My friend you are unique ! No one in this job shares so much information in public ! You have my huge RESPECT 🙏 Now in the subject. I have euro Transalp 750 2023 and I have yoshimura rs12 and arrow head pipes and DNA filter. Stock air box and 90.77 HP on wheel ! The bike was stock 79 HP on wheel. The final huge difference did it the yoshimura Rs12, that gave us with new full re mapping about 4 HP than first mapping with only the arrow pipes and an common slip on (“universal” because I was waiting from USA the yoshimura to come. I’m going to work it out about the air intake now in the winter I have time to search it. So I’ll have to run it after any change on it, again with my programmer to check it on dyno.
Is it safe to say the snorkels and the spirals that you removed are there to prevent water ingestion? Adv riders are more likely to keep riding in the rain than most. With no gains having been found would you recommend owners just leave them in place? Keep up the great content!!!
That's my guess. I don't think the engineers were trying to maximize intake flow. I think the "third snorkel" is more intended as a drain, and the spiral ducts and 90° bends are intended to let rain or water vapor spin out and collect on the walls, then drain down and out rather than being ingested or saturating the air filter.
I very much appreciate the academic work y'all have been willing to do and just give away like this while also using it to refine your maps. Hopefully the fact that somebody already validated potential results means somebody commit to making a higher flowing airbox with a waterproof mesh membrane over larger inlets than Honda gave us.
Is it possble to modify the settings function, like saving user mode settings? Also would it be possible to modify traction control level which most also complain about?
As a TA owner I’m enjoying these videos out of curiosity but honestly, if owners go to the extent of hacking at the air box, changing filters, forking out for a full system and then remapping, haven’t they just bought the wrong bike? May as well buy a +1000cc and be done with it.
Hi Nate, love your work! At 3:35 what you refer to as 'swirly effect' is probably a cyclone filter, very common in industrial applications, heaver particulates (i.e. dust) are thrown outwards and probably exit through that little void in the chamber. Very clever actually! 🙂
Thank you for an interesting investigation of this rather enjoyable model. 18,600 kms (about 11k miles) on mine here in South Australia, and I have swapped over to a K&N air filter. I should add, the paper element was surprisingly clean at around 12,000 kms, in spite of many dirt miles, so the convoluted passages may well reduce the ingress of dirt and water. Many miles in severe rain without a single 'cough' also suggests this bike is well waterproofed. So I won't be drilling holes in my airbox, but a more efficient airbox in the future would be great! But this bike has an enjoyable, smooth delivery down around 3 - 4,000 RPM - perfect for dirt exploring - and its fuel economy is legendary, so I would beware of sacrificing those features. But a 'fatter' midrange would be lovely, as it seems a bit 'flat' between 5 - 6,000 from stock. I will consider 'non-cat' headers at some point, possibly keeping the stock muffler. (It sounds OK, isn't too loud, and is out of the way of saddlebags). Keep us posted of your findings, perhaps including the impact on fuel economy. The access to the airbox is, to me, ridiculous, after many years of bike work, and involved 10 x panels(?) and about 50 x fasteners! Crazy, on a bike ostensibly designed for dirt roads, and I will be looking to improve access to the element. Apparently removing some plastic edges from the 'yoke-shaped' plastic cover at the front of the tank can reduce the time/work entailed, but I will look into that next time. But just getting to the airbox is a serious drawback of this model. Any suggestions welcome, since you have obviously done it a few times! Thank you for your efforts.
I think you need to consider that the Transalp has a high HP for its cc class. It is already very much optimized and that probably why only big mods will marginally improve it. To me the biggest issue with the transalp is its focus on HP rather than Torque. Interesting mods should be focused on reducing HP and increasing torque.
That factory air filter element looked just fine. I'd have ground off those little rivets to remove the flash arrestor screen, and ran it. Absolutely cut back any air box intake snorkel. Leave just the mouth if possible. That helps direct the incoming air steam.
Please send Dork in the road this. You solved the problem fortnine complained about and I would love for this to get more attention as im a huge fan of this bike
I wonder if putting some Uni-airbox vents would change anything. I'm sure they'd cause a little more restriction but they'd sure keep out more debris than a Swiss cheese box.
Was there simulated wind? I kept thinking that in the real riding situation there is wind blowing at the front of the bike. I did not see your t-shirt blowing so I presume the bike was just sucking air. Does this not matter? Thanks.
Impossible to simulate real conditions in a dyno room. That's why there's data-logging while out riding on the highways and byways and racetracks. A dyno cannot simulate part-throttle resistance and air pressure resistance or hills as most of the dyno machines are inertia machines (acceleration testing). The best way to get real-world tuning done is data-logging. Any tuner that isn't doing this is cutting corners for tunes and cannot get the best overall tune possible. 2wdw does data-logging.
