Dyno results 86cc Apex [Archive]

Nate McCoy

06-03-2011, 10:43 PM

Thanks for the understanding words LT 80.
A few comments about my being new to this forum:
First let me say that I am quite familiar with forums, and am only new to this one. Some people want to run from their reputation, and see a new forum as a place to get a "fresh start" or hide from their record. LOL I am sure that I am suspect to some under the same pretenses. :) But you'll see that I am not here under any other nickname; I am Nate McCoy. So thanks again for the welcome.
Now as to the relevance of dyno numbers: It is fact that some dyno champions, are real-world embarrassments. There are several reasons that that can be the case imho.
1. One reason is that some dyno simply reads high, and an impressive number on that dyno, might be below average on another, more accurate dyno. In that case the dyno numbers are only relevant to what is tested on that dyno, and compared to the results on the same dyno.
2. Another reason, and I believe the most common, is that the dyno data is not acquired in a way that is relevant to the real world. In this case the dyno could reveal accurate hp readings the way it was tested. But it is too difficulty, of impossible to re-create the dyno environment that produced the big hp in the real-world. The tune-up is too finicky, or the powerband is too narrow to get it to the ground, etc.
So questions about relevance are great questions, and definitely important ones, imho. Peak power numbers are not always an indication of usable power. And on the dirt, where traction is limited, the problem compounds.
Some other "small" issues come to surface here also. Some riders just can't handle more power than what they currently have yet. Some people might have slower lap times with more power than they are comfortable with. But as they mature they will be able to handle more power, and go faster with it. That is what we strive to make available. We strive to build more usable power. More power to the ground. More potential to win.
Beyond that, as you well know, opinion are very subjective. But just for you, here goes."It is a monster out of the hole", and goes "really fast" on the top end... :)

zach R 7x

06-04-2011, 09:19 AM

I had those same #'s off the dyno 2 years ago ( maybe a little better) with pretty much the same set up you discribed, the quad was fast as hell all around bottom, mid and top end.
We took it to the first race all proud of our set up and blew everybody off the gate had a 100' lead over the next quad for the first lap and then the the clutch's over heated and I watched everybody drive right on bye!

Good luck!

Nate McCoy

06-04-2011, 11:08 PM

Thanks Zach. That is the way it goes some times isn't it. More power exposes weak links.
I hoped to see some other 90cc dyno sheets on the forum, but so far they seem hard to find. We posted the best Apex dyno run for comparison. If someone else's dyno reads only 6-7hp on a good running/well tuned Apex, then maybe 15, or 16hp would match this little motor. And if the well setup stock Apexs make 10hp on another dyno, it would likely be 19-20hp to be equal to this. That is what I had hoped would come from this lil' thread. I am not thinned skinned, nor do I want to be disillusioned.
We are new to this venue, and only want to see how high the bar is set at the present time. In the field that our (much larger)motors typically in, we have had many motors go from our dyno to others across the county, and we have had the privilege to see how some of the dynoes compare. It's very informative. Bu we have no comparison on the dynoes that are common in the mini atv world.
I am enjoying the discussion so far too.

We would even be willing to sponsor a dyno shootout, If we could get some of the bikes that made power to show up. Anyway, thanks for the imput.

asadad00

06-05-2011, 04:32 PM

your set-up is very close to ours , my guess is that is a 2fast cylinder. Ladt year we changed from the trackside exhaust to the Mach1 pipe and gained 3 HP , I am sure you would see 19-20 hp on your dyno with an exhaust change. I would be interested in a dyno shoot-out . COOL !

Nate McCoy

06-06-2011, 08:48 AM

Thanks for chiming in asadad00. I am surprised, however at your confidents that the mach1 pipe would be in the 20hp range on our dyno. Anything is possible, but we know we our ATV dyno is very conservative. Of the few dyno sheets I find online, most of the stock Apex motors are in the 10hp range. And should the Mach 1 pipe make more power than our present setup, then we would be in the 22-23hp range on the more common dynojet calibration. That sounds a little optimistic. But maybe that is what some of you guys have out there.
One of the reasons that the "best pipe" discussions are rarely settled is that the pipe is part of a package. The porting, combustion chamber design, and case volume, and airflow among other things, determine what pipe a motor will work best with. And we ported this cylinder, reconfigured the combustion chamber, ans set up the case volume to optimise the Trackside pipe.
We did not, however, have a Mach 1 to try. So I can not say what it would have done. I would gladly dyno one on this motor and provide the results if I had access to one. It would be fun to see.
The reason we initially selected the Trackside pipe is worth mentioning. First I have confidence in the pipe designer. His work is second to none in many other racing disciplines. Second, our concern for this motor was that it is raced in the worcs series, so the motor needs to make power for a longer period of time. The lower rpm we can get the power at, the less clutch/belt fade and failure we will face.
Another interting fact is the torque of a 17.6hp motor that peaks @ 11900 is 10% higher a 19hp motor at a peak of 13500.
Not sure where the Mach 1 pipe will run, but that could be a concern for power to ground on a longer race. But I am willing to test one. And I'd be glad to post a same day, same motor comparison. :)

biggfurm6881

06-06-2011, 11:59 AM

What part of cali are you from? I'm from Taft we are racing arena cross this weekend its fun practice thursday race saturday night

Nate McCoy

06-06-2011, 09:54 PM

Do you have a pipe you'd like for us to test? :) We are north of Sacramento.

TTracer#22

06-07-2011, 11:03 AM

PM Sent

#404's Dad

06-09-2011, 10:21 AM

Surely not wanting to get into a "who has the biggest" contest here but our 2009 TT 70 motor made that on my dyno (same dyno as you) less a "small" bit of Torque, ran like a son of a b$$ch!

Nate McCoy

06-09-2011, 10:04 PM

Thanks for chiming in too #404s Dad. Of course it's possible that your 70 would make even more power on our dyno than this motor did. Maybe your seventy might make the same power on our dyno, and asadad00 might indeed have a 20hp 90 on our dyno. But sadly, it's unlikely either of you will want to travel to put yours on our dyno.
We have had dozens of our motors on Dynojet, Dynostar, Mustang, Land and sea, and Superflow dynoes over the years. The most common rear wheel dyno in the ATV industry is the Dynojet. And we have seen a wide variation with Dynojets HP readings from one to another. The only way to get a good idea how dynoes compare is to compare motors on the same dyno. :)
Of course, some might be surprised at how low our dyno reads; anything is possible.
It was not my intention to start a "this is better than yours" thread. But I had hoped that our little dyno sheet, however average or impressive it might be, would encourage others to post their own dyno sheets of what they have. And tell us whose dyno the motor was tested on. And if they have bench mark motors to compare to, like a stock Apex, it give a little more relevance to the #s.
Even with efforts to compare dynoes, little is settled on a forum. There is too much pride on the line. Everyone wants to have the best, or be the best...
But those who build motors to feed their families need to know what they have to compete against. That is where we come in. To establish superiority on the track takes more than a good motor; some very good motors will often go unnoticed. And, some average motors will be assumed superior because of the talent of the rider that takes it to the finish line.
So dynoes are the best means that I know of to get a feel for what's really out there. And if there were a dyno shootout, the truly powerful motors could easily be seen, if the the dyno shootout was conducted by a competent dyno technician.
Again, "thank you" to those who have chimed in so far.

chunky0071

06-10-2011, 08:26 AM

Dyno's should be used for tuning not #'s don't care what your #'s are if it's not all used then it's wasted. One of the fastest 90 in the XC nationals DNF's alot because to much HP. Just my 2 cents. in the Sport bike world dyno #'s are just to help with tuning.

MAXRPM

06-10-2011, 12:05 PM

McCoy,
Was the Apex you tested using the reverse intake with air box or side intake?
The numbers are quite different when doing a comparison.
I have a Land And Sea and Hetrick has a Dyno Jet, so that we are comparing apples to apples when him and I talk numbers I have ran numerous bikes and motors on both mine and his 50,70 and 90s to get the best base line as I can to be the same as his. As you mentioned before each company is different, so to make my Land and Sea the same as Rich's I had to put in a 1.04% gain and I believe we are within .1-.3 of a hp now. The last 50 we tested about 6 weeks ago that he tested on his came back 2 days later and mine read .1 more than his on hp and torque was the same.
Again they did not both read the same when I got the dyno, I kept adjusting and testing motors we had tested on his to get compaired numbers and the 1.04% gain is what I had to put in to make them the same.

o4twinpeaks

06-10-2011, 07:40 PM

In my opinion numbers are fun just like drag racing. But a 4sec run on one track doesn't mean you can turn that time on every track. When we were building our cvt 700 drag bike I spent alot of time on the dyno. We did nothing to the motor just machined the clutch and changed springs and we saw a 3 hp difference. These runs were only about an hour apart. Dyno can be made to read big numbers. The interesting part of dyno's is how much of an improvement was made and where that power is at. Nate's motor has more than doubled his hp but look at how long it holds that power and it never drops off.

