The CB1100 Community Forum

(Warning: Long post. Feel free to skip to last paragraph at any time where I describe my bottom line impressions.)

On Wednesday afternoon, I rode my 2014 CB1100 to Las Vegas for the purpose of visiting the Dynojet Research Facility. A week earlier I had contacted Dynojet via email, asking whether the currently available Power Commander V map for a stock 2013 CB1100 would work on my 2014 CB. I explained that Honda had added a sixth gear for the 2014 model. I received a quick response from Dusty Schaller, the Senior Product Manager at Dynojet who wrote that he couldn't say for sure but suspected the maps would be very close. He added that they had been trying to get a 2014 into their facility to verify but hadn't had any luck.

I couldn't resist. I wrote back offering a mutually beneficial arrangement - I would bring in my 2014 CB, equipped with a Yoshimura RS-3 slip-on, and allow them to develop a map off of it in exchange for a PC-V unit. I also explained that I was a part of this forum and that there were constant discussions about the need for or benefit of a PC-V and/or dyno tune and that I would share the results and give honest feedback as to any improvements in rideability. What did I have to lose? I was pleasantly surprised when I received another quick reply from Mr. Schaller saying he would absolutely be happy to do that if I could get my bike to their facility in Vegas.

Arrangements were made for me to meet with "his guys" on Thursday (yesterday). A quick check of the weather forecast showed that clear skies were expected through the week with highs in the upper 60s, low 70s along my route but dipping into the low to mid-40s at night. A quick trip to Cycle Gear for some Freeze Out base layers (I'll report on those in another thread) proved to be well worth the expense. Some of those mountain passes got pretty darn cold and both going and coming, I rode several hours in the dark. The initial plan was to leave early Thursday morning, hand over the bike by 1pm and get it back at the end of the day. I would stay for the night and return Friday morning (today).

That plan changed after I exchanged emails with one of the techs I was to meet, Chris Kelly. Great guy. Chris explained that the best case scenario would be that the existing hardware works fine then installation of the PC-V and dyno tuning the map would take from 2 to 3 hours. The worst case scenario would be that the existing unit doesn't work and a new unit would have to be built from scratch. They would need to review the bike, take photos, scope necessary signals with an oscilloscope (which reminds me, I'm overdue for my physical), then send the data and information to their engineers to have a prototype built. I would then need to schedule a time to come back to have the prototype tested, tuned, installed, etc. The expectation was that the existing hardware would work but to be on the safe side, it was agreed that I'd get them my bike first thing in the morning rather than at midday.

I changed my hotel reservations and set off for Vegas on Wednesday at 1pm. I would have left earlier but had an unavoidable meeting at work. Other than a few miles in Riverside, traffic flowed nicely and I made good time, stopping only for fuel and to stretch my legs and give my backside a rest. By 6:45pm I rolled into my hotel, just a few blocks from the Dynojet facility, 335 miles from my home in San Diego. In keeping with the ferret's travel calculations of approximately 50 to 55 mph, I averaged 58.26 mph (335/5.75). That traffic in Riverside took its toll but overall, it was a great ride.

At 8am sharp, I arrived at the Dynojet facility and met with Chris. He had me ride the CB around back, up a ramp and into the building where the work would be performed. The place was very clean and appeared to be very well organized. I met another member of the team who would be performing the actual work and analysis on my bike. Chris showed me around the place and explained how they performed the tuning. They had several dyno rooms with in-floor dynamometers and attached computers. They also had an above ground dyno like the ones I've seen on videos and even a dyno for cars. (There were no cars in there when I was present.) It was reassuring to see how professional it all seemed. Although I knew Dynojet is an industry leader in fuel-management systems, I'd be lying if I said I wasn't a bit nervous handing over my perfectly working CB to people I had just met for them to start fiddling around with it.

I spoke to Chris about ECU tuning/reflashing and how it seems to be gaining in popularity and asked his thoughts about it as it related to adding a piggy back device such as a PC-V. He was very forthright in saying there are things that can be done with a reflash that can't be done with a PC-V. Those things we've been discussing on the forum - elimination of speed limiters, increasing rev range, etc. Cost associated with a reflash is usually one drawback to going that route.

It appears Don Guhl is very competitively priced! A lot goes into analyzing a stock ECU for a particular model to know the existing parameters then a substantial amount of testing goes into what the appropriate and specific changes can and should be to the ECU. That includes dyno runs to optimize the AFRs. Normally that translates into higher costs to the consumer than simply adding something like a PC-V. Plus, reflashing isn't possible (yet) for all makes and models. It appears that we're fortunate to have that option because someone here provided his bike to Don. I can't remember who (CIP57 was it you? Or maybe HikerToo?) at the moment but THANKS!

Dynojet does make devices that allow you to flash tune your own bike (not available for our CB) and even make changes to ignition timing in addition to fuel management (again, not for our CB). I was told there would have to be some indication as to demand before those products would be expanded to include the CB in terms of availability. My thought is that if Honda limits production in the U.S. to just the 2013 and 2014 models, it's unlikely that we'll see production of those units for our bikes. In addition to Don Guhl, it appears that ECU Unleashed is able to reflash our ECUs and it's a matter of finding one of their dealers to work with. I don't know what they charge but they seem to be a legit operation.

