Should leave it alone, but

[AP996]

The new exhaust cam has been in for awhile now and as and when I get time I’m gradually logging the a/f ratio then making adjustments to suit, I’m finding that the map we did on the dyno last time was really rich, reinforcing my view that the sniffer wasn’t further enough in the exhaust. 
The engine feels much stronger in the upper half of the Rev range now and I hope that’s proved when I get round to getting on the dyno again.

If anybodies interested in the Dynojet wideband kit and software, here’s a screenshot of a log.

[M. Hausknecht]

Just now, AP996 said:

The new exhaust cam has been in for awhile now and as and when I get time I’m gradually logging the a/f ratio then making adjustments to suit, I’m finding that the map we did on the dyno last time was really rich, reinforcing my view that the sniffer wasn’t further enough in the exhaust. 
The engine feels much stronger in the upper half of the Rev range now and I hope that’s proved when I get round to getting on the dyno again.

If anybodies interested in the Dynojet wideband kit and software, here’s a screenshot of a log.

Wow, there is a lot of smoothing going on there. Actual AFR ratios jump around a  bit in the ordinary course. Your logs are much easier to read and evaluate than my aRacer log files but, thinking out loud, I wonder whether the smoothing results in any meaningful errors. Are you using the autotune function or reviewing data logs and making manual changes to your primary fuel map? If the later, I gather it is based on throttle position and rpm?

[AP996]

Just now, M. Hausknecht said:

Wow, there is a lot of smoothing going on there. Actual AFR ratios jump around a  bit in the ordinary course. Your logs are much easier to read and evaluate than my aRacer log files but, thinking out loud, I wonder whether the smoothing results in any meaningful errors. Are you using the autotune function or reviewing data logs and making manual changes to your primary fuel map? If the later, I gather it is based on throttle position and rpm?

As you can see I’ve just zoomed in on a 10 second segment of the file where I’ve run through the Rev range at a constant throttle position in this case 78% throttle, I found that trying to hold a constant throttle position was impossible other than 100% resulting in constantly altering positions and inconsistent a/f reading as the throttle opened and closed slightly over bumps etc. I’ve recently begun to restrict how far the throttle opens so I can hold it against the stop without it being fully open which seems to give me better more repeatable results.

There isn’t a proper autotune function with the Powervision 3, there is a feature called tune lab in the software with built in correction factors on a file that you request from Dynojet, However I find that I prefer to do the adjustments manually, it’s pretty long winded but strangely satisfying, it’s going to take awhile to get it somewhere near right all the way through.

On the screenshot the throttle position isn’t displayed, that’s a small anomaly with the software, it doesn’t seem to display it at the highest value unless you stretch that graph larger, in any other throttle position it would have been displayed, not a problem to me as I know what position I’ve restricted it to.

Yes all based on throttle position and rpm, although I can also display any input that the ecu sees so making changes based on map sensor values shouldn’t  be a problem.

[AP996]

On 6/14/2022 at 4:55 AM, M. Hausknecht said:

Wow, there is a lot of smoothing going on there. Actual AFR ratios jump around a  bit in the ordinary course. Your logs are much easier to read and evaluate than my aRacer log files but, thinking out loud, I wonder whether the smoothing results in any meaningful errors.

I hadn’t looked at the smoothing rate on the data, just assuming that Dynojet would have it default to a usable level, but now that you’ve brought it to my attention I’ve adjusted the smoothing from level 5 to level 1, this is what it looks like.

Edited June 16, 2022 by AP996
Wrong file

[M. Hausknecht]

Yeah, at smoothing level 1, looks like my aRacer AFR traces at a steady throttle. Good job holding a steady throttle.

[T1oas]

Ap996, hi I’m in the uk, West Yorkshire, I’ve managed to get a hordpower filter, ended up been crazy money getting it to the uk, but glad I bought it, I’m going to machine my throttle bodies at work, did you strip them down or leave the butterfly’s in place? Cheers

[AP996]

6 hours ago, T1oas said:

Ap996, hi I’m in the uk, West Yorkshire, I’ve managed to get a hordpower filter, ended up been crazy money getting it to the uk, but glad I bought it, I’m going to machine my throttle bodies at work, did you strip them down or leave the butterfly’s in place? Cheers

Hi, I think you’ll find the Hordpower air box a great improvement, I would have bought one myself if it hadn’t worked out so expensive to get it imported to the UK.

