I went for my dyno today... Finally

Today, the weather is pretty good.... so I went for the scheduled dyno tune for my X

Here is my little X, all prepared


And here is the tuner taking her for the first run


and the result?


Woohoo


A/F was pretty good


What I have on the X are:

K&N air filter
Delta Barrel 4 full system
PCIII USB
little DIY servo sub (Thanks Steve )
Air box top removed

On the other hand, my friend's R with almost the same mod gets only about 27 with PCIII only... he then put the ignition module to get it 29

I think there's indeed some ECU differences between the R and X....

Perhaps a more straightforward modification for the R is to change to the X ECU?

Overall, I am very happy with my X now!!!!

What map are you running?

mtb wrote:

I think there's indeed some ECU differences between the R and X....

Perhaps a more straightforward modification for the R is to change to the X ECU?

I can't speak for the bikes in Singapore, but the US bikes have the very same ECU for both R and X for both '08 and '09. All the same part number... 32C-8591A-00-00. I don't see Yamaha needing a different ECU for the R and X. It is the same engine. Must be some other reason your friend has less HP than yours.

edwardhill1995 wrote:

What map are you running?

It's a custom map just for my bike and modifications

mwakey wrote:

I can't speak for the bikes in Singapore, but the US bikes have the very same ECU for both R and X for both '08 and '09. All the same part number... 32C-8591A-00-00. I don't see Yamaha needing a different ECU for the R and X. It is the same engine. Must be some other reason your friend has less HP than yours.

hmmm... but Mark, in the WR special site, it states that the X has a dedicated/tweaked ECU...

and with the help of a friend who is good in Japanese, it seems to focus on the ignition for the X model

I think I will compare the ECUs this weekend and try to look for different numbers (if any)

are these results crankshaft or rear wheel measurements?

mtb wrote:

mwakey wrote:

I can't speak for the bikes in Singapore, but the US bikes have the very same ECU for both R and X for both '08 and '09. All the same part number... 32C-8591A-00-00. I don't see Yamaha needing a different ECU for the R and X. It is the same engine. Must be some other reason your friend has less HP than yours.

hmmm... but Mark, in the WR special site, it states that the X has a dedicated/tweaked ECU...

and with the help of a friend who is good in Japanese, it seems to focus on the ignition for the X model

I think I will compare the ECUs this weekend and try to look for different numbers (if any)

Like I said, I can only speak for the US bikes. Maybe the Japanese and Euro bikes have different ECUs. On my ECU, the part number is the top number on the little orange and silver sticker (32C-8591A-00). It has been my experience with Yamaha Marine ECUs that if the ECU gets updated the last part of the number is changed (ie. if this ECU changed it would be 32C-8591A-01). This also holds true for all Yamaha part numbers. The last part will go to an 01, 02, etc... as the part gets updated.

A simple test would be to swap ECUs with your buddie's R and do the dyno run again on your bike. Then you would know for sure.

flatboarder wrote:

are these results crankshaft or rear wheel measurements?

Sorry, I am not sure how DynoJet dynos perform the measurements...

But I guess it's rear wheel measurements?

mwakey wrote:

A simple test would be to swap ECUs with your buddie's R and do the dyno run again on your bike. Then you would know for sure.

I took down the part number when I first got the bike, but I forgot where I put it... so

I will check again this weekend and post the result...

As for swapping of ECUs, I would love to do it but it's hard to find a perfect timing for 3 of us (me, WR-R, and the tuner)...

However, my friend is going back for another run next week as I just did the servo sub for him... Let's see how he does then

oh ya, something worth mentioning (I think)... my blue line was obtained with the R map (from my friend's R dyno) loaded

mtb wrote:

flatboarder wrote:

are these results crankshaft or rear wheel measurements?

Sorry, I am not sure how DynoJet dynos perform the measurements...

But I guess it's rear wheel measurements?

It should be rear wheel, but that is up to software and adjustments used. These devices can as well calculate crank shaft performance (obtained by measurement when letting it roll along on dyno with closed throttle).
If that is rear wheel performance, that is quite a good result. Congrats. I will not install any tuning, but I will probably put it on some dyno someday. I am curious. And I would be very corious about the WR250R performance compared to my previous EXC200 2stroke. Unfortunately I have got not dyno run from it.

This is what I found:

Quote :

First it is important to have an understanding of how DynoJet
gets their horsepower numbers. Power in mechanical terms is the ability
to accomplish a specified amount of work in a given amount of time. By
definition, one horsepower is equal to applying a 550 pound force
through a distance of 1 foot in one second. In real terms, it would
take 1 HP to raise a 550 pound weight up 1 foot in 1 second. So to measure
horsepower, we need to know force (in pounds) and velocity (in feet per
second). Dynojet's inertial dynamometer measures power according to the
terms just described. It measures velocity directly by measuring the
time it takes to rotate two heavy steel drums one turn. It measures
force at the surface of the drum by indirectly measuring it's
acceleration. Acceleration is simply the difference in velocity at the
surface of the drums from one revolution to the next. The force applied
to the drums is calculated from acceleration using Newton's 2nd law,
Force = Mass * Acceleration. Since the mass of the drums is know and
acceleration has been measured, Power (horsepower) can now be
calculated. Torque is then calculated using the horsepower number:
Torque = Horsepower * 5252 / RPM.

