|
|
Visionary
Posts: 1632
Jasper, MO | I've seen dyno charts for the GL1800 that show 96 HP and 103 TQ at the wheel for a stock GL1800. The stock Vision appears to dyno at around 82 HP and 100 TQ. I've also seen Lloyd's chart of the Vision dynoing 94 HP and 110 TQ. What all was involved to get there? I've watched my buddy run his Goldwing at our local track (1000 foot elevation) at 12.78 @ 103 MPH. He and I are both aging former crotch-rocketeers, and the urge to twist the wrist is still there even though we've both graduated to more comfortable bikes. My question is: what would I need to do to get the power of the Vision to an equal point with the Goldwing? How much can be gained without changing the stock exhaust? Will Lloyd"s intake plate add much power without modifying the exhaust? Will his fuel controller do much if the exhaust is unmodified? What effect would opening up the stock exhaust a little have? My buddy is very fond of saying that "NO V-twin can ever make the power of a 6 cylinder motor". I'll grant the point that the GL1800 is a very smooth torque monster, which I can personally testify too. What I want is a "sleeper" Vision that maintains low end torque equal to, or better than a Goldwing, and matches it all the way through the powerband. Can it be done with a stock exhaust. I'd like to preserve what little bit of hearing I have left, in addition to needing a stock appearing/sounding bike. Thanks for any advice.
Ronnie
PS: I finalized the deal via telephone this morning for a new Super Steel Grey Vision Tour Premium. I'm supposed to go pick it up this afternoon, and storms have moved into our area and it's lightning/thundering and pouring down rain right now. How's the weather protection on the Vision?
Edited by rdbudd 2008-05-10 12:52 PM
|
|
| |
|
Iron Butt
Posts: 721
| I traded in a 2003 GL1800 Goldwing for my Vision Tour, I knew going into it that the Vision would not have nearly the low end power that the GL1800 has, but the increased comfort level and other features such as iPod integration and electrically adjustable windshield more than made up for the loss in power. Your buddy is correct, a V-twin, no matter who makes it, will never build up power as fast as a 4 or 6 cylinder engine. It's a matter of rotational mass and stroke length versus engine size. While the Vision's 1734cc engine isn't all that much smaller than the 1832cc engine of the Goldwing, the V-Twin configuration has to move two bigger diameter pistons a longer distance (stroke) than the smaller (but more numerous) pistons with a shorter stroke that the Goldwing flat six (boxer configuration) has. The Goldwing's engine also has a higher redline of 6000 rpm so what you have is a more compact rotating mass that can get spun up faster and thus make max power quicker.
I love my Vision, I've only recently gotten the revs up into the 4000 to 5000 range and the power at that point is similar to the GL1800, but it takes longer to get to that point and that is the advantage the Goldwing has. I'll miss the wide massive powerband of the Goldwing, but like I said earlier, the additional comfort level and amenities more than make up for it in the long haul. |
|
| |
|
Cruiser
Posts: 140
| The only thing required to get my 100" Kingpin engine into the 90s and well over 100s for peak power and torque was an S&S airbox with recalibration and Victory`s stage 1 slip-ons. While it is true that the long stroke V-Twin engine has less useful rpm range and does not spin up as quickly as the goldwing`s 6, this one is making nearly peak torque at just off idle, and it`s flat all the way to redline. I`m an ex-sportbike guy too, but never had any bike that would jump out from a standstill the way that Kingpin would.