I stripped my throttle bodies down and then had them bored out, I don’t think I’d try to do it with the butterflies still in place.

Be careful that you don’t take too much material off or the butterflies won’t seat correctly.

[T1oas]

Brilliant thanks for the reply, I might buy some second hand ones the same as you did! My bike is stripped down the only bit holding it up is what to do with the tb’s but it’s daft not to do them when they’re off and the bike will need mapping again. Cheers

[T1oas]

Do you just use lock tight on the screws for the butterfly’s of do you peen the end of the screw? Cheers sorry for the questions just don’t want a screw going down my intake

[M. Hausknecht]

I had my throttle-bodies bored by TWF (https://www.twfracing.com/). I believe the increased bore is only the back half, after air passes by the throttle plate. The stock bore is appreciably bigger prior to the butterfly. Be sure to open up the rubber boots and the intake ports to match the TB's increased bore or you'll end up with flow-disrupting "steps" as intake mixture exits the TBs and enters the head.

I suggest  replacing the stock butterfly screws with button-head cap screws and use Lock-tite. 

You'll like the Hordpower airbox.  The only other unit I'd consider using is the stuff from:

YAMAHA MT07/FZ07/R7 VELOCITY STACKS FOR MWR 63mm ANGLED POD

---

We have developed a high flow velocity stack kit for the Yamaha MT07/FZ07/R7. This combination will increase peak HP and TQ...

What is your plan for new fuel maps?

[T1oas]

Hi thanks for the reply, the tb’s at the filter side are 38mm but on the cylinder head side there 35mm, everyone seem to just machine that bit out, there are a few companies in the states that open the full body up to 40mm and make larger butterflies but I was just going to open the restricted part up, I’ve spoken to a few people and they say it’s worth 1-2 hp on a stock engine but I do agree to get full advantage the head wants porting as I’m just moving the restrictions further down stream by opening the tb’s up!

the bike has the euro 3 Akra (the one with titanium silencer under the bike) I had a dna filter and cover and it did 70bhp at the back wheel, it’s my second mt07 and I’ve used p3 tuning in Liverpool both times they use woolich software.

Edited November 30, 2022 by T1oas

[M. Hausknecht]

The U.S. flat track guys running the CP2 are using 83mm pistons (742.3 cc) and for those the 40 mm throttle-body bore makes sense. I'd avoid going that big on stock displacement unless I was willing to rev to 12k rpm, and have little power below 7000 rpm.  Of course, then we're talking about new cams, HD valve springs, and stout connecting rods. And frequent rebuilds.... Sounds like you've got a good, modest plan.

[T1oas]

1 hour ago, M. Hausknecht said:

The U.S. flat track guys running the CP2 are using 83mm pistons (742.3 cc) and for those the 40 mm throttle-body bore makes sense. I'd avoid going that big on stock displacement unless I was willing to rev to 12k rpm, and have little power below 7000 rpm.  Of course, then we're talking about new cams, HD valve springs, and stout connecting rods. And frequent rebuilds.... Sounds like you've got a good, modest plan.

It’s great fun messing about with them but not cheap! I’ve had a ktm 890 duke r and a street triple 765 rs but this is my second 07 there’s something about them I really like even though the other bikes where quicker, if I can just pep the 07 up a bit I’m a happy man

Edited November 30, 2022 by T1oas

[AP996]

2 hours ago, T1oas said:

It’s great fun messing about with them but not cheap! I’ve had a ktm 890 duke r and a street triple 765 rs but this is my second 07 there’s something about them I really like even though the other bikes where quicker, if I can just pep the 07 up a bit I’m a happy man

Your right, I’m used to bigger faster bikes but I really like the 07. If you want to pep it up I’d suggest reprofiling the inlet cam while you have it apart, it’ll give you approx an extra 1000 usable revs, stops the motor having an asthma attack at 8500 rpm but still have good bottom end performance. Cost about £200 for the regrind and some shims.

[T1oas]

2 hours ago, AP996 said:

Your right, I’m used to bigger faster bikes but I really like the 07. If you want to pep it up I’d suggest reprofiling the inlet cam while you have it apart, it’ll give you approx an extra 1000 usable revs, stops the motor having an asthma attack at 8500 rpm but still have good bottom end performance. Cost about £200 for the regrind and some shims.

