Triumphrat

RSDA

But this is not what Pieman/Triumph Twin Power's tests reveal.

From their site:

__________________
2012 Bonneville. Modifications.

Dave2001

No doubt the Breathe flows more air, but that air will not be flowing as fast. The two are presumably linked, but there is also presumably some trade off.

GDCobra

I guess it depends on whether you prefer more air or faster air in your cylinders!

richm

Not true. A well designed bell-mouth (which the Breathe certainly is) smooths the airflow into the filter cavity, giving maximum benefit of the opening size. Without a bell-mouth, you would have a relatively sharp edge and a sudden transition - not good in aerodynamics - that effectively reduces the area that the air can flow in. Bottom line, the Breathe will significantly out flow an opened out plate with no bell-mouth. BTW, I am a degreed Engineer with aeronautical experience, so do know a little about this.

Regarding exhaust, comments about an un-tuned exhaust making less power are true, but I'm not talking about an open pipe - I'm talking about a "proper" free flowing exhaust (call it tuned if you like), such as an Arrow, preds, etc. that have been proven to make more power vs. TORS which I don't believe do much. I'm looking at it from an entire systems point of view - i.e. intake and exhaust (and proper fueling, of course). If you only do one, you won't get the full benefits. When I put the baffles in my Arrows, for example, the results were horrible - very noticeable loss of mid to higher range.

LapinAgile

I've no intention of dissing TTP of course, and as said in an earlier post, it may have better effect for an EFI bike with open pipes and the availability of the download tunes.

But in terms of noticeable differences in my bike that I've experienced, it started with installing TORS; immediately better performance with the 128 MJ's. Next, remove snorkel; enormous difference! Then I opened the stock filter retention plate and removed the baffle; no improvement I could notice.

Last of course was rejetting to 135's with one shim and the Breathe unit; just didn't notice any difference except lower mpg. So obviously I'm maxed out on performance with the current configuration. If that could somehow change for the better I'd likely try it.

There can easily be correct assessments of the technology and physics of air supply and movement by others here, but for me, it just didn't do anything, and that's fact, not an argument against the technology or TTP.

I'm not sorry I bought it, the design requires some type of ring to hold the filter and it's better if it's full size of course, but if there was any measurable difference I didn't 'feel' it.

richm

I understand. The point I was trying to make (probably didn't put it too well) is that if you look at the engine as a system, one part will always be the limiting factor (could be valve size, cam, intake ports, etc., etc.,) depending upon what you have done. You said that you found no difference after removing the air-box baffle and my suggestion was that as you have TORS, maybe they are the limiting factor, assuming that jetting is correct? I would be interested to what others think, as removing the air-box baffle should definitely give you a noticeable improvement whether carb or EFI. Just trying to help

LapinAgile

Thanks for helping on this richm, I really appreciate your input. I remember, going back to Ventura's great early post on all this, how he was able to both measure and enjoy the differences in these steps, even mentioning the difference gained by enlarging the stock snorkel plate to the larger size of the filter itself. Then, another gain after the baffle removal. This all on a carbed bike.

The setup I had previous to the Breathe installation, 128MJ's, no shim, stock pilots 2 turns out, snorkel and baffle gone resulted in the best mileage and zero flat spots. I put some faith in Monday's dyno test to help guide me where to go on this, this shop has a good rep locally.

It may in fact be the TORS, but I do like them and got such a great price on them, and in fact, how could the bike really be made that much better? More than anything I want the bike to be 'correct', as in not too rich/lean and the best amount of 'breathing' being provided.

Sometimes it all gets a bit ridiculous fussing like I do about the bike; I mean it's beautiful, handles great, I jump on and within seconds I'm above 80mph, so I should ask myself how far away is perfect?

Thanks for your help.

Calliway

You know, that was a good read and great research. It will help others and I always believe the journey is the fun. That being said, for amount of mucking around and cost in side covers, bell mouths and filters the tried and proven removal kit could have been done.

__________________

Olhogrider

Based on this thread I removed the baffle, added a Breathe and DNA, removed the A/I and O2 and added the TTP tune. Already had the Arrows 2-into-1. My "butt dyno" and my ability to lift the front wheel confirm a huge increase in torque with the added benefit of running much smoother at low rpm. Was any of it overkill? Probably but it was reported to be a tried and tested package. I'm happy.

Now back to your theorizing.

__________________
Damned Dirty Biker!

Lasermax

Not to mention you probably have one of sweetest sounding bikes ever, with that setup. Velocity is definitely key on the bottom, flow on top. I learn from all the graphs and charts, figure in my budget and intended operating range, and just experiment. Anxious to get my bike to a dyno and see what the air to fuel ratios are, to make my torque curve the best it can be. Not interested in outright horsepower, if a few more ponies are at the expense of torque in the midrange, which this bike spends 90 percent of its time.