Steve Rauch has 58mm TB's for sale on his site, Sam Terranova at TurboTec made some for Kaz but I don't know how big. Anyone with these. Kaz maybe? Anyone else with the experience?

Sam's are also 58mm. There is another option too (actually is probably what Steve is marketing).

http://www.zippersperformance.com/catalogue/showproduct.asp?cat=852&prod=2074

http://www.zippersperformance.com/catalogue/products/Zm-9450.jpg



John

Doc,
I would wait till you did a few other mods.The Big Bore and TB's are good or with NOS is a Good Combo,but stock with pipes is a Waste!Call Sam about doing your Motor and check prices with the Other Guy.;)

Will I see much gains in power with an 2-1 full system and the RT. Already ordered the Joker Exhaust, RT is right here with me and the 28t pulley is downstairs with an 04 belt. The motorcycle? Well! At the dealer still.

Slightly off topic but I already have the HD 28T. Should I order the TT pulley? It is more than 2.5lb lighter.

Kaz, "stock with pipes" is what I have, or do you mean to tell that the stock pipes with the TB is a waste. The latter makes more sense.

We really don't know about the Joker exhaust yet. IF the primary tubes on the exhaust are equal length, you should also get the shorter velocity stack for the rear cyl. As for the lighter TT pulley, I wouldn't bother for the weight, but perhaps for the ease on installation and the ability to switch back to the 30T if you ever want to do so.

And as for the larger volume TB's, they aren't needed unless you have a BB kit or are running a blower of some kind or NOS. No need to flow more than the stockers do with a stock engine.


John

:stupid: What john said!

Hey thanks very much! They are on their way and I did not know that. Do you know if the primary tubes on the Joker exhaust are equal length. Where can I find the correct shorter velocity stack for the rear cylinder if necessary? Joker does not have an e-mail address that I can find on their website. May need to call tomorrow.
I am not much worried about a 2.5lb wt loss on the bike but mainly concerned about the possibility of performance gains with the motor rotating a lighter pulley. It may be negligible but then again I am not sure.

You can call Joker and ask them.
http://www.jokermachine.com/2002footer.gif


The short stack is HD P/N 29521-01 (about $10.00).:)

The rotating mass effect of an object as small as the pulley would be negligible at best.


John

Correct me if I'm wrong.But don't you wanna get the short srack for the front cylinder?I beleive the front one is longer.

Yes, the front stack is longer.
-john, we make our butterfly's and bore our Throttle Bodies ourselves.
Thanks: Steve

Originally posted by Ketsugo
You can call Joker and ask them.
http://www.jokermachine.com/2002footer.gif


The short stack is HD P/N 29521-01 (about $10.00).:)

The rotating mass effect of an object as small as the pulley would be negligible at best.


John

John,
I've agreed with most everthing that you've ever posted. Except this. Unless I miss understood what you consider negligible at best. A 2.5 lb lighter pulley spinning 9,000 RPM's will have a noticable affect on performance. Probably worth a few 100ths in the 1/4, not bad for just a pulley! I might try to calculate the HP loss of the heavier pulley. Does anybody have links to pics so that I don't have to look the parts up?

air1kdf,

I have to agree with John, the performance advantage of the lightweight pulley is negligible considering all the other rotational elements. The biggest reason is the Small radius, ~1.5". Of course there's an advantage but considering the inertial effects are multiplied by distance from center of rotation the loss of 2.5 lbs across the entire pulley really only equates to maybe 1 lb at the critical area, the outer rim. Doing some rough calculations the loss is ~.05 lb-ft of linear torque. That equals about .08 hp @ 9000 rpm.

Now, if you really want to see some increase, try reducing the weight of an 18" wheel by 50% (dymag carbon fiber). That can equate to almost 1.0 lb-ft of torque or ~ 1.7 hp @ 9000 rpm.