Justin your .1 hp could be due to air density.

Nate it was great talking to you the other night. I will be back in touch with you later.

Tom Petrick

#404's Dad

06-15-2011, 09:36 AM

Yep numbers can be fabricated on the dyno with a cvt for sure, our 09 70 was dyno'd as it ran on the track and many people on here witnessed it run and win races and holeshots all season long at the TT Nats and I believe a stock 07 air cooled 50 on my drum made like 4 hp and between 2-3 TQ back then, I'd have to pull the files to be sure though.

I surely am not wanting to get into any kind of a battle here at all but everyone always claims to have the low reading dyno, its a tool use it for that and don't worry about the numbers being higher or lower, it is what it is.

Very unlikely you will get any good builders to post any of there sheets for comparison, nobody is letting any cats out of the bag whether it be big quads or minis.

MAXRPM

06-15-2011, 10:16 AM

The biggest thing for the dyno for me is to use clutch set up that works best on the ground. Honestly when I set the clutches up on the dyno I set them up with what sounds good on the dyno which usually does not equate in the highest number but works on the ground. If it rips from top to bottom, accelerates good carries the RPM, revs good and has belt travel that is where I set it regardless of the number.
Last weekend someone brought their 2fast up and it sounded very sick on the dyno. My rpm gauge was not working which means it can’t calculate the HP or torque but you can still tune the bike in, and after changing intake and re jetting the quad sounded great and performed far better. But to start with it sounded horrible, proof in its own a 2fast is only as fast as its setup.
I dont claim to be an expert on dynos nor do I claim to be an expert in clutching but the dyno does help to tune it in much faster regardless of the pretty number at the top.

Nate McCoy

07-02-2011, 05:41 PM

MAXRPM, are telling us that you will clutch a bike for less power to make power? :) We were using MAXRPM spring btw.
The truth is the dyno is the way to see the power to the ground. It is also true that a dyno can be very misleading if used incorrectly.

jweidner

07-03-2011, 07:09 PM

Hey Nate,

Please don't take this the wrong way.... I don't understand why you are posting dyno #'s and encouraging other people to post theirs.
Every dyno is different. I think we would all agree on that. If you are a or builder and you would like to show your work, best way is on the track.
I,ve seen some incredible HP #'s produced and they get on the track and the quad doesn't go anywhere. Lets face it, we don't get first place for putting out high hp #'s, we get first place for winning races
What quad do you currently build engines for???? Where do you race at??

Thanks,

Nate McCoy

07-03-2011, 10:30 PM

I am quite confident that we can make more power than the graph we have posted, and have to hope that their are others more powerful out there. But there are few dyno sheets anywhere on the web. So we have posted one to start to remidy that. We realize that some dyno data is not going to have real-world validity. But the best setups often not only are the fastest in the real world but look the best on the dyno too. So we would love to see them all.
The truth is there are a lot of dyno games, and unscrupulous things people do to make themselves look better. Fudging dyno numbers, and unrealistic test conditions can definitely make dynoes look unreliable. But that doesn't discount the value of the dyno.

Winning races is more than a good motor, it is even more than the best motor. I am a two stroke engine developer. The dyno is one of our our tools. And if we test in the correct way, we can tell what motor is the fastest, and even which one will be most likely to win the race.

The ugly fact is that if I build only average motors in an audience that didn't think dyno data was relavant, I would only need a great rider to fool the world that I had the fastest motors out there. If I could build a motor that didn't power fade, and would not blow up, I could hide that the fact of my motor's inferiority by good tuning and riding skills. That would be sad. And the only ones who would want to keep it that way are those who don't want a better motor setup to come from anyone but their current builder.

The incentive to see progress is stymied by the fact that many assume that they have the best already. But we have never found a state of development that didn't have room for advancement. And that progress is first m found at the dyno. Then it's advanced to a state that makes it absolutely superior on the track.

Dyno time and shootouts, even drag races, have developed the fastest scooters, and setups that rule the ATV cvt world now. And likely that is where advancements will continue to come from, if the ATV world fails to see the value of the dyno.
We are at the development level, and we will continue, whether anyone sees the need or not. :)

jweidner

07-04-2011, 08:28 AM

Nate,

I would agree that many people fudge dyno #'s to make themselves look better, their only cheating themselves.

HP is only one small part of the puzzle when it comes to racing, there are many variables that come into play come race day.

One last item that I didn't see in your posts, who do you build motors for????? If you make the HP you think you do, they should be winning right??

That is what you should be posting!!!

Nate McCoy

07-04-2011, 09:17 AM

Originally posted by jweidner
Nate,

I would agree that many people fudge dyno #'s to make themselves look better, their only cheating themselves.

HP is only one small part of the puzzle when it comes to racing, there are many variables that come into play come race day.

Thank you for agreeing.
But your last comment,"If you make the hp...they should be winning..." is a contradiction to the rest of you own post.

As to who we build motors for, If you don't know who I am, then just assume that I am insignificant. And don't loose any sleep over what I say. The fact that I feed my family building two-stroke race motors in this economy is all I will say.

Further, I am thouroughly enjoying being the new guy, that is unknown here. And it's been a lot of years since we have stepped into a field where we had no credibility. I am learning a lot about people here. Thanks again. :-)

mmsoup

07-04-2011, 12:22 PM

NAte

Looks like you have a little experience with Banshee drag motors and Sleds

I for one am glad to have you posting on our little forum and welcome any suggestions, input and direction that you may offer.

The motor builders that have traditionally built our little sccoter motors are Rich Hetrick, Tommy Alley, Billy Holt and Chris Grissom. I respect and use Chris Grissom for port timing modifications and exhaust modifications and general set-up and ignition advice.

My kids race GNCC and we need motors that make good usable power for all types of terrain and conditions and most importantly will last for at least an hour and fifteen minutes.

Having burned more than my share of italian cylinders and pistons up, I must confess I have begun backing away from extreme horsepower set-ups.

Who has dyno's in range of East Tennessee?

Nate McCoy

07-04-2011, 02:21 PM

You hit on a great topic. Why do the high end Italian cylinder motors blow up so often. :) It looks like you have observed that often more power equals less reliability in some cases. Motors that are on "the edge"are very prone to go into deto and self destruct. Less but less hp is not the only way to solve the problem.

The problem the result of what we call "power by abuse".
A simple example would be like this:
On many motors you can get a little more power simply by advancing the timing, tightening squish, or even leaning the jetting, as well as a host of other "tricks" that look good on a short, low-load pull, but do not equate to a more powerful setup in the real world. In the real world, the motor will power fade, then deto, then blow. So to keep it alive, the end user often will have to run huge jetting to keep it alive for the whole race, then the power gains are more than lost in just keeping it alive with a too-rich condition.

To earn more power, and maintain reliability, is not quite so simple. But that is what some of us do for a living.

There is quite a difference in the setup of our 760cc DMX that makes 172hp at the rear wheels set up for a 300ft drag race (3.4seconds), and a F7 (700cc Arctic Cat) Hillclimsled motor that makes 180hp at the crank, but has to sustain Wide Open Throttle pulls till the cows come home. EVery element is different. Domes/Port size,shape, angle, timing, ignition timing, pipe dimensions, jetting etc.
The DMX looks more impressive on paper, but the F7 is the most challenging to make reliable.
The CVT quads, and scooters are more like the sled motors. They have to be stable because they run near peak power most of the time, and have some longer WOT pulls.

MAXRPM

07-04-2011, 02:34 PM

Nate the reason I ask what the stock set up was would tell me if you dyno is in line with mine and Rich’s dyno. Your numbers are very close to what a stock bike would read on mine but depends on which version you are testing.
Do I make less hp to make more hp kind of like power sliding you got to go left to go right…….
What I am saying is I set them up as we are going to race them what does best hole shots, maximum speed, belt travel, acceleration etc. We then put that on the dyno and run them for the numbers not just keep going until I get better numbers. None of my riders use anywhere close to 7 gram rollers even with the heaviest torque spring like 2000 or 2400. Flat track is a different story and even at that 7 gram is huge. I am not saying your fibbing numbers with heavier grams it’s just much heavier than I can make work on the ground.
To answer one of your original questions, yes there is way more to be had than the 17.9 you are getting if you stock tuned quad made 8.9 or something close to that. And the age old question is true the fastest rider can’t win first without a fast quad and a slower rider can’t finish first with the fastest quad. Somewhere in the middle is where the fastest rider is and if you have both you can’t be touched.
mmsoup I am in SE Ky so probably not too far from you if you want to dyno some time.

jweidner

07-04-2011, 04:04 PM

Hi MAXRPM,

I think you nailed it on the head. That was the point I was trying to get across to Nate....my fault for a poor explaination.

