Dyno Disappointment.....

Forum rules
Please can you post items for sale or wanted in the correct For Sale section. Items / bikes for sale here will be removed without warning. Reasons for this are in the FAQ. Thanks
Post Reply
phil x
Settled in member
Posts: 171
Joined: Mon Mar 21, 2011 8:29 am
Bike owned: 2 x 650 Transalp's, '90 nc30
Location: East Lancs

Dyno Disappointment.....

Post by phil x » Tue Oct 04, 2011 3:35 pm

I took the '30 to get dyno'd today at Quill (Golborne).

I don't know how to post pics or dyno runs here but;
Power topped out at 53.2hp at 13,000rpm (hit 50hp at about 10,300 rpm then levelled off).
Torque was 25.4ft/lb @ 10,100 rpm
There is a dip in both the power & torque between 5200 & 6800 rpm - this is the sluggish spot that I get - maybe timing/noise emissions related???
At tickover the AF is about 17:1 dropping off to 14:1 by 5000rpm, between 5-7krpm AF ratio richens to circa 12:1 & carries on +/- 12:1 to the redline.....

Now who the feck suggested fitting 115/118 jets....
As I suspected the bike is rich - hideously rich & would have been worse still if I had done the needle raise mod. Drilling the slides - nah feck that.
I'm going to fit the oe 110s back & leave as Honda intended, maybe tweak a little as needs be.
Every dyno that I have seen of an NC30 that has been posted here has been really rich. I'm sticking my neck out here but I reckon that there is lots of bad advice about jetting on this site not backed up by hard evidence.
If you give advice at least make sure that it's good advice.

FYI; The bike is a '90 'K' model with stock airbox & filter, unmolested original exhaust, carbs have had the 110 jets replaced with RO 115/118. Needles floats, pilots etc all correct with stock settings (I haven't checked the valve clearances/changed plugs etc yet (- thats one for the winter)

Phil
ps; Unless the non Keihin jets (as supplied by RO) do run significantly richer that the equivalent Keihin jets???

User avatar
CMSMJ1
Moderators
Moderators
Posts: 7152
Joined: Thu May 01, 2008 9:42 am
Bike owned: NC30-No9
Location: Chesterfield, United Kingdom

Re: Dyno Disappointment.....

Post by CMSMJ1 » Tue Oct 04, 2011 3:50 pm

Stock system and bigger jets = rich bike.

I have not had jets from Rick but reckon they may be Dynojet ones..and so are not the same.

I agree about the bollocks too - but either way, get a graph up and we can disect it.

Worthwhile getting a dyno graph thread sorted to stop all the blags..
IMPERATOR REX ANGLORUM

The V4 is the law..

NC30 - No9 - my old mate

phil x
Settled in member
Posts: 171
Joined: Mon Mar 21, 2011 8:29 am
Bike owned: 2 x 650 Transalp's, '90 nc30
Location: East Lancs

Re: Dyno Disappointment.....

Post by phil x » Tue Oct 04, 2011 4:53 pm

CMSMJ1 wrote:Stock system and bigger jets = rich bike.

I have not had jets from Rick but reckon they may be Dynojet ones..and so are not the same.

I agree about the bollocks too - but either way, get a graph up and we can disect it.

Worthwhile getting a dyno graph thread sorted to stop all the blags..
I upped the jets as I was led to believe that a stock '30 running 110 mains runs very lean, upping the mains size doesn't necessarily mean a rich bike - but it does in my case.

Yes we need hard evidence, modifications, jet make/sizes & dyno results with AF.
Do RO jets run richer than Keihin, if they do we are all pissing in the wind.....

Note, my bike stuttered & struggled to rev out, hence, with advice given here I decided to check the carbs out & up the jetting to those suggested on this site.
My float heights were out, pilot screws all over the place & 2 of the Emulsion tubes were in the wrong location, fed from a fuel tap with a shitty soft vac pipe....... I wish I'd corrected these & left the stock jetting & went from there (I nearly did but decided to fit the jets I got from Rick)!

Phil

User avatar
Smev
Site Supporter
Site Supporter
Posts: 858
Joined: Tue Apr 29, 2008 8:54 pm
Bike owned: NC30 of course
Location: The Mighty Cornwall :-)

Re: Dyno Disappointment.....

Post by Smev » Tue Oct 04, 2011 6:36 pm

I don't want to sound off but why change stuff if you don't know whats going on in the first place?!

