SuzukiHayabusa.org
TECHNICAL => ALL MOTOR TALK => Topic started by: tyboogie on February 08, 2012, 04:15:18 PM
-
Understand this has been spoke on before, but are the bored throttle bodies for the gen 1 worth it. I see at leats 3 builders advertising them RCs, Lee, Carpenter.
-
your ? is flawed.
it is like asking is a thropy wife benefical?
in otherwords add the following
what,bore head and cams?
-
1397 may go to 14441, or 1507..head 405 in 395 ex cams
-
1397 may go to 14441, or 1507..head 405 in 395 ex cams
Post pics of the 14441 build!!!
-
1397 may go to 14441, or 1507..head 405 in 395 ex cams
not worth the money too small cams and bore
-
14441 bore!! I think you need more than bored throttle bodies :hys:
-
...it is like asking is a thropy wife benefical?
I've been wrestling with that question myself. :D
-
Going to the dyno soon with bored throttle bodies will know results within a week with the same motor and cam combination as mentioned above
-
...it is like asking is a thropy wife benefical?
I've been wrestling with that question myself. :D
That was wife #1 Karl
I up graded and cost me less money :tu:
-
Thanks to all with helpful info, and to those with the unnecessary comments please stay off the thread. Anyone can see it was a typo guess some people don't have anything to better to do.
-
Thanks to all with helpful info, and to those with the unnecessary comments please stay off the thread. Anyone can see it was a typo guess some people don't have anything to better to do.
Are you kidding with that comment?? Its the internet bro. Its full of jokesters like myself :tu:
-
Pat I understand that, and it's all good. :thumb:, but unless I have had some sort of a prior contact with someone I keep my comments to myself even if they are a just kidding sort of thing. Just me showing respect. I just have to deal with at least one :ahole: a day and had just wanted some useful info...Never have had any contact with the other two..
-
Thanks to all with helpful info, and to those with the unnecessary comments please stay off the thread. Anyone can see it was a typo guess some people don't have anything to better to do.
twisted knickers, eh?
Cheese was asking a a real question, which you sort of answered.
What's the issue?
BTW: I am getting ready to test a set of oversized Montogmery TB's & custom Hartley stacks against stock TB's on a maxxed out 1635 Carpenter kit. Unless yr stacks are OS to match the TB's...
-
All in good fun ty...if im the worst ahole you meet on here, then you haven't met kirk :hys: so...my appologies.....but ya might wanna loosen up some. And by the way.....im 5'10 medium build and I like long walks on the beach. Lmao, now you know me
-
Entropy was just seeing if the bored TBs worked or was just hype... Pen well since you put it out there just to let you know I am not a cheap date...lol
-
Entropy was just seeing if the bored TBs worked or was just hype... Pen well since you put it out there just to let you know I am not a cheap date...lol
what part of my answer didn't you understand. IT IS NOT BIG ENOUGH, IT IS NOT BIG ENOUGH,IT IS NOT BIG ENOUGH,IT IS NOT BIG ENOUGH,IT IS NOT BIG ENOUGH!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
Damm don't ask a question if you do not like the answer :td:
-
The problem I have seen with bored TBs is that while increasing the internal volume would seem like an automatic way to gain HP especially on bigger ccs what happens is:
1-The profile through the TBs is changed.
2-Those '3 ridges' inside of the IN side of the TB are trip fences, designed to induce turbulence before the butterflies are removed.
Changing the profile of the tbs and removing the trip fences will lower HP....but after a while the bigger displacement/cam combos can benefit from the larger cfm values.....
But personally for these reasons I would not be surprised if people seen a loss with bored TBs on many applications.
Ideally....if there was a way to make an exact copy of a tb just a few MM bigger without changing profile or trips, along with properly matched cams, larger displacement, head porting, valve size (*and here one never discussed) but ALSO changing the distance between TB and head will all have a difference.
~jh
-
bahahahahahahahahahaha :D
now johnnie has his knickers in a twist. :hys:
Hey JC, Carpenter is with you, he said even a 1635 doesn't really benefit from OS TB's or OS valves.
