Do you want more power? come in.

[Whooshka]

Agree with Larry's comment that its not necessarily bashing, just giving honest feedback.

Regarding the 'tries something different' angle, if given the choice between a team of professional engineers who design bikes for a living using millions of dollars of test equipment and a guy on the Internet with a Dremel tool, I'm going to tend to favor the engineering team. Not saying its impossible for the guy with the Dremel tool to be onto something, but its not likely either. And, just because its 'different' doesn't imply its necessarily better. Honda engineers know how to make a hole bigger too, yet they chose not to, there's probably a sound reason behind that decision.

Haven't heard it mentioned much in years, but in the old days it was usually a case of "I'm just removing all the restrictions caused by EPA regulations, so it will run better" even though motorcycles have never been tested for emissions in California, ever. It didn't seem to work all that well in the carbureted days, and in the EFI days its even less likely to improve things.

Sometimes the guys with the Dremels aren't bound by corporate budgets, management visions or EPA regulations. If they were, guys like Rob Muzzy and the like wouldn't have developed aftermarket exhaust systems or other things that can improve a bike. Like jet kits for carbs or EFI fuel management boxes. And if I'm going to choose something on the internet that somebody has ACTUALLY TRIED, versus somebody who hasn't... I'm more than likely listening to the one with the real experience.

 

[dduelin]

Sometimes the guys with the Dremels aren't bound by corporate budgets, management visions or EPA regulations. If they were, guys like Rob Muzzy and the like wouldn't have developed aftermarket exhaust systems or other things that can improve a bike. Like jet kits for carbs or EFI fuel management boxes. And if I'm going to choose something on the internet that somebody has ACTUALLY TRIED, versus somebody who hasn't... I'm more than likely listening to the one with the real experience.

You also could say that when Rob Muzzy got started seat belts weren't mandatory yet. As regulations tightened world wide it became difficult to develop power increasing products that don't catch the eye of governing authorities. Eventually companies couldn't get away with labeling power increasing products "For Off Road Use Only", leaving pipes and airboxes as the only things we could fool around with, and now in jurisdictions that check such things pipes are clearly labeled.

 

[dwalby]

Sometimes the guys with the Dremels aren't bound by corporate budgets, management visions or EPA regulations. If they were, guys like Rob Muzzy and the like wouldn't have developed aftermarket exhaust systems or other things that can improve a bike. Like jet kits for carbs or EFI fuel management boxes. And if I'm going to choose something on the internet that somebody has ACTUALLY TRIED, versus somebody who hasn't... I'm more than likely listening to the one with the real experience.

Years ago a friend of mine had a FJ1200 and put on some aftermarket system that was lighter, and probably claimed 4HP gains at redline, or similar, since that's typically the case. Rejetted the carbs as recommended, less restrictive flow you know, his fuel economy dropped from 40-45mpg to 30-35mpg, and the bike ran no better. That's the typical story from people I knew who drank the "unleash the EPA restricted power" cool-aid, I don't know anybody who thought the mods were worth the time or money after trying them out.

If you're on a racetrack, then Muzzy might be able to provide you with benefits. If you're an old guy putting along on an ST at street speeds, maybe not so much. And, comparing Muzzy to a guy on the Internet with a Dremel isn't a fair comparison. Muzzy was a race team owner with the resources to do the job right, similar to the Honda factory, and custom tuning chip companies that re-map the EFI curves and test their changes on a dyno. One approach is scientifically based with carefully measured feedback to prove their results, randomly cutting holes in an airbox isn't.

The bottom line is you're most likely to give away something in street rideability or fuel economy to provide an additional benefit in a particular part of the powerband. For street bikes running at redline on a racetrack, that's not necessarily where the design engineers concentrated their efforts, so you can probably improve upon things if you know what you're doing. For the average guy putting along on the street, the factory design is usually close enough to optimum that you're not going to do a whole lot better, and there's a decent chance you'll do worse.

 

[Kevcules]

Most, if not all car enthusiast TV shows/mechanics that I've watched, will remove the stock air filtration choosing for a K&N set up and then even go with a turbo, which all feed more air onto an engine. Exhaust pipes are another option. This isn't something new, but must be controlled and tested to see actual results. Then there are computer modifications that can be made. Different ECM's, (power commander, etc) that change the engines power output. This is old news.
There are a lot of tweaks that have been successfully tried, not all, but some that actually do improve the engines performance.
To say that because the Honda engineers didn't manufacture it that way, or did it the way they did because it's the only way to do it ,I do not believe that at all. Engineers make bad decisions as history dictates. Every engine manufacturer designs their engines to give about 80% output IMO and these days, to stay within emissions laws. That strategy is to protect their engines and their whole product in general, which protects their warranty and their WALLET!
Hopefully we can listen to the op and help him understand the pros and cons of such mods in a positive way. Hopefully he doesn't cause any undue harm and actually gets some benefits.