I think everyone on this post has great ideas.. that it what makes every motor builders competative.

Thanks,

Nate McCoy

07-04-2011, 06:22 PM

It was happiest with 3, 6g rollers, and 3 5.7g rollers and a MAXrpm 1000lb spring. The setup we started with wanted 7g and 1500lb spring. But it was low 17hp on our dyno, and it didn't hold the power as well as it got really hot.
And the stock Apex would not make an honest 8hp hot, on our dyno. The 8.3 is the "generous" cold-shot, with too lean jetting. We posted it as the "best we could get" of any combination. Another otherwise stock Apex with a PCS pipe did make almost 9hp.

I am having fun sharing in an industry that I am new to. I hope you all can understand that I am an only an engine developer of two stroke motors. We do r&d for an aftermarket cylinder company here in the USA, and work with an international race pipe company as well. We do 50cc to 700cc cylinder development for various applications. We are not satisfied with any state of development, and specialize in making setups better. That shouldn't offend anyone. And so far, the pms have been very greatful. Thanks.

Back to the topic at hand:
Maxrpm, since you feel that your dyno is reading somewhat similar numbers, why not add a dyno sheet to this post for everyone's enjoyment? That is all I was hoping to see.

machwon

07-06-2011, 06:38 PM

Originally posted by Nate McCoy
Back to the topic at hand:
Maxrpm, since you feel that your dyno is reading somewhat similar numbers, why not add a dyno sheet to this post for everyone's enjoyment? That is all I was hoping to see.

Here's one to look at, how about some more? I think this motor may have pulled a few hole shots in the girls 90 class this year.

I put a couple up here over the past couple years but not alot else has been shown. I know in the past my dyno runs the same as 404dad for a stock 07ish 50 (4 hp) but I haven't seen other numbers.

o4twinpeaks

07-09-2011, 03:01 PM

This is our dyno runs. 1 and 2 were pre pvl and 3 and 4 were after. Look at the jump at the start of the run. Major improvement off the line.

Nate McCoy

01-21-2012, 11:14 PM

"There is always more", can be a great motto. And the 2-Fast has to keep getting better. This year, it's counterpart is a Stage 6 r/t 70, and it's no slouch. lol
I am not really happy with the Stage 6 pipe on the 70. Like most of the High Output European pipes, they funtion as if they are designed for cold motor/short bursts, and torque fade badly when they get really hot. And that is a disadvantage for the big tracks/ and longer WORCS-style racing, for sure.
We only fit the Trackside pipe on the 70 to test and modify it to make it work it's best. And with some minor mods, it proved to be more powerful, and by far, the more consistent than the stage 6 pipe as it heat soaked. But this 70 will race with the Stage 6 pipe until we get time to fit, and finish the tune-up on the Trackside, or do a new custom pipe.
The 2-Fast 86cc, ported, custom dome etc., seems to be working very well with the modified Trackside pipe also. Here is this years setup vs last, hot pipe/motor:

asadad00

01-22-2012, 03:54 PM

several guys on here have tried the Stage6 pipe and found it was not so good, wish I knew you wanted one would let this one go for 1/2 price if anyone wants one like new used once. 240. Are you guys running the worcs inthe 70 and 90 class?

Nate McCoy

01-22-2012, 05:10 PM

The dyno sheet is the 2-Fast 86cc, setup. It runs in the 90 classes of course. Likewise the stage 6 70cc motor runs in the 70cc class.
It's not that we were not able to make the Stage 6 pipe work, but it can not be made optimum. We have changed the engine and dome setup to work best with the Stage 6 pipe, and it is working well. The real problem is in the clutching. The clutching has to setup to work with a drastically changing rpm peak as the motor heats up.
It's like a moving target. lol The clutching that is "right" to start with, is very "wrong" after it heats up. Invariably, the peak power slides to a higher rpm as the pipe gets hotter. That is predicable and even expected. But in the case of the Stage 6 pipe the torque falls off drastically at the same time. So the rollers act heavier after every pull.
On the 2-Fast, with a slight modification to the pipe and some engine setup changes, the Trackside pipe is working amazingly well. It is remarkably consistent in the rpm/clutching that it pulls from cold, to hot, to hotter. lol As the motor invariably peaks at a higher rpm as the pipe heats up, the torque , and power climb as well. It pulls the same clutching harder and harder. The Trackside pipe is just a superior design.

Even though it didn't fit right, we got one on the Stage 6 70 as well. It started out a miserably low hp. lol But after some rearranging, we had found another 6hp, and became our benchmark for the Stage 6 pipe setup. The Stage 6 pipe got close in peak power, but was not comparable in consistency. So we worked on the motor to optimize it for the Stage 6 pipe the best we could. It's not bad. But it's begging for a better pipe. lol

The challenge with the Trackside pipe is that it is a one-size fits all pipe. And to make a pipe work on a modded stk motor, it will not be optimized on the high end cylinders. So there was tremendous potential for gains on the 70, and even some gains for the 86CC motor.

I realize many run the Mach 1 pipe, and I am sure it is a good pipe. But I understand that it is only 1-2hp better than the unmodified Trackside pipe on the 2-Fast. Yet we have found that much more in just optimizing the Trackside pipe. And it still has the huge torque-consistency advantage. I am sure the advantage of the Mach 1 pipe is that it is already optimized for the high end cylinders. But if it has the rpm shift, torque fade like many other European scooter pipes, it leaves room for a better design.

I would love to test a Mach 1 pipe, and maybe The 2-Fast pipe, and any others that might be considered competitive. Then post results here, and discuss their pros and cons...?

nastynotchback1

01-23-2012, 07:03 AM

Gotta love Dyno racing.

asadad00

01-23-2012, 11:17 AM

your findings of 1-2 hp gain with mach1 over the trackside is not consistant with ours findings just bolting on the mach1 with no adjustments was a solid 3HP gain and large torque gain also.

Nate McCoy

01-23-2012, 05:07 PM

Don't misunderstand me. There is no dog fight here. I am anxious to every find products that are really better. And I have not had a chance to test The Mach 1 pipe at all. The numbers 1-2hp was what Mark, @Hot Quads told me last year. He seemed like a nice guy, btw. And maybe he was just being modest. And he has already sold enough.

And, If the Mach 1 pipe is the best, I am willing to applaud it. And even recommend it, until something better is discovered. Does someone have one I can rent for a day at the dyno??? LOL

The fact that the motor in this post is going really fast with the modded Trackside pipe, is no hinderence either. This past weekend, it did fine. :) But, even in The WORCs series, the rider skills are very important, so the credit must always be to the rider. Yet, the "dyno racing" seems productive so far. LOL

Justin/Maxrpm sent a stamped pipe for us to test. So as soon as a Mach 1 pipe appears, we'll test some more...

chunky0071

01-23-2012, 05:47 PM

Glad to see some one doing some real research on pipes and builds if you call and ask any they all tell you their pipe is the best.
Would like to see a dyno like this on a stock bike with different pipes. There is more and more limited classes poping up so more can afford to race. I know for one that if we only had MX to race we would be out as we can't afford to spend 1k to 3k on a build and you can't add all that power with out suspenion to go along with it.

Thanks to Nate for bring this out!!!
If every one ran the same set up it would be more about the rider than the bike. Thats why we run limited classes every where we can. Limited has nothing to do with how deep your pockets are!

mmsoup

01-23-2012, 06:35 PM

Koodos Nate! I think everyone should buy Trackside and MaxRPM pipe.

Have a Trackside and Koso EGT I'll part with for $250
Nate says its the bomb so come and get it............

asadad00

01-23-2012, 09:25 PM

I may have a Mach-1 R/t pipe you could test , how long would you need it for ?

Nate McCoy

01-24-2012, 09:27 AM

Mmsoup your sarcasm is touching. Seems you want to force me to push a particular pipe.lol
I have already said that the trackside pipe wasn't optimized out-of-the box for the 2-fast, even though it did work well in some ways. And on the stage 6 70cc it was further off.
I am not promoting anything at this point. I have no reason too.
As to borrowing a pipe, I only need the pipe a couple days. I would need to coordinate the time of the pipe test with the upcoming races, so the bikes would be availible at the same time.
I am hoping to test the mach 1 for the 2 fast, a well.
Thanks you.

bignasty

01-24-2012, 09:29 AM

Is the 2-fast pipe, designed for the 2-fast cylinder. The last races we have run, we have gotten holeshot, topend speed, torque out of the corner and none of the other bikes matched up. There was other 2-fast out there running as well as 200cc blasters and 250 raptors. They run thing different here in NM....The pipe works good for use and me boy is pushing 130 lbs.

mmsoup

01-24-2012, 09:40 PM

Sorry Nate, just kidding

It was funnier than the bs I wrote first.......

