• WOULD YOU LIKE TO BE ABLE TO POST AND ACCESS MEMBER ONLY CONTENT AND FEATURES
    Join / Upgrade / Renew your membership to enjoy full membership and posting privileges.
    For simple instructions, click here
  • Can't post after logging to the forum for the first time... Try Again - If you can't post in the forum, sign out of both the membership site and the forum and log in again. Make sure your COG membership is active and your browser allow cookies. If you still can't post, contact the COG IT guy at IT@Concours.org.
  • IF YOU GET 404 ERROR: This may be due to using a link in a post from prior to the web migration. Content was brought over from the old forum as is, but the links may be in error. If the link contains "cog-online.org" it is an old link and will not work.

Anybody else doing Roll-On (modification) comparisons?

connie_rider

Member
Member
I think I'm top dog on being long winded, so not a problem..

Good info. THANK YOU!!
After you finish your read, please comment some more.

err, Ya need to check your Buddy out, there may be a Flash on that ECU.

NOTE: Steve has developed an EZ modification to the Delkevic and Black Widow headers that seems to add more low/mid power and a bit of peak RPM.
Try it and you might surprise your buddy.. <evil grin>

Check out this discussion for more info. He's posted the details on the Delkevic mod, but not the BW. (yet)
https://forum.concours.org/index.php?threads/delkevic-header-c14-getting-your-torque-back.53727/
 
Last edited:

connie_rider

Member
Member
Posting this again to ask if anyone else is doing Roll-on's?

This method is the best way to compare modifications to your bike.
Find a Buddy (It is not important that he have a C-14. Just a bike that is reasonably close on size/power.)
Do a roll-on with him and develop a base of whose is faster and when. (at what RPM)
later you can do modifications to one of the bikes and do a re-test.
That retest will show if your modification helped or hurt.
Please post your results here.


Previously I did comparisons with David. (See posts 66 and 67).
We agreed to compare again at the Final Fall Fling.

Update; At the FFF, David and I were able to do only 1 test.
ie; Not many straight sections in Arkansas for testing.
Results were about the same, but my RED bike seemed to do slightly better than it did previously.
(Err: Being a REALLY NICE guy, I offered him some RED spray-paint to make the bikes more even.)

We're now (both) considering some mods to our bikes, and will someday do a rematch.
(The madness never ends 😆)

Ride safe, Ted

PS: Good news: I've found another COGger/Buddy here in Houston to do comparisons with. (as he or I do mods)
We've already done a base line test.
(err) Since that test, he's added a Slip-on and a MRP Flash, {and I offered RED spray paint. 😜 }
""I think it's time for a rematch"".. (y)
 
Last edited:

2andblue

Member
Member
Are there not available some relatively economical telematics devices ( <$300 ) that can plug inline with sensor feeds and result in more data based performance metrics and evaluation of performance before / after changes? Guess I’m a data guy.

IMO showing up to a roll-on is great but unless carefully controlled could result in incorrect assumptions. There are a number of variables that can have a significant impact with this type of performance being measured. One of the largest is weight, are you scaling and adding weight to one bike to make all equal? Some may say 10# what is that on a roll-on drag, it’s huge! Another is tire size / outside diameter what’s the difference between a 50 / 55 tire - it is measurable.

All these subtleties add up to make a big difference and could direct someone in the wrong way when really the exhaust didn’t help the other guy it’s the gallon of milk in bag that made it look like the other outperformed.

If we could find a telematics device not overly spendy I would have fun with that any time I want versus tracking down my buddy to do a roll-on.

Not against the in person fun. Ted can’t wait to meet up, I’m sure you are already tweaking on your machine - I am 👍.
 

Steve in sunny Fla

Iron Butt
Industry Vendor
Are there not available some relatively economical telematics devices ( <$300 ) that can plug inline with sensor feeds and result in more data based performance metrics and evaluation of performance before / after changes? Guess I’m a data guy.

IMO showing up to a roll-on is great but unless carefully controlled could result in incorrect assumptions. There are a number of variables that can have a significant impact with this type of performance being measured. One of the largest is weight, are you scaling and adding weight to one bike to make all equal? Some may say 10# what is that on a roll-on drag, it’s huge! Another is tire size / outside diameter what’s the difference between a 50 / 55 tire - it is measurable.

All these subtleties add up to make a big difference and could direct someone in the wrong way when really the exhaust didn’t help the other guy it’s the gallon of milk in bag that made it look like the other outperformed.

If we could find a telematics device not overly spendy I would have fun with that any time I want versus tracking down my buddy to do a roll-on.

Not against the in person fun. Ted can’t wait to meet up, I’m sure you are already tweaking on your machine - I am 👍.

Again, you're not getting what the intent is here. Ted isn't trying - with the roll on's he's going to do with a fellow Houstonian - to prove whose bike is faster. He's trying to use a known performance bike as a "constant" so when he makes the changes he can tell if some improvement was made, or not. This is the best we can do, lacking telemetrics or a dyno.
 

2andblue

Member
Member
Again, you're not getting what the intent is here. Ted isn't trying - with the roll on's he's going to do with a fellow Houstonian - to prove whose bike is faster. He's trying to use a known performance bike as a "constant" so when he makes the changes he can tell if some improvement was made, or not. This is the best we can do, lacking telemetrics or a dyno.
Steve I get the concept and intent, it's not hard to follow, however condition control can be surprisingly hard. Then you start making changes on multiple machines(both test machines) and wow now you are all outta whack.

I like to measure the exact subject machine against itself.

Steve are you aware of any devices that can accurately measure time / distance: 0-60 mph, 1/4 mile, G-Forces, Calc HP that don't cost an 🦾 & a 🦿 ?
 

Steve in sunny Fla

Iron Butt
Industry Vendor
Steve I get the concept and intent, it's not hard to follow, however condition control can be surprisingly hard. Then you start making changes on multiple machines(both test machines) and wow now you are all outta whack.

I like to measure the exact subject machine against itself.