Back to my tuning - I left my bike at the facility and walked back to the hotel. I had breakfast and was enjoying some coffee when I got a message from Chris. Everything looked good. The wiring was exactly the same between the 2013 and 2014 models. The existing unit should work out fine. A short time later, another message informed me that things were going quickly and everything was working perfectly. A few more tests needed to be performed but they would likely have me done by noon. I decided to make the ride home rather than stay another night. Shortly after noon, I picked up my motorcycle, had a brief talk with Chris then started for home. Before leaving, I was given a print out of my dyno chart. Here it is:

[url=http://s51.photobucket.com/user/jamesfontaine/media/Mobile%20Uploads/IMAG1410.jpg.html]

I've since sent an email to Chris asking him about the numbers because they seem a bit high to me. I realize that dyno numbers can and will differ, at times dramatically, depending on the specific bike, the specific dyno, and the conditions at the time of the tests. What my dyno shows is that before tuning, my max horsepower was 90.72 with torque at 69.21 ft-lb. Well-made slip-on's have been reported to increase power by 1 to 5 hp. Assuming that's true and assuming the best case scenario, that would mean my bike in completely stock form prior to the tune was putting out around 85 hp. I guess that's possible. Motousa.com posted a dyno chart during their review of a stock 2013 CB1100 and it showed 84.02 hp and 66.45 ft-lb of torque. However, Motorcycle.com showed a chart with 81.5 hp and 64.6 ft-lb of torque for the same model. Our very own CIP57 posted his dyno for a 2013 CB running a full Yoshi exhaust and his best numbers were 86.46 hp and 63.81 ft-lb after reflash and with the AFRs from the Dynojet map for a stock 2013 CB.

After the tune and, of course, with my Yoshimura RS-3 slip-on, my numbers are 92.10 hp and 70.56 ft-lb torque. As much as I'd like those numbers to be accurate, I can't help but think they're rather generous. Still, they were produced at the Dynojet Research facility by the guy who Chris described to me as being a perfectionist and somewhat OCD when it comes to maintaining the shop and equipment. In the end, this isn't a motorcycle you buy for horsepower. What matters to me is that improvements throughout the entire range can be seen following the installation of the PC-V and the tune. The gain (approx. 1.5 hp and 1.5 ft-lb of torque), although modest, is appreciated. Also, you can see from the chart how the bike was running somewhat lean at lower rpms prior to the tune. It's not until around 6.5K rpm that the AFR approached ideal. In the 3K to 4K range (where I tend to ride), there was noticeable improvement. That improvement is seen throughout the entire rev range. That translates into a cooler running engine which, I imagine, isn't bad when you have a (primarily) air-cooled engine. I'll edit this post and share whatever feedback I get from Chris regarding my numbers.

I had plenty of time on the ride home to assess the bike for any noticeable changes in rideability. The traffic going south was significantly worse than the trip north. I did stop for a quick bite that added about 15-20 minutes but as I understand it, those stops are accounted for in the ferret calculation. This time the ride took 6.75 hours which translates to an average of 49.63 mph (horrendous). If you take the entire trip, there and back, into consideration, then my total average speed over the 670 miles was 53.6 mph. Ah...ferret, you're a genius. My seat-of-the-pants dyno could not feel any difference in power. Not surprising given the modest gains. However, one thing I noticed was how the bike felt in the sweet spot.

When travelling on the highway, my bike (as I'm sure yours does) has a sweet spot where everything seems to come together perfectly. The engine feels right, the revs feel right, there's sufficient roll-on still available, everything just feels effortless. Before the PC-V and tune, that sweet spot for me was 70 to 75 mph at 3K to 3.5K rpm. After the PC-V and tune, that sweet spot felt closer to 75 to 80 mph and 3.5K to 4K rpm. I like it. Am I imaging it? Wanting desperately to feel something, anything, for this effort? I don't think so. Mr. Schaller and his guys at Dynojet were kind enough to do all of this without charging me a penny. My expense was fuel, one night in the hotel, and the few cheap meals I had. Amazingly (sadly), I avoided the casinos and fancy restaurants! Spending a couple of days on the bike instead of in the office cut in my favor. Even if I am just fooling myself into feeling something that isn't there, I suppose all that matters is what I believe is there.

Bottom line - My motorcycle ran great before installing the PC-V and having it tuned. My motorcycle runs great now. Regardless of what the numbers are, there is a notable increase in both horsepower and torque following installation of the PC-V and tune. Also, the air/fuel ratio is closer to ideal throughout the entire range and in particular, where my bike tends to be. It's up to each of us to decide how much we're willing to spend for modest but real improvements and what is "necessary" given any modifications performed. I hope that through all of this, I have contributed even just a little to what is or will be available for our bikes. I hope the information I have shared helps some of you decide which route, if any, you want to take when it comes to tuning your CB.

EDIT no.1: One likely explanation for my readings being over 92HP and torque over 70 ft-lb is RLETs.