I think there is much more grunt to be had from these engines. |
|
| |
|
Iron Butt
Posts: 619
Southeast Iowa | rdbudd - It will be tough to get much more horsepower without making the motor breath easier and suck more gas. In other words you nead more air in, more fuel in, and more exhaust out. This means a new air cleaner, pipes, and a re-flash. On every Vic I've ever own the dyno showed around a gain of 10 in both HP and Torque by doing this. (cheap power) I have the S1L1 pipes and they offer a nice tone without too much noise. As for as the fuel controler goes you need to ask someone else, I have no experience with them. My guess is without pipes your not going to get very far. |
|
| |
|
Visionary
Posts: 1484
LaPorte,Tx. | If your serious about getting more hp out of your Vision, you need to give Lloydz a call and talk to him about what you want. I'm sure he can give you a recomendation. I had a Lloydz fuel controller on my Stage 1 Kingpin and it makes a difference. |
|
| |
|
Cruiser
Posts: 223
Valdosta, GA | The 94/110 charts from Lloyd is with a S1L1 intake and exhaust, Lloydz diffuser, and a VFC3 (properly tuned, of course). As for building power vs the Goldwing's 6...The Vision's torque curve is 100 +/- 5 from 2.5k to 4k rpm where it bumps up to peak before starting to drop off after 4.5k. The HP and TQ curves are very similar to those from GL1800s I've seen. Where the Goldwing does the Vision better, is with it's higher redline.
|
|
| |
|
Visionary
Posts: 1632
Jasper, MO | Roger that. I know the Goldwing has a short stroke/ quicker revving/ higher redline motor than the Vision. Where it really shows is in first gear. After that, the difference isn't so apparent. The Goldwing can reach 44 MPH in first gear where the Vision can achieve 36MPH. The Goldwing can reach 66 MPH in second, while the Vision reaches 57 MPH. Third gear means 90 MPH for the Goldwing VS 75 MPH for the Vision. Fourth gets 114 MPH for the Goldwing VS 93 MPH for the Vision. This means The Goldwing has shifted twice to get to 90 MPH while the Vision has shifted three times. One more shift each gets us to 115MPH (and the speed limiter on the Vision).
Practically speaking, the Goldwing jumps out ahead of the Vision about 2 or 3 bike lengths from a standing start, but the Vision will hold that distance constant the rest of the way down the quarter. In a fifth gear roll-on test, the Vision walks away from the Goldwing up to around 100 MPH, at which point the Goldwing starts to close the gap due to its superior power over 4500 RPM. Obviously, I need a power increase of about 10 or 15 HP in order to run with the Goldwing. Just as obviously, the Vision already matches the Goldwing in real world, everyday driving situations, such as passing traffic on a two lane road while running 50 MPH. Most of you are perfectly happy with that, but it would be fun to show my buddy that "a V-twin can run as good as a 6 cylinder". I just have to do it in stealth mode, (no apparent exhaust system, or other changes) if possible. All I need is the ability to run a 12.70 quarter.
How much do you think Lloyd's diffuser and VFC would gain me if I do not put the S1L1 exhaust on?
Ronnie
2008 Victory Vision
2000 Victory Sport Cruiser
1986 Kawasaki Voyager XII
2002 Suzuki Bandit
2004 Honda CRF230
An assortment of old bikes and "projects"
Edited by rdbudd 2008-05-11 12:36 PM
|
|
| |
|
Visionary
Posts: 1484
LaPorte,Tx. | rdbudd - 2008-05-11 11:24 AM
I just have to do it in stealth mode, (no apparent exhaust system, or other changes) if possible. All I need is the ability to run a 12.70 quarter.
How much do you think Lloyd's diffuser and VFC would gain me if I do not put the S1L1 exhaust on?
Ronnie
2008 Victory Vision
2000 Victory Sport Cruiser
1986 Kawasaki Voyager XII
2002 Suzuki Bandit
2004 Honda CRF230
An assortment of old bikes and "projects"
Ronnie, if you want to be "stealthy", put a NOS bottle on it. You can hide it under the trunk and no one will know. 
Hey, give Lloydz a call, they will talk to you......they are in the business to sell. |
|
| |
|
Cruiser
Posts: 223
Valdosta, GA | You will not see a 12.7 with a Vision with just the two air filters and a controller.
