacrifice a set of pipes might try tacking on an extension then hack off couple inches a go till power peak then falls off so the rest of us might trim ours similar. I would guess Maney system works out best.

I vote sell the kids :shock: my four girls and two boys are bleeding me dry, and they're still young yet. All kidding aside, I look forward to your results, thx for posting.. Cj

Hi Nigel, yes I am also keen to see these results as I am in the process of building a couple of sets of 2 into 1's a la Maney style.
Is this your JS1 cammed engine?
Regards Mike

Brooking 850 said:

Hi Nigel, yes I am also keen to see these results as I am in the process of building a couple of sets of 2 into 1's a la Maney style.
Is this your JS1 cammed engine?
Regards Mike

Click to expand...

Yes it is Mike. And that is what I am considering changing over winter. I might not be being fair on the cam, as my head is a stock RH10 I am perhaps not giving it chance to shine. But, frankly, it is not hot enough for me in the higher rev ranges. I think a change to JS2 is on the cards. Please check your mails as I sent you a question about this.

ludwig said:

Maybe too late to ask , but would it be possible to insert a short piece of tube in the peashooters ( in option 1 ) to reduce exit from 34 to 30 mm
to see what diff. it makes ?

Click to expand...

Hi Ludwig, that is exactly what I had in mind too, but I've not had time to fabricate anything like that unfortunately.

I am hoping the 1 3/8 pipes are made redundant anyway, either by the 1 1/2 or the Maney system, we'll soon see!

Interestingly, the 1 1/2 pipes (38mm) do have the initial few inches of internal bore at 32mm, so the thinking has already been incorporated into the design.

Strewth guys, that was a heck of a difficult day. Struggled like mad with the needle settings and other BS. Tried many permutations, summary below. Also had engine / cradle studs fall out due to squashed powder coating (don't get me started on this) and lack of AF spanners on hand meant this kept recurring! Sadly guys, I ran out of time to test the crossover pipes (sorry Sam et al)!

Anyway, here's the headlines...

The initial run was using the same set up as my last visit to the dyno, just to get a baseline from which to compare things against. The list below shows the variance against this baseline:

1. The baseline (as before) = 840cc, stock RH10 head, JS1 cam, 10.5:1 CR, 35mm FCR jetting as supplied but with enriched needle, stock filter adapter stubs on carbs, 1 3/8 pipes, 1 3/8 fluted peashooters.

2. As base plus 70mm long velocity stacks: Power +1.4@ -100rpm. Torque -2.9@ +1600rpm.

3. As base plus 40mm long velocity stacks: Power +1.8@ -100rpm. Torque +0.3@ +1700rpm.

4. As base plus 1 1/2 pipes: Power -5.1@ +200rpm. Torque -0.2@ -200rpm.

5. As above plus 1 clip weaker on needle: Power -5@ +400rpm. Torque -0.1@ same rpm.

6. As 4 + 70mm long velocity stacks: Power -2.2@ +400rpm. Torque -0.8@ -100rpm.

7. As above with anti reversion discs: Power -2.3@ +200rpm. Torque same @ same rpm.

8. As base plus Maney system: Power +4.1@ -100 rpm. Torque +4.3@ +1200rpm.

Summary:
Something is wrong, either with the dyno, or my engine as the baseline was several BHP less than last time with same set up. The dyno man is convinced his dyno is fine, so I may have some engine related issue. But, I decided to continue (the show must go on etc) as the purpose was to compare different permutations, not strive for highest reading.

On all but one permutation the carb needle setting was weak, ie 'off the AF scale' at times. This may require richer needles (I think, I'm new to FCRs) BUT one permutation made this good, so this may be what I pursue (see final summary point). Either way it needs addressing as this is precisely the range one would sit at for prolonged periods on the road, before holing a piston!

1 1/2 pipes did not work well. This surprised me as I thought they felt good when I road tested them. I think this is because they gave a low RPM torque peak and a high RPM power peak, creating a feeling of a broad spread of power, making it feel stronger, when in fact it was not.

Velocity stacks do work well. Both short and long were good, little difference between them, but the short ones are best. They gave smoother readings and better figures.

Anti reversion discs had almost zero effect. This does not argue against anti reversion theory, only that my shoddy attempt was, well, shoddy!

Maney system gave the best results and was the ONLY time the fuelling was OK on the needle. This is one well designed exhaust system. Well, I say best, but I mean 'best for my riding style'. Below 4000rpm, the 1 3/8 system was best. But above 4000rpm the Maney sytem was much better. It gave a much higher average power and torque above 4000. Even from below 4000rpm, although the graphs were less flat, they had a nice linear climb. If I add the increase to my earlier base line readings (pre mystery power loss) the Maney system would put me over 60BHP WITH A STOCK HEAD! The head is now clearly the bottleneck and must be addressed next, and I suspect the Maney system effect may be amplified by head work (and possible cam change). It looks like I need a Maney system (or at least a copy of)!

That's all folks, hope there's something of interest there for some.

Well done mate. Your tests make interesting reading. The Maney system is obviously as good as he says, but at £840 PLUS vat it makes for very expensive horse power. Your results just go to show that the boys at Norton got it right with the 1 &3/8" pipes with fluted peashooters. I have to say I would happily give up a few HP just for the amazing sound this set up makes.

Matchless said:

Well done mate...........

Click to expand...

+1 :mrgreen:

Hi Nigel,

Do you know how repeatable the test is? If you took the same set up into the dyno testing apparatus, would you get the exact same result every time?

