Tom M Posted November 19, 2013 Posted November 19, 2013 yes at least get the crossover, it is the weak spot in stock set up. it fixed a hickup/cough I was having around 3200 rpm.. after that I added the reverse cones, probably cut 20 pounds of the bike. I agree with foto on this. Any of the aftermarket crossovers will fix the 4k rpm torque dip from the stock crossover. I had the Fast by Ferracci crossover, which was very similar to the Stucchi but not as well made, for four or five years until it cracked. I replaced it with a Mistral a few years ago. In my opinion both helped out the midrange grunt but the FBF was superior at higher rpm. If I was in the market for a crossover today I would go with the Stucchi over the Mistral.
AndyH Posted November 19, 2013 Posted November 19, 2013 Mistral X-over and standard cans were frankly disappointing until I had a PCIII mapping, proper job done on each cylinder (with a lambda sensor on each header) about a month ago. A complete transformation and probably won't bother with new cans as a result. It had me riding until last week well after the salt was put on the roads - usually put it away well before as it wrecks the finish. I just couldn't stop riding and feeling a bit bereft now.
JBBenson Posted November 20, 2013 Posted November 20, 2013 This ⇧ I was planning the same configuration. Good to know beforehand how it worked out.
sp838 Posted November 20, 2013 Author Posted November 20, 2013 Thanks for the heads-up, AndyH. I do think I'm going to get a PCIII eventually anyway. Gonna start with the x-over, and go step by step from there. When you used the lambda sensors in the headers to tune the bike, was this all being done on a dyno? Or just with the back wheel up in the air? Where are the sensors inserted? My bike doesn't have the header crosspipe. It does have some cap bolts though, towards the middle of the header down pipes, right before the connection with the x-over. Are those holes meant for inserting the lambda sensors for tuning? This leads to another question: would there be any benefit in using the later headers with the crosspipe (2002 - ) on the 2001 v11?
luhbo Posted November 20, 2013 Posted November 20, 2013 Some say the crosspipe would give better low- and midrange torque, others say it's just additional rattle and risk for cracked headers. Least thing is you'd need different hoses to the oil cooler. Hubert
AndyH Posted November 25, 2013 Posted November 25, 2013 Thanks for the heads-up, AndyH. I do think I'm going to get a PCIII eventually anyway. Gonna start with the x-over, and go step by step from there. When you used the lambda sensors in the headers to tune the bike, was this all being done on a dyno? Or just with the back wheel up in the air? Where are the sensors inserted? My bike doesn't have the header crosspipe. It does have some cap bolts though, towards the middle of the header down pipes, right before the connection with the x-over. Are those holes meant for inserting the lambda sensors for tuning? This leads to another question: would there be any benefit in using the later headers with the crosspipe (2002 - ) on the 2001 v11? The dyno shop welded new bosses into the header pipe, just behind the standard bosses you refer to and just in front of the X-over junction to the header, one for each pipe. Apparently the standard bosses are used at the factory simply for idle setup and are too small for dyno work: or theydidn't have ones to match the size... They then plugged their sensors into the bosses and ran the bike on the dyno, first adjusting the fuel mapping for the right cylinder, then the left, finally cross-checking on the right again in case it needed further adjustments. There may have been a cheaper approach but I'm totally chuffed with the results so well worth it as ar as I'm concerned. Can't comment on your last point one way or the other, but I feel the additional balance pipe would just get in the way and is another thing to sort when removing and refitting the header pipes. Andy
motoguzznix Posted December 9, 2013 Posted December 9, 2013 Hi Some years ago I did some dyno measurements with my V11. During those sessions I compared the Stucchi Xover with the stock V11 part and found only minor differences: From 3 to 4000 rpm the stock part was about 3 to 4 HP in front, from 4500 to 5300 the Stucchi was slightly above (1 HP) but the difference was not worth thew money. I remember some dyno runs by different people that showed that the Mistral Xover takes away about 4 - 6 HP at the top end with sometimes very small gains at bottom end. Remember: When someone puts on open cans and the mistral Xover can cure a lean spot that occurs with the standard Xover, the conclusion is the mistral part has more restriction, so less air goes through the engine and therefore the lean spot is gone. When you would get the mixture right with the standard Xover, there will be more power due to more air through the engine. I would keep the standard crossover and put on open cans from a company with good reputation. Most important: Get the mixture right on a dyno - this is the cheapest way to go with exhaust. 1
Gottagetone Posted December 9, 2013 Posted December 9, 2013 I run the M4 slip ons, not sure what pipes I have since I just recently bought the bike. Pipes appear to be ceramic coated and are black. I get no lull or flat spots upon acceleration and get lots of compliments on how the bike sounds. Ill try to get a clip up soon.
JBBenson Posted December 10, 2013 Posted December 10, 2013 I run the M4 slip ons, not sure what pipes I have since I just recently bought the bike. Pipes appear to be ceramic coated and are black. I get no lull or flat spots upon acceleration and get lots of compliments on how the bike sounds. Ill try to get a clip up soon. Are you running the stock "crossover"?
GraeV11 Posted December 10, 2013 Posted December 10, 2013 Top of my Christmas list . . .Mistral reverse cones Is this what you have Ramon ?
ramon68 Posted December 14, 2013 Posted December 14, 2013 Top of my Christmas list . . .Mistral reverse cones Is this what you have Ramon ? I have the stainless version of that pipe.
ramon68 Posted December 14, 2013 Posted December 14, 2013 Just got back from my morning ride. Listening to these pipes while upshifting or downshifting is like listening to Bach organ music. What a rush!
AndyH Posted December 14, 2013 Posted December 14, 2013 Bach? Wow, big claim. A zorst that plays a fugue...!
helicopterjim R.I.P. Posted December 14, 2013 Posted December 14, 2013 Bach? Wow, big claim. A zorst that plays a fugue...! There are cheaper zorst alternatives ..... http://youtu.be/MNAkwLpVYxs
Recommended Posts
Create an account or sign in to comment
You need to be a member in order to leave a comment
Create an account
Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!
Register a new accountSign in
Already have an account? Sign in here.
Sign In Now