[abtech]

Originally Posted by 2001 929rr

A 2 degree ignition advancer. Here's the link.

Ignition Advancer

Wrong direction. The Blade works better with 2 degrees of retard above 9K.

[abtech]

Originally Posted by 2001 929rr

I'm selling my ignition advancer. It has worked very well on my bike.

I'm not saying it won't work (how well is pretty subjective), I am saying that when measured on the dyno, the 2 degree advancers have a small bump between 6K and 7.5K, but actually show a 2 to 3 HP loss above 7.5K over stock advance. Using a non-fixed advance system (like a PC111r) and retarding the ignition 2 degrees at 9K and above at 80% throttle and higher will net another couple of HP over stock and lower the operating temperature a bit (while the Factory advancer makes the engine run hotter than stock).

[Big Kahuna]

I don't want to start another "thing" here, but we've discussed this at length many times on the CBR900 mailing list where we are happy to have Marc Salvisberg of Factory Pro there to help answer our questions.

This is what he said in a recent discussion on the subject:

If the bike is properly tuned and has a stock compression engine, the worst that could have happened with having 2 degrees too much timing is you would have lost about 1 TRUE HP at very high rpm. The bike should have pulled better off corners.

At race days - we supplied +2 and +4 advancers - By the end of the year, most of the riders just left in the +4, because it pulled so much better off the corners and the single HP they lost on top just wasn't as important as pull off the corner.

BUT - If the bike is too lean, it will lose power when you add timing.

Very, very, very few stock engined bikes run better with retarded from stock ignition. The only weirdness that I've seen has never been on bikes tested with insufficient loading during the test. As a matter of fact - there's only one bike that actually has an optimal full throttle ignition curve - and it's not a Japanese bike. Everything else, with a stock engine - when tested and fuel tuned properly beforehand (and that's NOT to an a/f ratio) works better with whatever we suggested.

There's rare, uncommon individual bikes that don't but they are 1 in 100..........

Also - lame a** testing by the same people who said that K&N air filters "don't work" on cbr900's and that "short 929/954 stacks" don't work can be a source, too - Same guy who says ignition advancers "don't work" on 900's, even with Erion cams????

That's a 2 TRUE HP improvement, everywhere(!) with +4 and I didn't even have a +6 to try - I did a-b-a-b testing on that.

[abtech]

First of all, this has been discussed on Motorush, Rogue and here on .org probably 5 times more than on any single forum.

Factory even signed up here as a member and got in a pissing match with Dan Kyle over this very subject. When Dan showed them that additional advance hurt more than it helped, especially on a well tuned engine, Factory start whining that the dyno system Dan uses (DJ250) isn't reliable enough to measure anything, let alone HP or torque. After seeing this dialog go on for a few days, Factory then stated that THEY (Factory Pro) made the only dyno available that was able to measure HP or torque and that ALL of the factory AMA teams used their products exclusively, even though a few members of these teams came on here and called this a load of crap (besides carrying a DynoJet 250 in the transporter to the track for at least 2 of the major teams).

The gentleman that Marc is referring to in the last paragraph or so is yours truly, and the other "sources" he quotes are Dan Kyle, Rob Muzzy and Brian Uchida respectively (more than 21 AMA championships between these three gentleman alone).

I have tested all of the aforementioned Factory Pro components (for the models available) on a DynoJet 250 (short velocity stacks, 2 and 4 degree advancers and even the K&N air filter) on quite a few bikes including my last 929, my old RC30, an 01' GSXR750, 99 R7, 97 YZF1000, and various other machines. In every case the owners (including me) decided that whatever "spikes" these products provided in terms of power (except in the case of the K&N filter which just flat out made less power everywhere) in isolated portions of the power band were more than offset by losses incurred by these same devices throughout the major portion of the power bandwidth. In the case of the advancer, it dropped several HP right before it picked up a couple (over stock) yielding the effect of more "punch" in the mid range while in fact it just lost power right before it made some (I see this type of "power" all the time, especially with RC51 two into one exhaust systems).

Factory's response to my findings were "well of course our products look bad, you tested them on an inferior device" (the DJ 250).

I'll stick with the findings of the majority of engine builders and AMA crew chiefs out there, rather than someone trying to obtain market share by throwing rocks at the accepted standard in performance measurements.

[ConqSoft]

I split this off from the other thread... As you were.

[abtech]

sorry about that chief . . .

missed it by that much.

[ConqSoft]

It's fine... Just thought it'd be better served in the FireBlade area, and not For Sale.

[Big Kahuna]

Originally Posted by ConqSoft

It's fine... Just thought it'd be better served in the FireBlade area, and not For Sale.

Ah... Couldn't figure out what was going on. The email links to the thread were all mess up.

Abtech, maybe Conq's just worried this is going to start us both up again.