The major reason to do the aftermarket 28T is the ease of swapping. The factory 30T and the aftermarket 28T are interchangeable on the '02 - '03 driveshaft flange. The HD 28T requires a change to the driveshaft flange.

mjw930,
You are right on about the diameter, and especially the rims. However... Everything does add up.

A simple explanation for others as to how weight directly eats HP and torque is the definition of torque itself. This is the acceleration of a known inertia from one RPM to another RPM over a given period of time. Also the difference in diameters can demonstrated with bicycle rims. Take a 20" rim that weighs the same as a 27" rim. With the same gear ratio and stroke on the pedals, the 27" rim will accelerate much slower than the 20" rim. This is a real cool thing to try out.

Some background about myself. The reason that I could do the calculation is because I created the world’s second remote control engine dyno specifically for buggy engines. The first cost about the same as a Honda car, mine cost less than 150 for the electronics and 250 for bearings, machined parts, etc. I did all of the design, electronics, and am a professional developer. Real cool stuff.

Anyways you may be correct about the #'s, but I will do a simple calculation on a 3" diameter pulley for $hits & grins. Just seems a little low to be based solely on instinct. But like I said you may be right.

Bout time someone smart joins in on the Fun!:notworthy Wait till you see my My turbo Charged FluxCapsitor with Methanol Injection!;)

Well, 20 lbs off any part of the bike (or rider) would net a much larger gain than the weight of the pulley in question. And yes, I do consider 2/100's negligible unless you are racing Pro Stock for a living.;)



John

Well you guys kept me up too late tonight. I have to say that a 2.5 lb savings seems unrealistic, but what do I know. That equates to a disk with an ID of 1" and an OD of 3" and a width of 1.4" made of Steel, High Strength Low Alloy in order to get 2.5 lbs. That's alot of material. So I'm guessing that one is made of aluminum and the other SS or something similiar. That's .182ft/lbs of torque if you could accelerate it in 3 seconds from 1200RPM's to 9000 RPM's.

I'm sure you guys could tell me what it's worth in the 1/4.

I used a 1" shaft diameter and a 3" OD. If the shaft is smaller, so will the results, and if the 3" is larger, the opposite holds true. I should also point out that the faster your bike is the more important this weight savings would be. For example if the 3 seconds was only 2 seconds, the torque would be .27ft/lbs. If the 3 seconds was only 1 second the torque would be .54ft/lbs.

So where can I get this 2.5lb lighter sprocket? Can I get it in a 30 tooth configuration?

Call Sam at Turbo Tec USA 1-602-242-6099 tell'm Kaz referd ya!;)

air1kdf,

Looks like my math is a little rusty ;) Thanks for cleaning up the numbers and keeping Kaz entertained :)

If I were racing than absolutely I would put the lightest, strongest components in the drive train. I think John and my point is that in practice, on the street, the difference isn't noticeable. I also think that based on what I have seen, the dynos we tend to strap our bikes onto wouldn't be able to detect the difference either.

Your dyno sounds cool. Are you interested in doing something in the motorcycle dyno realm ;) Do you have any opinions on Brake dynos vs. Inertial Dynos?

:offtopic

LOL, you guys are great. I might try the 2.5 lbs on a rim and do a calculation, I bet we can get some serious power there.

The RC Dyno is real cool. I even did some electric motors. They always show max torque at startup, then gradually decrease. On some Nitro engines you could see it "come on the pipe" with multiple peaks. Real interesting stuff.

I never marketed the RC dyno because of the huge potential for liability. Kind of a waste of an awesome application, and hardware.

The software could easily be adapted to a morcycle, or car dyno.

The more you fully understand exactly how much energy is going in, the further you want to be from it. Liability just keeps coming up.

Brake dynos vs. Inertial Dynos is a double edged sword. And of course I have some opinions. Briefly both have advantages and disadvantages. Bottom line in my opinion is... An inertial dyno is the only real way to "accurately" measure true power, but a brake dyno is better suited for real world simulations, is much safer, and should be what you use for tuning.