Clip the tabs off the inner cowling and it's 30 minutes from picking up the first tool to putting down the last, without rushing. Probably faster once you have done it a few times. It's really not the task some make it out to be.
So i just watched the MT-09 air box mod and i gotta say...people forget dynos are wide open throttle rips they arent partial, half or 75% throttle ranges. the "meat" of the chart doesnt really matter because...you're not gonna be WOT at 4500rpm on most mid side to full size bikes, on like a ninja 300 yeah its full throttle everywhere if you want to get somewhere in a timely manor but on an MT-09 or the Transalp you arent full sending it when youre just commuting or chilling, so are you actually getting 25% more power everywhere? realistically no, no you're not
That's not actually ALWAYS the case. Obviously dyno graphs only display WOT with perfect accuracy, but that doesn't mean the improvements aren't present at lower throttle opening percentages. When the airflow improvements are present at every portion of the TPS v RPM fuel map, you are actually seeing that engine performance improvements throughout the entire throttle range. You're also forgetting (or just don't know) that maximizing torque at lower engine RPM does not always mean just slamming the throttle plates wide open; you can't actually create linear throttle mapping right off the bottom of the map on these engines or you'll create a significant bog. These sorts of ETV issues are actually why much of this area is controlled by requested torque maps (which are created in an ETV v Ignition Timing v Engine Load calculation table) in almost all modern automotive applications and in some of the most modern motorcycle ECUs (finally). On this specific application, the massive torque improvements are present throughout almost the entirety of the bottom end (regardless of throttle position). Obviously, yes, the top end improvements are massively more prevalent at WOT than at light throttle inputs because the throttle maps weren't restrictive in those portions of the mapping to begin with. TLDR: The bottom end gains are there everywhere, and the throttle response is MASSIVELY improved with our custom mapping. We already have dozens of folks that have sent in their ECUs to us for these bikes, and they're reporting (and thrilled about) exactly what I'm describing here 😎🤘
I don't follow what you mean? It looks like the gains were huge everywhere so even at 4500 RPM you're still getting massive gains. If you look at the chart, it gained everywhere so no matter where you are you have way more power than you did. No?
The throttle is not an on/off switch. You turn it, you sent a request for increased torque, a boat load of systems interpret your request and make the engine produce more of what you want. Don't over-think it. Yet, wouldn't you like to know what the full potential of an engine is at all RPM? Yes. That's why 2wdw tunes proper AFR's for partial to full throttle, data-logging out in the real world, not merely on an inertia dyno roller in a still-air environment (except for cooling fans).
@@ar2043 An engine is an air pump but to make power you need fuel, so the engine at a given fuel and air mixture will make X amount of power, the dyno only graphs wide open throttle. So for example if you are at 10,000rpm at wide open throttle ant your engine makes 100hp, if you are at 10,000 rpm at 25, 50, 75% throttle due to math and physics your bike will not be making what the dyno shows because you arent supplying the engine with a means to make that power. So are you making more power? Yes, but are you making the same amount the dyno is showing you at any point other then wide open? No, because physics and math.
@@victorgonza4528 What the dyno numbers have been showing is that airbox design is not optimized entirely for fluid dynamics, but rather emissions and noise compliance. Also, as a tuner in the powersports space, you're interested in making potential modifications to OEM equipment that offer a large performance increase for a very minimal cost/zero cost modification. And how are you going to find this out unless you hack up OEM parts (minimally or maximally)? I wouldn't accuse Nate of not understanding what an airbox is for, unless you enjoy being obtuse or making baseless judgements.
@@victorgonza4528 Where are you getting the idea that myself, or the host of this channel don't understand these things? Have you asked us to host a course on it, take out a whiteboard and explain it, or take the time to speak about it?
![BOWKYLION - วิงวอน (ex-change) [Official MV]](http://i.ytimg.com/vi/cLdnZWDaO-w/mqdefault.jpg)
your transparency is a rare thing these days ! I really appreciate your approach and videos
My friend you are unique ! No one in this job shares so much information in public !
You have my huge RESPECT 🙏
Now in the subject.
I have euro Transalp 750 2023 and I have yoshimura rs12 and arrow head pipes and DNA filter.
Stock air box and 90.77 HP on wheel ! The bike was stock 79 HP on wheel.
The final huge difference did it the yoshimura Rs12, that gave us with new full re mapping about 4 HP than first mapping with only the arrow pipes and an common slip on (“universal” because I was waiting from USA the yoshimura to come.
I’m going to work it out about the air intake now in the winter I have time to search it.
So I’ll have to run it after any change on it, again with my programmer to check it on dyno.