With regard to the HP and torque numbers, I heard back from Chris at Dynojet and the best he could do was say that he believes the particular dyno used on my bike tends to put out slightly higher numbers than the two motorcycle dynos next to it. He said he has no way to quantify how much higher than "theoretically perfect" that particular dyno runs and no scientific way to show that it does in fact give higher numbers. All of the Dynojet dynamometers are made under very controlled conditions with calibration of the mass of the dyno drums, bearing drag, etc., brought to as close to perfect as possible. The software used by Dynojet takes into consideration atmospheric conditions at the time of testing thus ensuring consistent results regardless of location, temperature, etc. Chris shared with me a short article written by their VP of Research that explains some of the differences seen from different dynos. It discusses car dynamometers but the principles apply equally to motorcycle dynos. I share it here with permission:

Truth, Lies, and Dyno Runs: Part 1

A popular thread that continues to surface in various enthusiast forums is related to the results attained from various chassis dynos. In the following paragraphs, I’ll attempt to explain the various types of chassis dynos and their operating principals, how they’re used in the field, and how to interpret the results. I know that you’re thinking, “oh boy, the VP of Dynojet is going on a sales pitch”, and that couldn’t be further from the truth. I’m an avid automotive enthusiast, and no, that doesn’t mean I just plop down cash for
the latest exotic car. I’ve made thousands of dyno runs, tuned 1000’s of automotive ECM’s, designed and fabricated my own turbo kits, and made hundreds of passes at the strip. I hope to educate the sometimes confusing subject of chassis dynos and how
they’re used in the field.

There are generally two types of dynos that are used for performance verification and tuning, “inertia type loading”, such as the Dynojet 224x or 248, or “electric type loading”, such as a Mustang 250, 1100, Dyno Dynamics, or Dynojet 224xLC / 424xLC.
Traditionally Dynojet has offered the inertia loading dynos, whereas Mustang Dynamometer and Dyno Dynamics have been electric type loading dynos.

The major differences in the two types of dynos are their principals of operation. A true inertia dyno (such as the Dynojet 224x or 248) uses large steel rollers that contain mass. This mass is fixed, it can never change, and for those that remember high school physics, Force = Mass x Acceleration. Based on the time that is required to accelerate a mass (the steel drums in this case), you are effectively measuring force. Ok, so now that we have force, how does an inertia dyno come up with horsepower? Simple, force (lbs) multiplied by speed (ft/sec) effectively yields horsepower. Since every Dynojet dyno on the face of the earth has a mass that has been precisely quantified using a proprietary process, and that value is stored in the dyno software for each dyno, not only are the horsepower numbers consistent every morning, noon and night, but each and every Dynojet is relative to one another. Go ahead, take your car to 25 different Dynojet dynos, run it up, and I personally guarantee the horsepower will repeat to within 1/2 HP (no one else would dare make that claim). What if the numbers aren’t the same between the 25 Dynojet dynos, well, it’s quite simple to explain, and you need look no further than the vehicle. Most modern powertrain management systems have a lot of authority when it comes to how much power they ultimately put to the wheels. Capturing OBD2 parameters such as spark advance, engine coolant temperature, inlet air temperature, mass air flow, and other critical PID’s provide the insight required to determine why the vehicle did, or did not repeat.

So let’s take a step back before we move on and look at this from a practical perspective. As an enthusiast, you may be wondering, “what are the variables that exist when I dyno my car on a Dynojet, there has to be something”. I would respond, “A Dynojet dyno operator CAN NOT change the data that determines what the power reading will be (remember the physics thing?). What ever power is being put to the drums will be measured and displayed, period.” Once that power has been measured, there are two ways to look at it, corrected or uncorrected. Since every Dynojet dyno is equipped with electronics that measure the atmospheric pressure, temperature, and humidity, the results are able to be analyzed as a “corrected value”. This allows an “apples to apples”
comparison when testing in regions that are at different altitudes, which affects the atmospheric pressure, and different temperature. This is also important for comparing results at the same dyno shop, for example, here in Las Vegas our atmospheric pressure stays relatively consistent, but our temps vary from 38 degrees to 118 degrees. So the same car with no changes will certainly make less power on the hot day compared to the cool day, but applying the SAE CF allows us to make an “apples to apples” comparison. If you take anything away from the last few sentences, it would be to ask your dyno operator to make sure that he is showing you SAE corrected HP figures, and before I get off my soap box, I will say that there are certain Dynojet dyno owners who apply the “STD” correction factor, and that’s not proper to do. The STD CF is an older standard that yields slightly higher HP numbers, so don’t allow yourself to fall into the trap (just use the SAE CF!!).

Ok, lets move on to “electric type load chassis dynos”. These types (Mustang, Dyno Dymamics) of dynos utilize rollers that usually have very little mass, hence they’re not a true inertia chassis dyno. In order to present any type of physical load on the vehicle, there needs to be a PAU (power absorption unit). Typically this PAU is in the form of electrical coils that utilize eddy current technology (think of this as a big electric brake). Now having a big electric brake is all very nice, but we need to use a chassis dyno to measure power at the end of the day. Since the mass of the rollers isn’t known (like a Dynojet), there needs to be a means to measure power, so how this is done is with a torque cell, or sometimes referred to as a strain gauge. As the big electric brake absorbs power, the strain gauge is actually measuring torque. Now here is the kicker, the strain gauge really doesn’t know the difference between 2 ft-lbs or 200 ft-lbs until you calibrate the device, so in doing this, you’re introducing a potential margin of error and inconsistency. This would apply to any "loading type dyno" that uses eddy current load control and a strain gauge, even our own 224xLC which is a hybrid inertia / electric load style dyno. The strain gauge needs to be calibrated to make it consistent and repeatable, but there are other user defined (by the dyno operator) variables that makes things very interesting. Once the strain gauge is calibrated properly, the dyno operator must enter certain parameters about the test vehicle that determine the rate of acceleration the dyno will allow, and are ultimately directly responsible for the power and torque readings that are displayed on the graph (WOW!). At this point you may have connected the dots and are either appalled, or still rather comfortable with the dyno graph you have in your hands. The question that pops up, “my car made 280 rwhp on a Mustang dyno, what would it make on a Dynojet”, should be countered with the statement, “I’m not sure, but I do know this, you’d most likely get 10 different numbers on that same Mustang dyno, let alone another Mustang dyno that’s installed in the field”. Now this isn’t meant to bash Mustang dyno or Dyno Dynamics, but some dyno owners just can’t resist “tuning the dyno”, instead of tuning your car. If you’re “measuring stick” isn’t consistent day in and day out, then how can you be certain your tuning and modifications are actually working? If these dynos are set up properly, they can provide relatively consistent and repeatable results. For what it’s worth, we do not allow dyno operators to adjust “certain parameters about the test vehicle” on our hybrid electric brake / inertia 224xLC dyno.