While I admit I'm just an amatuer at the track, but my personal best on S1L1/VFC3 Vision (no diffuser) was a 13.518 @ 97.38mph. Granted my response time (.862) and 60' time (1.999) sucked, but I honestly don't think there's a full second to gain with just an additional filter AND retaining the stock pipes.
|
|
| |
|
Visionary
Posts: 1436
| You aren't going to increase to what yu want without exhaust upgrades. Its sot of the old you cant get out what you don't put in argument only in reverse. Many riders claim big increases by simply changing exhaust to a more open pipe. All good and fine but if you aren't putting in more air it makes almost zero improvement. Same theory in reverse for exhaust. If you are increasing fuel and air with a stuffed up exhaust it has no place to go and the bike will run extremely poor.
I think the NOS under the trunk is your only option if exhaust doesn't figure in somewhere. |
|
| |
|
Visionary
Posts: 1632
Jasper, MO | Thanks for all the advice guys. I know that what goes in must come out, so a restrictive exhaust is not good for performance. I'm just not yet convinced that the stock exhaust is really all that restrictive. I dragraced motorcycles a lot back in the late 70's and most of the 80's. I won the brackets often enough to pay for my expenses. My Goldwing riding buddy won about as often. More often than not, we were lined up against each other in the final round of elimination. We even owned our own dyno back then, but it was the old style where you had to calculate the horsepower from the pressure and speed. Bottom line is that we found that most aftermarket exhausts didn't really help power very much. The quicker times usually came from the fact that the aftermarket exhaust systems were lighter weight than the stock ones. Lighter weight equals faster times. On highly modified motors, the aftermarket exhaust would help power, but not on basically stock motors. We found that opening up the intake did help power, as long as it wasn't done in a manner that introduced turbulence into the airstream. If head work and cam changes were made, then a whole new ballgame begins. The aftermarket exhaust often would help then. Factory bikes have been set lean for emissions reasons for many years. Improving the fuel delivery curve was very often much more beneficial to increasing power than changing the exhaust. However, pipe makers do like to sell pipes, and like to claim that any power increases were made because their pipes were installed. Maybe.
Anyway, I'm inclined to try improving the intake system and the fuel mapping while retaining the stock exhaust. Even stock exhausts can be made less restrictive, if need be. I just wondered if any of you had actually tried that yet. I'm really enjoying our new Vision and this site. Thanks.
Ronnie
|
|
| |
|
Visionary
Posts: 1350
| Add 4 more cylinders? The numbers you show for an engine that has 1/3 the cylinders? |
|
| |
|
Visionary
Posts: 2027
Brighton, TN | Yeah! add 4 more cyclinders based on the current size, then you have a 318 cubic inch six cylinder. Go baby, Go! That has got to be diesel territory, a six cylinder that big. 246 hp / 300 tq you would think looking at those numbers definitely a diesel. I say do it and then see what happens. Git'r dun!
I would have to agree to some extent with the rdbudd. He makes sense, but then so does BuckN8kd, sometimes. I almost find it hard to believe that even though the Goldwing has six tiny cylinders and redlines way high, that the 106 BIG VIc engine is unable to hang with that Wing. I have made the front end rise on mine dropping it into second getting way up into that powerband. The powerband and rear end should have something to say. I haven't had the chance to take on anybody yet, everyone afraid of the Rocket Ship! I just tell'em its rocket and Gerbil Powered (RGP). Build that boost baby! |
|
| |
|
Visionary
Posts: 1324
So Cal | All bikes will have base performance very close to each other. Some will claim higher TQ & HP numbers, some will boast quickest accell. or highest top speed maybe best handling. But they will all have hi-po options available from the factory. Why? Its good for business, keeps the $$$$ comming in. Want your bike to be faster than brand X ? Just leave the bike and a bunch of extra $$$$ and theyll see what they can do. When you blow his doors off brand X the rider goes to his dealer and they say, no problem just leave it here along with a bunch more $$$ and we'll see what we can do. The only real winner? The factory or aftermarket manufacturers. |
|
| |
|
Cruiser
Posts: 226
on the edge of Los Angeles | This is great, as technology has helped produce close to 1 hp per c.i. I see the same thing.