I appreciate how obsessive you guys are about these details. You guys really walk your talk 😎👍🏻
Is it safe to say the snorkels and the spirals that you removed are there to prevent water ingestion? Adv riders are more likely to keep riding in the rain than most. With no gains having been found would you recommend owners just leave them in place? Keep up the great content!!!
That's my guess. I don't think the engineers were trying to maximize intake flow. I think the "third snorkel" is more intended as a drain, and the spiral ducts and 90° bends are intended to let rain or water vapor spin out and collect on the walls, then drain down and out rather than being ingested or saturating the air filter.
I very much appreciate the academic work y'all have been willing to do and just give away like this while also using it to refine your maps. Hopefully the fact that somebody already validated potential results means somebody commit to making a higher flowing airbox with a waterproof mesh membrane over larger inlets than Honda gave us.
This is Public & Useful Service.
Congrats.
Tuning great, emailing them you'll be lucky to get a response
Another great video Nate.
Proper test work for the customer 🍻
All this in depth tuning makes me really want to buy a Transalp.
Is it possble to modify the settings function, like saving user mode settings?
Also would it be possible to modify traction control level which most also complain about?
You can buy a dongle which retains settings when you turn off the key.
Man, so sad that you are not over here in the EU / GB and fiddle with the 750 Hornet on our pump gas.
As a TA owner I’m enjoying these videos out of curiosity but honestly, if owners go to the extent of hacking at the air box, changing filters, forking out for a full system and then remapping, haven’t they just bought the wrong bike? May as well buy a +1000cc and be done with it.
Hi Nate, love your work! At 3:35 what you refer to as 'swirly effect' is probably a cyclone filter, very common in industrial applications, heaver particulates (i.e. dust) are thrown outwards and probably exit through that little void in the chamber. Very clever actually! 🙂
What happened to the mpg after mods?
Don’t think that really matters if you are doing all this
Thank you for an interesting investigation of this rather enjoyable model. 18,600 kms (about 11k miles) on mine here in South Australia, and I have swapped over to a K&N air filter. I should add, the paper element was surprisingly clean at around 12,000 kms, in spite of many dirt miles, so the convoluted passages may well reduce the ingress of dirt and water. Many miles in severe rain without a single 'cough' also suggests this bike is well waterproofed. So I won't be drilling holes in my airbox, but a more efficient airbox in the future would be great!
But this bike has an enjoyable, smooth delivery down around 3 - 4,000 RPM - perfect for dirt exploring - and its fuel economy is legendary, so I would beware of sacrificing those features. But a 'fatter' midrange would be lovely, as it seems a bit 'flat' between 5 - 6,000 from stock. I will consider 'non-cat' headers at some point, possibly keeping the stock muffler. (It sounds OK, isn't too loud, and is out of the way of saddlebags).
Keep us posted of your findings, perhaps including the impact on fuel economy. The access to the airbox is, to me, ridiculous, after many years of bike work, and involved 10 x panels(?) and about 50 x fasteners! Crazy, on a bike ostensibly designed for dirt roads, and I will be looking to improve access to the element. Apparently removing some plastic edges from the 'yoke-shaped' plastic cover at the front of the tank can reduce the time/work entailed, but I will look into that next time. But just getting to the airbox is a serious drawback of this model. Any suggestions welcome, since you have obviously done it a few times! Thank you for your efforts.
This is excellent! Thanks for sharing.
I think you need to consider that the Transalp has a high HP for its cc class. It is already very much optimized and that probably why only big mods will marginally improve it. To me the biggest issue with the transalp is its focus on HP rather than Torque. Interesting mods should be focused on reducing HP and increasing torque.
Why do you never talk about mpg with these mods?
That factory air filter element looked just fine. I'd have ground off those little rivets to remove the flash arrestor screen, and ran it. Absolutely cut back any air box intake snorkel. Leave just the mouth if possible. That helps direct the incoming air steam.
Please send Dork in the road this. You solved the problem fortnine complained about and I would love for this to get more attention as im a huge fan of this bike
So sick I want one of these bad now lol
I wonder if putting some Uni-airbox vents would change anything. I'm sure they'd cause a little more restriction but they'd sure keep out more debris than a Swiss cheese box.
Is it possible to see how the bike goes with stock exhaust, aftermarket air filter and ecu tune? I really want to keep a low profile on my bike.
Cb500f/cbr500r next?? Tons of people have them but no one has a tune for it
How hard does it look to cut the cat. out of the stock headers? Will decatted stock headers be any different than akro. headers?
Was there simulated wind? I kept thinking that in the real riding situation there is wind blowing at the front of the bike. I did not see your t-shirt blowing so I presume the bike was just sucking air. Does this not matter? Thanks.
