AR Inconel Install

thewoot said:

Honestly, the exhaust worked great out of the box minus the RB Evo unit. I can't really fault him for the RB unit. For all I know it could be bad. Was informed that Evo's would have issues with not running it's settings properly. But I think the nicer route is with getting an ECU tune. I came in with an open mind that I would more than likely need a tune. Not trying to sugar coat my situation though.

Click to expand...

thewoot said:

Honestly, the exhaust worked great out of the box minus the RB Evo unit. I can't really fault him for the RB unit. For all I know it could be bad. Was informed that Evo's would have issues with not running it's settings properly. But I think the nicer route is with getting an ECU tune. I came in with an open mind that I would more than likely need a tune. Not trying to sugar coat my situation though.

Click to expand...

thewoot said:

Honestly, the exhaust worked great out of the box minus the RB Evo unit. I can't really fault him for the RB unit. For all I know it could be bad. Was informed that Evo's would have issues with not running it's settings properly. But I think the nicer route is with getting an ECU tune. I came in with an open mind that I would more than likely need a tune. Not trying to sugar coat my situation though.

Click to expand...

stw said:

its supposed to work great without a tune... I quote from ar website..

No remapping is required although adding a rapidbike module pre mapped from us offers super smooth throttle response with large power gains

Click to expand...

jjsC6 said:

This thread is painful if you have not followed it from the beginning....as I have not. It would be nice if the OP would update the first post if anything good happened. I only got through about the first 18 pages. Has anything happened since then worth reading?

Click to expand...

sifubs said:

Not trying to argue , just pointing you in a direction to get some facts and understanding of how an engine works unless you're satisfied with relying on someone's say so. Lets not forget a few posts ago you responded incorrectly and at the same time ridiculed my pertinent and valid question to wmcdonal.

Click to expand...

DRSapp said:

OK, time to finally post on this thread:

First off, I have the Termi full system and I'm not a fan of AR's system, though I appreciate Rich for developing it and bringing it to market. Competition is the only thing keeping Termi and Akrapovic in check. Lets face it, if Termi was the only system available, a lot of us would pay an extra $k or two just to have it.

Rich's main fault in this is publishing his comparison numbers, both in peak power and noise. As we said nearly a year ago, that's just bad form. Publish your own graphs showing your curves, AFR and an expected average gains. By not doing so, Rich as left himself open for this discontent.

Any turner worth their salt will admit that Peak Power result from a given dyno are worthless if compared to other Peak Power result from another given dyno. You will find that results from different Dynos and taken under different conditions even on the same dyno will differ. Even though CF attempts to correct for temperature and pressure, the environment will vary your results by +/- ~2% or more.

As well as factors in the DYNO machine and environment, the selected Correction Factor (CF) can play a part in the numbers game -

DIN uses 1013mBar and 20 degrees Celsius as the nominal conditions, whereas the SAE uses 990mBar and 25 degrees Celsius as the nominal conditions. DIN also uses absolute air pressure SAE uses dry. Difference being that dry doesn't account for relative humidity.

The formula for CF is too difficult to type in the text area, but the important thing to remember is that CF DIN is usually ~1.16% higher than SAE.

In short, unless every run is under the exact same conditions, the peak numbers mean little. The only true thing to take from a dyno run is the shape of the torque and power curves and the Air/Fuel Ratio.

Gavin D - Subtraction of back pressure without remapping will decrease the fuel to air mixture ratio (Lean out). Running lean will give you more top end power and higher engine running temperature. In tuning term, lean is mean, but you don't want to go too lean least bad things will happen. But that will never be the case for the Termi slip-on our race exhaust mapping.. they'll always be on the safe side. (usually richer than the Stock map)

Addition of Back Pressure without remapping will increase the fuel to air mixture ratio (richen). In moderation, this can add more torque and response down but less top end power. The engine will also run slightly "cooler" due to unburnt fuel. Going too rich will bog down the engine and make it feel sluggish.