Too much is never enough. I equate the 106 in our Visions to a 2 cylinder high performance 427/ 426 ( Dependent on your flavor) of the muscle car years. But these run on now available pump gas and get 40 mpg. Fuel injection and 4 valves does help.
The Vision is already faster standing still. I dought that I will take mine to the track as I have other vehicles for that. If its for the street I have a phase "Stock is hot." Even after stating that I think about installing some sort of exhaust later on and possibly a fuel controller.
|
|
| |
|
Iron Butt
Posts: 721
| Just for your information, last year I had my 2003 GL1800 Goldwing on the dyno (after 5 years and 54,300 miles) and the average of the 3 "pulls" was 102 hp, 113 ft. lbs. of torque. I now have close to 2000 miles on the Vision (new 4/5/08, just daily riding, no trips yet) and am planning on getting onto the dyno in the next couple of weeks to get the stock performance figures so as to compare them with the stock GL1800 Goldwing dyno numbers. |
|
| |
|
Visionary
Posts: 1632
Jasper, MO | Well, 12.70 isn't very fast, but the Goldwing and Vision are luxury touring bikes and it's fast enough. If the vision were 112 cubic inches like the Goldwing, I have no doubt that the power would be very close, 2 cylinders versus 6 cyclinders not withstanding. I'm only talking about 1/4 to 1/2 second quicker times here. The Vision has been tested at 12.96 to the Goldwing's 12.78. I know it's trivial, but braggin' rights are braggin' rights. I also know that the aftermarket and dealers love this kind of rivalry in order to make money, which is why I asked the question about doing the intake and fuel mods while leaving the exhaust stock. 10 or 12 more horsepower is all that's needed to run with the Goldwing, and extending the torque curve another 500-600 rpm is all that's needed, even with the stock redline. The piston speed is pretty high at 5200 RPM, with the Vision's 4 1/4 inch stroke, already. I wouldn't want to try and rev it much higher. I'm going to have to find the time to give Lloyd's shop a call to see if his intake and fuel mods will work with the stock exhaust. I really suspect that the stock exhaust can easily handle a little more air and a richer A/F ratio.
Ronnie |
|
| |
|
Cruiser
Posts: 235
Evergreen, CO | yep, it's trivial. Victory Vision is to ride. ya want to OD on testosterone? go climb on a crotch rocket. ya want to wring the best out of the vision? go see lloydz. all else is trivial..... |
|
| |
|
Visionary
Posts: 1484
LaPorte,Tx. | rdbudd - 2008-05-11 11:24 AM
One more shift each gets us to 115MPH (and the speed limiter on the Vision).
I was there the other day on a speed run. I did not know there was a limiter.......can you explain? I've been over the red line in 5th gear which was ~115 mph. My Vision (stage1 level 1) falls flat on it's face when I shift to 6th at 115 mph.......too much frontal surface......hell that maybe the limiter or what?  "Giddy-up" |
|
| |
|
Visionary
Posts: 1324
So Cal | Got tired of waiting for Victory pipes. 18" up from the exhaust tips is an obstruction. A 1/2" drill bit on a 24" drill bit extension, accidentally poked two holes in each obstruction. Good thing the cat. is in the headpipe, no damage to it. Increase in noise is only marginal. Has a nice quiet rumble to it now. Definately made an improvement to acceleration, revs a little quicker now. Also noticed a slight increase in fuel milage. Im able to use a higher gear now without lugging the motor. Hole placement might be more acurate if you remove the muffler and work from the other end, but it WAS accidental(I'm lazy), and its only 'till the Victory pipes come in. Besides anything after the cat. conv. is fair game. |
|
| |
|
Visionary
Posts: 1324
So Cal | Ohh, I noticed after 2nd gear there is a little fudge factor with the rev limiter (5k rpm). 1st & 2nd gear power fals off. After that, I have been able to rev past 5k some without losing power. |
|
| |
|
Cruiser
Posts: 60
Denver | In simpler terms, do any of you think that if we use premium fuel it would make a difference. I noticed that I am supposed (yes newbe) to use premium. I am just curious.