So, in any case, there are a couple ways that even when testing on the same model Mustang dyno or Dyno Dynamics dyno (or even the same exact unit) that the numbers are subject to a few variables. These variables are ultimately responsible for the power numbers reported from the test session.

Then the argument comes out, "well, I need to have my car tuned on an electric load type dyno". This is not necessarily the case, I'd be more concerned with the ability of your tuner / calibrator. A car that needed a "ground up mapping session", ie. complete development on a stand alone system or "zero map", then a loading dyno would be VERY beneficial. When you do testing on a loading type dyno, ask your "tuner" to supply you with a plot of calculated load, along with as many other parameters you can get your hands on (spark advance, MAFv, IAT, etc). Log these types of parameters on a loading dyno, and then on an inertia dyno and let me know what you find. As an enthusiast, I would urge that you arm yourself with this type of data, it’s much more important than concerning yourself about which dyno you should test on. Tuning, or refining an ECM calibration is one discipline that requires specialized tools, but for “no bull cuss numbers” there is only one consistent means of measurement, and that’s a Dynojet dyno. I’ll go into detail on this subject another day, so until then, enjoy your chassis dyno experience.

*** For the record, Dynojet has offered “loading type automotive chassis dynos” since 2003, although a majority of the 1400 Dynojet automotive dynos in the field are “inertia only”. Currently there are about 200 224xLC and 424xLC’s in the field, the “LC” designation indicates that it’s an electric load type dyno. The LC dynos that we offer can be operated in either mode, inertia only, or inertia combined with eddy current load absorption.

Dan Hourigan
Vice President, Dynojet Research, Inc.

EDIT no.2: This article convinces me that my CB is pumping out 92HP and over 70 ft-lb of torque and it's doing so because of RLETs. Oh, and it's black. And asymmetrical. Haha. Again, all this business about horsepower and torque is most likely meaningless (and worthless) to most of you. The CB1100 in stock form performs beautifully. This all began with discussions concerning ECU reflashes vs. fuel management units following exhaust modifications. I have enjoyed geeking out over all this stuff and hope you don't mind me sharing what I've learned along the way.

Ahh yes, since you have the rlets the numbers make perfect sense.

What a great post. Thanks MG. I read the whole thing and will re-read it to make sure I understand it, but let me say this, having a bike that runs the best it can, or at least how it should, should be very reassuring for you.

I think it was definitely worth your time and expense considering now you know exactly how your bike is performing throughout the rev range. You know you are not lean here or there, that your af ratios are where they should be, and that there is little else that could be done ( outside of a reflash to eliminate the limiters on the machine) to make your bike run any better.

Plus you got to take off work and go for a great ride.

I will continue to try and understand all this new black magic that comes with making a modern motorcycle run, and posts like yours go a long way in helping. Thanks.

(01-09-2015, 08:04 AM)metallyguitarded_imp Wrote: [ -> ](Warning: Long post. Feel free to skip to last paragraph at any time where I describe my bottom line impressions.)

On Wednesday afternoon, I rode my 2014 CB1100 to Las Vegas for the purpose of visiting the Dynojet Research Facility. A week earlier I had contacted Dynojet via email, asking whether the currently available Power Commander V map for a stock 2013 CB1100 would work on my 2014 CB. I explained that Honda had added a sixth gear for the 2014 model. I received a quick response from Dusty Schaller, the Senior Product Manager at Dynojet who wrote that he couldn't say for sure but suspected the maps would be very close. He added that they had been trying to get a 2014 into their facility to verify but hadn't had any luck.

I couldn't resist. I wrote back offering a mutually beneficial arrangement - I would bring in my 2014 CB, equipped with a Yoshimura RS-3 slip-on, and allow them to develop a map off of it in exchange for a PC-V unit. I also explained that I was a part of this forum and that there were constant discussions about the need for or benefit of a PC-V and/or dyno tune and that I would share the results and give honest feedback as to any improvements in rideability. What did I have to lose? I was pleasantly surprised when I received another quick reply from Mr. Schaller saying he would absolutely be happy to do that if I could get my bike to their facility in Vegas.

Arrangements were made for me to meet with "his guys" on Thursday (yesterday). A quick check of the weather forecast showed that clear skies were expected through the week with highs in the upper 60s, low 70s along my route but dipping into the low to mid-40s at night. A quick trip to Cycle Gear for some Freeze Out base layers (I'll report on those in another thread) proved to be well worth the expense. Some of those mountain passes got pretty darn cold and both going and coming, I rode several hours in the dark. The initial plan was to leave early Thursday morning, hand over the bike by 1pm and get it back at the end of the day. I would stay for the night and return Friday morning (today).