We have a couple of youth racers in the family both on Malossi 86cc set ups
We have a Roost version Mach 1 and a Trackside.

We run the Mach 1 and the Trackside isn't close........ever
We also have one of the new (To the states) Malossi ATV pipes

I have wondered if the Mach 1 is driving the cylinder a touch too hard from time to time. We ended up with one of the new Malossi ATV pipes and run it on the ported Malossi BB Kit and it runs extremely well with little to no fall off and has noticeable torque. Just don't have dyno to compare against the Mach 1 we run on the stock Malossi BB set up.
Hope you get a chance to test and post

Nate McCoy

01-25-2012, 12:26 PM

It's no problem mmsoup. I am aware of the common opinion that the Mach 1 pipe is faster than the Trackside, bolt-on vs. bolt-on.

It looks like the dyno comparison is not far away. ttrace#22 has graciously offered a 2010 Mach 1 pipe, and a Profile Performance pipe to add to the list of test pipes. Thanks you!

If the 2011 Mach 1 pipe is different in function, I hope to test one as well. I understand that its fitted different, or at least appears different to some.

Hetrick Racing

01-25-2012, 01:00 PM

Ok I was trying to stay out of this buttttt.

Which pipe would you like me to make win a contest????
Without changing the dyno at all.

Ok Im goin to give you a hint
Looking at your dyno chart you line up against any one of my national motors and all you'll see is number plates(rear that is).

The chart you posted is not race ready, it is an hp chart,if you are looking for hp I can show you more than one rt 70 with 23hp at the rear wheels.
Why I chose that set up is because I think everyone on here can agree Bassani pulled every hole shot in the 70 class that we didn't start with the last gate pick,I think that was once.
HIS QUAD MADE 17hp +/- .3
race ready.
clutching,clutching,clutching
Did I say clutching

Now I have to say I am not being rude but realistic.

Ok so here is my take on the pipe deal

I like them all

If you port and flow the engine to the pipe you are installing They are all really good.
I am kinda partial to my 90 Gen 3 pipe
which I might add was on the motor people couldn't catch all year either.

But again It is all in the set up!!!!
Then maintaining it.

chunky0071

01-25-2012, 03:40 PM

Rich I agree with what you are saying but not every ONE can afford to have a motor ported to match the pipe. I for one look at bolt on #'s because that is what I can afford. I don't think any where he has said look at me I make bigger #'s than any one else! He is just putting the info out there that all of you don't want out there. Real word #'s I know are different but I don't want to spend $600 on pipe and lose power I want to make it!

Hetrick Racing

01-25-2012, 04:11 PM

That is what I was sayin,if you have a "kit motor" then set up is harder and more crucial to achieve max performance...

These numbers or at least the run posted are not a good reference for you guys buying pipes
As I said I am not trying to offend or be rude to anyone just stating the facts

Nate McCoy

01-25-2012, 05:39 PM

Hetrick Racing,
First you should recognize that this little dyno session will not be about "who do we want to win," but about an objective evaluation of the pipes that are out there.

Your comment about the dyno sheet we posted being a slow bike. You might well be right. And if you have any motors in the WORKS series, I am sure the chance for this "poor" motor/setup to be embarrassed will present itself soon. But I tend to think that a 70 auto atv on our dyno that hits 20hp is unlikely. But I have been wrong before.

If you just want to take some shots at dyno tuning in general, you not find any sympathy here. If it works on the dyno, and wont work on the track, you aren't using your dyno right, imho. If you don't agree, please don't derail this thread just to beat a dead horse. :) Plenty of that discussion is earlier in this thread.

We will give every pipe the advantage of an honest effort to jet and clutch it to see it's potential. It is possible that we will not get what is the perfect combo. But with the instrumentation that we test with, it doesn't take many runs to optimize a motor setup well enough to get a comparison. It will be much easier than a poor should trying in the field to shoot-in-the-dark to find the combo.

We can even test engine only, and take the clutching out of the combo, but we will likely clutch them to find a baseline for our own information. And we want to see how consistent they are as they heat up.

And If Hetrick Racing has a pipe that you think would do well on a 86cc 2-Fast, or even the 70 r/t, maybe you should send one over. It is very possible that this testing could prove to be in your advantage. :)

Nate McCoy

01-25-2012, 06:37 PM

Just sent you a pm about the testing details, Hetrick Racing...

Hetrick Racing

01-25-2012, 07:58 PM

Ok as I said I was clearly pointing out the facts!
Also that what you are showing is NOT what you are leading these people to believe .
NO sorry I will send you nothing to "test"

What I said was not that your quad was slow ,17 plus is good but to explain it takes off like a stock 50.Although you should know that if you have been around the dyno for any time at all
I am sorry to offend you

Nate McCoy

01-26-2012, 01:16 AM

Claiming that I am misleading people is serious. I must have misunderstood you.

Saying that the dyno sheet will take off like a stock 50, seems like a low-blow too. But that is fine for you think that. You must have some stout 50cc stockers.lol

And if you are unwilling to have anything to do with the test we will do, that is up to you. I am sure someone else has one to be tested somewhere. Or we'll just not test it. That's fine.

There is no reason to get your blood pressure up. We have no plan to embarrass anyone. The facts are all we are interested in, not drama. I am sure there is enough drama to go around already. Lets not let this thread turn into more of that.

For those who are interested, the testing will likely take place next Friday/Saturday, if all the pipes come in.

don bassani

01-26-2012, 05:25 AM

I think Hetrick means that by having 7gram rollers and a 1500 spring your HP numbers will be high but would be terrible on the track .That being said, if you based pipes on just shear HP some one could get the impression a given pipe was better but in reality(on track)would not be too good. You are right about stage 6 pipe heating up and being inconsistent . I have both Mach 1 pipe and stage 6 r/t pipe and both had that HOT inconsistent thing going on and it drove me nuts.Mach 1 pipe definitely made more HP but when tuned perfectly would do exactly what your dyno showed-inconsistent runs ! I think latest version of Mach 1 pipe may be better in the inconsistent department.

Nate McCoy

01-26-2012, 08:55 AM

Thanks for chiming in. The old setup that would pull 7 grams with a light spring was a lower rpm setup, that had huge torque. It ran well last year with the other clutch combo I posted.

I sure most people understand that finding the power on the dyno, and getting the best clutch set up are not the same goals, by any means. But neither are they unrelated either. The power that a motor makes, at a certain rpm, and under certain load, is what determines clutching.

That being said, it is not our goal to establish some perfect clutching, for some particular track, in some particular bike. That would a challenge to say the least.lol
But what we will try to do is to see what pipe has the most potential in the real world, on the bikes we will be testing. And those bikes will be similar enough to the common 2-fast 86cc, and stage 6 70cc r/t to have some usefulness to the readers of this forum.
We will do our best, using the techniques, and instrumentation that we have at or disposal.
Instrumentation will include air/fuel ratio, via wideband o2, cylinder head & pipe temperature, mass airflow, and internal pressure monitoring, horse power, torque, and rpm. We will have enough information to get a picture of the pipe's potential, imho.
And of cource, one of our main objectives is to see how they sustain their power/torque as they heat-soak. Dyno champs that power fade, are usually real-world embarrassments. We hope to get a sense of what will happen at the track.

I think most people that will view the results will enjoy the information.

Hetrick Racing

01-26-2012, 09:23 AM

120 over 80 bud lol

I just am looking out for the regular guy
without a dyno

Nate McCoy

01-26-2012, 10:15 AM

Nice. And I hope so.

LT80

01-26-2012, 02:01 PM

Mr. McCoy, Hetrick Racings' name is Rich.
Mr. Hetrick, This is Nate.
I thought you 2 might as well be intruduced to one another.
It's much nicer when friends fight. :D :devil:
So what have we learned here:::
1) Ya I know, your not really fighting.
2) We all want the best for everyone.
3) We agree on the dyno/ track thing....sorta probably...
4)Dyno numbers are like Azzholes, we all have one but some are bigger than others.
How about a quote::
" HP numbers seem to vary from state to state".
Arlen Lehman (LRD) 1999

I hope you see the humor intended. :D :D

Hetrick Racing

01-26-2012, 02:37 PM

Jack
You always put a smile on my face, good to hear from ya,,,,,

This is one of the reasons I dont post dyno runs,lol

FISH ON!

