PC-V'ed Norge Dyno Run

[GTM®]

Below is a run @100% (only) throttle dyno run for a custom mapped Norge in Sweden (read he is *not* running AutoTune, nor my ECU). Keep in mind, this is only at 100% throttle, which most people rarely spend any time at. Also note the horrifically rich stock fueling at 5.5k+ RPMs as shown by the red line dipping downwards below 10.0:1 AFR , and the PC-V corrected blue line.

Thanks to Tommy for sending me the drf files(!).

 

[JohninVT]

At first I read the peak number and was sort of unimpressed with a 3hp peak gain. Then I actually looked at the chart and saw that the stupid-lean condition under 4,000 is erased which will stop the surging and helmet knocking around town. It also may have only gained 3hp at peak but it holds a nearly 10hp advantage over stock past peak for 2,000 rpm. That is a massive change and must really transform the engine power characteristics.

 

[GTM®]

At first I read the peak number and was sort of unimpressed with a 3hp peak gain. Then I actually looked at the chart and saw that the stupid-lean condition under 4,000 is erased which will stop the surging and helmet knocking around town. It also may have only gained 3hp at peak but it holds a nearly 10hp advantage over stock past peak for 2,000 rpm. That is a massive change and must really transform the engine power characteristics.

John, it's actually rich below 4k rpm in the above graph, but again, remember this is at 100% throttle. I don't think any helmets will be knocking at WFO.

If you want to see the fueling at more reasonable throttle position and RPMs, see my original post HERE or shown below for reference in this thread (blue line top graph is uncorrected, red line is stock bottom graph, corrected in blue)... which is where one does ride most of time. Fueling revisions in this area require my ECU (and PC-V/AT for those who want automatic/perfect fueling every second the engine is running). I have a few left still of the custom run PC-Vs.

 

[alfaguzzi]

Yes, the PCV from Todd gave my Norge a new engine. I´m pleased with the torque figure but not the hp, becuse it feels alot more then 73

 

[Skeeve]

Yes, the PCV from Todd gave my Norge a new engine. I´m pleased with the torque figure but not the hp, becuse it feels alot more then 73

This is why Harley likes to talk torque #s instead of HP, 'cause riding feel is all about the torque: HP is just a function of torque, so a Harley w/ 50 #-ft and a powerband only 4k rpm wide [1k-5k] is eminently more satisfying to ride around on vs. a Honda RC165 (?? - whichever the 5cyl 250GP bike they campaigned back in the 60s was) which, even tho' it had a 10k rpm wide powerband, only put out something like 35 #-ft & couldn't get off the line if the engine was turning less than 6k rpm.

If you could rev your Norge out to the 10k+ rpm limits that race reps have, well, it would be churning out more than 73 ponies. Doesn't mean it would be any more satisfying to ride tho'...

 

[Mi_ka]

Engines provide braking when off throttle in normal driving.
The braking force depends on rpm.
An engine running at high rpms need micro adjustment of throttle opening to achieve smooth movement at low speeds in normal driving. That is why a low rpm torqey engine is better for everyday use than a high rpm one.
Also, the engine has dynamic inertia. A fast revving one needs more time to achieve higher rpms than a slow revving one.
If you put a lighter flywheel to help the fast revving engine go into its powerband faster, you have jerky/stalling operation at low speeds as the compression would slow down the piston too much because of lack of rotating inertia. That is why F1 engines stall when off the gas pedal.
Contradictions that dictate engine design based on intended use.
If you always want to go slow, a potato-potato is a better V2 choice.
If you want to go faster, a MG is better for real life spirited speed situations.
For a really fast V2 (for this nice vibing feeling) you must look at the 1000 jap bikes but it is not as nice to go slowly as the gas grip seems emptier...