 

[Whooshka]

Years ago a friend of mine had a FJ1200 and put on some aftermarket system that was lighter, and probably claimed 4HP gains at redline, or similar, since that's typically the case. Rejetted the carbs as recommended, less restrictive flow you know, his fuel economy dropped from 40-45mpg to 30-35mpg, and the bike ran no better. That's the typical story from people I knew who drank the "unleash the EPA restricted power" cool-aid, I don't know anybody who thought the mods were worth the time or money after trying them out.

If you're on a racetrack, then Muzzy might be able to provide you with benefits. If you're an old guy putting along on an ST at street speeds, maybe not so much. And, comparing Muzzy to a guy on the Internet with a Dremel isn't a fair comparison. Muzzy was a race team owner with the resources to do the job right, similar to the Honda factory, and custom tuning chip companies that re-map the EFI curves and test their changes on a dyno. One approach is scientifically based with carefully measured feedback to prove their results, randomly cutting holes in an airbox isn't.

The bottom line is you're most likely to give away something in street rideability or fuel economy to provide an additional benefit in a particular part of the powerband. For street bikes running at redline on a racetrack, that's not necessarily where the design engineers concentrated their efforts, so you can probably improve upon things if you know what you're doing. For the average guy putting along on the street, the factory design is usually close enough to optimum that you're not going to do a whole lot better, and there's a decent chance you'll do worse.

I somewhat agree with you but I don't think your friend knew what he was doing. And Rob Muzzy started somewhere, maybe he was making exhausts in his backyard with a pipe bender. He wasn't born a race team owner. I put a slip on, K&N filter and flashed my ECU on a 2006 FZ1. HP went from 120 to 149, on the Dyno. And the bike rode better in every respect. Same for the ZRX before it. Is your bike totally stock? Did you improve it in any way? Maybe better brake pads? Or oil?

 

[dwalby]

I put a slip on, K&N filter and flashed my ECU on a 2006 FZ1. HP went from 120 to 149, on the Dyno. And the bike rode better in every respect. Same for the ZRX before it.

OK, this is exactly what I was talking about in my previous post, you went with a professionally developed and proven set of mods, I don't deny this is possible.

What you didn't do, apparently, is randomly cut holes in the airbox purely on a whim.

Regarding my friend not knowing what he was doing, that's my point regarding the typical experimentation back in the days of carbureted bikes. You couldn't fine tune them like you can now with EFI re-mapping, so you had as much chance of making things worse rather than better.

 

[Larry Fine]

My opinion is that mods that genuinely produce more power only do so when going for maximum acceleration, at full throttle.

Otherwise, you might gain a bit of mid-range torque, but you can accomplish that by using the engine's normal power band.

Unless we're racing, or just showing off, how often are we accelerating as much as possible? The ST engine doesn't need it.

 

[Al st1100]

 

[ST Gui]

I remember putting 4 K&Ns on my 750-4. It didn't run all that well and a plug reading showed a far too lean fuel mixture. Different needles raising needles new high speed jets but finally I got it dial in pretty good. Very noticeable seat of the pants dyno improvements. And the sound was awesome. LOVE the sound of an un-silenced air cleaner.

I put some larger K&Ns on my 750 Duc because it just had stone guards on velocity stacks from the factory. The bike could barely run as the engine couldn't 'breath'. I had to put some giant green foam filters on it to get the grunt back but keep the bugs out.

Those were the days. These days I'm pretty happy to keep the ST STock. Except maybe for a farkle or two.

 

[ad.hom]

I've "desnorkled" a sports bike... made it sound great but did nothing for the performance.

I've "desnorkled" a car, and then flipped the snorkel upside down & put it back in. That was pretty cool for driving through deep water...

 

[dwalby]

Well, unfortunately their design is not based solely on maximum performance in mind. First of all, they have to stand by all of the strict regulations imposed by the countries the bike is going to.
So, the performance in today's world is not a first priority.

I think it could be argued that the typical ST customer is looking more for sporty, practical conveyance rather than maximum performance anyway. And back to the original topic, cutting holes in the airbox isn't going to return that maximum performance that the Honda engineers left sitting on the development room floor for whatever reason.

 

[Whooshka]

I think it could be argued that the typical ST customer is looking more for sporty, practical conveyance rather than maximum performance anyway. And back to the original topic, cutting holes in the airbox isn't going to return that maximum performance that the Honda engineers left sitting on the development room floor for whatever reason.

Agreed. Honda engineers might have drilled holes only to find the intake roar now violated noise standards. LOL While the concept of feeding the motor more air is OK, it may/can affect driveabilty. You won't get full benefit unless you pump more fuel in with the added air and pump it all out with a freer flowing (to a certain extent) exhaust. Heck, I remember adding washers under carb needles to raise them a hair, not to increase HP but just eliminate a nasty flat spot in the rev range where emissions were measured.

 

[ST Gui]

Honda engineers might have drilled holes only to find the intake roar now violated noise standards.

Legend has it that's exactly the reason the why CBX didn't have an exhaust setup that sounded like an F-4 Phantom. So close...

