2003 VFR Dyno results

[Buckwheat]

As I mentioned in another thread, there is a big bike rally here in town every 1st Sun of the month and the local Honda dealership opens up their their dyno to the public.
I've never had a bike tested. Actually, never even watched it done. I had no intentions of testing my bike but figured I'd stop by to watch some of the other bikes run. My bike is a bone stock '03 with about 5K on the odometer. Certainly nothing to brag about.....but it was the end of the day and the guys smooth-talked me into it.

Unfortunately, they weren't currently equipped to measure torque, only horsepower.

The 3 runs were surprising consistent but the shop owner said that is typical for FI engines.
From 3800 to 6500 RPM's the HP went up very evenly. Pretty much adding 10 HP per 1K RPM's. At 6.6K, it flattened out somewhat and at 6.9K it spiked hard right where the VTEC kicked in. HP jumped from 58 to almost 70 inside of 200 RPM. From there it continued a steady climb up to 95 rear wheel HP at just under 11K RPM.

Run 1: 94.70 HP
Run 2: 94.50 HP
Run 3: 95.35 HP

Comments:
In the past, my comments on the VTEC transition were more about the noise, less to do with the power jump. I guess this sort of proves me wrong.

Shop owner says he only sells 2-3 VFR's per year. Only 1-2 of the ST1300's. He'd like to see the VFR jump to 1000 cc and drop the ST from the line. He won't know what Honda is planning to do until Oct. He commented that both bikes are niche markets and will never account for big sales. However they are the bikes that make owning a Honda dealership fun.

He said if he had to only own 1 bike, the VFR would easily be it. Of course, he never WANTS to own just 1 bike, but that is the shoes many of us find ourselves in.


Any comments from others who have had their VFR's tested? Is my bike below avg? I'm guessing the dyno's can vary somewhat too?

[NorcalBoy]

Taken from Factory Pro's Website:

Problem:

Today, about 75% of the entire world's hp values are a mess of dynojet "hp", dynojet clone's rough approximations of dynojet horsepower , some brake dyno mfgr's "dynojet channel" that's "+/- 10% of a dj number" , some dynos that out exaggerate the dj numbers and imply that they know what the transmission hp and crank hp is, and even other dynos with the most expensive brochure that read whatever the user wants them to read, True, Real, SF and DJ..... (sigh...)

All because some guy thought that a 1985 prerelease version V Max made 145 crank hp according to the marketing dept. and he couldn't have his "new" inertia dyno read 90 hp on a stock dealership V-Max. Well, he WAS right at 85-90, but he made it read 120 to sell more people on his dynos. And that's where the chassis dyno hp mess started.

Simple Solution:

True HP.
Every dyno company can all do it.


DEF:
Corrected True HP is the:
Actual power under Steady State or Sweep with CORRECT inertial mass value at 20 f/ps
delivered to the drive roller of a chassis dyno
to which is ONLY added the dyne coast down parasitics and then
corrected to existing atmospheric test conditions.


Factory Pro has confidentially refused to exaggerate measured and corrected horsepower figures to sell more dynos.

Since Factory Pro hasn't rescaled horsepower for the last 20 year and our software reads the same files the same from the very first EC997 dyne system.

Some Dynamometer companies add to measured rear wheel power readings a factor that is based on ESTIMATED rear wheel power losses (under what power conditions? 125cc? 1200cc? under coasting conditions? with a 3.00x17 bias ply tire? a 190x17 radial tire? New heavy radial tire vs. worn old, light, stock bias ply tire? Who knows?)

In short, there is NO meaningful "average" tire to get a correct rear tire power transmission loss measurement for all bikes - so obviously, unless they actually measure the power lost in the rear tire, under driven load conditions, NO dyno company should BE ADDING incorrect power figures into the measured power. It's simply wrong.

The fact that they add varying amounts of power to the actual, "true" amount of power delivered and measured to the surface of the drive roller creates a situation that makes it an onerous task to compare power figures from different brands of dynamometer systems.