Steve are you aware of any devices that can accurately measure time / distance: 0-60 mph, 1/4 mile, G-Forces, Calc HP that don't cost an 🦾 & a 🦿 ?
Steve I get the concept and intent, it's not hard to follow, however condition control can be surprisingly hard. Then you start making changes on multiple machines(both test machines) and wow now you are all outta whack.

I like to measure the exact subject machine against itself.

Steve are you aware of any devices that can accurately measure time / distance: 0-60 mph, 1/4 mile, G-Forces, Calc HP that don't cost an 🦾 & a 🦿 ?
The idea is that one machine cannot make any mods between the testing. I did this with a fellow cogger in 2015 when first developing my flash, and it turned out to be very helpful. Did it again in 2016 with another who had an area p, first with my stock exhaust and then with the area p exhaust. Now I have a dyno, but controlled roll ons were good, too. Of course I was datalogging the whole time, which is invaluable from a tuning aspect.

One thing that everyone either glosses over or doesn't understand is that I talk about overall performance, which is area under the curve on WOT, and also light throttle performance, which you're NOT SEEING on dyno runs. I'm considering this bike from a street riders perspective, not a drag racers perspective. And I have to ask... do you see the bikes with my tune in them getting whooped regularly? if it's happening, I sure don't hear about it.

Steve
 

Steve in sunny Fla

Iron Butt
Industry Vendor
OK, everyone wants to see dyno charts or it didn't happen. I get it. So I'm going to post 2 charts here. Look at them carefully, you'll see
1) the effectiveness of my reducer mod;
2) what I mean by tuning for the whole area "under the curve"
3) these are BOTH done with a BLACK WIDOW EXHAUST and are depicted in the same STD correction factor. (very comparable)

So you know what you're looking at... The first is a dyno chart taken from a you tube video of a Concours 14 with the BW system that was first tuned by "a competitor" and then re-tuned by Chris Moore of Moore Mafia you tube channel. (you can watch the whole video there).There's 2 runs, one is the before, as tuned by " a competitor" , the second (higher) run is after Moore's tuning.

The second chart is from a customer's bike I tuned a few months ago. The lower powered run is what it charted with just my tune / bw header. The higher powered run is what it did with the exhaust reducer added into the BW header.

Now I know y'all are going to get wrapped up in the peak power on both charts being low. I get it. I know the bike I worked on well, from stock with a slip on all the way through the BW header tuning... and it was IMO lower on power, comparatively, than alot of other bikes I've dyno'ed. It was a very low miles bike, and think it still had friction throughout. I also feel the one Moore tuned was also a relatively weak bike. So don't get all hung up on the peak #'s. Welcome to the world.

What I DO want you to look at is what I'm calling "area under the curve" . Compare the HP runs on both charts, and you'll see mine hits just about peak HP at 8000 rpm and holds it just about to redline, whereas the other tunes are still climbing at 8000 rpm. I consider that power left on the table... less power under the curve.

The final thing to look at is that you'll see the higher powered run on my chart is WITH the exhaust reducer. WHAT! you mean it made power with a restricted exhaust!!! BLASPHEMER!!! o_O o_O o_O

Steve
 

Attachments

  • GorskiBW.jpg
    GorskiBW.jpg
    62 KB · Views: 62
  • Benoit restriction vs none STD.png
    Benoit restriction vs none STD.png
    50 KB · Views: 63
Last edited:

connie_rider

Member
Member
That's what I like to see.. Open discussion and the exchanging idea's!

2and blue, I can see your point, but I can also see that "your a believer".
ie; You believe the numbers are the same on different dyno's/locations/bikes/conditions and are unaware of the MULTIPLE variables on dyno (or telemetric) tests.
Take my word for it. No 2 dyno's produce the same number's.
Particularly
when those 2 dyno's are in different locations and the tests are conducted under different conditions, on different days, by different people.

ALL the variables you mentioned (including weight) also "occur" on dyno tests, "plus" temperature, humidity, altitude, barometric pressure, dyno rolling resistance, warm up, dyno calibration, operator, data collection/calculation, etc, etc, etc..

Next; Consider a Roll on.
A roll on test is being run; bike vs bike, so both bikes are seeing the same conditions during the test.
ie; Temperature, humidity, altitude, barometric pressure, dyno rolling resistance, warm up, dyno calibration, operator, data collection/calculation, etc, etc, etc... are the same, and the things that I crossed out, don't exist in the Roll-on test.

Lastly. Consider the cost of doing roll-on's vs Dyno time, or dyno/telemetric costs.

I'm NOT saying that the Roll-on Test is without variables, nor is it fool proof.
But, it's a very good option to evaluate modifications.
And, it's fun.

Thoughts???

Ride safe, Ted
 
Last edited:

2andblue

Member
Member
I like it Ted for the fun factor.

I am a believer of controlled conditions and reduction of variables that can effect my measurements. Being a control freak my outcomes are usually very predictable, I don’t like surprises, one reason I could never be a MC passenger for any extended period of time.

My thoughts - let’s roll!
 

connie_rider

Member
Member
My excuse; I've been trying to get some discussion (on Roll-on's) for a long time.
I want to discuss that (Roll-on's) rite now, and your chart helps me make my point.

2 and Blue, look at his charts.
(For the sake of discussion, lets assume the reducer was added to your bike).
The 3rd chart (after adding the reducer) "clearly" shows an increase in torque/power in several different area's.
By the way Steve, "Wow" (That is impressive)!

2 and Blue;
Your method;
If you had done a base line plot, you could now compare the plots., and see a before/after plot {of your bike}.
Because there was an increase in several area's of the plot, you could see that "there was a change"!

But; Do you "know" if the reducers actually helped your bike on the road?
ie; Would your bike have an advantage because of that change, and at what RPM?