But we'll find out if a 1635 with his new short intake head & bigger valves & even bigger cams works better with OS TB's.
It be a direct comparison with Greenie's (stock TB's) NICE results on yr dyno a couple mo ago.
Can a 1635 make even more hp???
We'll see in less than a mo. :thumb:
Karl
-
Ok Johnnycheese I was just replying back to Entropy about why I asked the question. I understood from your 2nd reply that with my current setup it would not be of much help. I do not understand your last post, me not liking the answer? Who said I did not like it?? I know I did not reply back insulting your experience with the TBs, so why the last post?
-
...
Ideally....if there was a way to make an exact copy of a tb just a few MM bigger without changing profile or trips, along with properly matched cams, larger displacement, head porting, valve size (*and here one never discussed) but ALSO changing the distance between TB and head will all have a difference.
~jh
JH,
that's the experiment we'll be doing on JC's dyno.
(matching the stacks to the TB's is also an issue, solved by a call to John Hartley)
I'm building that motor right now, woo-HOO!
Experiments are cool.
-
JH,
that's the experiment we'll be doing on JC's dyno.
(matching the stacks to the TB's is also an issue, solved by a call to John Hartley)
I'm building that motor right now, woo-HOO!
Experiments are cool.
I dont know if John has developed an airbox for the V but without helmholtz these engines loose a good 10-15%. All the pics I have seen have open stacks.
BTW:
I have a set of thin wall TBs if you want to experiment.
~JH
-
i port matched my gen1 throttle bodies to k7 gixxer 52mm short stacks,prob affected torque but i dont need more torque on my 1507 swb,the hp up top is pretty good.Turbulence is for torque,flow is for hp when the rpm allows the port speed to create sufficient combustion turbulence,so pick your priority with the build and go with that.
-
In our testing we have seen power gains with our bored 47 mm throttle bodies on stock zx14 engines of 8hp.
On a built 1570 we have seen 13 hp. Dan Millholland among many other people will confirm this.
On the gen 2 busas replacing the 44 mm units with our 47mm units will pick up about 6 hp on a stock motor and 13 hp on a busa motors with a ported head and cam. Cecil at HTP is one of many that will verify this as well.
Now here's the deal. All bored throttle bodies are not the same. Ours are bored all the way threw and are never smaller than the butterfly diameter. There are at least two laces selling "bored" throttle bodies out there that have the stock size blades or they leave a huge lip in the bore. Don't even waste your time with them. We tested them and they don't do a damn thing.
If there is any part of the bore that is smaller than the dia of the blade then don't waste your time with them.
With that being said, the gen 1 busa throttle bodies are 46 mm stock and there is very little gain with going to a larger bore on the gen 1 busa throttle bodies ON A STOCK MOTOR. However, on a built motor of 1507 or bigger there is a gain with going to the larger throttle bodies. And the more radical the head and cams are the more power you gain.
Again, they have to be done properly and have smooth bores of no less than the new over sized butterfly diameter.
-
hey Jim, great info.
The Montgomery OS TB setup i have is:
52mm top of the Hartley stacks where they start to bell out
51mm at the TB/stacks connection
49mm at the blades
below the blades there is a tapered section, goes from 49 down to 44.8
44.8mm where they go into the head.
You think that config will work any better than stock TB/stacks with Carpenter's short intake/big exh head & 465/425 cams, 18.3-18.5:1 CR??
One of these days, i'd like to try yr new big exh head :thumb:
-
So, is it any good to open up std gen1 bodies after butterflies to 46mm ? Of course matching the head to it, with 1507cc, .433/.415 cams.
-
In our testing we have seen power gains with our bored 47 mm throttle bodies on stock zx14 engines of 8hp.
On a built 1570 we have seen 13 hp. Dan Millholland among many other people will confirm this.
On the gen 2 busas replacing the 44 mm units with our 47mm units will pick up about 6 hp on a stock motor and 13 hp on a busa motors with a ported head and cam. Cecil at HTP is one of many that will verify this as well.
