Insofar as dueling wikipedia quotes go, this debate is OVER, lol.

 

What's really a shame, is that more skilled people don't post more, mainly because of jagoff's like canyondancer. It's just too aggravating.

Thank goodness J.D. is thick skinned, and is willing to share some of his hard earned knowledge.

 

What's really a shame, is that more skilled people don't post more, mainly because of jagoff's like canyondancer. It's just too aggravating.

Thank goodness J.D. is thick skinned, and is willing to share some of his hard earned knowledge.

Comment deleted.

 

ten pages and I still can't figure out what the hell the problem is with the original test setup and why the results are being argued in the first place. :hmm:

 

Originally Posted by Simon Warburton, Triumph product manager for the Daytona 675
while Triumph's Daytona 675 nestles one in the secondary pipe, between the collector and the end-can, just after the catalytic converter. 'We didn't want the weight and bulk of the valve and its actuator at the back of the bike,' says Triumph's product manager, Simon Warbuton. 'This location is the best place for keeping the bike compact, putting mass where it will have the least impact on handling while still giving us the effect we wanted.'And the desired effect has changed. With advanced injection and ignition systems, the role of the throttle valve is no longer about filling the midrange or chasing horsepower. 'On the 675 it has nothing to do with emissions or peak power.' continues Simon. 'There's a small effect on torque at lower engine speeds and it can improve driveability in some conditions, but it really helps on noise - a valve in the secondary pipe helps to take the edge off exhaust noise without compromising power.'

Geez...i know it HELPS the noise. I never said otherwise.
And he agrees what i've been saying all along about about lower torque at lower engine speeds....and for street riding...driveability improves a little. THAT IS ALL I WAS SAYING. FLUX and Hordboy both have said that the PURPOSE of that valve is noise control. Mr Warburton says it HELPS the noise. He doesn't say it's the sole purpose of the valve.
Now you have proof from the man himself that the valve has a small effect on torque at lower RPMS. If that valve wasn't there...you would have a dip in power and torque at lower RPMS. THE SAME DIP YOU GET WITH A FULL SYSTEM. That is why {ok it "helps" the noise} Yamaha..Triumph....Honda...Suzuki...etc etc put that valve on there. To get rid of the annoying DIP IN THE TORQUE curve.
For Hordboy and FLUX to say that the only purpose for that valve is noise control ...is wrong.

Maybe if I had said that the EXVP valve serves TWO purposes....we wouldn't be argueing about it.

 

Warburton stated that the EXBV helps in some conditions for drivability, and torque by a small amount. hordboy's independent empirical tests show that with correct mapping for the absence of the EXBV, just exactly what the size of those differences are, and it's basically a gnat's dick of difference. When it comes to the torque benefit of the EXBV, the difference is about as close to zero as it possibly gets within the margins of error of dyno testing.

So, when we have two things it's supposed to do:

1) Improve torque
2) Reduce noise

...and we then measure that the torque improvement is zero (keeping in mind that Triumph would not have likely explored mapping correctly for the non-existence of the valve to any great degree as their goal was to reduce noise, so it's quite probable that hordboy has done a better job of producing an optimised fuelling map), and we all know that pulling it out makes the bike noisier at low rpms, we must therefore come to the conclusion that, in the final 675 product as shipped, the only tangible benefit that the EXBV provides is that of noise reduction.

Seriously, this is logical reasoning 101, well within the grasp of pretty much any 1st grader to comprehend and understand. Why it is being continually argued and denied when all testing and statements point to the same conclusion is beyond comprehension.

 

Reality meet CD, CD meet reality...


*awkward*