I never meant to hijack the thread, sorry.

Uffff! One could say:

I'll just call Sam and order one. Whatever .00001 gain will be welcome AND I can swap back if necesary however unlikely it may seem. Also if any benefit possible at least it's got to be better than what the new 04 will be running out of the dealership. Races, street or strip, are sometimes won by adding the many little things.

OR

Just install the darn thing (HD 28t kit) on tool chest downstairs for weeks now. If I need swapability (unlikely), then I could consider the TT 28t.

HMMMMMM! I just don't know.

How about this one.

Gerolamy (http://www.bcheads.com/fuel.htm)

V-Rod Throttle Body Modification
Max Air Flow V-Rod Throttle Body
• Bore from 53mm to 56mm

Part #VR01
Price $325 (to your throttle body)

Take a 20" rim that weighs the same as a 27" rim. With the same gear ratio and stroke on the pedals, the 27" rim will accelerate much slower than the 20" rim. This is a real cool thing to try out.


wouldn't that only be if the rim is touching the ground and not "freewheeling"? and that would be because the ratio is changed, because freewheeling--it wouldn't matter if it's 4 inches or 40 inches if it's the same weight--- or am I wrong?

wouldn't that only be if the rim is touching the ground and not "freewheeling"? and that would be because the ratio is changed, because freewheeling--it wouldn't matter if it's 4 inches or 40 inches if it's the same weight--- or am I wrong?

Sorry, you're wrong. Using an equal weight (and uniform weight distribution), a larger diameter has a larger rotational inertia by a factor of the radius squared. Thus, a larger diameter is more resistant to change speeds.
:thumb:

Sorry, you're wrong. Using an equal weight (and uniform weight distribution), a larger diameter has a larger rotational inertia by a factor of the radius squared. Thus, a larger diameter is more resistant to change speeds.
:thumb:
:offtopic: SPEAK ENGLISH! :confused:

ack, i hated math class....

:offtopic: SPEAK ENGLISH! :confused:
Centrifugal and gyroscopic forces.
If you get the rear v-rod wheel for instance and it was made of silly putty aluminum so you could easily shape it then harden it (uh uh-ohh! :mrgr: ), if you were to shape it so that it had most of it's mass in the hub area making for a thin rim and thinner thickness it would spin faster with less work thus more efficient thus faster. If on the contrary you shaped the same mass so that you get a thick rim with much less metal around the hub area spread towards the outside making for a thicker thickness that would move the weight outwards in relation to what makes it rotate, the rear sprocket. The motor would have to rotate a heavier mass longer thus taking more of the work, eating horsepower to do other work besides forward motion. It's just a matter of how energy is spent on a system. Like a 500hp AWD vehicle vs a RWD vehicle with say 450hp pulling same on roll ons, the extra hardware eats away at hp just to make it move, not to mention pulling that extra weight. That's why I'd like dymag to make those wheels but I guess they be like Daytona Twin Tec and have no interest on our so-called "limited market". Mondo OFF TOPIC huh? Numbers will explain it better AND not lie EVER if you take all variables into consideration.

Anyone tried different throttle body configurations without a BB motor?
Kaz, Shawn, who would make custom billet velocity stacks for the V-Rod?

Centrifugal and gyroscopic forces.
If you get the rear v-rod wheel for instance and it was made of silly putty aluminum so you could easily shape it then harden it (uh uh-ohh! :mrgr: ), if you were to shape it so that it had most of it's mass in the hub area making for a thin rim and thinner thickness it would spin faster with less work thus more efficient thus faster. If on the contrary you shaped the same mass so that you get a thick rim with much less metal around the hub area spread towards the outside making for a thicker thickness that would move the weight outwards in relation to what makes it rotate, the rear sprocket. The motor would have to rotate a heavier mass longer thus taking more of the work, eating horsepower to do other work besides forward motion. It's just a matter of how energy is spent on a system. Like a 500hp AWD vehicle vs a RWD vehicle with say 450hp pulling same on roll ons, the extra hardware eats away at hp just to make it move, not to mention pulling that extra weight. That's why I'd like dymag to make those wheels but I guess they be like Daytona Twin Tec and have no interest on our so-called "limited market". Mondo OFF TOPIC huh? Numbers will explain it better AND not lie EVER if you take all variables into consideration.

