DynoTech's AmSnow Adirondack Shootout Apex dyno results

[shadow44]

There are some well-meaning people posting stuff on this site that is incorrect. Those of you DTR members who follow what I really do know that when I replaced the original sf901 electronics with new 902 stuff, I had my own HTG1000 triple edge on the dyno. 225hp with early electronics, 225hp with the new electronics. I have the original absorber, and original torque measuring strain gauge. If I hang xxx lb of torque calibration weight and adjust properly, then the hp results are identical. It's just math, whether it's a cheap $100,000 dyno like mine or a million dollar dyno (?)--torque x rpm / 5252=hp. The SF tech who came here for two days to train me on the new system understands why I wanted to see identical numbers before and after on the same engine--all the nascar teams he's trained when they've switched to the new 902 stuff have done the same thing, with the same result. It's just math. But it made me feel warm and fuzzy seeing it for myself on my own engine. And since I've upgraded the electronics, I've had several engines here for repeat tuning/ testing and of course all is the same. Hentges racing has a 600 polaris mod mule engine that they use for all testing/ evaluation, and it made xxx hp with 901 stuff and identical xxx hp with 902 stuff. It's just math. Then we always use STP J-607 correction factor (adjusts the HP to what it should be a 60 degrees F sea level baro, dry air). I always thought it would be good to have a "J-snowmobile" correction factor for sea level baro, 0 degrees F dry air which would be considerably higher hp than the J-607.

Those of you DTR members who follow my detailed tech info know that some sled manufacturers have, understandably, wildly differing EFI calibrations from 70 degrees F (where EPA testing is said to be done) to 20 degree F winter air. So when the preproduction broken-in 2011 Apex was wickedly lean at 70 degrees F, and we fixed it by adding fuel, it would have been inappropriate to report that, and cause needless concern since when the cold air arrived all could have been perfect. But as we would see with the brand new zero mile Apex that D&D brought here for the shootout in 25 degreeF air, it was equally lean on top end. Not lean to create deto like would probably happen with most two-strokes, but lean to make considerably less than max power, but excellent fuel mileage (like gas engine airplanes do--setting mixture to max power for takeoff then leaning out even more for cruising mileage) and perhaps lower emissions.

But all of us greedy bastards want max power--screw the mileage and emissions--so adding fuel is a cheap way to do that on the 2011 Apex. But I doubt that adding duel to the band new Apex we had here would bring it up to the power of the perfectly tuned preproduction Apex that Woody brought here. Was the difference just breakin miles? DTR members know the HP difference we saw several years ago on the Shootout RX1 from out of the crate, to after running 8 hours, full load, at WOT (!!) on my dyno. But could there be some mechanical difference between the prepro Apex to the production Apex?

It's still December and we have good early season conditions out east--Apex riders are racking up breakin miles, and people are making hotrod parts. So it's just a matter of time before we glean more info on this new machine, along with exact fuel tuning requirements. Plus we will know the exact value of added hotrod parts. But please don't assume that your out of the crate 2011 Apex is as powerful as Woody's dyno-tuned preproduction 2011 Apex. It's not the dyno calibration--it's the brand-new 0 mile machine and its extremely lean tuning vs one with a bunch of miles and perfect dyno tune, and perhaps some differences in the machines themselves.

I don't think anyone was claiming you would be anything but completely honest...absolutely not! I know you have the highest level of integrity and you do your best to produce accurate and repeatable power figures, every time you run your equipment and I mean that!

The question I have, in reading the original results from the pre-production testing last year, compared to the results you got this year...of course 1800 miles on these engines makes a difference. The part I'm missing and correct me if I'm wrong is "why wasn't it made clear that the base-line test on the pre-production engine and the subsequent result from that test (~164HP), how did I miss the fact that an aftermarket fuel controller was used to produce those numbers? How was anybody to know the pre-production sled wasn't stock?
Did Yamaha know the engine wasn't stock and the results of the tests may have been lower than observed, without the use of the fuel controller?

There was no disclamer present on the add material I read in my dealers show room to indicate an aftermarket performance enhancing device was used to produce the numbers for the pre-production sled.

I didn't see a disclaimer stating the output for the 2011 production engines would be different from the pre-production figures.

As far as I know, Fuel Injection, even non-closed loop injection takes sensor input to adjust for differences in air temp, BP, knock etc and would maintain the proper A/F ratio to account for the "fueling" differences between you testing in the warmer and cooler air recently.

I don't know, maybe I'm being a bit over the top here and I certainly "get it" with regard to the 2011 APEX being a great sled but man...this stuff is clearly used to entice people (as indicated by Yamaha's use, reproduction and posting of the Dynotech data on the actual sleds in the dealer show room and in every magazine I've read) to make a decision to part with 15K dollars and that is serious coin!

The reason this is exceedingly more important in this case is due the the weight of the APEX sled...the thing needs more power than anything else it competes with to run at least as good as the sleds it competes with!

I don't know...just a little frustrated with a tendancy for dishonesty by all of these sled manufacturers at times.

I hope 1800 miles turns up 10hp and all this goes away!

I stand by my original posts point, which was simple...purchase a fuel controller for your 2011 APEX and hope 8 -10HP shows up when the sled gets 1800 miles on it.

The bolded is bang on...I don't think guys are desputing the numbers so much as nobody was expecting 163hp...but why was it not mentioned in the original dyno testing...in my eyes that's false advertising.

 

[WeSled2]

What is a DTR member?

 

[SuperStroker!]

Dynos are necessary evils. We need them to help us develop and improve our platforms. But they cannot and should not be used for predictors of real world performance.

THANK YOU...ALWAYS whenever someone says something about anything on here..how much HP does this add, does that add? If we were worried about HP #s wed be riding the new cfr cat right now...seems to me everyone forgot about what this site is intended for...to help other Yammie riders, not to bash one another. if someone doesnt like someones elses dyno #s...go buy one or keep it to yourself, in a perfect world...Hell ive got 2 Hauck Powersports stickers on my sleds (one on each side).. they gave me a few extra HP...TRY THEM EVERYONE,IT WAS EVEN ON THE DYNO!
Ask Allen, i bet he can hook you up too

Is asking reasonable questions and making reasonable points "bashing anyone"?

I would still like an answer to my question...here, I'll restate it for you.

1-Why was a performance enhancing device used to establish base-line power figures for the pre-production tests?

2-Why was the fact that the use of a performance enhancing device left out of the reported information, which was widely distributed amongst potential 2011 Yamaha customers?

3-If points 1 and 2 are correct, why did Yamaha post the information on its web site and place the same refference to the Dynotech information on its sleds to entice the purchase of their product?

4-Did Yamaha know the numbers they were reporting were produced on a modified engine?

Yamaha must agree with the numbers Dynotech reported...its not like the company who designed the motor, doesn't know exactly how much power the motor makes (it is my hope this is the case and the engine output is reported officially by Yamaha as 163)!

You don't think "leaving out the point that the numbers reported by Dynotech failed to disclose the fact that during pre-production testing last spring THE ENGINE WASN'T STOCK and the subsequent use of those numbers by Yamaha in advertising may have been misrepresentation of the truth"?

By your comment above...you've confirmed that anything Dynotech reports has no value and might as well be a comic strip read. You also confirmed the acceptance of possible dishonestly and potential misrepresentation of "truth in advertising"

Don't worry everyone...the next report from Dynotech will have recovered the entire 12 HP and Yamaha, Dynotech, Woody the Yamaha dealer and everyone else will be off the hook for this!

This is the point and this is what sucks!

 

[FrostyNutz]

I can answer some of the other various questions...
I am not sure about the ECU in the 2011 as being reprogrammable or not as I haven't had the chance to take one apart. I would assume it is although Yamaha does not give this capability to their dealers AFAIK. IMO this is a costly mistake if you do have an issue with the ECU calibration once production starts.

I agree ! I don't like piggyback systems and a full standalone on this sled is not an option . IMO ,, if they detuned for fuel mileage than we should have the option to get a performance reflash from our Dealer.

2006-2010 Apex's are reprogrammable. I can read them out and reprogram them.

So it's possible the 2011 will be as well ...hmm

All of the ones I have taken apart so far do account for changes in IAT, ECT, BARO among other things to correct the fueling.
I haven't seen any information yet if a 2011 ECU has a knock sensor or not.

It must have knock control of some sort. question is . If it detects knock or a lean condition does it pull timing or add fuel ? I've been tuning boosted cars for years on piggybacks and the AEM V1 standalone. This sled makes me feel like i'm stuck with hands in my pockets . All this talk of a lean top end makes me want to add a wideband now so I can see for myself. I'm at sea level and temps do drop below -20*c . If they were showing lean at 20*F than how lean will it be at -20*c (-4F ) ? The Baro sensor and IAT sensor should dictate the amount of fuel to maintain that stock lean top end regardless of the temps. I just can't help wondering if it's going to pull timing at some point.

If anyone who has a 2011 can get me the numbers written on the ECU or take a picture of it I can try to figure out what is in it. 2006-2010's are made by Mitsubishi.

I'll get them for you ASAP !

 

[sk-rx1]

I have to agree with Superstroker. We as buyers, or potential buyers, were led to believe by a series of info coming from both Dynotech and Yamaha that a stock 2011 Apex made 164 HP on a dyno, a repected dyno shop who carefully corrects for all the variables that he can correct for.. Now we're learning that the sled as tested was not stock, but that fuel was added. I'm betting that Yamaha knew this all along,and Dynotech just forgot to telll eveyone. Seems clearly deceitful to me and possibly illegal. Some may remember that Yamaha did this back in 2002 when the Viper was 1st released. They sent dealers sheets on the new sled promising 17HP over the SXR 700. Turned out to be like 7 HP. I'm sure I will be happier about this if we got more than 3 inches of snow from the big noreaster............

 

[RunninRX1]

Since the ECU does not have a O2 sensor, it cannot detect or measure what the fueling is at. All it can do is look at various sensor inputs and command X fuel based on the fuel calibrations in the ECU.
If it does have a knock sensor (and I am not sure as I have not seen the wiring diagram), it will retard the timing based on the knock severity and duration.