My method; If we had done a base line run (of our bikes), installed the reducer in one (yours), and then do another Roll-on, we "would" be able to see the difference the mod made, and at what RPM it works.
(in this scenario, lets assume the bikes were dead even during the base line),

{The scenario}; Lets "assume" that your bike "now" easily pulls away from mine (at lower rpm's), stays ahead thru (the mid rpm's), but mine comes "surging" past you (at higher RPM's).

So,,,
How would "you" rate the reducer install?

My guess is;
,,,,{As you like high RPM power}, you would not like the change {because my bike pulls away at high RPM's}.
,,,,{As I like low RPM torque}, I would add the reducers to mine. {as they demonstrated a low/mid RPM advantage}

Ride safe, Ted

PS: Looking at Steve's chart, I do not "know" how the scenario would actually play out.
I just laid it out this way (as the scenario I used) helped me demonstrate how a plot and a roll-on work.


Last PS: If I were you, I would keep the reducers and paint your bike RED. <evil grin>
 
Last edited:

Steve in sunny Fla

Iron Butt
Industry Vendor
My excuse; I've been trying to get some discussion (on Roll-on's) for a long time.
I want to discuss that rite now, and your chart helps me make my point.

2 and Blue, look at his charts.
(For the sake of discussion, lets assume the reducer was added to your bike).
The 3rd chart (after adding the reducer) "clearly" shows an increase in torque/power in several different area's.
By the way,, "Wow" (That is impressive)!

Your method; If you had done a base line plot, you could now compare the plots., and see a before/after plot {of your bike}.
Because there was an increase before and in several area's of the plot, you could see that "there was a change"!

But; Do you "know" if the reducers actually helped your bike on the road?
ie; Would your bike have an advantage because of that change, and at what RPM?


My method; If we had done a base line run (of our bikes), installed the reducer in one (yours), and then do another Roll-on, we "would" be able to see the difference the mod made and at what RPM it works.
(in this senario, lets assume the bikes were dead even during the base line),

{The senario}; Lets assume that your bike "now" easily pulls away from mine (at lower rpm's), stays ahead thru (the mid rpm's), but mine comes "surging" past you (at higher RPM's).
How would "you" rate the reducer install?

My guess is;
,,,,{As you like high RPM power}, you would not like the change {because my bike pulls away at high RPM's}.
,,,,{As I like low RPM torque}, I would add the reducers to mine. {as they demonstrated a low/mid RPM advantage}

Ride safe, Ted

PS: Looking at Steve's chart, I do not "know" how the senario would actually play out.
I just laid it out this way (as the senario I used) helped me demonstrate how a plot and a roll-on work.


Last PS: If I were you, I would keep the reducers and paint your bike RED. <evil grin>
Geez Ted, you have a elevated complication to an art form. How would it play out? look at the chart. Compare the before and after. The restricted run is stronger from throttle turn to redline. Stronger is stronger. It's marginal, but it's there. If it were 2 different bikes, all else being equal, it would have a marginal edge.
Steve
 

connie_rider

Member
Member
Looking at Steve's chart, I do not "know" how the senario would "actually" play out.
I just laid it out this way (as the scenario I used) helped me demonstrate how a plot and a roll-on work.

ie; I "made up" a scenario to demonstrate the differences; what a plot indicates, and what a Roll-on demonstrates, and how 2 people would evaluate the results differently.
NOTE: The final "surge" (Included in my scenario), was the effect of the RED paint. <evil grin>

Ride safe, Ted
 
Last edited:

kzz1king

Member
Member
Geez Ted, you have a elevated complication to an art form. How would it play out? look at the chart. Compare the before and after. The restricted run is stronger from throttle turn to redline. Stronger is stronger. It's marginal, but it's there. If it were 2 different bikes, all else being equal, it would have a marginal edge.
Steve
But an edge non the less.
 

2andblue

Member
Member
My excuse; I've been trying to get some discussion (on Roll-on's) for a long time.
I want to discuss that (Roll-on's) rite now, and your chart helps me make my point.

2 and Blue, look at his charts.
(For the sake of discussion, lets assume the reducer was added to your bike).
The 3rd chart (after adding the reducer) "clearly" shows an increase in torque/power in several different area's.
By the way Steve, "Wow" (That is impressive)!

2 and Blue;
Your method;
If you had done a base line plot, you could now compare the plots., and see a before/after plot {of your bike}.
Because there was an increase in several area's of the plot, you could see that "there was a change"!

But; Do you "know" if the reducers actually helped your bike on the road?
ie; Would your bike have an advantage because of that change, and at what RPM?


My method; If we had done a base line run (of our bikes), installed the reducer in one (yours), and then do another Roll-on, we "would" be able to see the difference the mod made, and at what RPM it works.
(in this scenario, lets assume the bikes were dead even during the base line),

{The scenario}; Lets "assume" that your bike "now" easily pulls away from mine (at lower rpm's), stays ahead thru (the mid rpm's), but mine comes "surging" past you (at higher RPM's).

So,,,
How would "you" rate the reducer install?

My guess is;
,,,,{As you like high RPM power}, you would not like the change {because my bike pulls away at high RPM's}.
,,,,{As I like low RPM torque}, I would add the reducers to mine. {as they demonstrated a low/mid RPM advantage}

Ride safe, Ted

PS: Looking at Steve's chart, I do not "know" how the scenario would actually play out.
I just laid it out this way (as the scenario I used) helped me demonstrate how a plot and a roll-on work.


Last PS: If I were you, I would keep the reducers and paint your bike RED. <evil grin>
Ted when we ride together the only red that will be seen from my bike is my brake light waiting for you to catch up 🔥

Steve and I talked offline regarding the reducer, dimensions, install, etc.. will make some measurements and see what I can do to get this done. Interest certainly peaked.
 

2andblue

Member
Member
Found a no cost App that might be fun for some to try and share results, then changes can be tested against yourself or others and shared. Weather, altitude, road surface level, etc. are some major variables to be aware of - however does make roll-ons more available to compare…. Accuracy? But could again be way to get some engagement in the privacy of your own favorite spot..