Now here's the deal. All bored throttle bodies are not the same. Ours are bored all the way threw and are never smaller than the butterfly diameter. There are at least two laces selling "bored" throttle bodies out there that have the stock size blades or they leave a huge lip in the bore. Don't even waste your time with them. We tested them and they don't do a damn thing.
If there is any part of the bore that is smaller than the dia of the blade then don't waste your time with them.
With that being said, the gen 1 busa throttle bodies are 46 mm stock and there is very little gain with going to a larger bore on the gen 1 busa throttle bodies ON A STOCK MOTOR. However, on a built motor of 1507 or bigger there is a gain with going to the larger throttle bodies. And the more radical the head and cams are the more power you gain.
Again, they have to be done properly and have smooth bores of no less than the new over sized butterfly diameter.
so you are boring oem gen2 throttle bodies now? Send me some info or call me at the shop..803.285.8093
-
your ? is flawed.
it is like asking is a thropy wife benefical?
You could stand a 'THROPY' wife next to a 'TROPHY' wife and I don't think anyone would be bored! :hys:
Unless it was 'beneficial' as being "benefical" :hys:
:mrgreen: No one has ever called me a Jakcass either! :lol2:
-
hey Jim, great info.
The Montgomery OS TB setup i have is:
52mm top of the Hartley stacks where they start to bell out
51mm at the TB/stacks connection
49mm at the blades
below the blades there is a tapered section, goes from 49 down to 44.8
44.8mm where they go into the head.
You think that config will work any better than stock TB/stacks with Carpenter's short intake/big exh head & 465/425 cams, 18.3-18.5:1 CR??
One of these days, i'd like to try yr new big exh head :thumb:
Karl, the taper needs to be constant. Basically the intake port starts at the bell mouth and ends past the valve in the combustion chamber. Any hour glass shape is detrimental.
We would have to try it to know what the results are in the real world. Computer simulations only tell you so much.
Let me know if you want me to update your stage 3 head.
FYI Were testing another revision of our latest cams and port designs as we speak. I guess you would call it rev 4. So far each revision has matched the computer simulations almost perfectly. Thats scary. We are really getting into one off custom cams playing with cam ramp acceleration rates and the results are very positive. If i had more customers for these big busa motors with stage 3 heads the pace of development would be much faster. Richard said there expecting over 315 hp from this engine on the dyno. Which is what were seeing for crank numbers in the simulations. Should know very soon.
Dwayne, it was nice chatting, looking forward to working with you.
-
Jim, there is no way to get a constantly decreasing bore by boring stock TB's below the butterflies. Best that can be done is a section with a taper.
I don't know antone who makes full custom Busa TB's.
315 at the crank???!!! YIKES!
What do you figure that is at the wheel?
-
What about turbo applications?? How much hp could be expected??
-
Jim, there is no way to get a constantly decreasing bore by boring stock TB's below the butterflies. Best that can be done is a section with a taper.
I don't know antone who makes full custom Busa TB's.
315 at the crank???!!! YIKES!
What do you figure that is at the wheel?
Yea they are tapered to the port manifold.... I shoiuld take some pics... hard to describe....
Jenvey makes custom busa throttle bodies but they are small, 42mm? I believe.
We should know what it makes for power very soon Karl.
Richard said the head he had on the bike (our medium port stage 2 head intended for a 1507-1580cc engine) made almost 300 on the dyno.
He sold that head and he now has the stage 3 gen4.
-
What about turbo applications?? How much hp could be expected??
turbo application? I dont think you would see much if any power with them on a turbo. Maybe if you were running huge boost... but i really dont know for sure.
-
I have 49mm throttle bodies, and it starts with 50mm, 49mm at butterflies, then quickly tapers to 45mm, rest is 45mm. So, is there a flaw in design ? I don`t know who made these, they were in the bike when i bought it.