It would make sense, just the inlet cam or would you do the exhaust as well? I’ve read back through the thread and realise its the inlet cam that makes the biggest difference, and do you think it would make much difference without any porting? I’d rather do everything over winter as this will be the second time the bike will of been mapped and it gets expensive having it set up on the dyno so would rather do everything now and not have to pay again further down the line!

Edited November 30, 2022 by T1oas

[M. Hausknecht]

For what its worth, I have a stock bottom end (including pistons) motor that puts out nearly 92 rwhp on 100 octane fuel. To get there: ported head, bored throttle bodies, and mild cams with stock valve springs. ECU-limited revs to 10,400. I have all the pieces for a second motor that'll have 13:1 pistons and Carrillo rods, plus cams with a bit more overlap, heavier duty valve springs, ported head.  It should be good for about 95 rwhp, but with more bottom end than the stock piston motor.

I have some ideas for porting  another head but not any need. Think smaller ports for higher velocity on the intake charge. Its what the best CP2 motor builders are doing in the U.S.  

[T1oas]

Flipping heck 92 rwhp that must go well! There is definitely a lot more knowledge and people tuning the cp2 in American, there a popular bike in the uk but nobody seems to tune them, most end up with a loud exhaust running lean! I’d love to get it to 80 whp but whatever power I can extract it would just be nice for it to rev a bit more freely at the top end like everyone says they just run out of puff at high revs! I do everything on my bikes but not sure I’d feel comfortable pulling the engine in bits, the bikes only done 2500 miles, could do with a man who knows what there doing and I’d remove the engine and let them work there magic as I’d rather do it now than get it mapped again and then next year do a bit more and have to pay £400 to map it again! 

Edited November 30, 2022 by T1oas

[AP996]

1 hour ago, T1oas said:

It would make sense, just the inlet cam or would you do the exhaust as well? I’ve read back through the thread and realise its the inlet cam that makes the biggest difference, and do you think it would make much difference without any porting? I’d rather do everything over winter as this will be the second time the bike will of been mapped and it gets expensive having it set up on the dyno so would rather do everything now and not have to pay again further down the line!

All depends on how much work you want to do and how much you want to spend, the inlet cam is straight forward but the exhaust cam is a little more work as you need to shorten the decompressor pins to suit the new re ground base circle size, I think you would still get a reasonable result without the head work but obviously if you do that as well that’s even better.

Bang per buck ratio gets worse the further you go though

[T1oas]

4 minutes ago, AP996 said:

All depends on how much work you want to do and how much you want to spend, the inlet cam is straight forward but the exhaust cam is a little more work as you need to shorten the decompressor pins to suit the new re ground base circle size, I think you would still get a reasonable result without the head work but obviously if you do that as well that’s even better.

Bang per buck ratio gets worse the further you go though

Shall I take my engine out and pay you to build it for me

[Triple Jim]

It seems like a stock MT-09 would be the easy way to get what you want, @T1oas.  Cycle World got 107 RWHP when they ran one on a dyno, and it weighs only 10 lbs more than an MT-07.  For the extra $1,700 bucks (US prices) it might be cheaper than the parts, machining, and ECU reflashing it would take to get less than that RPWP out of an MT-07.

[AP996]

1 minute ago, T1oas said:

Shall I take my engine out and pay you to build it for me

Nice idea but I only build my own or very close friends back in our racing days.

[T1oas]

My mate has an 09 and I’m not that bothered for them, love the 07, I’m probably best opening the throttle bodies up at work and sticking it back together, I’ve a habit of getting carried away!

[T1oas]

Just now, AP996 said:

Nice idea but I only build my own or very close friends back in our racing days.

Hahaa no problem just thought you seemed like a man that new his stuff

[AP996]

1 minute ago, T1oas said:

Hahaa no problem just thought you seemed like a man that new his stuff

Really Just an illusion mate

[T1oas]

Opened up my throttle bodies last night at work, machined them with the butterfly’s still in place, cut some round bits of rubber to protect them and masked everything up, just removed the injectors and a float sensor in the middle, I also back turned them so the swarf was coming out rather than been pushed again them, blew them out and washed them down with intake cleaner, pleased with the results, think I might build it back up, get it mapped and see how I get on then try find a spare engine to mess about with! 
 

Edited December 2, 2022 by T1oas