App is called GPS Race Timer Looks like an easy app to use and several different types and endless configurations of tests can be measured.

Roll-ons can be set by setting a starting gear and speed with a specific range of speed to be measured in time to go from starting speed to target speed. Seems this would be rather reliable. For this test you’d set the device to measure a range of speed just above your start speed. Set a starting gear, and speed range and have at it. For instance: 2nd gear roll-on you would set App to measure time to travel from 30mph to 70mph. Get your bike up to 25 mph 2nd gear then WOT the has and hold until after 70. Timer will measure the time it takes to go from 30mph to 70 mph.

Other tests include standing still start to any defined distance such as 60 FT, 1/8; 1/4; 1/2; 1 or custom miles.

Or even other tests of standing still start to any defined speed such as 0-60, 100 or other mph.

Reading reviews it seems the start from standing still measurements could be hit/miss. All about detection of the movement.

I am going to try the above roll on that I described and share. Need to find an open space here, not as easily done some days in SE PA.
 

fastenova

Member
Member
Steve, very interesting to see the dyno charts, and this is not the first time I've seen proof that decreasing the size of an exhaust component shows better performance. I'm no exhaust expert, but I've done a lot of reading about various intake/header/cat/muffler modifications on cars over the years and a little bit of tinkering, and I know that just having a gigantic pipe with no restriction is NOT the way to go in pretty much all cases. Thanks for showing us some measurable results!

On the other topic...

I have to say that I've been reading through discussion about the 'Roll-On Tests' in various threads, and while I agree that it is a fun way to see how mods impact your bike's performance, I would tend to think of these as little races. You're only really comparing two different bikes at a given point in time, but there are too many other variables at play to DEFINITIVELY say that mod X did Y, in terms of performance. If you want to measure things, you put the bike/car/engine on a dyno and you control as many variables as you can, and measure those that you can't control. Temperature, humidity, same rider who is familiar with the operation of said dyno.

Roll-on testing would definitely be far more useful than, say, a 0-60 or 1/4 mile test, because that introduces even more variables.

If I slept poorly or somehow skipped my morning coffee (say it ain't so!) would probably affect my own ability to ride the bike to its potential... Maybe I'm shifting too late or too early, or sitting more upright because my back hurts that day (more wind resistance). Certain modifications are affected more by temperature and humidity whereas the stock systems may provide less performance overall, but also less deviation under changing conditions. And we as humans are, despite our incredible adaptability, imperfect machines, especially when it comes to repeatability. I feel there's so much human input involved in riding motorcycles that the deviation from run to run is more than most minor modifications would show in a roll-on race.

Now, that's not to say that the rider, who is accustomed to that motorcycle, would feel the change... we all know our butt dynos are INCREDIBLE accurate, but 'feel' is such a hard thing to quantify, and I think I speak for most riders that if a performance parts company is marketing their product not based on observed numbers but just on "it feels nice", they'd go out of business real quick.

Having said all of that, real-world ride testing absolutely has value. For instance, not having ridden Steve's tunes but reading about them, it seems to me that most of the improvement is NOT in the numbers produced on the dyno but rather in the drivability of the tune. Throttle mapping, ignition timing, etc. all play a role in this.

OK, so having typed all this out, I guess I mean to say that I wouldn't believe a lot of claims about improvement based on Roll-on tests from other people. If I rode the bike before/after and felt something myself, that would be worth something. Otherwise, I'd better see numbers or a whole lot of personal observations from people who have done said modification, and the logic/science/math/whatever would have to make sense to me too.
 

Steve in sunny Fla

Iron Butt
Industry Vendor
Steve, very interesting to see the dyno charts, and this is not the first time I've seen proof that decreasing the size of an exhaust component shows better performance. I'm no exhaust expert, but I've done a lot of reading about various intake/header/cat/muffler modifications on cars over the years and a little bit of tinkering, and I know that just having a gigantic pipe with no restriction is NOT the way to go in pretty much all cases. Thanks for showing us some measurable results!

On the other topic...

I have to say that I've been reading through discussion about the 'Roll-On Tests' in various threads, and while I agree that it is a fun way to see how mods impact your bike's performance, I would tend to think of these as little races. You're only really comparing two different bikes at a given point in time, but there are too many other variables at play to DEFINITIVELY say that mod X did Y, in terms of performance. If you want to measure things, you put the bike/car/engine on a dyno and you control as many variables as you can, and measure those that you can't control. Temperature, humidity, same rider who is familiar with the operation of said dyno.

Roll-on testing would definitely be far more useful than, say, a 0-60 or 1/4 mile test, because that introduces even more variables.

If I slept poorly or somehow skipped my morning coffee (say it ain't so!) would probably affect my own ability to ride the bike to its potential... Maybe I'm shifting too late or too early, or sitting more upright because my back hurts that day (more wind resistance). Certain modifications are affected more by temperature and humidity whereas the stock systems may provide less performance overall, but also less deviation under changing conditions. And we as humans are, despite our incredible adaptability, imperfect machines, especially when it comes to repeatability. I feel there's so much human input involved in riding motorcycles that the deviation from run to run is more than most minor modifications would show in a roll-on race.

Now, that's not to say that the rider, who is accustomed to that motorcycle, would feel the change... we all know our butt dynos are INCREDIBLE accurate, but 'feel' is such a hard thing to quantify, and I think I speak for most riders that if a performance parts company is marketing their product not based on observed numbers but just on "it feels nice", they'd go out of business real quick.

Having said all of that, real-world ride testing absolutely has value. For instance, not having ridden Steve's tunes but reading about them, it seems to me that most of the improvement is NOT in the numbers produced on the dyno but rather in the drivability of the tune. Throttle mapping, ignition timing, etc. all play a role in this.