-
I have 49mm throttle bodies, and it starts with 50mm, 49mm at butterflies, then quickly tapers to 45mm, rest is 45mm. So, is there a flaw in design ? I don`t know who made these, they were in the bike when i bought it.
the 45mm is an orifice
-
Basically the port reduces in cross sectional area from the bell mouth to about where the port divider v is in the intake port. That's where the ports minimal cross sectional area is. Then the port gets larger again to the valve seat.
The port is like a funnel. you want the area of the port to steadily get smaller to increase the velocity to xxx feet per second. The rate of area change should be consistent over the length of the port. This area A vs area B vs length is the ports overall taper.
Any abrupt changes in cross sectional area absorbs port kennetic energy (air mass energy) as well as reflects a portion of the postive and negative pressure wave's amplitude (sonic). This hurts power when you reduce the positive pressure wave's effect on the intake charge.
If you guys are into learning more about this sort of stuff i highly recommend Gordon Blair's book "The design and simulation of 4 stroke engines". It came out in 1998 I think and its about $100 or $80 if you are an SAE member. You can find it on amazon. Its very dry text book type reading with mind boggling mathematical formulas but if you are really really into complex engine dynamics then its for you.
Its considered by most as the most up to date research on engines in the world. The software based on the formulas in the book is used by F1 teams, cup teams, and just about every top levels of racing. The software is about $30,000 per year for a licence!!! But you can buy the book and get a good understanding of whats going on in the entire engine.
-
I have a set sitting here on my bench , don't know if they were done by hand or not . I got them from Bill W some time back and was going to put them on my bike (1397 425/425 cams Carpenter Motor) But was advised that they most likely would do nothing but hurt power
-
I have a set sitting here on my bench............. was advised that they most likely would do nothing but hurt power
I'm just curious, who told you that?
-
Here is the 49mm throttle body, and there is almost a step after blade.
There is markings on throttle body "BMT 02" ,anybody knows who made them ?
-
what is stamped on the blades??
-
Nothing, only the markings on bodies, and numbers for cylinders
-
Here is the 49mm throttle body, and there is almost a step after blade.
There is markings on throttle body "BMT 02" ,anybody knows who made them ?
That step is exactly what im talking about. I have seen several sets like that. Also it looks like there a step again at the rubber manifold. Thats just as bad, it does the same thing. Any abrupt change in CSA reflects part of the wave and reduce the amplitude of the wave.
-
Throttle bodies were not from that head, just put them on, that`s why the rubber doesn`t fit. I have struggled with different cams and compression, power allways stops at certain level, maybe this could be the cause.
Head in the picture is made by Lee`s, is that Lee`s performance(?) , good quality ? It needs all valves and few guides, bought from blown engine.
-
The lift (valve window area) has to be of proper ratio to the ports MCSA. Thats very important. Thats why a one port size aproach doesnt work on a wide range of engine sizes.
The static compression ratio has to be correct for a given duration on tha cams.
so cams have to be carefully matched to the head porting to get the last 10 hp from one of these modern sport bike engines.
Its the difference in making 210-215 hp with a 1397 street motor and making 220-225 hp.
-
Jim, there is no way to get a constantly decreasing bore by boring stock TB's below the butterflies. Best that can be done is a section with a taper.
Yea they are tapered to the port manifold.... I should take some pics... hard to describe...
Can you take pics of the taper design ?
I tried to make the step smoother but ended up wasting my throttle bodies, there is now hole on the side :(
-
Damn, they get pretty thin. Did it break threw where the boring was done where that step is? You may be able to epoxy them. That's the problem when they "round" bore them too deep past the blades.
When we are talking constant taper bore we aren't talking about a "round bore". We are talking about cross sectional area.
You will have a constantly decreasing area creating an ever increasing velocity that's gradual. I wish I had a set here now so I could take some pics.