That plan changed after I exchanged emails with one of the techs I was to meet, Chris Kelly. Great guy. Chris explained that the best case scenario would be that the existing hardware works fine then installation of the PC-V and dyno tuning the map would take from 2 to 3 hours. The worst case scenario would be that the existing unit doesn't work and a new unit would have to be built from scratch. They would need to review the bike, take photos, scope necessary signals with an oscilloscope (which reminds me, I'm overdue for my physical), then send the data and information to their engineers to have a prototype built. I would then need to schedule a time to come back to have the prototype tested, tuned, installed, etc. The expectation was that the existing hardware would work but to be on the safe side, it was agreed that I'd get them my bike first thing in the morning rather than at midday.

I changed my hotel reservations and set off for Vegas on Wednesday at 1pm. I would have left earlier but had an unavoidable meeting at work. Other than a few miles in Riverside, traffic flowed nicely and I made good time, stopping only for fuel and to stretch my legs and give my backside a rest. By 6:45pm I rolled into my hotel, just a few blocks from the Dynojet facility, 335 miles from my home in San Diego. In keeping with the ferret's travel calculations of approximately 50 to 55 mph, I averaged 58.26 mph (335/5.75). That traffic in Riverside took its toll but overall, it was a great ride.

At 8am sharp, I arrived at the Dynojet facility and met with Chris. He had me ride the CB around back, up a ramp and into the building where the work would be performed. The place was very clean and appeared to be very well organized. I met another member of the team who would be performing the actual work and analysis on my bike. Chris showed me around the place and explained how they performed the tuning. They had several dyno rooms with in-floor dynamometers and attached computers. They also had an above ground dyno like the ones I've seen on videos and even a dyno for cars. (There were no cars in there when I was present.) It was reassuring to see how professional it all seemed. Although I knew Dynojet is an industry leader in fuel-management systems, I'd be lying if I said I wasn't a bit nervous handing over my perfectly working CB to people I had just met for them to start fiddling around with it.

I spoke to Chris about ECU tuning/reflashing and how it seems to be gaining in popularity and asked his thoughts about it as it related to adding a piggy back device such as a PC-V. He was very forthright in saying there are things that can be done with a reflash that can't be done with a PC-V. Those things we've been discussing on the forum - elimination of speed limiters, increasing rev range, etc. Cost associated with a reflash is usually one drawback to going that route.

It appears Don Guhl is very competitively priced! A lot goes into analyzing a stock ECU for a particular model to know the existing parameters then a substantial amount of testing goes into what the appropriate and specific changes can and should be to the ECU. That includes dyno runs to optimize the AFRs. Normally that translates into higher costs to the consumer than simply adding something like a PC-V. Plus, reflashing isn't possible (yet) for all makes and models. It appears that we're fortunate to have that option because someone here provided his bike to Don. I can't remember who (CIP57 was it you? Or maybe HikerToo?) at the moment but THANKS!

Dynojet does make devices that allow you to flash tune your own bike (not available for our CB) and even make changes to ignition timing in addition to fuel management (again, not for our CB). I was told there would have to be some indication as to demand before those products would be expanded to include the CB in terms of availability. My thought is that if Honda limits production in the U.S. to just the 2013 and 2014 models, it's unlikely that we'll see production of those units for our bikes. In addition to Don Guhl, it appears that ECU Unleashed is able to reflash our ECUs and it's a matter of finding one of their dealers to work with. I don't know what they charge but they seem to be a legit operation.

Back to my tuning - I left my bike at the facility and walked back to the hotel. I had breakfast and was enjoying some coffee when I got a message from Chris. Everything looked good. The wiring was exactly the same between the 2013 and 2014 models. The existing unit should work out fine. A short time later, another message informed me that things were going quickly and everything was working perfectly. A few more tests needed to be performed but they would likely have me done by noon. I decided to make the ride home rather than stay another night. Shortly after noon, I picked up my motorcycle, had a brief talk with Chris then started for home. Before leaving, I was given a print out of my dyno chart. Here it is:

[url=http://s51.photobucket.com/user/jamesfontaine/media/Mobile%20Uploads/IMAG1410.jpg.html]

I've since sent an email to Chris asking him about the numbers because they seem a bit high to me. I realize that dyno numbers can and will differ, at times dramatically, depending on the specific bike, the specific dyno, and the conditions at the time of the tests. What my dyno shows is that before tuning, my max horsepower was 90.72 with torque at 69.21 ft-lb. Well-made slip-on's have been reported to increase power by 1 to 5 hp. Assuming that's true and assuming the best case scenario, that would mean my bike in completely stock form prior to the tune was putting out around 85 hp. I guess that's possible. Motousa.com posted a dyno chart during their review of a stock 2013 CB1100 and it showed 84.02 hp and 66.45 ft-lb of torque. However, Motorcycle.com showed a chart with 81.5 hp and 64.6 ft-lb of torque for the same model. Our very own CIP57 posted his dyno for a 2013 CB running a full Yoshi exhaust and his best numbers were 86.46 hp and 63.81 ft-lb after reflash and with the AFRs from the Dynojet map for a stock 2013 CB.

