Author Topic: Pods Thread  (Read 137809 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

Offline seaweb11

  • 1st Mate &
  • Really Old Timer ...
  • *******
  • Posts: 6,258
  • Ride & Smile
    • Playground Directory
Re: pods v standard air box.
« Reply #50 on: July 23, 2007, 10:50:00 PM »
Ya got another convert there TT ;D

You won't get me................... ;D ;D ;D ;D

I du no, my k8 runs great w/pods, 138 mains.... rain, wind, what ever :o

But I am glad others who have not had success are riding again with a smile due to your help.

Offline edbikerii

  • Master
  • *****
  • Posts: 2,128
    • Gallery
Re: pods v standard air box.
« Reply #51 on: July 23, 2007, 10:50:31 PM »
AAAUUGGGHHHH!!!! Twotired you Bastard!!

Oh yeah.  Don't you just hate it?  Ignorance was truly bliss.  I had torn my bike down years ago, and really didn't ride it much because I was riding my other bike.  Plan was to turn it into more of a race replica.  So, just as you did, I put on the pods, then didn't really ride it much, so didn't notice the huge difference.  Now that I've seen the light, I'm kind of disappointed too.

But hey, console yourself by knowing that you're really going to enjoy riding your good-running bike, not just looking at it!  The more I look at that airbox now that I know the difference, the prettier it looks.
SOHC4 #289
1977 CB550K - SOLD
1997 YAMAHA XJ600S - SOLD
1986 GL1200I - SOLD
2004 BMW R1150R

Jetting: http://forums.sohc4.net/index.php?topic=20869.msg258435#msg258435
Needles:  http://forums.sohc4.net/index.php?topic=20869.msg253711#msg253711

Offline pablo78cb550

  • Hot Shot
  • ***
  • Posts: 318
  • mmmph.
Re: pods v standard air box.
« Reply #52 on: July 24, 2007, 12:03:34 AM »
are all main jets the same?(obviously not the hole in them) but the thread and outer dimension's?
mikuni
Keihin
or do they take differnet(per manufacture) main jets?
how is that for a noob question.
well new to try diving into carbs.
Bikes in hand:
1977 Yamaha XS650
1978 Yamaha SR500 #119!
1978 Yamaha XS400
1978 Honda CB550K
1965 Ducati Monza 250

Sold off:
1992 Yamaha FZR600
1978 Yamaha SR500- I miss it so much.
1981 Yamaha Seca 550

Offline edbikerii

  • Master
  • *****
  • Posts: 2,128
    • Gallery
Re: pods v standard air box.
« Reply #53 on: July 24, 2007, 05:10:17 AM »
Generally they are different from brand to brand and sometimes even year to year.  For instance, 77-78 used screw-in main jets and press-in pilots, whereas some of the earlier cb550s have screw-in pilot jets, and I believe jets are press-in held in by a clip or something (I'm really only familiar with the 77 and 78 carbs, though).

Dynojet DJ series is what we need for the 77-78 CB550.

are all main jets the same?(obviously not the hole in them) but the thread and outer dimension's?
mikuni
Keihin
or do they take differnet(per manufacture) main jets?
how is that for a noob question.
well new to try diving into carbs.
SOHC4 #289
1977 CB550K - SOLD
1997 YAMAHA XJ600S - SOLD
1986 GL1200I - SOLD
2004 BMW R1150R

Jetting: http://forums.sohc4.net/index.php?topic=20869.msg258435#msg258435
Needles:  http://forums.sohc4.net/index.php?topic=20869.msg253711#msg253711

Offline pablo78cb550

  • Hot Shot
  • ***
  • Posts: 318
  • mmmph.
Re: pods v standard air box.
« Reply #54 on: July 24, 2007, 08:44:29 AM »
thank you kind sir.
Bikes in hand:
1977 Yamaha XS650
1978 Yamaha SR500 #119!
1978 Yamaha XS400
1978 Honda CB550K
1965 Ducati Monza 250

Sold off:
1992 Yamaha FZR600
1978 Yamaha SR500- I miss it so much.
1981 Yamaha Seca 550

Offline mmtsquid

  • Hot Shot
  • ***
  • Posts: 393
Re: pods v standard air box.
« Reply #55 on: July 24, 2007, 09:04:34 AM »
Reading this thread, I'm seriously considering NOT putting on the Pods I've ordered - I don't hear many good things!

