So how long till the hpr 19 is posted? And all pipes were tested on the same bike right?

So how long till the hpr 19 is posted? And all pipes were tested on the same bike right?

Heres the perfect example why the info is slowly being let out..

  The first pipe shoot out two years ago resulted in some big name builders claiming not fair and that the bikes were under TOO MUCH LOAD for their pipe designs... NOW...already we have gotten adverse feedback saying not fair that the ATV dyno didn't put ENOUGH LOAD for their pipe design...lets see where it goes from here.
 

I might have missed it, but were the Q pipes and the hpr pipe tested on the same motor? Or different motor?

 

Yes all 4 pipes were tested on 2 quads.
Other threads will be posted with those dyno graphs with the HPR-19 and the DCS, They will be posted as there own Dyno runs, we did not want to just post graphs and start the Dyno Pipe War again, As for myself the testing  was just for research, cant fix what I dont know is broken that's what the testing was all for, I am still on the razors edge on making anymore pipes, the only reason for making the DCS pipes were for members that just cant afford $800 to $1000 pipe.
 
As for Dale, he will explain his reasons.

so you dont belive in building a pipe and then having it tested along other pipes that work well.


now that dont make sence to me. 

Why would you need to take measurements off other builders pipes to make improvements?

Is that an admission that your are intending to copy another builders work?



 

Post the other graphs up!! They must still be in photoshop production.



 

Agreed....lets see the dip that you are referring to Mitch.

How do you correct the dip?

You can see it on this Graph with the link below through RPM5500-6300RPM, Being able to compare with the other pipes really helps to be able to fine tune.
 As to how I am going to correct my pipe everyone will have to wait and see when the DCS-5 comes out, the fun part is going to be correcting the dip and not to loose the torque # I have in the Low and Midrange section.
http://www.suzukiquadracerhq.com/lt500r-exhaust/dyno-testing-my-dcs-pipe-on-my-87-lt500/

Dale,

Point is, it's hard for me to believe that you and Mitch are unbiased in this instance (Mitch is selling pipes & you have spent and incredible amount of time, money, & effort with Jerry - that is not unbiased and transparent, great things have come out of it, but you are not independant).

There were over 60 runs according to you guys and we have one hand picked to run of a V1 vs. a V2. There is no HPR 19 curve. There is no DCS curve. Where's the overlay? Mitch is now modding his pipe gonna make more runs and then post results. How is that fair unbiased  results? Show all the respective curves. I can't believe it would take that long to throw together a single graph showing the 4 contestants.  All "best of" runs.  Or we wait till after the weekend to get those? Why when they are done now.

 Dale I really would like to see you and RK shoot it out, run what you brung. He wants pavement, you want olds. Hopefully there can be a common ground. Me racing you, would be like me racing Mitch, there are certain physics we can't overcome. I would have to starve myself for a year or two and still you would have me beat as a jockey when it comes to the scale.   On a similar full wieght duner, with another heavywieght rider I'll run anyone. my bike is a small reed duner, no big carb or drag porting or lightwieght stuff.

 This is more about the constant discrediting of RK's work, V-2 shows up in your hands & now Mitch's/powerpros pipe is getting modded, that was the whole point of not wanting the pipe to get into other peoples hands so it wouldn't get immediately copied, Ala AAEN. Now saying there is only 200rpm more frontside curve, and only 2HP more than the V1, if I remember correctly the HPR on the 2010 runs only barely eaked out 2HP more peak than the V1. Point is the pipes are not far appart in total HP (V2 vs HPR)  From owning both I call BS that the HPR is that much stronger in the frontside than the V2.

Also I noticed the chart said Mitch was runing a 440 main jet, on a big reed duner with an 9" element filter. I'm runing a 470 main on an small reed with a 9" element filter.  Seems kinda lean, I'm sure after a number of pulls there would be a major drop off in power with that jetting.

In the grand sceme I guess it doesn't make any difference. Just people reading this stuff really need to use their minds to get down to the truth.
 

  Ken,   This wasn't a pipe shoot out.  I haven't said one word about the Hall pipe except confirming it does make more power.
  I asked months ago what the difference in V1 and V2.   We were led to believe it was re-designed pipe.  I liked the possibility of more performance and know first hand the best way is a better pipe. I couldn't get the info I wanted so I had to get it myself.  This is what I mean about a transparency issue. I'm now satisfied what the V2 is about,  I will be gracious and say it is an improvement over the V1..but as a result of my testing you won't see one on my bikes.
 At this point I think Mitch should remove all the graph posts, we own that info, if questions come up in the future regarding pipe differences we can certainly refer to it and give it out as an example of what we found during our testing... you or anyone else can believe the numbers or not.
And we will wait for your "group" to post up any data you would like to support any other difference between the V1 and V2.
And for all to know.. I did share the info with JH, it gives him another example of shorter run testing on an ATV dyno compared to his, and gave him permission to share at his discretion.


 

Lots of butt hurt going on around here.  I would be pissed if I paid all that money for a extra 2 HP. 

 

Dales quad the V2 does seem to have a little more punch down low...Just curious how long are the dyno pulls each run?

The run times were 4.5 to 5 secs