Anyone tried different throttle body configurations without a BB motor?
Kaz, Shawn, who would make custom billet velocity stacks for the V-Rod?
CALL SAM! :thumb:

Centrifugal and gyroscopic forces...
Now, with those larger diameter throttle bodies, don't we have the same angular momentum problem as with the wheels. With larger throttle bodies, that butterfly mechanism is a larger diameter, and therefore takes more energy to make it turn. That's all controlled by your wrist. So, following the laws of physics, one must conclude that your wrist can't open a larger throttle body as fast as a smaller throttle body because of the extra weight at a larger radius. Therefore, larger throttle body leads to slower acceleration. So, if Kaz was really on his toes, he would machine down the outer edges of the butterfly to make it thinner (lighter), keeping the weight towards the center of rotation! A titanium butterfly would also help. That's my performance tip of the day. :laugh:

Also, all that talk about wheels and acceleration also applies to deceleration (braking). And, the tire is the major weight at the largest radius. So, a lighter tire can really affect acceleration (and braking). Wheel spin throws a monkey wrench into this though.

CALL SAM! :thumb:
:thumb: :diablo:

Now, with those larger diameter throttle bodies, don't we have the same angular momentum problem as with the wheels. With larger throttle bodies, that butterfly mechanism is a larger diameter, and therefore takes more energy to make it turn. That's all controlled by your wrist. So, following the laws of physics, one must conclude that your wrist can't open a larger throttle body as fast as a smaller throttle body because of the extra weight at a larger radius. Therefore, larger throttle body leads to slower acceleration. So, if Kaz was really on his toes, he would machine down the outer edges of the butterfly to make it thinner (lighter), keeping the weight towards the center of rotation! A titanium butterfly would also help. That's my performance tip of the day. :laugh:

Yeah! I know! But I'm having my throttle mechanism modified with a carbon fiber flange thing so that it will turn quicker AND with less effort :eek: . This same guy is making me carbon fiber throttle body mechanisms. The butterfly itself will be carbon fiber tapered in the ends so air can start rushing in faster from a better seal. All this will make for a more snappy and efficient, lighter, faster motorcycle, and will add about 4hp on the dyno over a same bore setup made of titanium. Carbon fiber does makes hp. :rofl:

Watch for a group buy...session...thing...whatever...wherever... :confused: .

Schizophrenic???...Much??.. :D :hyper:

group buy, I'm in! #1

Yeah! I know! But I'm having my throttle mechanism modified with a carbon fiber flange thing so that it will turn quicker AND with less effort :eek:
Ok, now I gotta spend a ton more to get it in carbon fiber. Damn :banghead: But my setup will still be quicker than yours. I've already ordered the parts to install a CO2 operated solenoid to open the throttle body way quicker than you can do with your wrist. And it's triggered by a high-tech super sensitive quick action optical thumb switch. So I can get that thing opened quicker than the blink of an eye. Only a brain surgeon with an electronic brain tap could beat my setup! :twisted:

Ok, now I gotta spend a ton more to get it in carbon fiber. Damn :banghead: But my setup will still be quicker than yours. I've already ordered the parts to install a CO2 operated solenoid to open the throttle body way quicker than you can do with your wrist. And it's triggered by a high-tech super sensitive quick action optical thumb switch. So I can get that thing opened quicker than the blink of an eye. Only a brain surgeon with an electronic brain tap could beat my setup! :twisted:
I just SO HAVE ONE ON MY TEAM! :diablo:

Electronic brain tap. A Matrix kind of thing.
Actually, I know a guy! :angeldev: