Sneezing problem after mods

There's not one for the Sidewinder, however, I know for a fact the CES + RAMAIR is going to be closer than a best guess done by Hanso. Not knocking him, but, educated guesses vs actual dyno time. The CES + Ramair tune I posted was in the 13:1 region at high RPM, so, the Sidewinder setup willl see mid-high 13s, a little leaner than optimal, but still completely safe.

All tunes should be considered base-line tunes until strapped to a dyno and adjusted.

As an example, of why, when adjusting the valve tolerances on a rocket, only 2 intake valves were changed on clyinder #3, same intake, same dyno, same pipes, same cams, same tuner, the fueling was significantly different, more than a 10% adjustment in fueling was required.

Now imagine the tolerance differences, cam timing differences, ring sealing differences not to mention dyno differences and I will never endorse throwing in a downloaded tune and calling ti good
 
Last edited:
There's not one for the Sidewinder, however, I know for a fact the CES + RAMAIR is going to be closer than a best guess done by Hanso. Not knocking him, but, educated guesses vs actual dyno time. The CES + Ramair tune I posted was in the 13:1 region at high RPM, so, the Sidewinder setup willl see mid-high 13s, a little leaner than optimal, but still completely safe.

All tunes should be considered base-line tunes until strapped to a dyno and adjusted.

As an example, of why, when adjusting the valve tolerances on a rocket, only 2 intake valves were changed on clyinder #3, same intake, same dyno, same pipes, same cams, same tuner, the fueling was significantly different, more than a 10% adjustment in fueling was required.

Now imagine the tolerance differences, cam timing differences, ring sealing differences not to mention dyno differences and I will never endorse throwing in a downloaded tune and calling ti good

Thanks a lot Clavinger for the help, then I absolutely have to put your CES + Ramair, last doubt I have to put back the secondary butterflies?

I tried 3 points dyno but do not understand anything with their maps the bike is horrible, unfortunately they can not work
 
Last edited:
The secondaries can be gone with the tune I posted, I think they're gone on the bike that the tune was built on.
 
The secondaries can be gone with the tune I posted, I think they're gone on the bike that the tune was built on.
Thanks Claviger, I reassembled the secondary butterflies gotten the map and made the reset of adaptation of the tps through tunecu, I tried the bike on a ride of 45 miles ..... wow really very very well has taken over all the power at laps medium low, no "sneezing" and also the clutch / gear management with gear insertion now works really well as from stock .... the deceleration is very good some mumbling at 4000 rpm and some popping between 2200 to 1500

What about the little that I could test seems excellent! in 4th it stops the lancet at the end of the scale of 220 km / h and rpm rises again

I THANK YOU INFINITELY
 
The secondaries can be gone with the tune I posted, I think they're gone on the bike that the tune was built on.
I just reviewed this tune (I think). Doesn't this tune have the secondaries restricting the power in the first three gears?
 
I think it sets them at 88% at low-mid rpm. There's no restriction, I suspect it was an attempt to smooth bottom end power delivery.

the stock Auto bodies are already massively oversized for the stock rocket with just an exhaust, so the secondaries in or out it really doesn't matter.
 
I think it sets them at 88% at low-mid rpm. There's no restriction, I suspect it was an attempt to smooth bottom end power delivery.

the stock Auto bodies are already massively oversized for the stock rocket with just an exhaust, so the secondaries in or out it really doesn't matter.

Hello here are the tables of the second butterflies have split by 78% .... have done so not to deliver power abruptly or to improve the torque at low revs?

if you open them 100%, would you change the air-fuel ratio? creating imbalances?
 

Attachments

  • 2 farfalle.jpg
    2 farfalle.jpg
    106.1 KB · Views: 0
Last edited:
Back
Top