01-26-2012, 04:09 PM

Ok, here's how we should settle this one........... if Nate and Rich will both send me their best built 2Fast and favorite pipe, I'll see if my son will be willing to test them on his quad. Lol

:D

hotquads1

01-26-2012, 05:05 PM

Hello guys and gals and I would also like to welcome Nate to the forum. A little spirited debate can be fun and beneficial. I haven't had alot of time to surf the forum lately so I've been missing all the action. We are a small company deep in the backwoods of the south but we're up for the challenge heck I am flattered that you guys on the west coast have heard of our exhaust. I don't totally understand your objective ... is it to find out which is the best pipe on the market for a 2Fast engine? Or do you want to find out which pipe can be customized to make most power on a 2fast(such as the mods your referring you made to the trackside pipe? Nate I am fine with you testing a Mach-1 pipe and welcome a comparison with the others and even curious as to how they would stack up to the pipe which you have custom modified and optimized for the particular engine being tested which should have an obvious advantage . You seem to be most interested in the Mach-1 but I hope you condsider all the current offerings in this field probably 5 good exhausts available for less than 500$ ea. and including the 600$+ 2fast and profile.
I heard you mentioned there was only 1 mach-1 exhaust being used at the worcs series last year I am not sure who you were speaking of (I thought there may have been a couple there) but I would invite you to ask that owner if the pipe will hold up for a whole worcs series race or if it fades and get some honest real world feedback, that can be more important than dyno results. You are correct in saying that drivers win races and not motors but we find that all the fast drivers seem to be driving the fastest motors also, they don't usually settle for sub par equipment. I do not know you personally so I can only trust that you will shoot us straight on your findings, although it does appear that you favor the Trackside and that could make it hard to be objective. Also give us your proffesional opinion on fit, finish and overall quality of each, there are a couple that I have never seen in person.
Marc

jweidner

01-26-2012, 05:06 PM

Hey Guys,

I saw where this post was going a long time ago... I got the pop corn, soda and am enjoying the show!! This is why in any form of racing engine builders don't post dyno #'s. It takes a lot more than a high HP engine to win races.

A dyno should be used to establish a base line or starting point, and then used to improve your process, but they shouldn't be used for "bragging rights".

I've seen way too many times people are holding a 17HP dyno sheet at the track and their kids can't catch the last place guy.

A lot goes into having a competative set up and just because you have a competative set one day, doesn't mean you'll have it the next.

Thanks,
J Weidner

raidernut

01-26-2012, 07:07 PM

OK ill bite:D We ran the Mach I pipe all last season in the WORCS series with great results. Pulled nearly every holeshot with our R/T motor. As far as pipe heating up and fading, that is not true. This motor and pipe combo held up from the gate to the checkered flag. We ran it in both the 70 Open 30 minute long race, as well as the 45 minute 70 Production with zero loss in power. Here is an example of Buddys lap times with this combo on a MX only track for 30 minutes. Sure look consistent to me!

1 - BUDDY WILLIAMS
LA QUINTA, CA 16y - DRR

04:18.358
00.00.000

1 04:23.821
00.00.000

1 04:32.097
00.00.000

1 04:31.469
00.00.000

1 04:30.694
00.00.000

1 04:32.218
00.00.000

1 04:42.146
00.00.000
1

don bassani

01-26-2012, 08:18 PM

Not true for your motor raider nut,but at the nationals many real good tuners could not stop the heat/bog thing unless you mask it with out clutching motor to full potential or gearing real hard ect.. As far as lap times a racer can pick up faster times with a slower bike due to finding faster line as race goes on.Regardless of pipe and engine combo ,everyone has seen spring fade and some bogging on last lap and yet still one the race or put down a good lap.Perhaps MX on east coast is tougher on motor/clutching ect.. Make no mistake about it, the Mach 1 pipe is the best for r/t 70 at Nats last year,but it was tough to keep consistent-just like Nates dyno showed.

raidernut

01-26-2012, 08:49 PM

Mr. Bassani, not meant to be a thorn in your side, but i humbly consider myself one of those "real good tuners". I disagree that your east coast 8 minute motos are harder to tune for than a 45 minute moto out west. I can tune a clutch and pipe for 8 minutes in my sleep. Regardless, im not here to argue that we suddenly found a faster line on a Sunday morning after racing all weekend and a full friday practice. Just stating that i had no problem tuning a stage 6 70 with a mach I pipe without ANY noticable fading. I could care less what a dyno says, never have, the only dyno i need is my ears and eyes. I have managed in my lowely 8 years of mini existence to figure out how to keep a motor and clutch strong for 45 straight minutes. By your sons results there is not doubt you have figured these monsters out yourself, but to say that its harder to tune for 8 minutes of MX than 45 minutes of any racing is at best a stretch. At any rate, if properly tuned, there is no reason the average tuner should be concerned with the heat issue with this pipe in an mx moto. I maintain contact with several top atva youth dads, and i have heard about the bogging issue with the R/T setup, guess i just solved the puzzle.

don bassani

01-26-2012, 09:20 PM

Wow ! You are a super tuner !!!!

mmsoup

01-26-2012, 09:27 PM

Obviously everyone here needs to load their kids and quads up and meet somewhere in the middle of the country where it isn't snowing and hold the 1st annual Ya'll Come National.

Needs to be a combination of MX, XC and fields and needs to be at least an hour.

Winter.....................What is it good for?.........................

Absolutely Nothing

Yee Haw

FISH ON!

01-26-2012, 09:43 PM

Originally posted by mmsoup

Winter.....................What is it good for?.........................

Absolutely Nothing

Yee Haw

75 degrees down here today in the sunny south!

:blah:

Logan #34's Dad

01-27-2012, 02:17 AM

Okay, I'll come play in this one too.
It's my opinion that the only real way to compare fairly for "bolt-on" exhausts on the same engine is to eliminate the clutching factor all together.
A crank dyno would be King. Tune the carb in for each pipe, run it, those numbers would be legit. From there, pick your favorite pipe and clutch her in......
Nate, In one of your prior posts you state that you could dyno just the engine without clutching............have at it.

mmsoup

01-27-2012, 03:47 AM

Don't rub it in Todd

Been amazingly warm this year in the mountains though

chunky0071

01-27-2012, 06:50 AM

Originally posted by Logan #34's Dad
Okay, I'll come play in this one too.
It's my opinion that the only real way to compare fairly for "bolt-on" exhausts on the same engine is to eliminate the clutching factor all together.
A crank dyno would be King. Tune the carb in for each pipe, run it, those numbers would be legit. From there, pick your favorite pipe and clutch her in......
Nate, In one of your prior posts you state that you could dyno just the engine without clutching............have at it.

I agree!!!

Hetrick Racing

01-27-2012, 07:02 AM

Rock,,,,
I agree that was my point,I was trying to make.
I guess when my blood pressure was up lol...
If someone NEUTRAL had a engine dyno
I would get involved

Mark
I do agree that you know about clutches and making them work,but mx is completely different our xc is actually different as well.
Its all racing though and we all have to figure out our racing divisions.
I think they are all equal,in "know how" or "can do".

remember this mx is a sprint,xc and worcs are endurance marathons.

Its is similar to the Olympics, They are all the best at what they do,but not many can do both.

Also Todd,I would be more challenged by something Mark set up ,because he is one that can dabble in both

EthansDad

01-27-2012, 07:23 AM

ok, after 8 pages of fun, I'll chime in. I'm not a motor builder, but I know what fast is when I see it, and I do know how hard it is to do testing that leads to fair, meaningful results.

I don't have a dyno, but I use some high end test gear (I don't chat about on here) that gives repeatable, predictable GROUND results. IMO - that is the only way to baseline performance is what the quad will do on the ground, then see how it holds up to a moto. I really don't care what my HP is - doesn't matter.

sum up
1. HP numbers are pointless - they are only good for bragging and chest thumping off the track. a dyno is a great tool for tuning/motor building - but you still need to test it on the ground and track when done.

2. average folk (race dads looking to buy more speed) -need a "simple" way to know what speed is. they usually turn to HP numbers because its easy to think the higher number is faster - that will lead them to no where. Dyno results are a "clue" that you may have it right, not the authority -that is double true with CVT bikes- even with the best dyno operator at the helm - still true.

3. a pipe / motor shoot out is a GREAT idea. This is the wrong way to do it. I can think of no less 20 different combos of things that will mess up results - and to add to that the "bias" of one motor builders dyno - not a stab at any one motor builder - but if you're in the business of selling your fast stuff, how do you give fair data on others "fast stuff"? I think we'd get some good data, BUT I don't think everyone would every agree to it - and that defeats the purpose. it would just end up a he said / she said shoot out not a pipe/motor shoot out.

4. If I take a really good nat pipe and put it on a bike that is "not ready" - wrong intake, carb, clutch, ignition, etc - the results are crap. same pipe on the "right" setup -its gold. point being - without taking into account all the "other" stuff that makes the motor perform, a pipe test is going to give some USELESS results. now nat pipe "A" might like this brand of "other stuff" and nat pipe B might like "that brand" of other stuff. How do you get a fair baseline for testing?!?! the setups changed from bike to bike and test to test?? its not a pipe shoot out we need, its a "package" shoot out really.