Surely the best idea would have been to dyno it first - all standard. THEN decide whether you need bigger jets etc etc....

I understand you are annoyed, but you have no-one to blame but yourself!

Alot of the information on here and most forums, is what has been tried out and is from peoples personal experience. Also, people come from all walksand ages of life - and some aren't technically minded at all (you just have to look at some of the obvious questions that get asked in the workshop) I always bear this in mind when reading about things people have done.

Again, this is all just my opinion and you don't have to act on it!

Good research should lead you away from disappointment.

By the way - this is how to post pics (its easy to find if you do a search)

viewtopic.php?f=5&t=19475
Last edited by Smev on Tue Oct 04, 2011 6:42 pm, edited 1 time in total.
Mister Donut Rep NC30

amorti
Regular Member
Posts: 957
Joined: Sun May 18, 2008 4:51 pm
Bike owned: CB-1, MSX125
Location: Gibraltar

Re: Dyno Disappointment.....

Post by amorti » Tue Oct 04, 2011 6:40 pm

Worth noting - a bike running a little rich will feel lots better than a bike running a little lean. It will pick up quicker when cracking the throttle open for example. It will use more fuel and won't be any faster, but if you are going to be a little bit off perfect then most folk's butt-dynos will prefer a little rich. So that could be where the jetting recommendations came from? Apart from that, I thought they were intended for bikes with at least an end can on?

User avatar
Man_Named_Dave
Site Supporter
Site Supporter
Posts: 359
Joined: Mon Apr 26, 2010 5:41 pm
Bike owned: NC30(K)
Location: Nairn, Highlands

Re: Dyno Disappointment.....

Post by Man_Named_Dave » Tue Oct 04, 2011 6:51 pm

His Rick-ness suggested the 115/118 combo to me for a standard exhaust and that's what I'm gonna try. Everything he's said has helped me out a great deal.
In short, there may well be people giving dodgy advice on here, but RickO certainly ain't one of them! Chances are he's given you suitable jets, whatever size they are.

Calm down and the nice people here will help you.

User avatar
Drunkn Munky
Site Supporter
Site Supporter
Posts: 6313
Joined: Thu May 01, 2008 9:37 am
Bike owned: NC30 MC21 TZR FZR GSXR RG MITO
Location: Kent

Re: Dyno Disappointment.....

Post by Drunkn Munky » Tue Oct 04, 2011 7:04 pm

Yep i think you need to wind that neck in a bit, advice given on here should only be taken as general as all bikes are different and need setting up accordinally.

You mentioned nothing about checking/changing the air filter in your OP, id check that first if its running hidiously rich.

phil x
Settled in member
Posts: 171
Joined: Mon Mar 21, 2011 8:29 am
Bike owned: 2 x 650 Transalp's, '90 nc30
Location: East Lancs

Re: Dyno Disappointment.....

Post by phil x » Tue Oct 04, 2011 7:24 pm

Cheers for the replies.

I went for the 115/118 due to it being unanimously recommended as 'the' thing to do on a stock bike along with the needle raised to get good a/f ratio & good power.

With hindsight, I can never recall anyone putting up a dyno showing before & after results & it's that, that niggles me. Everyone seems unanimous about the 115/118 mains & needle raised but where's the proof?

Sure these bikes are 20=/- years old so theres sure to be some variation between them, I'm not knocking the fact that there are some very knowledgable & experienced folks on here.

The air filter is good by the way :whistle:

Phil

User avatar
royster81
NWAA Supporter
NWAA Supporter
Posts: 2509
Joined: Wed Apr 30, 2008 8:04 pm
Bike owned: VFR400R-L NC30 CBR400RR-R NC29
Location: Belfast,Northern Ireland

Re: Dyno Disappointment.....

Post by royster81 » Tue Oct 04, 2011 7:34 pm

115/118 came stock on the bike after 1991 so it should run perfectly fine with a stock set of carbs, standard clean filter and a full stock exhaust..... But you say you rises the needles?

Why ?

If everything else is standard why lift them?

Would this be the cause of your richness?
It's not having what you want but wanting what you've got....Loud ,Proud and Modified ....

scooble
Settled in member
Posts: 197
Joined: Mon Aug 08, 2011 8:13 pm

Re: Dyno Disappointment.....

Post by scooble » Tue Oct 04, 2011 8:08 pm

12.1:1 doesn't sound hideously rich though, 12.5:1 give or take a bit is usually the range that gives best power.

Post Reply