I had a 99 200EGS... I have to say the 200 felt much stronger... BUT, it was a petrol sucker... and that is no good for daily usage (not to mention that you have to carry the 2T around)

mtb wrote:

This is what I found:

As far as I can see it does not state about any calculations done on the data retrieved from the run.

Quote :

I had a 99 200EGS... I have to say the 200 felt much stronger... BUT, it was a petrol sucker... and that is no good for daily usage (not to mention that you have to carry the 2T around)

It seems quite difficult to me to compare different types of engine just by riding them. Most of those 2stroke competition engines are not as strong as they are known to be by most people. I heard about maybe 40HP for an EXC200 (I had a 2002), but I am quite sure it is far less than that (I believe that 250 2stroke Gasgas and EXC were captured at slightly above 40HP). Those lightweighted engines feel very strong and quite responsive, but numbers speak a different language mostly, I think.

Those engines running smooth, soft and silently are mostly considered weak, although I know they can be quite fast. This is the main reason why I like to compare the WR against the EXC200 and what makes me quite curious about it. I would say, just from my impression, the 200 might deliver a stock peak performance of probably 35HP at rear wheel (this changed over the years with different models, BTW). But I cannot tell, definitely. Would like to see some charts of it.

Well, first of all I would definitely need to ride my WR to gain an initial impression, which is not possible at all since weather turned extremely bad again. It goes on and on. Snow, rain, salt, bad humid cold. The WR has been in my garage for 6 weeks now, I finally managed to get papers, insurance and number plate, but no way of riding it at acceptable conditions. It starts getting annoying to me. At least I found a way of drinking beer, however. *sigh*

flatboarder wrote:

....It goes on and on. Snow, rain, salt, bad humid cold. The WR has been in my garage for 6 weeks now, I finally managed to get papers, insurance and number plate, but no way of riding it at acceptable conditions. It starts getting annoying to me. At least I found a way of drinking beer, however. *sigh*

Salt? where did the salt come from?

Don't worry my friend, your time will time... just remember to wind it up and it actually feels good

all the best for the weather

mtb wrote:

Salt? where did the salt come from?

Salt is the traditional stuff that's used for controlling ice buildup on the roads in cold climates. Actually, it's only good to about -15C After that, some places will use a chemical de-icer which is good to -30C

Fargo_Wolf wrote:

Salt is the traditional stuff that's used for controlling ice buildup on the roads in cold climates. Actually, it's only good to about -15C After that, some places will use a chemical de-icer which is good to -30C

Ah I see... thanks

It never snowed here, so....

mtb wrote:

flatboarder wrote:

....It goes on and on. Snow, rain, salt, bad humid cold. The WR has been in my garage for 6 weeks now, I finally managed to get papers, insurance and number plate, but no way of riding it at acceptable conditions. It starts getting annoying to me. At least I found a way of drinking beer, however. *sigh*

Salt? where did the salt come from?

Don't worry my friend, your time will time... just remember to wind it up and it actually feels good

all the best for the weather

Thanks, MTB, I know I can no longer hide my frustration about an extremely long term of continuous bad weather over here, north of the alps. Thats a matter of not living a 100 kms to the south probably, where there is no problem at all...
I am simply missing things as like some sunny day every now and then, or so.
:)

mtb wrote:

Fargo_Wolf wrote:

Salt is the traditional stuff that's used for controlling ice buildup on the roads in cold climates. Actually, it's only good to about -15C After that, some places will use a chemical de-icer which is good to -30C

Ah I see... thanks

It never snowed here, so....

Then you have an advantage. It's always warm where you are, so you can ride year round.

Sweet!!! Can you post up or pm me your map??

same here

I will try to load the map to my laptop this weekend and post it here

mtb wrote:

I will try to load the map to my laptop this weekend and post it here

Sweet. If you cant post it can you please email it to me sneedbd@gmail.com Thanks.


Also, one factor I don't think many consider when dynoing the R as compared to the X is that the R's wheel/tire is both larger in diameter and likely heavier (though I'm not 100% sure). This will affect max wheel hp.

Do you think the gear ratio will affect the max HP output too?

nice numbers! thats about what mine did, averaged about 30 and peaked up to 34 one run. id like to see what your map looks like also!

For those who are interested, here are the maps off my X and my friend's R (with ignition module)

My humble WR250X (K&N/Delta full system/top of airbox removed/servo sub/PCIII/13-45):
http://www.mediafire.com/?zwjytcbnwl4

My friend's WR250R with ignition module(TwinAir/Delta full system/top of airbox removed/servo sub/PCIII/Ignition modeul/13-48):
http://www.mediafire.com/?jjcgrg0nm0z

So..... any feedback on either of these maps?

PS: I am not sure if you load the R map with ignition setting to the PCIII (without the ignition module) will eventually change the ignition timing