On simple inertial dynamometers, some (most, actually, all that I know of in the MC market) companies use an average for the inertial mass value of the engine, transmission, rear wheel, sprocket and chain on every bike - as if a YZ125 has the same rear wheel or internal rotating mass as a 1340cc Harley Davidson. Needless to say, if the software thinks that the YZ125 had a HD rear wheel on it, it would look like the 125 makes more HP at the rear wheel than it does at the crankshaft. It's simply wrong.
And - that's why you hear of 125cc Karts that make 43 hp at the rear wheels!!!!!

It's expensive to measure frictional losses in the engine and drivetrain, requiring the dyno to be able to drive the vehicle with engine off. Add the cost of a 50+hp electric motor, controlled power supply, etc. It's just not likely that $20,000 dyno will be equipped with that equipment.

It is also common for dynamometer companies to add to the power readings by adding transmission and primary gear/chain losses back into the measured power readings. Some companies make a concerted effort try to measure frictional losses and, optionally, add the power to the measured readings. Other companies - some that would surprise you - say that it's not important and give a blanket, single factor for frictional losses in every engine. That includes some $25,000-$35,000 dynes.

Some simply say that there is a meaningful "average" for every motorcycle,(2 stroke, 4 stroke, 1 cylinder/1 transmission, 4 cylinder/1 transmission) and apply it to every bike and that it is not a significant difference.

Blanket estimates of "average" losses and corrections are, quite simply, incorrect. At the upper levels of the industry, (we are talking about $150,000 - $500,000 AC or DC 4 quadrant dynamometers) it is not tolerated - shouldn't be - and needn't be.

There is a dyno company that actually has different versions of software that displays their own identical data files as different amounts of power depending on whether you use the DOS version or the Windows version of their software!!

True Rear Wheel Horsepower (tm) is Factory Pro's standard of measuring the power that is actually delivered to the rear wheel. It is honest, true, fair and duplicable. It is the ONLY standard that can be duplicated by the entire industry - regardless of the dyno manufacturer.

You be the judge of what your numbers mean. 94.5 is higher than average for a stock VFR800, of course that's just my worthless input based upon the data that i've seen (14 stock VFR's, approximately 60 dyno pulls by all 14 total) You can probably add dyno numbers to oil, air filters, tires, which gen is the best...etc, etc, etc. if you think you like the sound of 94.5 RWHP, then that's what you have.

[eddie cap]

Well, I dont know where to start or what to say, but Norcal you know one hell of alot
about Dynos. Back in my day there were very few chassis dynos out there.My
first experience with dynos was what I believe was called an engine dyno. This
particular dyno was owned by a champion drag racer in Southeastern Penna.
The first few times I watched this dyno do its thing was really impressive. I
suppose an engine dyno removes many of the questionable factors/variables that
you mention. I guess another factor that I dont believe you talked about is
temperature and humidity . I am sure temp/humidity can have a significant
effect on torque and horspower. Anyway I am sure all of us would like our
machines to post above average HP/Torque numbers but with what you are
saying, and I do believe that you know what you are talking about, the
numbers generated from your average chassis dyno can be all over the
place. So knowing this, how best can we use a dyno to tell us if a
modification helps or hinders the engine performance of our machine. eddie

[elf800]

thats about what it should have cw tested at 96 hp...

[NorcalBoy]

Engine dynos will only provide numbers for the actual crankshaft, what we all want to see is Rear Wheel Horsepower because that is the true number factoring in all of the parasitic losses of the moving parts..after the crankshaft.

The serious dyno tuners use temperature and humidity controlled dyno rooms when it comes to testing the results of modifications. This is done to ensure that these factors do not affect the testing results, the atmospheric conditions remain identical.

I have used dynojet dyno testing to check the result of every individual modifcation I have done concerning the engine. Stock baseline, air filter, slip ons, header, mapped PCIII with o2 elims, emissions removal, PAIR block, airbox modification, even runs with race fuel vs. pump gas, motor oils and different types of spark plugs. Some mods do nothing until they are grouped with additional improvements, and some show improvement immediately.