 

[SuperStroker!]

Since the ECU does not have a O2 sensor, it cannot detect or measure what the fueling is at. All it can do is look at various sensor inputs and command X fuel based on the fuel calibrations in the ECU.
If it does have a knock sensor (and I am not sure as I have not seen the wiring diagram), it will retard the timing based on the knock severity and duration.

Understood.

"Closed Loop" means there is an O2 sensor feeding exhaust gas information back to the ECU. In the case for the APEX, it is "non closed loop" controlled.

But the sensors in play on the APEX ECU certainly can account for changes in air temp and density differences of the two sessions at Dynotech...spring and fall.

I would expect, due to the FI ECU, if the A/F would be lean in the spring, it would equally lean in the cold...not LEANER!

 

[jamesc]

i've built engines, raced cars, dragsters and bikes for over 30 years including a national championship and i've never seen one dyno make a pass. it's a tool nothing else why people get all in a tizzy over numbers is beyond me. how many people that are squawking about the dyno numbers are actually capable of extracting all the performance these sleds have? personally i think anyone that would spend apex money on a sled based off some "reported" dyno numbers is foolish. look at the overall machine, previous performance, improvements, strengths and weaknesses and decide on the best machine for your application. as much as the performance junky in me would like to have an apex the logical side felt the vector ltx better filled my needs.

get over the numbers and go riding already, it's a lot more fun than hammering on a bloody keyboard.

 

[tcona-AGT]

i've built engines, raced cars, dragsters and bikes for over 30 years including a national championship and i've never seen one dyno make a pass. it's a tool nothing else why people get all in a tizzy over numbers is beyond me. how many people that are squawking about the dyno numbers are actually capable of extracting all the performance these sleds have? personally i think anyone that would spend apex money on a sled based off some "reported" dyno numbers is foolish. look at the overall machine, previous performance, improvements, strengths and weaknesses and decide on the best machine for your application. as much as the performance junky in me would like to have an apex the logical side felt the vector ltx better filled my needs.

get over the numbers and go riding already, it's a lot more fun than hammering on a bloody keyboard.

 

[BETHEVIPER]

I think these are considered "Speed Density" like the early 5.0 mustangs. We richened those up by just installing a lower temperature thermostat.

 

[evil eagle]

I think these are considered "Speed Density" like the early 5.0 mustangs. We richened those up by just installing a lower temperature thermostat.

Did the old mustangs have a map sensor to measure vacum to determain load?
I don't belive the apex operates that way. I think it just uses throttle pos, rpm, air temp or something to determain the fuel map, well at least I think it is.

 

[BETHEVIPER]

I think your right, only other thing in the mix for an apex is the barometer. I havent noticed any other sensor that could pull map.
I wonder if it is reading speed of sled compared to speed of engine, combined with tps, it could come up with a general predetermined load. If this was true, sleds on track dynos compared to engine dynos would change dramaticly in fuel usage/timing so I doubt they did that.

Too bad they hadn't installed a map as well as an o2 sensor, Those two items could make the off throttle mileage alot higher, well, a little higher anyway.

 

[SuperStroker!]

Still not getting it...

how many people that are squawking about the dyno numbers are actually capable of extracting all the performance these sleds have?

I can...and every race we won, the engine program was built around the countless hours we spent on the dyno!

You're correct, not everyone is capable of getting the power these sleds make, to the ground.

That's not the point!

Those people who are not as capable, experienced or aware as we are, what it takes to go fast...EAT THOSE BIG NUMBERS FOR LUNCH!

Regular people who don't have our background BUY SLEDS BECAUSE DYNOTECH published a number...in this case it was nearly 164HP for the APEX and YAMAHA MOTOR COMPANY USED THAT INFORMATION to "real em in"!

That is the point!

 

[jamesc]

Regular people who don't have our background BUY SLEDS BECAUSE DYNOTECH published a number...in this case it was nearly 164HP for the APEX and YAMAHA MOTOR COMPANY USED THAT INFORMATION to "real em in"!

so you have that much faith in advertising? ever heard the phrase "believe half of what you see and none of what you hear"?

if these "regular" people are really in such need of power i would strongly suggest skipping NA and go right to forced induction.

Dynos are necessary evils. We need them to help us develop and improve our platforms. But they cannot and should not be used for predictors of real world performance.

100% true my point exactly, and people going on a rant isn't going to change that. there have been more threads about dyno numbers in every possible configuration of internal combustion engine than you could shake a stick at. IF you're a manufacture, builder and / or tuner than dynos have a purpose, other than that basing a purchase off one is foolish, same as all the hoopla that surrounds flow benches and cylinder head flow numbers.

 

[jamesc]

i believe the ECM uses cam position, crank, throttle position, ambient and manifold pressure, coolant temperature, speed and intake charge sensors but i'm a total rookie with sleds. i'm guessing all they would need to go closed loop is the O2 sensor and the appropriate fuel maps. thing is though how often would it actually be in closed loop. i would think the TPS and engine loads / speeds change too much on sleds.