Aftermarket Crossover with stock exhast cans

[v11cafe]

WS: None of the US V11s have the lamba sensor.

 

It seems every piece of evidence agrees that if you want ultimate top-end, the Succhi is the best choice. This meshes exactly with what a one-day comparison by feel, and not dyno, showed me. I would love to have the xtra top end of the Stucchi. It would be a boon on some of my rides, but for the other 90 percent of the riding, I like the no-torque-hole performance the Mistral provides.

Don"t really know if there are different settings between US & Euro models, but my V11 never suffered from a hole in midrange,

or if it exists, it is not obvious on the road, maybe in a dyno.......

My set up is Ti kit (ECU+cans), with stock crossover, and I am thinking to add the Stucchi for the extra top end.

You say that Mistral is better than Stucchi in midrange,

please make a comparison (by feel) of both with stock crossover.

Is the Stucchi worse than the stock in midrange???

If you have the time, your answer would be very helpful for me to make my decision, since you have tried them all.

[Greg Field]

Don"t really know if there are different settings between US & Euro models, but my V11 never suffered from a hole in midrange,

or if it exists, it is not obvious on the road, maybe in a dyno.......

My set up is Ti kit (ECU+cans), with stock crossover, and I am thinking to add the Stucchi for the extra top end.

You say that Mistral is better than Stucchi in midrange,

please make a comparison (by feel) of both with stock crossover.

Is the Stucchi worse than the stock in midrange???

If you have the time, your answer would be very helpful for me to make my decision, since you have tried them all.

 

Unfortunately, I didn't run them all on the dyno. I did run them on the street back to back. The Mistral definitely felt torquier in the 1500-4000 or so rpm band. I do a lot of commuting in traffic, so that's useful for me. The Stucchi felt stronger than the stock crossover everywhere. Mine's an '04 with the front crossover. I think it would makes and even more noticable difference on the earlier bikes without the extra crossover. I don't have data to back that up, though. It's just intuition.

[dlaing]

It seems every piece of evidence agrees that if you want ultimate top-end, the Succhi is the best choice. This meshes exactly with what a one-day comparison by feel, and not dyno, showed me. I would love to have the xtra top end of the Stucchi. It would be a boon on some of my rides, but for the other 90 percent of the riding, I like the no-torque-hole performance the Mistral provides.

The dyno evidence suggests Mistral has best midrange, Stock and Stucchi neck and neck for high RPM, and Stucchi in between stock and Mistral for mid range.

Evidence on low end seems to be impossible to decipher, but Mistral seems to have the edge.

Most will prefer the Stucchi because it fills in the hole while keeping the exhilaration in the acceleration, but the Mistral is better for those that want grunt.

Early Quat-D had Stucchi like midrange, but lost out at high rpm.

Later Quat-D performed did much better at high rpm.

[BrianG]

To me the graph says Mistrals win for low end torque improvement...almost 10ft-lb better...right?

I read that the torque and HP curves should cross at 5252 RPM can someone explain the math to me? And why have I seen variance in a couple graphs but the "torque dip" was still around 4500RPM

 

The Mistrals seem like a better buy as they were cheaper than the Stucchi and while the Stucchi was double walled I was told the "siamese" set up was subject to cracking. The siamese part means the two main parallel pipes are joined in the middle

 

Mistral in Red and Stucchi in Blue.

 

 

The Stucchi doesn't seem to do much for the midrange torque hole on this graph.

 

Anyone here have all of the Stucchi, Mistral, and stock graphs from one bike?