The dynojet dyno is a great tool to check overall improvement of your total package from the initial baseline up to the current configuration, the numbers are only relative to what you started with and what you end up with - under identical atmospheric conditions. These results do translate to real world improvement though.

I do know there is quite a bit of opinion on this forum concerning the positive, and or, negative effects of certain mods. I personally know the results of each and every one with respect to my bike. All I can say is that there are more opinions than information being provided here usually and I'll leave it at that. HP can be gained in some very surprising ways if you are willing to take the time to test. I know who's talking , believe me, it just makes me smile and giggle a bit.

I am working on gaining the help of a very well known and respected tuning company and their eddy current dyno to perform some additional tuning very soon. I hope I will have more info to share in the near future. Peace

[eddie cap]

Thanks Norcal; sounds like you are on the right track,I am sure some of the work that you have done in conjunction with certain modifications have often been surprising. I am not trying to steal your dyno magic, but can you give me an approximate per cent
horsepower increase from when you started until your latest / highest horsepower
reading. I ask this question because I would like to know the approximate potential horsepower improvement possible in the Honda V-4 powerplant. thanks eddie

[R.W.]

My bike increased about 5 HP & 2 pounds of Torque when I had the custom map done, made a huge difference on smoothness & ride ability factor

[NorcalBoy]

Originally Posted by eddie cap

Thanks Norcal; sounds like you are on the right track,I am sure some of the work that you have done in conjunction with certain modifications have often been surprising. I am not trying to steal your dyno magic, but can you give me an approximate per cent
horsepower increase from when you started until your latest / highest horsepower
reading. I ask this question because I would like to know the approximate potential horsepower improvement possible in the Honda V-4 powerplant. thanks eddie

To date this increase has been just a tick over 20% running 91 octane Chevron pump gas and 22.7% utilizing VP U4 race gas.

The race gas is very expensive and not really applicable for daily use, for obvious reasons. I tested the bike with the race fuel just for informational purposes and only made 3 pulls with it. I did the race gas thing because I wanted to confirm, and or, disprove the standard opinion around this forum that race gas doesn't provide any performance increase benefit. I will concede that the race gas test was done after the addition of all of my mods to date, and may not reflect the results if it had been done with a bone stock engine and FI confirguration.

I'm sure there is quite a bit more HP hidden inside the engine, but the extraction process becomes quite expensive at this point. If you are not prohibited by cost, I'm positive that you could get substantial gains above what I have already experienced.

I am trying to pursue one more avenue of improvement that doesn't require internal engine modification and hope to be able to accomplish this soon.

[hondawolf]

Norcalboy, it would be neat some time to see a chart stating your hp numbers after each modification....

[NorcalBoy]

I understand that everyone here would like to see such a chart. I would never post such a thing for a few reasons:

1.) These numbers are only good with respect to my machine.

2.) I absolutely don't want to get into having to defend the numbers or the modifcations, which I'm POSITIVE would happen.

3.) I have invested a great deal of money and time into what I currently have. I have taken the time, effort and $ to find out what works and what doesn't and really don't want to just give that away. Call me an a$$hole.............

Sorry, but thanks for asking.

[Buckwheat]

I appreciate all your input NCB!

If nothing else, at least I have a starting point for my stock bike. If I stick with the same dyno, I should be able to measure changes after any upgrades.

Unfortunately, temp & humidity were not controlled.

[eddie cap]

NCB and all interested in HP gains; 20% over stock is pretty impressive , your bike should have close to the power of a 600 cc CBR etc. Anyway a few months back I
got a hold of a 99 VFR engine with supposedly 7000 miles on it. I plan on doing some work on the engine while still riding the bike. I probably would like to freshen up the pistons,rings,and touch up the valves.I will keep all my current mods on the bike and plug in the new motor. I probably wont go as far as NCB did with all the dyno pulls, but just as he learned what these Honda V-4's like in the way of modifications,I plan on
doing also. I'll do some stuff on the dyno but because I dont have alot of $$'s, I will
do some seat the pants mods. Anyway it should be a good learning experience. I will try to keep you guys somewhat informed in the way of what mods dont work etc. eddie
eddie