5. we have a lot of motor builders on here that want to show their goods - that's exciting! I'd propose, though - that there needs to be a couple of test categories drawn up (like best for stock, best for RT/6, best for EV4, best for 2fast), the rules - must use that top end and stock cases - all else is "fair" and up to the motor builder how they put it together, THEN you equalize the testing by showing Elapsed time (ET ) of say 150ft and 300ft drag runs. Use your dyno to tune, but test results are ET. can even call out the rider weight, dirt type and incline of the drag run.

6. I really doubt this testing will come to be across all these motor builders - would be nice though and help the "average" buyer know whats what. top speed is not for everyone - a lot of folks needs to make a cost VS speed decision - showing a package for local (stk-ish), regional (mild mod) and nat (full monty) is a great way to show folks what fast is, yet keep it simple -everyone can understand a lower ET is faster!

This is a pic of some of my test output. no HP on here. This is done on bike, on the ground with rider on board. on the bottom axis (cut off in this pic) is time. so I can see in X amount of time what my top speed is, how quickly I got to top speed, how my CVT shifted out, and what rpm my motor made to get these results. speed is messed up on this one - had the gear ratios wrong in my test tool - fixed now. I can do this test on any bike, and as long as the drag strip and rider is similar, results are easy to compare bike to bike. can see here at the end of my run, I achieved greater than CVT unity meaning my CVT ratio is beyond 1:1, or could say turning the tranny input at faster than the motor rpms...a good goal. I am fully shifted out on this run. If I read this right, I can also see stall (clutch engage rpms), clutch shoe slippage, and other run CVT specific info that really only shows on the ground with rider on board getting it.

<a href="https://picasaweb.google.com/lh/photo/16G-N_Q4lBZCgJzoqS0-FtMTjNZETYmyPJy0liipFm0?feat=embedwebsite"><img src="https://lh3.googleusercontent.com/-Ff__Pv6S7DM/TyK4ppTaIoI/AAAAAAAAAOk/iK0LTDV06D8/s640/data%2520log3.PNG" height="252" width="640" /></a>

raidernut

01-27-2012, 08:08 AM

This last post nailed it on the head, I have exactly the same theory's as ethansdads has posted, i just cant explain it as well:)

raidernut

01-27-2012, 08:14 AM

Originally posted by Hetrick Racing
Rock,,,,
I agree that was my point,I was trying to make.
I guess when my blood pressure was up lol...
If someone NEUTRAL had a engine dyno
I would get involved

Mark
I do agree that you know about clutches and making them work,but mx is completely different our xc is actually different as well.
Its all racing though and we all have to figure out our racing divisions.
I think they are all equal,in "know how" or "can do".

remember this mx is a sprint,xc and worcs are endurance marathons.

Its is similar to the Olympics, They are all the best at what they do,but not many can do both.

Also Todd,I would be more challenged by something Mark set up ,because he is one that can dabble in both

I understand what your saying Rich and your right i wouldnt do the same setup for MX as XC, my point was just that i think Nates theory of a pipe not being as good as another because of heat build, is misleading to the average tuner. We ran our R/T motor at 14,000 rpm's for 40 minutes straight without issue. WORCS is not the same as XC, as there are no tight sections where the track may force you to slow down for a bit, it is basically fully pinned for 40-45 minutes. Our 2fast setup turned upwards of 15,000 rpm's for the same length of time. I cant imagine many average tuners MX setups being pushed harder than that.

edwardsp&b

01-27-2012, 09:04 AM

DISCLAIMER......Im am by no means as knowledgeable as any of the other guys posting. Im in the minor leagues as far as tuning compared to Hetrick, Marc Hot quads, Bassani and Eric. But.......

In lays terms it would seem to me that you running xc (14,000rpms pinned for 40 minutes, not blipping the throttle because of running out of track) your words. This means that your spring is more or less compressed for 40 minutes. Mx over here is different because of the tightness of the coures we run. Our spring would be (In my therory) getting compressed and releasing a thousand times during a race. Causing more heat, which in turn causes bogging. Which makes us clutch our bikes differently than you. Like others said on here before me, we are running a sprint, not a marathon.

I stayed away from this post because I dont like pissin matches....If a comparison is done why not Lorretta's? A real world comparison on the same track, with same conditions, will usually tell the tale.

Bryan

don bassani

01-27-2012, 09:17 AM

Not to be a thorn raidernut,but twisting a r/t 70 at 14000 rpm is masking the bog issue.Mach 1 pipe on r/t makes about 10 up at that rpm.The max hp is at 13200 and falls off like a cliff after that.If you run at 14000 that rpm it probably would not have any issues but your giving up serious performance.This is where a dyno helps , it lets you see what's happening. Max power at proper rpm.Like I previously stated when tuned to maximum output that hot pipe thing presented itself.

raidernut

01-27-2012, 09:26 AM

Originally posted by edwardsp&b
DISCLAIMER......Im am by no means as knowledgeable as any of the other guys posting. Im in the minor leagues as far as tuning compared to Hetrick, Marc Hot quads, Bassani and Eric. But.......

In lays terms it would seem to me that you running xc (14,000rpms pinned for 40 minutes, not blipping the throttle because of running out of track) your words. This means that your spring is more or less compressed for 40 minutes. Mx over here is different because of the tightness of the coures we run. Our spring would be (In my therory) getting compressed and releasing a thousand times during a race. Causing more heat, which in turn causes bogging. Which makes us clutch our bikes differently than you. Like others said on here before me, we are running a sprint, not a marathon.

I stayed away from this post because I dont like pissin matches....If a comparison is done why not Lorretta's? A real world comparison on the same track, with same conditions, will usually tell the tale.

Bryan

WORCS is different than MX, but as much as it is different it is the same. You see, we run a full lap on an MX track, before exiting the MX track and doing an off road loop. For instance our last race was at Glen Helen MX, former ATVA MX track. We ran the full MX track, in addition to several miles of off road before re-entering the mx track and doing it all over again. Im not sure how many laps you guys get in on a moto, but we average anywhere from 4-10 depending on the lengh of the off road section. So there is plenty of spring compressing going on. When i said pinned for 40 minutes i didnt mean it so literally, i apologize, we do sometimes slow down for a corner LOL.:p

hotquads1

01-27-2012, 09:28 AM

Don , You have to remember that you were running the old R/T pipe and Raidernut is running the newer R/t pipe that is tuned for several hundred more rpm . I also have never experienced a bogging issue with the r/t but I do think the porting is crucial and can be the cause in loss of low-end torque.

raidernut

01-27-2012, 09:34 AM

Originally posted by don bassani
Not to be a thorn raidernut,but twisting a r/t 70 at 14000 rpm is masking the bog issue.Mach 1 pipe on r/t makes about 10 up at that rpm.The max hp is at 13200 and falls off like a cliff after that.If you run at 14000 that rpm it probably would not have any issues but your giving up serious performance.This is where a dyno helps , it lets you see what's happening. Max power at proper rpm.Like I previously stated when tuned to maximum output that hot pipe thing presented itself.

Mr. Bassani no offense or disrespect meant but, we have never had to mask a bog issue with our setup, because we have never had one. As far as assuming that our HP is not maximized due to being above your 13200 rpm number, that would be true if we all used the original Mach I pipe exactly as sold without modification, and all had identical work done to the motor. Since you are a regular at the Nationals you probably already know that some of us like to "tweak" the parts to our likeings. I built two of these setups identically last year for two different riders, and neither had a bog issue either at 13200 RPM or 13875 where we run them.

FISH ON!

01-27-2012, 10:20 AM

I have a great idea and good marketing scheme for all the top engine builders on here...........

My son runs GNCC and was the 90CVT champion last year and the highest finishing CVT among all the class. Lets do something I will call "Engine Builder Wars". We will run a full series again this year (13 National races.) I will pay a negotiated fee (rent) to the engine builders who want in. They will give me their 90cc CVT to run at the GNCC events and the number of events will depend on the number of engine builders wanting to play. For instance, if i get 4 that want in, we'll run three back to back races for each motor. I will give each builder the specs on the quad, riders style and info on the track (tight woods, open fields, hilly, etc) The builder will have to build their baddest 90CVT with one requirement I will throw in........ the intake filter MUST be protected from the harsh XC racing conditions.

This will test more than just the motor. This is a test to see who can deliver to a customers needs. Thats what it is all about.......who can build the best motor package to match the rider and the race track. It also tests who can DELIVER on time as well because I wouldn't want to get the motor delivered in a box at the race track via UPS.

