looking for some advice. I dont plan on doing any futher engine mods except what i have K@N filter ported manifold V@H longshots.I see Hellrisers has a sale for Dyna 3000 Is it woth it for what i have? Engine wise? Thanks for any advice or tips Scott

If the OEM ignition module is less expensive I would probably purchase that.

I've purchased the whole Dyna set up "coils and module" a little over $400 at the time and there is no real impressive effects. Every mod that I have made for the exception of a 32T pully hasn't made a difference. With all the torque of this engine seems nothing will be that noticeable except big bore and other engine mods if you want to beat another R*

You will have to make up your own mind and I know its hard.

The general consensus among folks who use the Dyna 30000 is that its primary contibution comes in the extension of your rev limits Scott.

99-03 Road Stars rev limit at about 4250 RPM, 04-05s at about 4600-4800 (sorry, but can't remember this exactly).

A practical rev limit for the Road Star is about 5000 rpm, which is where most folks that use the Dyna set their limits.

If your bike is an 04 or later, I am not sure this represents any real appreciable benefit. On my bikes (00 and 01) it made a nice difference in rideability.

Without engine mods, there is NO appreciable performance benefit, as the Road Star motor generates its peak power near the Rev limits. Extending them adds nothing but the ability to maintain a single gear up to a higher RPM range.

I like it primarly for the twisties and mountain roads. It just provides a smoother range of transition for keeping the bike in an optimum RPM range for the road (in these circumstances).

If you can find a Rev Master (don't remember who makes it) you can do the same thing without having the option to advance or retard your timing like the Dyna offers. I played with the timing on a few bikes and really found the recommended timing settings were best for a stock bike. So having the option to adjust the timing really did not equal a benefit. Others may chime in who had different experiences though.

Rev Masters cost a few bucks less.

GRAM

thanks for your input.I kinda had my mind made up,was just looking for feedback,and from the way you describe, probably not worth the price for me to buy a Dyna 3000 with my set up thanks scott

thanks Gram for your input.I think I will pass on the Dyna 3000 and go with Rev Master (I think its a Dynojet product by the way) .Also thanks for always answering questions. scott

I am a little late with this reply but I have a 2004 Roadstar and I can tell a heck of a difference with the dyna 3000. I have 2.75 drags and a Hypercharger as the other mods. It is like day and night for me in the seat of the pants meter!
DL<br><br>Post edited by: DL, at: 2005/03/17 19:14

First, Steve and I live nearby and have bantered theory and practice on a few occasions. Most of the time we're in agreement (he really knows his stuff), but I see this differently.

Stock bikes suffer from a few performance tuning shortfalls due to EPA emmissions testing.

One shortfall is restricted air and lean jetting (to get past EPA). Many &quot;un-cork&quot; the intake and run richer jetting (V-Twins seem to like it a little on the rich side through much of the RPM range)

Another shortfall was done by the factory to off-set the above. They retard timing so they can run those lean jet settings.

Correcting the jetting without advancing the timing (preferably to the maximum possible) does not achieve full tuning potential. Running any motor short on timing advance deprives it of a complete &quot;tuning symphony&quot;. It works best when it all works together.

The benefit may be subtle to many (more noticeable in &quot;mid-range riding&quot; as Steve mentioned) but I notice it. Well timed and tuned engines are more responsive and crisp (and maybe run a little cooler).

The way I see it; if you've gone to the trouble of intake/jetting mods, completing the effort with suitable timing adjustment makes sense. And that means a Dyna, set one (maybe two) settings over the &quot;factory curve&quot;.

The fastest internally stock R* Steve and I have seen (dyno'd a &quot;real&quot; 75hp) runs an S&amp;S/Nemesis intake, Pro-pipe and K&amp;N; pretty common.

What's different is a Yost power tube (Bob Yost convinced me, who knows??), a VOES switch and aggressive Dyna settings. It runs advance right on the edge, so if the bike is two-up, pulling a hill with thick air density, it pings.

This bike (it's Jimaray's) pulls very strong on top. It ran very differently before the VOES switch and aggressive Dyna settings. I could outrun it with an &quot;under-piped&quot;, stock carb'd, BAK'd and well-tuned bike. Not any more.

Reasonably, bike to bike run-offs can be inconclusive due to many variables, but there was no question of before/after improvement on Jimaray's bike. I think most of the gain was due to timing. (there's a whole other discussion concerning TPS/timing alteration)

Nonetheless, I think the Dyna finishes the job on tuning mods and what it does for timing advance is more important than the rev limit. (Although, better tuned motors hit the rev limit faster, so increasing it is very desireable)

Jim

I can believe that theory!

Would like to know more about Voes, but that would make another good topic.

Great Overview Jim!

Your one of the few people I really enjoy disagreeing with

I always know I am about to learn something...

GRAM

Thanks Steve!!

But, remember our discussions on vacuum, volume and velocity?

That's where I get humbled and I'm still trying to learn.

There's a established knowledge base among Harley tuners, who consider volumetric efficiency (volume inducted divided by displacement)and flame front velocity (helps decrease combustion time).

These factors can permit retarding advance to gain more power, something practiced more outside of the Harley scene due to antiquated design. This seems like a paradox at first glance against old timing lore (&quot;advance till she pings and back off&quot. But, if those factors can be improved, running less advance produces more power, because it reduces &quot;negative&quot; force of sparking the mixture as the piston travels towards TDC (retarding timing).

That's why I've wondered about potentially significant differences between the R* motor and Harleys. We have 4 valve heads and I suspect some well thought out intake design and combustion chamber design, aimed at those factors (and possible more improvements in post 04 design). Add to that, our ported intakes, which lead to our discussions on the three &quot;Vs&quot;.

SO what do we have? And how do we understand how best to tune it? Most of us &quot;hit and miss&quot; on what feels better or dyno the bike, which limits us to WOT measurement.

We're at a disadvantage, since R*s don't have time and following of really knowledgeable tuners (at least I haven't found or read anything that addresses R* engine intake design like what's available for Harleys). Here's a good link to an example of Harley tuning support:

http://www.daytona-sensors.com/tech_tuning.html

p.s. has suggested AFR values at different RPM, which you can convert to CO

But, even if we did understand, we don't seem to have an ignition system we can tune to exploit our R* advantages.

Or do we?

Consider this. The Dyna can be set to aggressively ramp up. I suspect the R* (un-corked) can handle it (more than a Harley). But the at high RPM, I think there's too much advance. If only we could run the most agressive curve and &quot;clip&quot; the max advance a few degrees...

I recall the Dyna has a retard override (put there for NOS or whatever). How about 2 VOES switches (or one with some trick connections) that work both curve switching and high advance (low vacuum) override??

That would be a fun experiment in theory and might pan out in practice. If only we had the time...

Jim