Willy |
|
| |
|
Visionary
Posts: 1632
Jasper, MO | VisionTex - 2008-05-13 10:59 PM
rdbudd - 2008-05-11 11:24 AM
One more shift each gets us to 115MPH (and the speed limiter on the Vision).
I was there the other day on a speed run. I did not know there was a limiter.......can you explain? I've been over the red line in 5th gear which was ~115 mph. My Vision (stage1 level 1) falls flat on it's face when I shift to 6th at 115 mph.......too much frontal surface......hell that maybe the limiter or what? "Giddy-up"
As I understand it, the Vision has a speed limiter which is activated at 115 MPH. I'm told that it is a "soft limiter" which restricts the fuel delivery and won't let the bike go any faster. The result is that the Vision won't go any faster in 6th gear than it will in 5th gear, no matter what you do to enhance engine performance. More power would let one accelerate quicker however. The speed limiter and the rev limiter are two different things. One limits the RPM's of the engine and the other limits the vehicle speed regardless of the engine RPM. Lots of new machines have both rev limiters and speed limiters. The aftermarket is usually pretty quick to find ways around both of them. If the Vision had no speed limiter, then redline would produce 137 MPH. The bike would probably actually be capable of about 125, maybe 130 with a good tailwind.
My goal in this quest is to prove to my Goldwing riding buddy that a V-twin can run with a six cylinder. The Goldwing has 101 cc (6 cubic inches) more displacement and an 800 RPM higher redline, so the ability to run even would be a good accomplishment and would prove him wrong. If, by chance, I could actually outrun him, it would be an even bigger victory. I can already pull him in 4th or 5th gear roll-on contests, which is great, but he claims that is due to the Vision's slightly lower gearing in each of those gears. Technically, he is correct. In summary, I need the ability to run the same or quicker quarter mile and the elimination of the speed limiter (the Goldwing has been clocked at 134) . I can already walk away from him in traffic passing situations in 4th or 5th. 
Ronnie |
|
| |
|
Visionary
Posts: 1324
So Cal | Your roll on power is due to the longer stroke of the Vision. TQ not only builds lower, but quicker. Time is the key to performance. What isnt published, but is available, about dyno runs is the time it takes to reach peak TQ and HP. A motor that produces lower numbers, but reaches those numbers 1-2 seconds faster, could very easily out run the more powerful motor. But time is also its enemy. The longer the distance (more time) these two motors run flat out, the better chance of the more powerful motor overtaking.
If you can get a copy of the May '08 Thunderpress, Motorhead Memo has a good article on the truth about dyno numbers. |
|
| |
|
Visionary
Posts: 1632
Jasper, MO | Umm, actually the Goldwing makes good torque at as low a speed as the Vision, and the torque rise is nearly identical. Honda did a great job with that motor. It is a torque monster. About 91 ft/lbs at 1500 RPM, and 95 ft/lbs at 2000 RPM. The Vision has the advantage in 4th and 5th gear because of the marginally lower overall gearing compared to the Honda. The effective rear wheel torque is slightly higher than the Honda because of it. 1st, 2nd, and 3rd gears are nearly identical when comparing the Goldwing and the Vision, so with the higher torque generated by the Honda (compared to the stock Vision), and with the overall gearing being the same in the first three gears, and with 800 more RPM at redine (resulting in more horsepower) the Honda wins the dragrace. In the 4th and 5th gear scenerio, the Vision still makes less engine torque than the Honda at the same road speeds, but more rear wheel torque due to the lower gearing. The Vision wins the roll-on contest in those gears. To run equal in a dragrace, the Vision needs to match the rear wheel torque and horsepower numbers of the Honda, which are around 96 HP and 103 TQ at peak. However, the Victory is going to have to shift one time more than the Honda, so it had better be a quick shift. Just how good are these new narrow belts that Victory is using now? I've busted two belts on my Sport Cruiser doing power shifts, and it's pretty much stock.