We ran into this on the busa gen 2's, breaking threw in a few areas. That's why we wont do the 47mm on the gen 2's anymore just 46mm. You have to constantly be checking the thickness. Its a real PITA. We check thickness using a Dakota ultrasound unit. http://dakotaultrasonics.com/?gclid=CKqHi7PF_64CFQgRNAodF22e2g (http://dakotaultrasonics.com/?gclid=CKqHi7PF_64CFQgRNAodF22e2g) We use it on heads, manifolds, throttle bodies, welds, and all sorts of stuff.
-
Yes, the step was about the same on outside and didn`t pay enough attention to it :(
I think i will take std bodies and make some minor modification, try some taper but smaller diameter.
How much difference would be expected if shortening throttle bodies, or intake tract ?
-
How much to do a set GEN1 for a 1441..?....i have tried them before and always gained hp...and we were swapping stockers vs bored ones at the time...and picking up beetween 5 to 8hp...on small motors.
-
Yep thats a typical hp gain on a smaller motor.
Give us a call at the shop.....
-
So what about the head and the intake manifold? on my 09 busa the bottom of the tb are 44mm. the head is 42mm. the manifold goes from 44mm tb side to 42mm head side. Is the bottom of the tb bored out to 46mm or is it 46mm at the blades and 44mm out the bottom? Can't go from 46mm out the tb to 44mm manifold.
Would it be benificial to have the head ported biger to match the 46mm tb? Why wouldnt you port out the stock manifolds and head to be 44mm strait through instead of 42mm with the stock tb?
Just thinking about the bored tb and working on my engine right now. these questions came to mind.
thank you
jeremy
-
The cross sectional area of the port is constantly decreasing from the bellmouth of the air horn to the ports Min Cross Sectional Area. That's called port taper and its critical for performance.
So its "normal" for the MCSA to be smaller at the flange vs the blade.
-
Hey Jim,
I have been thinking about setting up a program to port all the way from the top of the tb. Only prob is getting a good shape for the tb blade and not creat a lip in the tb under the front edge of the blade. What do you think?
Rodney
-
Hey Jim,
I have been thinking about setting up a program to port all the way from the top of the tb. Only prob is getting a good shape for the tb blade and not creat a lip in the tb under the front edge of the blade. What do you think?
Rodney
Rodney, yea you def dont want any lips in there. Blending like that is the way to go... you have the same machine we have so you should be able to do it. Mounting the throttle body and getting repeatability is key.
-
The Montgomery OS TB setup i have is:
52mm top of the Hartley stacks where they start to bell out
51mm at the TB/stacks connection
49mm at the blades
below the blades there is a tapered section, goes from 49 down to 44.8
44.8mm where they go into the head.
How did this work ? I know the performance result, but what was the difference in power ?
-
The Montgomery OS TB setup i have is:
52mm top of the Hartley stacks where they start to bell out
51mm at the TB/stacks connection
49mm at the blades
below the blades there is a tapered section, goes from 49 down to 44.8
44.8mm where they go into the head.
How did this work ? I know the performance result, but what was the difference in power ?
what performance result are you referring to???
-
I thought you installed throttle bodies before Zack and Colt did their runs. Well, it`s not the first time i thought wrong. I`m curious how it changes power and AFR curve, just installed my own modified big throttle bodies and it felt ok, but needs tuning more than just the upper revs.
-
One of the problems I have found with bored TBs is the OEM TB limitations and inherent problems with trying to oversize the stock TBs.
I dont know if this has ever been done but I think a really cool experiment for someone (*other then me!) to try is to ditch the 4 individual TBs, build a 4-1 manifold with injector bosses, and use a single larger TB. There are a poop ton of different TBs available from places like summit racing for 2-3 hundred.
I did the math and the (4X) 49mm busa TBs = 7543 total square.
A single 100mm TB would equal 7853 total square.
The longer runners of a 4-1 manifold would likely loose some low rpm HP but make it peaky on top (I dont know if longer runners would make any difference to a turbo).
Could yield some interesting results.
WHOSE GONNA TRY IT!!!!!?????
~JH
-
the bigger TB's lost a lil hp at peak tq, but gained 4-6 from 9-11.5k.
motor w/stock bodies starts dropping hp at 11.1, big bodies makes it keep climbing to 11.5 (limiter)
AF had to be adjusted everywhere.