Impossible to simulate real conditions in a dyno room. That's why there's data-logging while out riding on the highways and byways and racetracks. A dyno cannot simulate part-throttle resistance and air pressure resistance or hills as most of the dyno machines are inertia machines (acceleration testing). The best way to get real-world tuning done is data-logging. Any tuner that isn't doing this is cutting corners for tunes and cannot get the best overall tune possible. 2wdw does data-logging.
I'm gonna wait until you find more shit to change before I send my ecu back in lol
Went with Woolich and not FTECU?
Is only for USA version or european version ?
I think you are correct, the us epa restrictions take the top end off this motor, which Ryan F9 explains
Tell me there's a mod that lets you change the air filter without removing the fuel tank and I'll buy one of these.
Clip the tabs off the inner cowling and it's 30 minutes from picking up the first tool to putting down the last, without rushing. Probably faster once you have done it a few times. It's really not the task some make it out to be.
Same was sad about GSX-8s
So i just watched the MT-09 air box mod and i gotta say...people forget dynos are wide open throttle rips they arent partial, half or 75% throttle ranges. the "meat" of the chart doesnt really matter because...you're not gonna be WOT at 4500rpm on most mid side to full size bikes, on like a ninja 300 yeah its full throttle everywhere if you want to get somewhere in a timely manor but on an MT-09 or the Transalp you arent full sending it when youre just commuting or chilling, so are you actually getting 25% more power everywhere? realistically no, no you're not
That's not actually ALWAYS the case. Obviously dyno graphs only display WOT with perfect accuracy, but that doesn't mean the improvements aren't present at lower throttle opening percentages. When the airflow improvements are present at every portion of the TPS v RPM fuel map, you are actually seeing that engine performance improvements throughout the entire throttle range.
You're also forgetting (or just don't know) that maximizing torque at lower engine RPM does not always mean just slamming the throttle plates wide open; you can't actually create linear throttle mapping right off the bottom of the map on these engines or you'll create a significant bog. These sorts of ETV issues are actually why much of this area is controlled by requested torque maps (which are created in an ETV v Ignition Timing v Engine Load calculation table) in almost all modern automotive applications and in some of the most modern motorcycle ECUs (finally).
On this specific application, the massive torque improvements are present throughout almost the entirety of the bottom end (regardless of throttle position).
Obviously, yes, the top end improvements are massively more prevalent at WOT than at light throttle inputs because the throttle maps weren't restrictive in those portions of the mapping to begin with.
TLDR: The bottom end gains are there everywhere, and the throttle response is MASSIVELY improved with our custom mapping. We already have dozens of folks that have sent in their ECUs to us for these bikes, and they're reporting (and thrilled about) exactly what I'm describing here 😎🤘
I don't follow what you mean? It looks like the gains were huge everywhere so even at 4500 RPM you're still getting massive gains. If you look at the chart, it gained everywhere so no matter where you are you have way more power than you did. No?
The throttle is not an on/off switch. You turn it, you sent a request for increased torque, a boat load of systems interpret your request and make the engine produce more of what you want. Don't over-think it.
Yet, wouldn't you like to know what the full potential of an engine is at all RPM? Yes. That's why 2wdw tunes proper AFR's for partial to full throttle, data-logging out in the real world, not merely on an inertia dyno roller in a still-air environment (except for cooling fans).
@@ar2043 An engine is an air pump but to make power you need fuel, so the engine at a given fuel and air mixture will make X amount of power, the dyno only graphs wide open throttle. So for example if you are at 10,000rpm at wide open throttle ant your engine makes 100hp, if you are at 10,000 rpm at 25, 50, 75% throttle due to math and physics your bike will not be making what the dyno shows because you arent supplying the engine with a means to make that power. So are you making more power? Yes, but are you making the same amount the dyno is showing you at any point other then wide open? No, because physics and math.
Never do that again.
Do what? R&D for tuning motorcycles?
@@exothermal.sprocket destroy the air box ,not understand what the air box does , fluid dynamics .
@@victorgonza4528 What the dyno numbers have been showing is that airbox design is not optimized entirely for fluid dynamics, but rather emissions and noise compliance. Also, as a tuner in the powersports space, you're interested in making potential modifications to OEM equipment that offer a large performance increase for a very minimal cost/zero cost modification. And how are you going to find this out unless you hack up OEM parts (minimally or maximally)? I wouldn't accuse Nate of not understanding what an airbox is for, unless you enjoy being obtuse or making baseless judgements.
@@exothermal.sprocket we disagree then ,I get it , check out the bernoullis principle in fluid dynamics
@@victorgonza4528 Where are you getting the idea that myself, or the host of this channel don't understand these things? Have you asked us to host a course on it, take out a whiteboard and explain it, or take the time to speak about it?