After the tune and, of course, with my Yoshimura RS-3 slip-on, my numbers are 92.10 hp and 70.56 ft-lb torque. As much as I'd like those numbers to be accurate, I can't help but think they're rather generous. Still, they were produced at the Dynojet Research facility by the guy who Chris described to me as being a perfectionist and somewhat OCD when it comes to maintaining the shop and equipment. In the end, this isn't a motorcycle you buy for horsepower. What matters to me is that improvements throughout the entire range can be seen following the installation of the PC-V and the tune. The gain (approx. 1.5 hp and 1.5 ft-lb of torque), although modest, is appreciated. Also, you can see from the chart how the bike was running somewhat lean at lower rpms prior to the tune. It's not until around 6.5K rpm that the AFR approached ideal. In the 3K to 4K range (where I tend to ride), there was noticeable improvement. That improvement is seen throughout the entire rev range. That translates into a cooler running engine which, I imagine, isn't bad when you have a (primarily) air-cooled engine. I'll edit this post and share whatever feedback I get from Chris regarding my numbers.

I had plenty of time on the ride home to assess the bike for any noticeable changes in rideability. The traffic going south was significantly worse than the trip north. I did stop for a quick bite that added about 15-20 minutes but as I understand it, those stops are accounted for in the ferret calculation. This time the ride took 6.75 hours which translates to an average of 49.63 mph (horrendous). If you take the entire trip, there and back, into consideration, then my total average speed over the 670 miles was 53.6 mph. Ah...ferret, you're a genius. My seat-of-the-pants dyno could not feel any difference in power. Not surprising given the modest gains. However, one thing I noticed was how the bike felt in the sweet spot.

When travelling on the highway, my bike (as I'm sure yours does) has a sweet spot where everything seems to come together perfectly. The engine feels right, the revs feel right, there's sufficient roll-on still available, everything just feels effortless. Before the PC-V and tune, that sweet spot for me was 70 to 75 mph at 3K to 3.5K rpm. After the PC-V and tune, that sweet spot felt closer to 75 to 80 mph and 3.5K to 4K rpm. I like it. Am I imaging it? Wanting desperately to feel something, anything, for this effort? I don't think so. Mr. Schaller and his guys at Dynojet were kind enough to do all of this without charging me a penny. My expense was fuel, one night in the hotel, and the few cheap meals I had. Amazingly (sadly), I avoided the casinos and fancy restaurants! Spending a couple of days on the bike instead of in the office cut in my favor. Even if I am just fooling myself into feeling something that isn't there, I suppose all that matters is what I believe is there.

Bottom line - My motorcycle ran great before installing the PC-V and having it tuned. My motorcycle runs great now. Regardless of what the numbers are, there is a notable increase in both horsepower and torque following installation of the PC-V and tune. Also, the air/fuel ratio is closer to ideal throughout the entire range and in particular, where my bike tends to be. It's up to each of us to decide how much we're willing to spend for modest but real improvements and what is "necessary" given any modifications performed. I hope that through all of this, I have contributed even just a little to what is or will be available for our bikes. I hope the information I have shared helps some of you decide which route, if any, you want to take when it comes to tuning your CB.

EDIT no.1: One likely explanation for my readings being over 92HP and torque over 70 ft-lb is RLETs.

Has anyone tried putting a RLET ON TOP OF another RELT? Just imagine what that would do, if you could physically manage that feat. One's hard enough to install...

Ohh, and I wore one of mine out... Literally there's a hole in my clutch side. Ack.

(01-09-2015, 11:08 AM)kevbroce_imp Wrote: [ -> ]

(01-09-2015, 08:04 AM)metallyguitarded_imp Wrote: [ -> ](Warning: Long post. Feel free to skip to last paragraph at any time where I describe my bottom line impressions.)

On Wednesday afternoon, I rode my 2014 CB1100 to Las Vegas for the purpose of visiting the Dynojet Research Facility. A week earlier I had contacted Dynojet via email, asking whether the currently available Power Commander V map for a stock 2013 CB1100 would work on my 2014 CB. I explained that Honda had added a sixth gear for the 2014 model. I received a quick response from Dusty Schaller, the Senior Product Manager at Dynojet who wrote that he couldn't say for sure but suspected the maps would be very close. He added that they had been trying to get a 2014 into their facility to verify but hadn't had any luck.

I couldn't resist. I wrote back offering a mutually beneficial arrangement - I would bring in my 2014 CB, equipped with a Yoshimura RS-3 slip-on, and allow them to develop a map off of it in exchange for a PC-V unit. I also explained that I was a part of this forum and that there were constant discussions about the need for or benefit of a PC-V and/or dyno tune and that I would share the results and give honest feedback as to any improvements in rideability. What did I have to lose? I was pleasantly surprised when I received another quick reply from Mr. Schaller saying he would absolutely be happy to do that if I could get my bike to their facility in Vegas.

Arrangements were made for me to meet with "his guys" on Thursday (yesterday). A quick check of the weather forecast showed that clear skies were expected through the week with highs in the upper 60s, low 70s along my route but dipping into the low to mid-40s at night. A quick trip to Cycle Gear for some Freeze Out base layers (I'll report on those in another thread) proved to be well worth the expense. Some of those mountain passes got pretty darn cold and both going and coming, I rode several hours in the dark. The initial plan was to leave early Thursday morning, hand over the bike by 1pm and get it back at the end of the day. I would stay for the night and return Friday morning (today).