OK, so having typed all this out, I guess I mean to say that I wouldn't believe a lot of claims about improvement based on Roll-on tests from other people. If I rode the bike before/after and felt something myself, that would be worth something. Otherwise, I'd better see numbers or a whole lot of personal observations from people who have done said modification, and the logic/science/math/whatever would have to make sense to me too.
Steve, very interesting to see the dyno charts, and this is not the first time I've seen proof that decreasing the size of an exhaust component shows better performance. I'm no exhaust expert, but I've done a lot of reading about various intake/header/cat/muffler modifications on cars over the years and a little bit of tinkering, and I know that just having a gigantic pipe with no restriction is NOT the way to go in pretty much all cases. Thanks for showing us some measurable results!

On the other topic...

I have to say that I've been reading through discussion about the 'Roll-On Tests' in various threads, and while I agree that it is a fun way to see how mods impact your bike's performance, I would tend to think of these as little races. You're only really comparing two different bikes at a given point in time, but there are too many other variables at play to DEFINITIVELY say that mod X did Y, in terms of performance. If you want to measure things, you put the bike/car/engine on a dyno and you control as many variables as you can, and measure those that you can't control. Temperature, humidity, same rider who is familiar with the operation of said dyno.

Roll-on testing would definitely be far more useful than, say, a 0-60 or 1/4 mile test, because that introduces even more variables.

If I slept poorly or somehow skipped my morning coffee (say it ain't so!) would probably affect my own ability to ride the bike to its potential... Maybe I'm shifting too late or too early, or sitting more upright because my back hurts that day (more wind resistance). Certain modifications are affected more by temperature and humidity whereas the stock systems may provide less performance overall, but also less deviation under changing conditions. And we as humans are, despite our incredible adaptability, imperfect machines, especially when it comes to repeatability. I feel there's so much human input involved in riding motorcycles that the deviation from run to run is more than most minor modifications would show in a roll-on race.

Now, that's not to say that the rider, who is accustomed to that motorcycle, would feel the change... we all know our butt dynos are INCREDIBLE accurate, but 'feel' is such a hard thing to quantify, and I think I speak for most riders that if a performance parts company is marketing their product not based on observed numbers but just on "it feels nice", they'd go out of business real quick.

Having said all of that, real-world ride testing absolutely has value. For instance, not having ridden Steve's tunes but reading about them, it seems to me that most of the improvement is NOT in the numbers produced on the dyno but rather in the drivability of the tune. Throttle mapping, ignition timing, etc. all play a role in this.

OK, so having typed all this out, I guess I mean to say that I wouldn't believe a lot of claims about improvement based on Roll-on tests from other people. If I rode the bike before/after and felt something myself, that would be worth something. Otherwise, I'd better see numbers or a whole lot of personal observations from people who have done said modification, and the logic/science/math/whatever would have to make sense to me too.

Fastnova... one of the best roll ons for the c-14 is a roll on using only 3rd gear. The gearing is high enough that the bike won't overwhelm anyone, and it taps out around 120 mph, so anyone who is trying for their junior hoolie award had gone fast enough to deserve it. Doing a rolling start and then shifting gears does start to bring rider ability more into the picture. Even if the bikes are mismatched by rider weight, the idea is to modify only one of the bikes and use the other as a constant. So lets say your buddy has you by 2 lengths at 100, when you pre-determined to roll off. Then you change you bike, and he doesn't. You go out and do it again, starting at the same rpm, and see what the difference is at 100. Now you're even? clearly you did something to make your bike more powerful. It can work the other way, too.

Steve
 

fastenova

Member
Member
Fastnova... one of the best roll ons for the c-14 is a roll on using only 3rd gear. The gearing is high enough that the bike won't overwhelm anyone, and it taps out around 120 mph, so anyone who is trying for their junior hoolie award had gone fast enough to deserve it. Doing a rolling start and then shifting gears does start to bring rider ability more into the picture. Even if the bikes are mismatched by rider weight, the idea is to modify only one of the bikes and use the other as a constant. So lets say your buddy has you by 2 lengths at 100, when you pre-determined to roll off. Then you change you bike, and he doesn't. You go out and do it again, starting at the same rpm, and see what the difference is at 100. Now you're even? clearly you did something to make your bike more powerful. It can work the other way, too.

Steve
That makes sense. I also have to say that I shy away from any sort of racing on public roads... I think the penalty for racing is much higher than simply speeding. Though I guess I'd have to look that up, I just assumed that's the case. So I am more comfortable relying on numbers taken from a dyno or even the track, than casual racing to triple digits.

Of course, I'm sure everyone is talking about doing these on private property or in 'Mexico' (as said on another forum).

One other problem I have is that I don't have any moto friends currently with engines nearly as potent as the C14, so it would be hard to compare our Roll-on tests when they're always so far behind me!
 

texas.devops

Eager Upshifter in SW Houston
Member
LOL, hours of entertainment. I’m very much enjoying the show fellas. We can see that the differences in opinion are not so far apart after all.

Just went to Mexico with a local amigo, who shall remain nameless for now. Earlier this year I had the pleasure of getting thoroughly trounced by my amigos’ red rocket, while my machine was bone stock except for the grip puppies and handlebar risers.
70101B39-4E49-45E9-9FF2-A5EA071C18E4.jpeg


Thanks to Shoodaben Engineering and BlackWidow, Inc I was no longer eating dust and watching taillights disappear. LOL

In truth, these machines are so much more engaging with a flash and open throat. Top end left a tiny bit to be desired, but at the minimal level of investment I’ve made thus far it was sincerely $’s well spent and I have no real need to get faster. Not only did the red devil NOT walk away by two+ bike lengths like in the first roll-on tests, depending on how quick one of us was with the throttle I pulled ahead by an eyebrow as many times as my mustachio’d amigo did.
22992ECE-FAF8-413B-BE5F-C5DE18239001.jpeg


Roll-ons are miles of entertainment, especially in Mexico. And they give real world feedback for quick evaluation. No pricey dynos or scheduling snafus. No disassembly and reassembly required.