 

[Bulitt]

Thanks for the suggestions and the pictures to explain the thought behind it. I'd like to offer that because the Honda programmed fuel injection system runs in a closed loop - taking data from the exhaust gas temperatures for cylinders 1 & 3 and 2 & 4 plus coolant temp and intake manifold pressure - it makes adjustments to the fuel/air mixture to run the precise mixture that Honda programmed into the ECM. This constant monitoring and adjusting of fuel to air defeats efforts to derive more power from modifications that allow more air flow and/or more fuel. Mods like this can't affect a rich or lean mixture so no potential harm is done. If the ST1300 from the factory had a very restrictive air intake system or exhaust system like many bikes do, but not the ST, the efforts to improve airflow could help some but it would take some before and after dynometer runs to quantify any improvements.

Efforts to gain more power make quantifiable improvements when the ECU fuel mapping is modified and we have had members attempt to do this with electronic black boxes like Bazaaz with mixed results. I think this is the way to go with a closed loop system. Of course, I'm responding to how the ST was sold in the USA and Europe. The Asian bikes might have a different ECU and different emission control systems.

I always like the deep roar of the ST1300's 360 degree crankshaft V-4 short vertical intake tract engine when flogging the bike and yet when ridden at a moderate pace it reverted to the quiet mild mannered Honda character. Mods like this might improve the intake sound.

Nobody ever accused me of being the brightest bulb on the porch, but this is so far over my head, ...... All except the “deep roar of the V-4”.....I like that part. Pretty sure that is one of the reasons I have one.....

 

[Larry Fine]

IDK, I wish the first gear was taller and faster at takeoffs. Sometimes I have to redline in order to get it up to speed a bit faster off the line.

Sounds like your engine isn't working properly, or perhaps you need a different bike.

 

[Catmandu2]

with electronic black boxes like Bazaaz with mixed results

I will have some great mixed results to report later tonight,,, Dave. As I had a great 80km test ride on the Bazzaz today !! Stay tuned,,, no pun intended,,, CAt'

 

[Sadlsor]

<SNIP>
Haven't heard it mentioned much in years, but in the old days it was usually a case of "I'm just removing all the restrictions caused by EPA regulations, so it will run better" even though motorcycles have never been tested for emissions in California, ever. It didn't seem to work all that well in the carbureted days, and in the EFI days its even less likely to improve things.

I'm no engineer, and I don't play one on the internet.
But "conventional wisdom" (by any definition), or at least what I read over and over regarding bike performance is, for every 5 lbs of weight reduction, you increase horsepower by one.
So the repeated joke for those riders who spend hundreds of dollars on questionable performance-enhancing mods or weight-shaving metallurgic-miracle exhausts or pegs or levers, over-bored pistons, or hotter cams is, lose some weight yourself! Going from 260 lbs to 210 just netted you 10hp! Well, you get the idea.
To the point, I know the infamous KTM "cannisterectomy" or eliminating the catalytic converter (at least on my FI 2005-spec 950 and similar) dropped about 16 lbs, and improved fuel economy by a handful of mpg.
EDIT: Golly gee, there sure was a flurry of replies whilst I was typing that.
Somebody said way back up top, 'thanks for giving us something new to talk about'.

 

[Larry Fine]

But "conventional wisdom" (by any definition), or at least what I read over and over regarding bike performance is, for every 5 lbs of weight reduction, you increase horsepower by one.

So, between my '82 Nighthawk 750 and me (at 375 lb), and my '96 Nighthawk and me (at 225 lb), at 100 and 150 pounds lighter, respectively, I gained an equivalent of 50 HP?

 

[Bulitt]

I'm no engineer, and I don't play one on the internet.
But "conventional wisdom" (by any definition), or at least what I read over and over regarding bike performance is, for every 5 lbs of weight reduction, you increase horsepower by one.
So the repeated joke for those riders who spend hundreds of dollars on questionable performance-enhancing mods or weight-shaving metallurgic-miracle exhausts or pegs or levers, over-bored pistons, or hotter cams is, lose some weight yourself! Going from 260 lbs to 210 just netted you 10hp! Well, you get the idea.
To the point, I know the infamous KTM "cannisterectomy" or eliminating the catalytic converter (at least on my FI 2005-spec 950 and similar) dropped about 16 lbs, and improved fuel economy by a handful of mpg.

Well if that is true, think how much horsepower could be gained by a lot of “wingers” by clicking the box or their route planner to “avoid DQ’s”.

 

[Sadlsor]

So, between my '82 Nighthawk 750 and me (at 375 lb), and my '96 Nighthawk and me (at 225 lb), at 100 and 150 pounds lighter, respectively, I gained an equivalent of 50 HP?

I didn't come up with this "conventional wisdom", I'm just passing it along. Either way, don't tell me you've never heard something similar, vis a vis weight reduction / power increase?
Then again, we haven't factored in the inflation equation, so just off the cuff, I would estimate the 14 ensuing years from '82 to '96 should get you, what, ...about 2 or 3hp per year? So, there's part of it, anyway.
And what about the trigonometric geological exponent when we substitute horsepower per dollar? Especially given the indeterminate global warming factor!
OK, I'm quite done now.