SuperStroker! said:dynotechjim said: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.