That being said, minor tweaks may not register as brilliantly as my two relatively mild mods have. For example, installing the brighter LED bulbs demonstrated zero impact on my 3rd gear / 3,000RPM launch velocity. LOL
A0C0B423-CBE0-4D4D-BF05-4470AE6DF5C4.jpeg


Cheers y’all, AB
 
Last edited:

connie_rider

Member
Member
Ride report;
Yesterday we went out and did Roll-on's. (See posts/photo's above)
Test Details;
I'm prolly 20 lbs heavier, have more weight on my bike, and also have a trunk bag.

His bike is BLACK/(slight disadvantage) Mine is RED.(fastest color)
Tires are both 50 series.
I have MRA Vario shield. He has a stock (taller) shield.
As always, we used 3rd gear for testing, and initially started at 2000 RPM. (see below)
**


{In our first meeting, texas.devops bike was completely stock and mine had ZX-14 header/MRP Flash}
My bike pulled away easily, and was prolly 5-6 lengths ahead after the Roll-on's.
{In this meeting, texas.devops had installed Black Widow Slip-on and MRP Flash. Mine was unchanged}

We went out into the country away from Houston to a looooong straight road.

We initially did 2 roll-on's. Results were inconclusive as each bike led 1 of the Roll-on's. {WTH ??}
** We decided to find out what was going on, and opted to do additional runs. (with differing RPM start and shut down)
We then did our series (and after riding to a "distant" area), stopped to discuss.

Results; "Whichever bike" {that gets the first instant of throttle twist} pulls away about 1 length, the distance remains unchanged, until high RPM's where mine seems to gain.
ie; The bikes are so even now that we called it a draw.
NOTE:
His bike might have a slight advantage at low RPM's.
My bike might have a slight advantage at high RPM's.

MOST IMPORTANT FINDINGS:
The Roll-on tests "clearly show" that his modifications made a difference.

ie; {His mods worked, and the Roll-on Test itself was a success}

Future plans; One of us will do a modification to his bike. (The problem is,, Who ??)
At this point, I'll probably install Steve's Reducers.
(This is difficult as his reducer size calculation is based on a single muffler set up and my bike has 2 mufflers)
(I've done roll-on's with others and want only 1 bike changed in those tests too)
or;
We might install a reducer in TeXaS.devops Stock Header.
(Time for Steve to do some calculatin')
(Wouldn't it be cool if the Reducer improves a stock header?) {If so, it could help a lot of folks}.

Ride safe, Ted

PS: No Red or Black spray paint cans were exchanged after the tests.
 
Last edited:

Steve in sunny Fla

Iron Butt
Industry Vendor
Ride report;
Yesterday we went out and did Roll-on's. (See posts/photo's above)
I'm prolly 20 lbs heavier, have more weight on my bike, and also have a trunk bag.
His bike is BLACK/(slight disadvantage) Mine is RED.(fastest color)
Tires are both 50 series. I have MRA Vario shield. He has stock.
As always, we used 3rd gear for testing, and initially started at 2000 RPM. (see below)
**


{In our first meeting, texas.devops bike was completely stock and mine had ZX-14 header/MRP Flash}
My bike pulled away easily, and was prolly 5-6 lengths ahead after the Roll-on's.
{In this meeting, texas.devops had installed Black Widow Slip-on and MRP Flash. Mine was unchanged}

We went out into the country away from Houston to a looooong straight road.

We initially did 2 roll-on's. Results were inconclusive as each bike led 1 of the Roll-on's. {WTH ??}
** We decided to find out what was going on, and opted to do additional runs. (with differing RPM start and shut down)
We then did our series (and after riding to a "distant" area), stopped to discuss.

Results; "Whichever bike" {that gets the first instant of throttle twist} pulls away about 1 length, the distance remains unchanged, until high RPM's where mine seems to gain.
ie; The bikes are so even now that we called it a draw.
NOTE:
His bike might have a slight advantage at low RPM's.
My bike might have a slight advantage at high RPM's.

MOST IMPORTANT FINDINGS:
The Roll-on tests "clearly show" that his modifications made a difference.

ie; {His mods worked, and the Roll-on Test itself was a success}

Future plans; One of us will do a modification to his bike. (The problem is,, Who ??)
At this point, I'll may install Steve's Reducers.
(This is difficult as his reducer size calculation is based on a single muffler set up)
(I've done roll-on's with others and want only 1 bike changed in those tests too)
or;
We might install a reducer in TeXaS.devops Stock Header.
(Time for Steve to do some calculatin')
(Wouldn't it be cool if the Reducer improves a stock header?) {If so, it could help a lot of folks}.

Ride safe, Ted

PS: No Red or Black spray paint cans were exchanged after the tests.
Ride report;
Yesterday we went out and did Roll-on's. (See posts/photo's above)
I'm prolly 20 lbs heavier, have more weight on my bike, and also have a trunk bag.
His bike is BLACK/(slight disadvantage) Mine is RED.(fastest color)
Tires are both 50 series. I have MRA Vario shield. He has stock.
As always, we used 3rd gear for testing, and initially started at 2000 RPM. (see below)
**


{In our first meeting, texas.devops bike was completely stock and mine had ZX-14 header/MRP Flash}
My bike pulled away easily, and was prolly 5-6 lengths ahead after the Roll-on's.
{In this meeting, texas.devops had installed Black Widow Slip-on and MRP Flash. Mine was unchanged}

We went out into the country away from Houston to a looooong straight road.

We initially did 2 roll-on's. Results were inconclusive as each bike led 1 of the Roll-on's. {WTH ??}
** We decided to find out what was going on, and opted to do additional runs. (with differing RPM start and shut down)
We then did our series (and after riding to a "distant" area), stopped to discuss.

Results; "Whichever bike" {that gets the first instant of throttle twist} pulls away about 1 length, the distance remains unchanged, until high RPM's where mine seems to gain.
ie; The bikes are so even now that we called it a draw.
NOTE:
His bike might have a slight advantage at low RPM's.
My bike might have a slight advantage at high RPM's.