That plan changed after I exchanged emails with one of the techs I was to meet, Chris Kelly. Great guy. Chris explained that the best case scenario would be that the existing hardware works fine then installation of the PC-V and dyno tuning the map would take from 2 to 3 hours. The worst case scenario would be that the existing unit doesn't work and a new unit would have to be built from scratch. They would need to review the bike, take photos, scope necessary signals with an oscilloscope (which reminds me, I'm overdue for my physical), then send the data and information to their engineers to have a prototype built. I would then need to schedule a time to come back to have the prototype tested, tuned, installed, etc. The expectation was that the existing hardware would work but to be on the safe side, it was agreed that I'd get them my bike first thing in the morning rather than at midday.

I changed my hotel reservations and set off for Vegas on Wednesday at 1pm. I would have left earlier but had an unavoidable meeting at work. Other than a few miles in Riverside, traffic flowed nicely and I made good time, stopping only for fuel and to stretch my legs and give my backside a rest. By 6:45pm I rolled into my hotel, just a few blocks from the Dynojet facility, 335 miles from my home in San Diego. In keeping with the ferret's travel calculations of approximately 50 to 55 mph, I averaged 58.26 mph (335/5.75). That traffic in Riverside took its toll but overall, it was a great ride.

At 8am sharp, I arrived at the Dynojet facility and met with Chris. He had me ride the CB around back, up a ramp and into the building where the work would be performed. The place was very clean and appeared to be very well organized. I met another member of the team who would be performing the actual work and analysis on my bike. Chris showed me around the place and explained how they performed the tuning. They had several dyno rooms with in-floor dynamometers and attached computers. They also had an above ground dyno like the ones I've seen on videos and even a dyno for cars. (There were no cars in there when I was present.) It was reassuring to see how professional it all seemed. Although I knew Dynojet is an industry leader in fuel-management systems, I'd be lying if I said I wasn't a bit nervous handing over my perfectly working CB to people I had just met for them to start fiddling around with it.

I spoke to Chris about ECU tuning/reflashing and how it seems to be gaining in popularity and asked his thoughts about it as it related to adding a piggy back device such as a PC-V. He was very forthright in saying there are things that can be done with a reflash that can't be done with a PC-V. Those things we've been discussing on the forum - elimination of speed limiters, increasing rev range, etc. Cost associated with a reflash is usually one drawback to going that route.

It appears Don Guhl is very competitively priced! A lot goes into analyzing a stock ECU for a particular model to know the existing parameters then a substantial amount of testing goes into what the appropriate and specific changes can and should be to the ECU. That includes dyno runs to optimize the AFRs. Normally that translates into higher costs to the consumer than simply adding something like a PC-V. Plus, reflashing isn't possible (yet) for all makes and models. It appears that we're fortunate to have that option because someone here provided his bike to Don. I can't remember who (CIP57 was it you? Or maybe HikerToo?) at the moment but THANKS!

Dynojet does make devices that allow you to flash tune your own bike (not available for our CB) and even make changes to ignition timing in addition to fuel management (again, not for our CB). I was told there would have to be some indication as to demand before those products would be expanded to include the CB in terms of availability. My thought is that if Honda limits production in the U.S. to just the 2013 and 2014 models, it's unlikely that we'll see production of those units for our bikes. In addition to Don Guhl, it appears that ECU Unleashed is able to reflash our ECUs and it's a matter of finding one of their dealers to work with. I don't know what they charge but they seem to be a legit operation.

Back to my tuning - I left my bike at the facility and walked back to the hotel. I had breakfast and was enjoying some coffee when I got a message from Chris. Everything looked good. The wiring was exactly the same between the 2013 and 2014 models. The existing unit should work out fine. A short time later, another message informed me that things were going quickly and everything was working perfectly. A few more tests needed to be performed but they would likely have me done by noon. I decided to make the ride home rather than stay another night. Shortly after noon, I picked up my motorcycle, had a brief talk with Chris then started for home. Before leaving, I was given a print out of my dyno chart. Here it is:

[url=http://s51.photobucket.com/user/jamesfontaine/media/Mobile%20Uploads/IMAG1410.jpg.html]

I've since sent an email to Chris asking him about the numbers because they seem a bit high to me. I realize that dyno numbers can and will differ, at times dramatically, depending on the specific bike, the specific dyno, and the conditions at the time of the tests. What my dyno shows is that before tuning, my max horsepower was 90.72 with torque at 69.21 ft-lb. Well-made slip-on's have been reported to increase power by 1 to 5 hp. Assuming that's true and assuming the best case scenario, that would mean my bike in completely stock form prior to the tune was putting out around 85 hp. I guess that's possible. Motousa.com posted a dyno chart during their review of a stock 2013 CB1100 and it showed 84.02 hp and 66.45 ft-lb of torque. However, Motorcycle.com showed a chart with 81.5 hp and 64.6 ft-lb of torque for the same model. Our very own CIP57 posted his dyno for a 2013 CB running a full Yoshi exhaust and his best numbers were 86.46 hp and 63.81 ft-lb after reflash and with the AFRs from the Dynojet map for a stock 2013 CB.

After the tune and, of course, with my Yoshimura RS-3 slip-on, my numbers are 92.10 hp and 70.56 ft-lb torque. As much as I'd like those numbers to be accurate, I can't help but think they're rather generous. Still, they were produced at the Dynojet Research facility by the guy who Chris described to me as being a perfectionist and somewhat OCD when it comes to maintaining the shop and equipment. In the end, this isn't a motorcycle you buy for horsepower. What matters to me is that improvements throughout the entire range can be seen following the installation of the PC-V and the tune. The gain (approx. 1.5 hp and 1.5 ft-lb of torque), although modest, is appreciated. Also, you can see from the chart how the bike was running somewhat lean at lower rpms prior to the tune. It's not until around 6.5K rpm that the AFR approached ideal. In the 3K to 4K range (where I tend to ride), there was noticeable improvement. That improvement is seen throughout the entire rev range. That translates into a cooler running engine which, I imagine, isn't bad when you have a (primarily) air-cooled engine. I'll edit this post and share whatever feedback I get from Chris regarding my numbers.