If I was doing the experiment you outlined, I would run the #1 condition first, and maybe 4th and last. I would compare those results. While what you did is not a classically designed experiment, running the baseline 3 times, NOT in a row, but where you had to break down the test apparatus, set it up again, capture as much other outside variation as possible, et., et., you would have three sets of results with, one would hope, a tight distribution of results. If you have a wide distribution of results, it teaches you that any result has as much variation as the baseline, so if the repeated baseline has a variation of, for example, +/- 3BHP, you need to see, say 5 bhp to say the numbers are really statistically different, or something close to that. (Ed note. Full disclosure - It is Friday night, another tough week and I am in the middle of my second rye hi-ball.)

Does the guy that has the dyno have a set of very recent data of a similar setup done repeatedly that shows the test measurement capability? Does he do any measurement system capability analysis? Can he share with you?

I am not trying to be negative, but if the test system is only capable of natural experimental variation of X, and you are looking to discern a change of Y, and X is greater than Y, you are generating random numbers. If the measurement system is incapable, you are down the rabbit hole.

Hi rwalker28.
I think perhaps you mean 'calibration' rather than 'capability'.
The same dyno, same day, same operator, same bike, etc mitigates variation in the system to assess the differences between the exhausts/mufflers. Modifying jetting may confound the data as it adds a level of variability to the output.
Calibration means 0 = zero and 100 = one hundred in a measurement system but even in this case the percentage of +/- variation is of more importance than the actual number. Capability of a measurement system will account for repeatability and reproducibility due to different operators, environmental conditions, etc. Hope this helps when the grog wears off.
With so many exhausts/mufflers and jet options to process, perhaps a Taguchi Design of Experiments approach may have exposed the 'better' combination of all the variables tested.
Ta.

Hi Needing,

No I mean capability. That is totally different from calibration. Every time one starts over is a new adventure. I do not know how repeatable and reproducible the dyno system is. Never done it. However, very simple sounding things like measuring dielectric constant with a $150K network analyzer sounds like for $150K should be darn good...but....well...no.

A true DOE would tell a guy something. Factor at a time is tough to do.

Taguchi will tell you what is important (those are screening experiment? I never did them - , I used the Box, Hunter, Hunter screening experiments), but you got to get to the factorial experiments and try to hold all the other factor steady. I bet this is not easy to do on a motorcycle - lot of other possible random inputs.... or I am over complicating this?

Thanks Fast Ed for sharing this - except for the common sidetrack time stealers. Tests like this should be repeated a few times in a row to take an average of the swaying variation and see if heat soak is hurting much. Note, time and type of day can matter as distinctly more power shows up on cool days with some humidity with helps combustion but not too high as displaces O2. Low pressure storm fronts also knock down power. There are calculators to semi compensate for variations by converting to same air pressure, temperature and humidity as if all the tests done in standard conditions. How much power do ya want - how much can ya afford in time and money and more grey hair loss.

rwalker28 said:

Hi Nigel,

Do you know how repeatable the test is? If you took the same set up into the dyno testing apparatus, would you get the exact same result every time?

If I was doing the experiment you outlined, I would run the #1 condition first, and maybe 4th and last. I would compare those results. While what you did is not a classically designed experiment, running the baseline 3 times, NOT in a row, but where you had to break down the test apparatus, set it up again, capture as much other outside variation as possible, et., et., you would have three sets of results with, one would hope, a tight distribution of results. If you have a wide distribution of results, it teaches you that any result has as much variation as the baseline, so if the repeated baseline has a variation of, for example, +/- 3BHP, you need to see, say 5 bhp to say the numbers are really statistically different, or something close to that. (Ed note. Full disclosure - It is Friday night, another tough week and I am in the middle of my second rye hi-ball.)

Does the guy that has the dyno have a set of very recent data of a similar setup done repeatedly that shows the test measurement capability? Does he do any measurement system capability analysis? Can he share with you?

I am not trying to be negative, but if the test system is only capable of natural experimental variation of X, and you are looking to discern a change of Y, and X is greater than Y, you are generating random numbers. If the measurement system is incapable, you are down the rabbit hole.

Click to expand...

I'm not quite sure want you mean to be honest, but I'm no scientist, but thank you for your scientific corrections, I shall try and do better next time.

Please remember the list I quoted was only a summary. Each permutation was run at least 3 times to irradiate any strange erroneous readings (which does happen).

I don't know if you've ever run on a dyno before, but you get small variations every time you run it up, even without changing anything, even when only a minute or two apart (ambient temp, engine temp, humidity, etc all play a part).

The order of experiments was based on ease of change over / minimal change each time. Some runs are missing from the list. Only ONE thing was changed between each run.

The key is (as Needing has said) this was same bike, same fuel, same dyno, same operator, same weather, same day. It is also the same dyno and operator as used last time, and with only one change done at a time. So, to be frank, it was all clear enough to have concluded what I wanted to conclude at this stage.

It's not over though! I will procure richer needles to give the non Maney pipes another chance. But the thing I would really like to do if I can organise accordingly is, change the head, without any other engine work, and measure the effect of that in isolation. This would be very interesting to see. I'm just not sure I'll be able to do it.

Hi Eddie

Glad you liked my Maney I thought it must have worked for you, when I saw your message asking if I wanted to sell it!!!!

Fortunate find brand new in Ireland half price & Gerry went halves on postage. Steve did'nt have them in stock at the time. Dave Watson had one made by NRP but Gary was'nt happy with it. Until it was redone. Steve A has had one done for his Rickman & is now pleased with it. Still not sure they are in stock with Steve Maney.

Hopefully at Donnington.

Chris

Chris I have had a brand new Maney 2 into one lent to me to copy here in NZ as Steve told me he he isnt making them anymore and sold his last sets to Minnovation.
There are none listed on his site in 'Products'
I will post pics of progress.
Regards Mike