MOST IMPORTANT FINDINGS:
The Roll-on tests "clearly show" that his modifications made a difference.

ie; {His mods worked, and the Roll-on Test itself was a success}

Future plans; One of us will do a modification to his bike. (The problem is,, Who ??)
At this point, I'll may install Steve's Reducers.
(This is difficult as his reducer size calculation is based on a single muffler set up)
(I've done roll-on's with others and want only 1 bike changed in those tests too)
or;
We might install a reducer in TeXaS.devops Stock Header.
(Time for Steve to do some calculatin')
(Wouldn't it be cool if the Reducer improves a stock header?) {If so, it could help a lot of folks}.

Ride safe, Ted

PS: No Red or Black spray paint cans were exchanged after the tests.
Ted, leave Texasdevops bike alone. There's no need to further reduce the flow on the stock header. the cats are acting as an impediment to reversion. All you'll accomplish is knocking out more top end from his bike (or was that your evil plan?) .
Steve
 

texas.devops

Eager Upshifter in SW Houston
Member
Ride report;
Yesterday we went out and did Roll-on's. (See posts/photo's above)
I'm prolly 20 lbs heavier, have more weight on my bike, and also have a trunk bag.
His bike is BLACK/(slight disadvantage) Mine is RED.(fastest color)
Tires are both 50 series. I have MRA Vario shield. He has stock.
As always, we used 3rd gear for testing, and initially started at 2000 RPM. (see below)
**


{In our first meeting, texas.devops bike was completely stock and mine had ZX-14 header/MRP Flash}
My bike pulled away easily, and was prolly 5-6 lengths ahead after the Roll-on's.
{In this meeting, texas.devops had installed Black Widow Slip-on and MRP Flash. Mine was unchanged}

We went out into the country away from Houston to a looooong straight road.

We initially did 2 roll-on's. Results were inconclusive as each bike led 1 of the Roll-on's. {WTH ??}
** We decided to find out what was going on, and opted to do additional runs. (with differing RPM start and shut down)
We then did our series (and after riding to a "distant" area), stopped to discuss.

Results; "Whichever bike" {that gets the first instant of throttle twist} pulls away about 1 length, the distance remains unchanged, until high RPM's where mine seems to gain.
ie; The bikes are so even now that we called it a draw.
NOTE:
His bike might have a slight advantage at low RPM's.
My bike might have a slight advantage at high RPM's.

MOST IMPORTANT FINDINGS:
The Roll-on tests "clearly show" that his modifications made a difference.

ie; {His mods worked, and the Roll-on Test itself was a success}

Future plans; One of us will do a modification to his bike. (The problem is,, Who ??)
At this point, I'll may install Steve's Reducers.
(This is difficult as his reducer size calculation is based on a single muffler set up)
(I've done roll-on's with others and want only 1 bike changed in those tests too)
or;
We might install a reducer in TeXaS.devops Stock Header.
(Time for Steve to do some calculatin')
(Wouldn't it be cool if the Reducer improves a stock header?) {If so, it could help a lot of folks}.

Ride safe, Ted

PS: No Red or Black spray paint cans were exchanged after the tests.

I approve of this ride report. 😎🤙
 

connie_rider

Member
Member
Ok, it's official as TeXaS agrees with my report. 🤠

Steve; Actually, I was thinking of ways to do another test. (throwing out idea's, with only 1 bike having Mods).
As to the evil plan; Shhhhhhhhhhhhhhh............

Ride safe, Ted
 
Last edited:

Steve in sunny Fla

Iron Butt
Industry Vendor
I have something to say ... it's very interesting seeing the increase in both low and high rpm torque and HP after putting a restriction in the exhaust system.

Now, what size restrictor do I need the get the same results from my BW header?
I'll get that for you and post it in my shoodaben area later today.

Steve
 

Steve in sunny Fla

Iron Butt
Industry Vendor
PLEASE READ.

Based on posts and PM's I'm getting, COG is doing what COG has always done best, take an idea and analyse it to death before even trying it.

Let's go back to the basics... what were my design goals when I started experimenting?

goal 1) To improve light throttle / lower rpm response and power, lost by larger than stock aftermarket headers;

goal 2) Do it for minimum expense with an easily sourced part, no machining or extensive modifications needed. Something anyone who could bolt a header on could do.

These goals have been getting swept aside in this discussion. Now there's machining / telematic testing and extensive math formulas being considered.

So please STOP.

Just buy a reducer or 2, fit it, and see what you think of it before you re-engineer. In the end, you might take my idea and really improve on it or hone it. But if it gets away from design goal #2, it won't help anyone. Please remember, this is for everyone to improve their bikes with absolutely minimal expense and time involved... at least it was my intent.

Steve

ETA... here's another way to say this, I think most will understand... I'm tired of talking, I want to see some work getting done.
 

2andblue

Member
Member
PLEASE READ.
Steve

ETA... here's another way to say this, I think most will understand... I'm tired of talking, I want to see some work getting done.
Holy Smokes Steve’s putting us to work, he’s regular slave driving us.

Kidding aside, Thank You Steve for your awesome effort.

As committed I’ll get the AreaP FE dimension today - hopefully no need to fabricate and can purchase an easily sourced parts drop in and rip!
 

connie_rider

Member
Member
Err; The Subject of this discussion is;
Anybody else doing Roll-On (modification) Comparisons?
I've been trying to stir discussion on Roll-on Comparisons since May and it's finally happening.
Yahoooooooo....... I like to "discuss" all idea's.
"Please help me keep the Roll-on Comparison Discussion discussion going".

As always, a discussion slips towards other things. (in this case, "Modification" is part of the original subject)
At this stage, the current Modification happens to be Reducers. (It "was" differing Headers/Flashes/etc)
A subject slip is totally ok by me.
I like to discuss all idea's. (as long as it helps keep the subject (Roll-on Comparisons) going)

Err again; Did everyone Notice that I keep "trying to push" the discussion "back to" Roll-On (modification) comparisons? <sly grin>

Getting back to Roll-On (modification) comparisons, "Fastenova sed",,
I have to say that I've been reading through discussion about the 'Roll-On Tests' in various threads, and while I agree that it is a fun way to see how mods impact your bike's performance, I would tend to think of these as little races. You're only really comparing two different bikes at a given point in time.
He also sed; OK, so having typed all this out, I guess I mean to say that I wouldn't believe a lot of claims about improvement based on Roll-on tests from other people.