I had plenty of time on the ride home to assess the bike for any noticeable changes in rideability. The traffic going south was significantly worse than the trip north. I did stop for a quick bite that added about 15-20 minutes but as I understand it, those stops are accounted for in the ferret calculation. This time the ride took 6.75 hours which translates to an average of 49.63 mph (horrendous). If you take the entire trip, there and back, into consideration, then my total average speed over the 670 miles was 53.6 mph. Ah...ferret, you're a genius. My seat-of-the-pants dyno could not feel any difference in power. Not surprising given the modest gains. However, one thing I noticed was how the bike felt in the sweet spot.

When travelling on the highway, my bike (as I'm sure yours does) has a sweet spot where everything seems to come together perfectly. The engine feels right, the revs feel right, there's sufficient roll-on still available, everything just feels effortless. Before the PC-V and tune, that sweet spot for me was 70 to 75 mph at 3K to 3.5K rpm. After the PC-V and tune, that sweet spot felt closer to 75 to 80 mph and 3.5K to 4K rpm. I like it. Am I imaging it? Wanting desperately to feel something, anything, for this effort? I don't think so. Mr. Schaller and his guys at Dynojet were kind enough to do all of this without charging me a penny. My expense was fuel, one night in the hotel, and the few cheap meals I had. Amazingly (sadly), I avoided the casinos and fancy restaurants! Spending a couple of days on the bike instead of in the office cut in my favor. Even if I am just fooling myself into feeling something that isn't there, I suppose all that matters is what I believe is there.

Bottom line - My motorcycle ran great before installing the PC-V and having it tuned. My motorcycle runs great now. Regardless of what the numbers are, there is a notable increase in both horsepower and torque following installation of the PC-V and tune. Also, the air/fuel ratio is closer to ideal throughout the entire range and in particular, where my bike tends to be. It's up to each of us to decide how much we're willing to spend for modest but real improvements and what is "necessary" given any modifications performed. I hope that through all of this, I have contributed even just a little to what is or will be available for our bikes. I hope the information I have shared helps some of you decide which route, if any, you want to take when it comes to tuning your CB.

EDIT no.1: One likely explanation for my readings being over 92HP and torque over 70 ft-lb is RLETs.

Has anyone tried putting a RLET ON TOP OF another RELT? Just imagine what that would do, if you could physically manage that feat. One's hard enough to install...

Ohh, and I wore one of mine out... Literally there's a hole in my clutch side. Ack.

Has anyone tried putting a RLET ON TOP OF another RELT? Just imagine what that would do, if you could physically manage that feat. One's hard enough to install...

Ohh, and I wore one of mine out... Literally there's a hole in my clutch side. Ack.
Legend has it, such a man exists.

It is said that his passport requires no photo.

When he rides his motorcycle off the lot, its price increases in value.

His feet don't get blisters but his shoes do.

His tears can cure cancer. Too bad he never cries.

He once brought a knife to a gun fight, just to even the odds.

The dark is afraid of him.

Mosquitos refuse to bite him, purely out of respect.

His mother has a tattoo that reads, "Son."

He once put an RLET on top of an RLET while riding a CB1100 to back-to-back victories in the Isle of Man TT and Dakar Rally.

(Borrowed shamelessly from "The Most Interesting Man in the World."

Its has to be the color creating the HP

Its quite possible your bikes a freak. I remember back in the day 3 of us had 650 Yamaha's and one of the 3 would walk the other two by a few bikes. The graphs from a few members have shown stock bikes putting out about 79-80 HP ATRW stock which I think is in the normal range.

Whats important is the changes you see from the Dyno + a/f ratio's before and after the tune. The 2 HP gain is what you would expect from the change in fuel delivery.

Kevbroce: replace that RLET IMMEDIATELY! You are in grave danger. The imbalance caused to a Honda CB1100 by a hole worn in one RLET can cause unpredictable occurrences at speeds between 56.324 and 78.618 mph.

As for you, metallyguitarded, two things: first, shame on you for deviating from your normal empiricism. No-one knows what would happen in the event that someone managed to get two sets of RLETs onto their CB1100, but there is a strong school of thought that the sheer superfluity of this action (requiring as it does feats of unimaginable strength and low cunning) might override the ECU and shut the bike down completely until one or both sets were removed.

Secondly, and seriously, thanks for that really informative post about the trip to Vegas. I've really enjoyed the learning from this forum about ways to improve the performance of the bike. Your post has added more to that. I also found the post about the dynamometer interesting.

Ok I have to ask, how does one wear a hole in an RLET? You never touch it and it doesn't touch anything.

I hope—oh, yes, I really do—that you don't come to regret that question, Ferret.

I admit, I wondered the same thing. The only thing I could come up with is that Kevbroce must have been in a horrific crash during which his CB tumbled end over end down a steep, unforgiving hillside. The resulting damage being the hole in the RLET. Then again, there was an observable meteor shower recently...

Cormanus, I knew I could count on you to set me straight. And thanks to you and the ferret for your kind words.