My son and I will post honest feedback in addition to the results. I can even establish a rating system with input from the builders of what to rate. The rolling chasis will be brand new at the start of the season at my expense with the best of everything for XC racing. Builders provide the motor, pipe, and intake filter protection. We'll make it fun and come up with some wild graphics that has "Engine Wars" all the motor builders on it along with any other contributors. I feel confident we could probably get some magazine coverage for such a thing. It would be bad to have an AMA MX rider and/or WORCS rider do the same thing to compare results.

How does that sound?

EthansDad

01-27-2012, 10:54 AM

Like how you think Todd :)

Don't think that would happen either. I think the real measuring stick for motors is, as it always has been in racing- who wins.

For motor builders in mx, it's more like:
- who got the hole shot
- who won
- in what series

testing/ shoot outs, hp numbers and other stuff is fun to talk about, but the best marketing is to show up with what ya got, and put up with a hole shot - then hammer the point home with a win. That's what I look at, specific to the series/class we plan on running.

hanker

01-27-2012, 11:00 AM

10 Laps wide open on a 1/2 mile oval sounds good to me. :D

LT80

01-27-2012, 11:33 AM

Wins...........
What about bringing a mid HP machine, with a inexpierienced dad/mechanic, and a rider with a God given talent for whipping butt and sending lil boys home to cry to mommy??
That's what I did. :devil: :devil:
I did learn. Angela won anyways.. :)

There goes the win theory..:D

How about giving young Mr.Bassani or young Mr. Williams a low HP machine? Think their results would change much? :eek2:

All add to my list::
5) let's race..

EthansDad

01-27-2012, 11:41 AM

There goes the win theory.

that's why I listed hole shot as #1, and win as #2 (for motor builders) - taking into account "little johnny never-lift" that could win on a pedal bike....

I think if a new motor builder showed up with a rider that needed some development to win a moto, BUT could get the holeshot - that's good marketing -at least better than arguing about HP numbers - people will talk about it and you can't deny who got their first.

raidernut

01-27-2012, 01:22 PM

Originally posted by LT80
Wins...........
What about bringing a mid HP machine, with a inexpierienced dad/mechanic, and a rider with a God given talent for whipping butt and sending lil boys home to cry to mommy??
That's what I did. :devil: :devil:
I did learn. Angela won anyways.. :)

There goes the win theory..:D

How about giving young Mr.Bassani or young Mr. Williams a low HP machine? Think their results would change much? :eek2:

All add to my list::
5) let's race..

I thought this thread was about pipes, not rider ability. But since you ask, i think young mr. williams would be just fine. He raced his first race last weekend in the production 250 class with his Raptor 250 with bone stock motor, against other highly modified ones build by Rage, etc. He was near dead last in the field of 19 going into the start around Talladega, and managed to finish a respectable 6th. I am keeping motor stock for the year, so well get an answer to your question Jack. Speaking of Angela, any chance of her making a comeback?

LT80

01-27-2012, 04:12 PM

"Speaking of Angela, any chance of her making a comeback?"
Nither of us has hit the lottery yet..So prolly not. :(

I'm thinking buddy will do just fine. That was my point anyways. :)

"I thought this thread was about pipes"
I thought it was dyno results..About pipes, or was it clutching, On dirt, off dirt, oh geez, Anyways............
That was over long ago. :blah:

Sorry Mr.McCoy, This thread has gone a long way off.
For what it's worth, I think Mr. McCoy wanted to give his honest findings for the good of all.
I've never thought it was for his personal gain.

Nate McCoy

01-28-2012, 12:24 AM

You guys can cover a lot of ground in one day. lol
A lot of great comments and ideas here, from those who seem sincere.

It sounds like a lot of people have been soured to dyno data, by poor, or even incompetent dyno testing (that which was unhelpful, or even misleading in the real-world). So many think that dyno testing is not relevant. And that is unfortunate. And I can't help but think that at least some, if not all, the builders on this site have successfully used dyno data to better their setups. Whatever the case, our focus remains somewhere between the dyno sheet and the [I]checkered flag[I/]. And we must continue to use [I]both[I/] in determining what is [I]best[I/].

Now there is almost too many side topics in the thread for anyone to keep track, so I'll try to re-focus on where we are at.

We will be dyno testing pipes.
The test motors that we will have at the dyno will be The Stage 6 70rt, and the 2-Fast 86cc motors, with common engine components. We will tell what the components are that we use. Again, our goal will be to test with common parts, for some objective comparisons that can be useful to the common person.

To over-simplify, we will do our best to evaluate each pipe to find its best potential with the common components, optimizing jetting, and ignition timing, etc. ,to find the highest possible power/ rpm peaks, in a good-case scenario that is arguably much easier to find on the dyno than the real-world.
Then we will move to the more grueling real-world load/heat too see how they like "abuse". We will monitor various heat, airflow, and air/fuel ratio, and various other things, to help determine what is optimal for the engine setup with each pipe, and for our own assessment of what the "modded" potential for the pipes are as well.

What we will [I]not[I/] be able to do is test every imaginable intake,reed,carb,ignition, porting, dome configuration, case volume combination that has ever been run. As much as we would love to,:ermm: our time will not permit it.

Pipes in the running so far that should be here by next Friday:
2-Fast
Profile Performance
Mach 1 (2010)
Trackside
Stage 6
and maybe Hetrick Gen3, if we can get it here from Vegas in time...lol
Others are unconfirmed.

And to once again settle some fear, and lower some blood pressure: I have no allegiance, nor am I connected with any of the mini quad pipe builders in any financial way. I am in no way biased against any of the pipes, (except for my experience with the Stage 6 pipe. And that is too limited to be dogmatic at this point. :)

It is possible exists that each of the pipes have strong points that will equal them out on the grand scale. And it is also possible that the power/consistency/affordability/ fit-&finish/and ease to tune to, all favor one pipe. But that's unlikely.

Hetrick Racing

01-28-2012, 06:33 AM

Just so you know if you do happen to acquire one of my gen 3 pipes that there are 2 completely different.
A 90 and a 70
The 70 pipe was built before the rt came out specific for the Polini evo 3,and it ended up working rather well on the Malossi and most other 70cc as well as the evo4.
Then we did a bit of testing on the 50cc evo and Malossi with great results.
The 90 pipe worked well on any 90 I have tested , some better some worse depending on configuration

quadrider79

01-28-2012, 07:12 AM

I know for a fact, when Rich put his 70 pipe on my son's bike it increased the HP by 2.5 and that was just taking one pipe off and putting his 70 pipe on. NO other changes were made. Now I won't say which pipe was taken off but it's in your list of pipes to try. That was on a Evo 2 cylinder. I then tried it with a Evo 4 with even better results.

heepers

01-28-2012, 06:07 PM

Absolute traction 300' drag or 200' drag with highest rpm (concrete,blacktop etc.)post times and mph. If this data can't easily be had very ?able on who's tunning and or building these machines. A certain consideration would be for the gncc guys seemingly needing tobe a bit more mild for longevity. 2cents

machwon

01-29-2012, 09:03 PM

Thought I would share some testing we did on a malossi 90 using my RB Racing pipe we have built. We were tuning in a new 30mm stage 6 carb and were working on using a new stainless spring by Kombat.

I also had a stage 6 RT motor to test buy my pipe doesn't work due to the outlet angle. Sounds like its time to make gen II.

Does anyone know, are the stage 6 pipes interchangable on the 2-fast cylinders? I'm thinking if I send Nate my pipe for comparison it might not work on the 2 fast either?

Nate McCoy

01-31-2012, 09:31 AM

You can get a flange for the r/t 70 that basically fit the the standard stock-style flange. And that flange style is the one used by the 2-fast.

We do have some pipes on the way that the owners might not want the details published. And some might be waiting to see how they stack up to decide. Lol But our goal is to test-n-tell. We are still working on it, and still plan to test at least the pipes already on the list in just a few days. :)

hotquads1

02-03-2012, 12:19 PM

Has testing begun ? Did all the pipes arrive?

Nate McCoy

02-04-2012, 12:00 AM

No. And no. lol.
We got one pipe in yesterday. And two more this evening. We will have an opportunity to start at least some testing tomorrow. We will keep you posted...

Nate McCoy

02-04-2012, 10:06 PM

We had bikes and pipes at the dyno today. But we had two race bikes with priority/urgent status that consumed the day of tuning. :( We will now have to wait more than a week for another opportunity. I must say that I am a little disappointed. But we simply ran out of time.
Maybe we could have a couple more pipes by them too.

asadad00

02-06-2012, 09:23 PM

sorry can't send the mach-1 r/t pipe sold engine and pipe this week.

asadad00

02-11-2012, 06:46 PM

Nate done any testing yet ?

Nate McCoy

02-16-2012, 07:01 AM

We are scheduled to go back to the dyno this saturday.