Most manufactures tune a little lean to help pass emissions - Lean = a cleaner burn and less work for the catalytic converter.

Picture this if you will - you have a Stock system which is trying to meet noise regulations so is creating back pressure which will in turn richen the fuel mixture. Now Ducati has to back off the fuel to lean out the mixture to to meet EPA and EU3 emission standards. Now you take away the Stock system back pressure by installing an open system ie Termi Slips or full system, the Up Map will have to enrich the mixture.

From the results thus far, I would speculate the RB unit is setup for the Stock map and not the Termi slip/full system upmap. This would cause the extra rich running with the addition of the RB unit and the AR system.

Click to expand...

Stw said:

Cliff notes version of this thread....


Ar's claims for the benefits of their pipe appear dubious at best..
Pipe looks great
Pipe sounds great
Pipe is made of Inconel
Despite claims to the contrary a heat shield is a must
Pipe does'nt produce anywhere close to the numbers previously touted by AR
Air must be blown into your bike at 150mph
98 Ron fuel must be used.
Gavin and I are being sued for questioning the veracity of said claims
Melted fairing have occured on both bikes fitted with AR pipe
RapidBike Module supplied with AR map appears .. well not sure ..shall we say unusable??
There maybe more magical potions/remedies I have omitted here??

Oh..Almost forget... Ozzie tuners and their dynos are crap...

Click to expand...

ttkarp said:

Products don't seem to be living up to hype, few people getting sued. Other than that, not really.

Click to expand...

Stw said:

Cliff notes version of this thread....


Ar's claims for the benefits of their pipe appear dubious at best..
Pipe looks great
Pipe sounds great
Pipe is made of Inconel
Despite claims to the contrary a heat shield is a must
Pipe does'nt produce anywhere close to the numbers previously touted by AR
Air must be blown into your bike at 150mph
98 Ron fuel must be used.
Gavin and I are being sued for questioning the veracity of said claims
Melted fairing have occured on both bikes fitted with AR pipe
RapidBike Module supplied with AR map appears .. well not sure ..shall we say unusable??
There maybe more magical potions/remedies I have omitted here??

Oh..Almost forget... Ozzie tuners and their dynos are crap...

Click to expand...

Trauma said:

2 more items: AR will guarantee results (not specific here what results) only if AR does the install, and Rich will no longer post here as it may interfere with litigation mentioned above.

Click to expand...

Castor Troy said:

Geez, this situation is a mess

Click to expand...

DRSapp said:

STw - for your notes:

Research Octane Number (RON)
Motor Octane Number (MON)

EU and UK use straight RON for their ratings.
US and the Amreicas use (RON+MON)/2

For standard "pump" gas, MON (on average) is 10% lower than RON.

98 RON = (98 -10% + 98)/2 = 93 US Octane

Click to expand...

Trauma said:

2 more items: AR will guarantee results (not specific here what results) only if AR does the install, and Rich will no longer post here as it may interfere with litigation mentioned above.

Click to expand...

DRSapp said:

STw - for your notes:

Research Octane Number (RON)
Motor Octane Number (MON)

EU and UK use straight RON for their ratings.
US and the Amreicas use (RON+MON)/2

For standard "pump" gas, MON (on average) is 10% lower than RON.

98 RON = (98 -10% + 98)/2 = 93 US Octane

Click to expand...

ttkarp said:

I would add one more: Thus far, the claimed vast performance superiority of the AR system over Termi systems only appears to be valid in the AR shop on the AR dyno

Click to expand...

DRSapp said:

STw - for your notes:

Research Octane Number (RON)
Motor Octane Number (MON)

EU and UK use straight RON for their ratings.
US and the Amreicas use (RON+MON)/2

For standard "pump" gas, MON (on average) is 10% lower than RON.

98 RON = (98 -10% + 98)/2 = 93 US Octane

Click to expand...

Stw said:

I think you and Trauma will be added to AR's suit very soon...

Click to expand...