Ronnie |
|
| |
|
Puddle Jumper
Posts: 25
Gilbert, AZ | Ronnie...a V-twin can perform like a 6 cyl Goldwing. I just purchased my Vision and am loving every minute of it. Working on the break in these days, and trying not to twist the right wrist too hard...lol. Anyway, back to the subject here. I also own a 07 Kawasaki Vulcan 2000 LT. I've added aftermarket pipes, an air kit and a PowerCommander. I have a good riding buddy with a 05 Wing. I can walk away from him from a dead stop or on a roll on. We've gone at it numerous times, and I've always come out on top. I'm not sure the Vision will perform as well because of the displacement difference, but trust me, a V-twin will perform...
Jim
Lakeside, AZ |
|
| |
|
Fountain Inn, SC United States | Let's not forget the first Vision drag was caught on video....
http://www.vision-riders.com/bb/forums/thread-view.asp?tid=100&post...
|
|
| |
|
Cruiser
Posts: 257
Under the Rule of Jedi - Masshole | Just to add...
People have mentioned about what the engine takes in, needs to get out. This is true. And while doing air box mods does help, as seen in Lloyd's dyno graphs, I think some better gains can be made in the exhaust area. Sure level 1 pipes flow more than stock, and level 2 more than level 1, but you still have that big restrictor in the head pipes known as the catalytic converter. So you might not be getting the full benefits of the pipe upgrade. What would really help is a system from the head back.
I noticed this on my 06 KP after I installed a 2 into 1 with no cat.
True a 2 into 1 will work better than a 2 into 2, but still, it breathed better. |
|
| |
|
Visionary
Posts: 1632
Jasper, MO | Everything all of you are saying is true, I know. I know a V-twin Victory can run with a 6 cylinder Wing. My ole' Sport Cruiser would run even up with my buddy's GL1500. Then he went and got a GL1800. Game over. Now I have a Vision. Game on again. This time though, he still has a displacement advantage of 101 cc's and an 800 RPM higher redline. My only hope is to be able to produce more torque in the 2500 to 5000 RPM range than the Goldwing produces in the 2500 to 6000 RPM range. That's a tall order, but the graph of Lloyd's Vision tuneup looks like a real good start. If Lloyd's torque curve could be extended level another 500 RPM, we would be looking at 103 to 105 horsepower at 5000 RPM. I don't know if that's possible without a cam change, which would most likely give up some of the torque at 2000-2500 RPM. That probably wouldn't be good on a 900 lb touring bike. As soon as I recover from paying the sales tax and insurance I'll be giving Lloyd a call.
Ronnie |
|
| |
|
Visionary
Posts: 1324
So Cal | Member No. 1 - 2008-05-15 7:57 AM
Just to add...
People have mentioned about what the engine takes in, needs to get out. This is true. And while doing air box mods does help, as seen in Lloyd's dyno graphs, I think some better gains can be made in the exhaust area. Sure level 1 pipes flow more than stock, and level 2 more than level 1, but you still have that big restrictor in the head pipes known as the catalytic converter. So you might not be getting the full benefits of the pipe upgrade. What would really help is a system from the head back.
I noticed this on my 06 KP after I installed a 2 into 1 with no cat.
True a 2 into 1 will work better than a 2 into 2, but still, it breathed better.
I agree, no matter what you do that restriction in the headpipe will be an issue. |
|
| |
|
Cruiser
Posts: 64
Northern RI | Lloyd just did my Vision in Myrtle Beach. With stock exhaust, stock air filter, VFCIII, and Lloydz new intake plate it posted 90hp and 104tq. Should see a nice gain with and exhaust and intake. |
|
| |
|
Visionary
Posts: 1632
Jasper, MO | vtwin17 - 2008-05-19 4:14 PM
Lloyd just did my Vision in Myrtle Beach. With stock exhaust, stock air filter, VFCIII, and Lloydz new intake plate it posted 90hp and 104tq. Should see a nice gain with and exhaust and intake.
That's the kind of info I was looking for. Thanks.
Ronnie |
|
| |
Vision performance