So, my question to Fastenova is;
Did the Roll-on Ride Report/Report's and Roll-on Comparison "explanation" help you decide that a "Slip-on and Flash" is a good Modification to try on your new toy?

Ride safe, Ted

PS: Did I happen to mention; Roll-On (modification) comparisons above?? <sneaky grin>
 
Last edited:

2andblue

Member
Member
Holy Smokes Steve’s putting us to work, he’s regular slave driving us.

Kidding aside, Thank You Steve for your awesome effort.

As committed I’ll get the AreaP FE dimension today - hopefully no need to fabricate and can purchase an easily sourced parts drop in and rip!
Steve ID of AreaP FE final collector going into the mid-pipe is 2.16” - 2.20”, ovality probably from clamping too hard.
 

Steve in sunny Fla

Iron Butt
Industry Vendor
Steve ID of AreaP FE final collector going into the mid-pipe is 2.16” - 2.20”, ovality probably from clamping too hard.
we can find a reducer with an OD of appx 2. 140" to 2.150", but that will be loose.

What is the ID of the midpipe where it slip-fits over the final collector? I'm guessing it was built to be 2.25"

Steve
 

Steve in sunny Fla

Iron Butt
Industry Vendor
Mid pipe ID is 2.26” - 2.29”
in the area where it's flared to fit over the final collector?

If so you can use a reducer that's 2.25OD and reduces to 1.750 ID (AP#8653) OR if you're scared it might take away some top end get AP#8938, it has an exit ID of 2" (I think that's to big). IMO buy both of them. You'll have to shorten the large OD end so that it's just the taper down by the exit reduction area, because you're going to slide this down inside the midpipe flared section and then slide the midpipe back onto the header. Be sure to bevel the leading edge, and if t's loose, you can use a punch and punch some divots from the inside of the reducer to the outside to tighten up the slip fit. NOTE - you can get those reducers at most any auto parts store, or even rock auto or summit racing online.

Steve
 

2andblue

Member
Member
in the area where it's flared to fit over the final collector?

If so you can use a reducer that's 2.25OD and reduces to 1.750 ID (AP#8653) OR if you're scared it might take away some top end get AP#8938, it has an exit ID of 2" (I think that's to big). IMO buy both of them. You'll have to shorten the large OD end so that it's just the taper down by the exit reduction area, because you're going to slide this down inside the midpipe flared section and then slide the midpipe back onto the header. Be sure to bevel the leading edge, and if t's loose, you can use a punch and punch some divots from the inside of the reducer to the outside to tighten up the slip fit. NOTE - you can get those reducers at most any auto parts store, or even rock auto or summit racing online.

Steve
I’m on it! I’ll try this telemetry App and get some baselines tomorrow - possibly have a live victim as well - then will get insert and redo likely next weekend. Fun times!
 

connie_rider

Member
Member
I've tried some apps on my phone to measure the accels.
All, were unsuccessful, but I'm an admitted Computer/Phone Illiterate.
Hope it works for you.


possibly have a live victim as well,,,,

Do I hear Roll-on Comparison??

Ride safe, Ted
 
Last edited:

2andblue

Member
Member
I've tried some apps on my phone to measure the accels.
All, were unsuccessful, but I'm an admitted Computer/Phone Illiterate.
Hope it works for you.


possibly have a live victim as well,,,,

Do I hear Roll-on Comparison??

Ride safe, Ted
Yes - Machine I just did the valves on, AreaP Slip-On and a flash.
 

connie_rider

Member
Member
Sounds good. Hopefully you have a base line already, or will this be a base line without reducer?
If your doing it with the Reducer, (and haven't done a base line) how will you know if it works?
Whatever you do, be safe out there!

To anyone that is just getting into this discussion;
I want to clear something up about the Roll-on (modification) Comparison, by putting it into a simple statement.
The purpose of the Roll-on Comparison is "not" to see whose bike is the fastest.
The purpose of a Roll-on Comparison is to see if a Modification works.


I also want to agree with fastenova; Like him, I'm not into racing on public streets.
If an officer saw you doing this, it would be considered a race.
So, Doing one of these Roll-on Comparisons' is done at the risk of getting a ticket.

NOTE:
We do the test's away from traffic, do only 1 or 2 test's, and stop the accell as soon as the mod has been evaluated. (to prevent triple digits)
Normally, the success of a mod can be determined by 7-8k, but occasionally we do a tad more.

Ride safe, Ted
 
Last edited:

2andblue

Member
Member
Baseline will be without reducer.
Our machines under acceleration out of a corner 2nd, 3rd are darn close until the top end where I get a pull away. However this WOT comparison is with our machine carrying 150# more weight - 2up vs. single rider. Previous pulls 1 rider both machine there is no doubt my machine runs away.

Will try the reducer see if there is a difference leaving corners same speed if I can pull away before top.
 

Steve in sunny Fla

Iron Butt
Industry Vendor
Our machines under acceleration out of a corner 2nd, 3rd are darn close until the top end where I get a pull away. However this WOT comparison is with our machine carrying 150# more weight - 2up vs. single rider. Previous pulls 1 rider both machine there is no doubt my machine runs away.

Will try the reducer see if there is a difference leaving corners same speed if I can pull away before top.
what rpm are you turning WOT at?
 

texas.devops

Eager Upshifter in SW Houston
Member
I’m just gonna recommend a healthy dose of safety awareness and incident response prep when doing the roll-ons with pillions.

It’s one thing to risk ourselves in the name of science, but quite another to bring additional unsprung weight along on test runs.

Have fun and keep both wheels down. AB
 
Top