Yea, this is just another topic that seems to draw more disagreement than answers I'm afraid. Although we have traveled in different circles, it seems our discussions have all been done before somewhere else. I've heard Marc say that other dynos are inferior many times, but who am I to say who's right or wrong. I do know that Marc knows more about bikes than I ever will.

Each group has their go-to-guy and many listen to Dan Kyle and others, and many listen to Marc Salvisberg. We, you and me can only share what we've learned with others and let them decide what is best. I always think it's best to shed light on all perspectives before making any decision. I'm just thankful for places like this that allow this sort of communication.

[abtech]

Originally Posted by BigKahuna

Ah... Couldn't figure out what was going on. The email links to the thread were all mess up.

Abtech, maybe Conq's just worried this is going to start us both up again.

Yea, this is just another topic that seems to draw more disagreement than answers I'm afraid. Although we have traveled in different circles, it seems our discussions have all been done before somewhere else. I've heard Marc say that other dynos are inferior many times, but who am I to say who's right or wrong. I do know that Marc knows more about bikes than I ever will.

Each group has their go-to-guy and many listen to Dan Kyle and others, and many listen to Marc Salvisberg. We, you and me can only share what we've learned with others and let them decide what is best. I always think it's best to shed light on all perspectives before making any decision. I'm just thankful for places like this that allow this sort of communication.

I am thankful as well, but I should point out (I think the threads were lost in a software upgrade a while ago) that for the vast majority of members who participated, the Factory stance was pretty "godlike" in that they essentially claimed anyone who didn't agree with them was a complete moron (I believe that was the actual term used). Since I am pretty opinionated (as well as a master of understatement), I understand how there may be different approaches to the same issue that may in fact both be correct. This certainly didn't appear to be the case, as Dan asked the gentleman from Factory several specific questions that went ignored and unanswered throughout the entire thread.

The crux of the issue with the Factory Pro Advancer, is that once Dan pointed to specific empirical data regarding adjusting the timing at specific RPM, and how this degree of control definitely allowed a much more precise ignition curve once the A/F ratio was optimized, the gentleman from Factory maintained was that there wasn't any device available that could adjust the timing at a specific RPM or throttle setting. In short, he essentially dismissed any product manufactured by DynoJet, as all of the R model Power Commanders and several of the PC11 units feature very precise adjustment of ignition advance at these settings. He then maintained that due to design flaws in the DynoJet 250 system, there was no way to maintain and measure either A/F ratio or ignition advance at any RPM when using this system. When he was asked if he had ever actually used a DJ 250 system, he stated that he didn't have to, as he knew the design was flawed and couldn't possibly work under any circumstances. When pressed to answer the question as asked, he admitted that he had never in fact used either a DynoJet Dynomometer, Tuning Link software or any mapping device for the Power Commander series of products, as they were all "known to do nothing".

I guess I have a problem with this type of logic . . .

[Jungleboy]

Originally Posted by abtech

I'm not saying it won't work (how well is pretty subjective), I am saying that when measured on the dyno, the 2 degree advancers have a small bump between 6K and 7.5K, but actually show a 2 to 3 HP loss above 7.5K over stock advance. Using a non-fixed advance system (like a PC111r) and retarding the ignition 2 degrees at 9K and above at 80% throttle and higher will net another couple of HP over stock and lower the operating temperature a bit (while the Factory advancer makes the engine run hotter than stock).

I had a converstaion with Dave from Sydney Dyno just over a week ago about this as I have a PC3R and was wondering if any improvement were possible by adjust the timming and what he said mirrored nearly exactly what Abtec said about retarding 2 degrees up top, he said there was a very slight gain in power but the main benifit was that the engine would run much cooler!
Personaly I dont like the physical advancers like factory pro because your ignition should be taylored to each RPM and not just wacking on 2 or 4 degrees across the board! they are a bit of a compromise!

[Zeeman]

Originally Posted by Jungleboy

I had a converstaion with Dave ... about retarding 2 degrees up top, he said there was a very slight gain in power but the main benifit was that the engine would run much cooler!

After seeing how hot these darn bikes run, that would make for a huge benefit. Especially if it helps lengthen the time it takes to heat up in traffic and helps it cool down quicker...

Z...

[aussie_929]

Originally Posted by Zeeman

After seeing how hot these darn bikes run, that would make for a huge benefit. Especially if it helps lengthen the time it takes to heat up in traffic and helps it cool down quicker...

Z...

The 1000 seems to run even hotter...

[Zeeman]

Serious? even with that huge mutha radiator that's in there?

Fark...

Z...

[aussie_929]

Originally Posted by Zeeman

Serious? even with that huge mutha radiator that's in there?

Fark...

Z...

Yeah I was kinda surprised too. I thought I read somewhere that brand new engines will run hotter at first.

I could be wrong though.