belfastguzzi Posted April 19, 2006 Author Posted April 19, 2006 Put the hammer down. Have a drink. Re-evaluate. Try again. 86499[/snapback] If I can't have the hammer, can I use a grinder? Compromise – I'll not use the 9" one.
v50man Posted April 19, 2006 Posted April 19, 2006 Put the grinder away -- we're dealing with high-quality Italian stainless steel here. It'll kick back and take yer nose off! Go get the hammer -- whack away -- and gracefully collect your bodge point...
OldButNotDead Posted April 20, 2006 Posted April 20, 2006 If I can't have the hammer, can I use a grinder? Compromise – I'll not use the 9" one. 86582[/snapback] I've got a couple of spare washers you're welcome to. Hard left-handers come with their own grinder!
OldButNotDead Posted May 18, 2006 Posted May 18, 2006 Just got the bike back from custom (individual cylinder) mapping the PCIII for a new Quat-D; it's a good news (smoother) / bad news (less torque) story. 2002 V11 naked, open airbox, K&N, 0.1/0.15 valves, ~8000 mi, run in gradually with synthetic. The graph shows two runs with Stucci+Ferracci cans (upper traces) and two runs with a new Quat-D minus the cat (lower traces). All runs used a map optimized for that setup, though individual cylinder mapping wasn't done for the Ferrachi cans. The bike runs more smoothly and is **very** linear - it should be easier to ride well. It's also lost the kick in the pants at ~5.5k. Not sure how much I miss it yet, I'll need some more ride time to say. I do expect I'll be reving it harder to make sure I'm having enough fun. I do like the look.
dlaing Posted May 19, 2006 Posted May 19, 2006 Not bad! Much better than my results above 6000RPM I'll bet with the Cat in the muffler, ours would look more similar. Mine in Blue Someone elses stock bike in Red Despite the reduction in power, I miss it.
dlaing Posted May 19, 2006 Posted May 19, 2006 PS, I'll bet that individual tuning really helped what the dyno does not show!
orangeokie Posted May 19, 2006 Posted May 19, 2006 The major factor for going with a QuatD to me, all else being somewhat equal (re: performance) is how it improves the appearance of the V11. I just put on the Ti's and the looks and sound, along with the seat of the pants performance is worth the price of admission. However, that's not to say I wouldn't reconsider the QuatD in the future.
OldButNotDead Posted May 19, 2006 Posted May 19, 2006 PS, I'll bet that individual tuning really helped what the dyno does not show! 89652[/snapback] I think that's probably right - more stable mirrors! Like OrangeOak I like the look. I also like the lowered and centered mass, less scraping, and the ability to hang bags off the back seat. James the dyno guy was pretty disappointed though. After finally sorting out proper adaptors to fit the header bungs and relating a number a choice comments to me about Italian manufacturing practices , he had to send me away with less performance than I rode in with.
motoguzznix Posted May 22, 2006 Posted May 22, 2006 Not bad! I think this is really bad! I agree with James the Dyno guy. This bike lost about 10 HP in the middle of the rev range where you really can use it! I wouldn't accept a result like this performing a tuning modification. I also like the looks of such a center box exhaust, but this dyno result moves it from my list! The V11 isn't really overpowered, so spending a lot of money to loose considerable power and torque is not the route to go! Is there nobody out who can make the QuatD silencer work?
dlaing Posted May 22, 2006 Posted May 22, 2006 I agree with James the Dyno guy. This bike lost about 10 HP in the middle of the rev range where you really can use it! I think James the dyno guy was bummed about the small loss of power going from run 8 to run 9. I think he should have gotten more power out of it. Perhaps there were air leaks at the probe fittings With individual cylinder mapping and using bung adapters, I would have expected better results I got nearly a 4HP increase from my tuning and all they did was stick a probe into the muffer measuring both cylinders at the same time. I got increased pinging from my tuning, so I always suspected the probe shoved in there was inaccurate and welding bungs on would have been more ideal Here is my before and after mapping compared with a Jackal with Bubs and open airbox. http://www.scripps.edu/~dlaing/v11s/DLV11-vs-TEJack.jpg
dlaing Posted November 28, 2006 Posted November 28, 2006 Just got the bike back from custom (individual cylinder) mapping the PCIII for a new Quat-D; it's a good news (smoother) / bad news (less torque) story. 2002 V11 naked, open airbox, K&N, 0.1/0.15 valves, ~8000 mi, run in gradually with synthetic. I am really surprised the tuning did not show a gain from run 8 to run 9. I suppose it makes sense that compared to my QuatD you lost mid range but gained some high end power (Alot more than my Quat D (the early series with port on left) ). The removal of the catalytic convertor probably has some effect there. But I suspect running the valves at that that setting, while good for peak power, it may be contributing to a loss of mid range, and if the engine is running hot the tuner may have had trouble optimizing the mixture for proper burn and maximized power. I would seriously give 0.15/0.20mm a try.
OldButNotDead Posted November 28, 2006 Posted November 28, 2006 Yah, that a reasonable suggestion - I'll give it a go when next season rolls around...
Eyeshotit Posted July 2, 2014 Posted July 2, 2014 Is the Quat D still available? If so where can I find it?
sp838 Posted July 2, 2014 Posted July 2, 2014 I was in contact with Ghezzi Brian last summer asking them if it was still available and they said it wasn't.
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