GEN 2 TI FORCE 4-2-1-2 vs. STOCK

Reefman - I wouldn't be surprised if you got 196 - post the chart and lets see if those are SAE numbers. BTW, Ti Force WAS made in Japan, Brock's pipes are made by Hindle, and the last I checked, Akrapovic was made in Slovenia. Most of these exhausts are 4 into 1; the Ti Force 4 into 2 into 1 into 2 is actually an "X" pipe - something a company called Murray Headers used to do back in the 70s. Apparently it works, since Ti Force's 4-2-1-2 actually puts down more horsepower than their 4 into 1. They are not the same headers at all . . .:whistle:

Haha I was just about to say that one pipe is Italian, one is Canadian and the other is Japanese :laugh:
 
THE PICS ARE ON THIS THREAD " My bike baseline dyno'd @ 196!!" GO LOOK...

Reefman - I wouldn't be surprised if you got 196 - post the chart and lets see if those are SAE numbers. BTW, Ti Force WAS made in Japan, Brock's pipes are made by Hindle, and the last I checked, Akrapovic was made in Slovenia. Most of these exhausts are 4 into 1; the Ti Force 4 into 2 into 1 into 2 is actually an "X" pipe - something a company called Murray Headers used to do back in the 70s. Apparently it works, since Ti Force's 4-2-1-2 actually puts down more horsepower than their 4 into 1. They are not the same headers at all . . .:whistle:
 
THE PICS ARE ON THIS THREAD " My bike baseline dyno'd @ 196!!" GO LOOK...

Just took a look at your other thread where you posted a sheet of it making "BHP - 196.01". Not to burst your bubble, but that is quite different from actual SAE corrected WHP(wheel horse power) numbers. Is there an actual dyno sheet with the power curve or just that print out with your numbers?
 
Don't know how many people have to tell bigreef that his numbers are not wheel horsepower numbers. Denial I guess.:laugh:
 
called the guys from @ XTREME MACHINES IN MILLSTONE, NJ.... one of the best on the east coast..

Just took a look at your other thread where you posted a sheet of it making "BHP - 196.01". Not to burst your bubble, but that is quite different from actual SAE corrected WHP(wheel horse power) numbers. Is there an actual dyno sheet with the power curve or just that print out with your numbers?
 
did you look at all the pics i posted in that thread... go look again...
Just took a look at your other thread where you posted a sheet of it making "BHP - 196.01". Not to burst your bubble, but that is quite different from actual SAE corrected WHP(wheel horse power) numbers. Is there an actual dyno sheet with the power curve or just that print out with your numbers?
 
hater #2 @ XTREME MACHINES IN MILLSTONE, NJ contact them!! :moon:

Not hating. I really don't give a f. I joined this forum to be educated. It's your bike and your numbers but I would expect if people are trying to inform you that you would at least consider they may have a point. If they are wrong them by all means throw it back in there face. But all you are doing is making teenage commits about haters instead of presenting a rational argument. Even the one that you tried to make only proves what everyone else was saying. I just hope you don't put money on the line against someone with 185 rwhp against your 196 bhp.
 
did you look at all the pics i posted in that thread... go look again...

Yeah I did. Just trying to help you out so that one time you run into a guy with a Gen II that only made a measly 178whp and he's right next to you when you guys bust off a roll race so you don't end up in shock. It's your story homie, tell it how you want :thumbsup:
 
This is comical.....looks like the tuners plan is working.......better numbers means all the kiddos will send their friends there.......Look at us....we are here talking about em.
 
:rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl:

How does he find a helmet to fit with that much swelling... :rofl: :rofl: :rofl:

Probably watched to many episodes of Jersey Shore, unless he's married to Snooky... :laugh:
 
196 rwhp sounds right power output.
my stock busa was 180, then the dyno guy did 40 full runs to run my engine in so that's 185 , hanged exhaust akra 4:1 then mapped it by ecu editor

a couple of weeks before a stock zx14 2012 also did 196 rwhp but with increased full fat mid range.

so i'd say the figures are real

my mate with TI-force also got 196 rwhp but that's across the pond.

not sure you guys have derated engines in the states:laugh:

mines the blue power and torque line

mark3evo v baldman zzr1400.jpg
 
196 rwhp sounds right power output.
my stock busa was 180, then the dyno guy did 40 full runs to run my engine in so that's 185 , hanged exhaust akra 4:1 then mapped it by ecu editor

a couple of weeks before a stock zx14 2012 also did 196 rwhp but with increased full fat mid range.

so i'd say the figures are real

my mate with TI-force also got 196 rwhp but that's across the pond.

not sure you guys have derated engines in the states:laugh:

mines the blue power and torque line


Mark, FIY the "DIN" correction factor used on your side of the pond is not SAE, just like BHP is not SAE rwhp. Apples to oranges, there is no comparison that can be accurately made. Stock Gen 2s usually come in at mid to high 170s rwhp SAE, and then after piping and mapping you could be anywhere from 188-195 rwhp SAE, depending on the pipe. Akrapovic and Yosh ain't what it used to be, we are seeing the most with Ti Force and Brock's right now on stock motors . . .:whistle:
 
As an example, here is another Gen 2 that POWERHOUSE mapped - this one with a 4 into 1 pipe. The two charts that follow are the SAME run: the first is with the SAE correction, and the second chart is with the DIN correction factor. Different correction factors can "skew" the results, which is why many people post charts with the STD correction, which inflates the numbers. This is why you should always use the same correction factors whenever you are making comparisons . . .:whistle:

gen2saechart.jpg


gen2dinchart.jpg
 
Back
Top