-
Ok, thanks. I had max hp at 10.4k ,let`s see how it changes with TB mod. Now AFR varies from 11.9 to 13.5, not in any logical order. TB`s are now 51.5mm where stacks are fitted, 49mm blades, 43mm before rubber to head.
-
I'm now running Carpenter's new short intake head and big diameter headers:
On Johnny Cheese dyno:
BC 1635 Kit with standard BC race head = 270-ish DJ hp
BC 1635 Kit with new style BC head & headers = 281hp (Greenie was config-ed this way when I sold her)
BC 1635 Kit with new style BC head & headers & OS TB’s = 285hp (next week the Salt bike is going to Bonneville set up this way)
I'll be selling/parting out the salt bike after world of speed.
Karl
-
I gained 3-4hp with oversized TB`s, let`s see how they work on a mile. We use DIN standard measuring power (Dynostar) and now i`m about 30hp behind Greenie, that feels almost light year, but few things must be compromised to retain streetability.
-
, but few things must be compromised to retain streetability.
you mean you want to idle below 2000rpm? :hys:
-
, but few things must be compromised to retain streetability.
you mean you want to idle below 2000rpm? :hys:
That is one thing, dyno guy starts to pull from 2000, so it has to be under that :D
Another is that i have to use mufflers with noise killers on the street, otherwise i lose my plate if police catch up. Today, if it`s not raining, i`ll put my girl (woman) on the backseat and we go touring the countryside.
-
http://www.sbdev.co.uk/Hayabusa/Hayabusa_fuel%20injection%20kits.htm
-
http://www.sbdev.co.uk/Hayabusa/Hayabusa_fuel%20injection%20kits.htm
those look like alot of work and money to get them setup and working correctly. I don't like how the gen 2's only use one set of different aftermarket injectors. I guess it would be pretty nice if you were useing a standalone aftermarket ecu and were only runing one set of injectors. Doesn't look like you can use them with stock air box either. If you did use the stock air box you would have to cut them up pretty good and mount the plate to the stock air box.
Any idea how much they are?
-
i port matched my gen1 throttle bodies to k7 gixxer 52mm short stacks,prob affected torque but i dont need more torque on my 1507 swb,the hp up top is pretty good.Turbulence is for torque,flow is for hp when the rpm allows the port speed to create sufficient combustion turbulence,so pick your priority with the build and go with that.
**************************************************************************************************************
How complicated was to adapt the T/B GSXR 1000 K7 / K8 on a Busa? Any suggestion to make?
And how many HP could I win with this modification ?
-
I'm from Argentina and I have a query, depending on your experience and knowledge
I have a Suzuki Hayabusa 1300 model 2006, equipped with: - Power to commander III + Power ignition + Hub + airbox modified + Air Filter K&N + - Exhaust complete Muzzys (4 to 1) + - Velocity stacks, Race (all short, 41 mm) + Wiseco Piston kit stock bore 81mm 13.1 to 1 + Elimination counter balancer + Intake cam on the exhaust (2 cams intake OEM) + cam sprocket adjustable + Scoop ram air + seal, ram air tubes (Carpenter) + chains EK 520 zzz + ECU Flash
Nowadays it got 206 HP in the rear Wheel with final speed in 335 kmh (210 mph).
My question -->
I would like to fit a 48 or 50 mm diam. throttle bodie. I’m looking for power in high Revs (from 8000 RPM)
What do you suggest? And how many HP could I win with this modification ?
Throttle bodies in study
a) Trottle bodies Suzuki 1000 K7 / K8 ?
b) Trottle bodies Kawasaki zx-10r 2011/13 ?
c) Others
Any suggestion to make?
Thank you very much
-
I don't think you would see any benefit with bigger TBs on a 1300, could possibly lose some HP. On my 1350 motors I use 1/2" shorter velocity stacks made by John Hartley. I get 3Hp out of them and it moves my max hp up about 500rpm.