Nate McCoy

02-18-2012, 11:00 PM

We did get to do some testing today.
The tests today were done with the cvt eliminated. So the power curves observed are simular to an engine dyno, in that the shape of the power curve is seen, and the rpm where peak power is obtained can be determined easily.
The tests are all rear-wheel, however. And although the test meathod does appear to hinder the peak power readings a bit, it is consistant. So, we can find comparitive data from this meathod.
We did have some difficulty getting a happy setup on a couple of the pipes, and we are assuming that it is not the pipes fault. And hope to give them another shot as soon as time permits.
But we did get some great info.
First let's look at the 2-Fast pipe.

The Good: It was one of the easiest to setup. It was as close to bolt-and go as anyone could imagine.
It also had a notably broad power band, as your will notice on the graph. That means the clutching should be a little easier.

The Bad: It did have some negative aspects as well.
To begin, it was not the nicest fitting pipe, imho. The huge center section was hard to away from stuff that didn't like to hot-like your plastic and your leg...lol
It did exhibit a torque slide as it heated that was significant. So it becomes a greater challenge to clutch for the hole-shot, and still have good clutching after everything getts good and hot, a little futher in the race. Nevertheless, the broad torque curve that it has will help ofset some of the challenge of the torque shift.

It looks like on this particular motor 12,500 would be a great target rpm...

Nate McCoy

02-18-2012, 11:31 PM

Here you go:

asadad00

02-19-2012, 06:45 PM

Nice information, it falls right where I had heard, do you have any torque #'s? Can you graph the runs with the stock trackside results on same graph? Maybe the best run achieved by each pipe could be all put on one graph(stacked) for easy comparison, that would be cool! How many pipes did you have arrive?

Nate McCoy

04-12-2012, 12:12 PM

We have completed testing for now. The pipe shootout was a lot of fun, and we are able to get some relevant comparison between these pipes on the 2-fast motor that we were able to test.

I plan to post some more dyno sheets, but for now I just want to summarize the final results.

First, it was our desire to test the motors with the cvt eliminated so that we could honestly compare the torque curves and present an opinion that was a fair comparison between the pipes. We could consider then not only what and where they make peak power, but how that peak changed as everything heat soaks. Something critically important in the WORCS-type series.

So our first day at the dyno, we tried to. We tested The 2-Fast, Trackside, Mach 1, Profile, PSE, all commercially available. We also tested a couple of custom pipes that are not from the ATV industry.
However, a couple of the higher rpm pipes did very poorly as we attempted to test in this manner. That wasn't surprising in that the motor had to start the pull from about 2000rpm, well below the "pipe". Yet, the lower rpm pipes were "closer" to where the pipe begins to work, so they were at an advantage.
While were able to get some testing data, the higher rpm setups seemed to not do very well. It seemed as if the time to recover from the low rpm start was to slow, and took too long. We also were suspecting that the ignition was having some issues in the higher rpm ranges. So we didn't post the any info at that time, so that we could be sure that we were being fair.

The second dyno day, we tried to test though the cvt, and began the long process of clutching to find the power. We had changed to the Stage 6 ignition, and also tested a wide variety of timing on the various pipes as well.

We went through the testing of the pipes again, Spending the most time with the Profile and Mach 1, as they were the ones that we had hoped to see some improvements on.

Results:

Things were not as close as we had expected. It is clear that all of the pipes that we tested are very different design-in appearance and in function.

Hot-The pipes that worked the best hot were the 2-Fast, and the Trackside.

The 2-fast, more than any of the other was happier the hotter. It slowly built more and more power for several runs. When it was tuned well, it would go from around 13hp cold, to around 17hp hot, and it would sustain the 17hp. The rpm shift from cold to hot was around 600rpm, and not a serious issue because it had a good power curve. It makes good power before the peak, and has good overrev. Clutching should be straight forward, and the power is good. But it might not be the easiest to get a hole-shot with since it's slow to heat/make power.

The Trackside pipe started a little stronger that the 2-fast cold. It went from around 15hp cold to 18hp hot. The peak power changed from cold runs to hot runs by about 500rpm. The Trackside seemed a little short on overrev. So With the Trackside pipe, an error to watch for is a clutching setup that builds too many rpm.

Cold-
The Profile and Mach 1 were in their element when all was cold. as a matter of fact the colder the better.
The Profile had a slight edge on the second runs, meaning that it didn't fade quite as fast. But both acted very similar with power starting as high as 16hp, but then fading to 14hp fairly quickly.
Both of these pipes must be setup with the "hole-shot" in mind. And since they work at higher rpm, the lower load on the clutching that must be run with them will help minimize the fading. In any event, the peak power on both of these pipes peak shifted around over 1000rpm from cold to hot. With these pipes clutching prowess is most valuable.

The PSE pipe , really, was not good at anything on this motor. It had a peak power shift that was over 2000rpm, and then it's heat-retaining properties would have detonated the motor if we would have tried to make it work very hot, or with too much load.

[The other test pipe that we tested did make the most power, and had the least torque shift, but was not a fair comparison, in that it was unfitted straight pipe]

Again the motor was tested was 86cc 2Fast topend, (ported), custom domes (would be similar to stock dome around .027" sq.) on a stage 6 44mm crank, Stage 6 reed, Koso-style intake.Malossi ignition tested from .060-.090", and Stage 6 IGN. .140" .156" grounded, and grounded, 28mm PWK 120 to 160 mains, also 30mm oko, 120-145main.

The mass airflow peak, best runs:
2Fast-58.9cfm
Trackside-60.5cfm
Profile-55.2cfm
Mach1-49.8cfm
PSE-47.7cfm

The mass airflow is part of the indication of how hard the pipe is drawing air, and trapping. Higher airflow is more stable. And less likely to detonate. All told, more airflow increases the capability of sustaining more power for a longer period of time.

All of the pipes that were tested were unmodified, as they would come from the manufacturer. The engine setup does play a role in the ultimate outcome, and different porting, and dome combinations were not tested, and would change the results as well.
The Mach 1 was is last years version, and it would stand to reason that the new one better.

We have gone to great lengths to be fair with the pipes that we had to test, and spent the most time with the pipes that were lower power to be sure we had given them a fair shot on this motor. And we believe that the characteristics that we observed in each pipe, though results will not be identical, will have some relevance to similar motors that are out there.

FISH ON!

04-19-2012, 03:37 PM

Thanks for the test Nate. The only thing it lacks is a comparison of the newer pipes that most of the East coast top riders are using on their 2fast motors. Any plans for more testing with a MaxRPM, new Mach 1 or Hetrick Gen III pipe?

Nate McCoy

04-23-2012, 01:50 PM

We would be glad to. But at this time we do not have any of them lined up to test.
Because there it's always room for improvement, testing will be ongoing. At this point, we are looking at doing a more affordable 90cc setup that makes the same power. So far the power seems to be "enough" for now. But that can change as soon as someone shows up with something faster. And someone likely will. Lol
So we are also working on something faster than our 2fast setup as well....it just never ends, it seems...

Nate McCoy

02-09-2013, 09:37 AM

I apologize not to have revisited this thread sooner, but the dyno data now has a year of validation behind it.
As all who are familiar with the WORCS series are aware, WORCS races are grueling. Power and reliability are more evident than in most other series that have much tighter tracks, and shorter races.
And the 2 fast motor that was used in this thread for testing was raced in the 8-15 year Sport class. In that class there were many other 2-Fast setups with the most modern versions of pipes we tested. And the motors built by those considered the best builders on this sight.
The result:
The dyno didn't lie.
Kyler Thau, won every race with this Trackside piped 90 he entered, pulling hotshots, and outrunning the other bikes with an average win by substantial margins. (Hearty congratulations to Kyler!)

"WORCS 8-15 Year Sport Champion, undefeated. (First perfect season in WORCS 12 year history)"
There is no doubt in my mind that the Trackside pipe has the greatest potential of any of the 90 pipes on the market.

There can be a lot of confusion about what are the best components in this industry because so many people are left to the opinion of a select few "experts". And while I have no reason to believe that those people are intentionally misleading anyone, every business person had to give advise that murderous then in business. That's understandable, and justifiable. Ever builder, parts seller etc has certain items that make them more money than others. They need to sell then to stay in business, in many cases. And if they are "good" parts, with everything setup well together(motor/clutching/suspension etc.) They have a good combination. And win races.
But in the case of the Trackside pipe, there is not as much profit in selling it, there is no builder dependent on selling them, so it's superiority to others on the market is easy to ignore.
And the fact that it makes power without having to be leaned to the edge, makes for the most reliable combination. Reliability = affordability.
And while the r/t 70 that we did won the WORCS 70cc Production, and the 70cc Open championship s, the higher rpm stage6 pipe setup, like many of the other 90 pipes, are just harder on parts. And was not nearly as reliable as the lower rpm Trackside setup. The 14,000+ rpm setup broke a crank, and lost a belt over the season.

That's my conclusion. I hope it doesn't offend anyone.