But, since humans are curious creatures, I'm sur eI'll give it a try.
But one question - what do I do with the hose coming out of the top of the engine that goes to the bottom of the airbox?
77 CB550K4

Offline edbikerii

  • Master
  • *****
  • Posts: 2,128
    • Gallery
Re: pods v standard air box.
« Reply #56 on: July 24, 2007, 09:28:52 AM »
mmtsquid:
Don't let my experience discourage you.  I just got too lazy to try rejetting properly, and I'd like to enjoy riding for a little while before I potentially start in again.  I have not given up, yet.

At least it is good to know that it will only take me a couple of hours to return to stock and have a good running bike, if a little hot.  I'm going to try buying an IR thermometer today and measure some engine temps with the airbox on.  If I end up with anything more than 230F after running around for awhile and stopping at stoplights, then I'm definitely going to jump right into pods and rejetting again.

I don't want to have to tear down the engine again anytime soon.  I suspect that the hot-running engine has a lot to do with the cylinder head o-rings leaking prematurely, etc.

Besides, I just paid almost $60 for four sets of jets plus S&H.  I'm way too cheap to spend $60 for absolutely nothing!
SOHC4 #289
1977 CB550K - SOLD
1997 YAMAHA XJ600S - SOLD
1986 GL1200I - SOLD
2004 BMW R1150R

Jetting: http://forums.sohc4.net/index.php?topic=20869.msg258435#msg258435
Needles:  http://forums.sohc4.net/index.php?topic=20869.msg253711#msg253711

Offline seaweb11

  • 1st Mate &
  • Really Old Timer ...
  • *******
  • Posts: 6,258
  • Ride & Smile
    • Playground Directory
Re: pods v standard air box.
« Reply #57 on: July 24, 2007, 10:31:43 AM »
"But one question - what do I do with the hose coming out of the top of the engine that goes to the bottom of the airbox?"

Offline Wheelhorse77

  • She's got some Juice
  • Enthusiast
  • **
  • Posts: 198
Re: pods v standard air box.
« Reply #58 on: July 24, 2007, 11:00:57 AM »
mmtsquid:
Don't let my experience discourage you.  I just got too lazy to try rejetting properly, and I'd like to enjoy riding for a little while before I potentially start in again.  I have not given up, yet.

At least it is good to know that it will only take me a couple of hours to return to stock and have a good running bike, if a little hot.  I'm going to try buying an IR thermometer today and measure some engine temps with the airbox on.  If I end up with anything more than 230F after running around for awhile and stopping at stoplights, then I'm definitely going to jump right into pods and rejetting again.

I don't want to have to tear down the engine again anytime soon.  I suspect that the hot-running engine has a lot to do with the cylinder head o-rings leaking prematurely, etc.

Besides, I just paid almost $60 for four sets of jets plus S&H.  I'm way too cheap to spend $60 for absolutely nothing!

Along with lean, make sure your timing isn't too far advanced. I've set mine with a bit more base but I also run premium as a result.

It's a shame that we can't get an A/F ratio from a dyno...the headaches it would solve.
77 750F2 ressurected from the dead
ASE Advanced Level Master Tech

Offline mmtsquid

  • Hot Shot
  • ***
  • Posts: 393
Re: pods v standard air box.
« Reply #59 on: July 24, 2007, 11:51:51 AM »
Crap!  So I really need 5 pods???????
The kit only comes with 4!
77 CB550K4

Offline seaweb11

  • 1st Mate &
  • Really Old Timer ...
  • *******
  • Posts: 6,258
  • Ride & Smile
    • Playground Directory
Re: pods v standard air box.
« Reply #60 on: July 24, 2007, 12:20:10 PM »
Yeah, you need a little one. Most Auto supply stores can sort you out for a couple bucks.
I got mine on Ebay.

fuzzybutt

  • Guest
Re: pods v standard air box.
« Reply #61 on: July 24, 2007, 02:01:16 PM »
running #130 mains with the needle clip in the second from lowest (richest)position, stock air jets screws 1 1/2 turns out. thats was the setup when i still had the 736cc motor in my 74' k bike. it ran like a bat out of hell with the pods and a kerker 4 into 1 pipe.

Offline Gordon

  • Global Moderator
  • Really Old Timer ...
  • *****
  • Posts: 12,114
  • 750K1, 550K2
Re: pods v standard air box.
« Reply #62 on: July 24, 2007, 04:03:17 PM »
You guys who are successfully running pods should set up some type of chart that lists what bike you have, any modifications, and what carb settings and jetting you're using, so when this question comes up we can point the person to the chart and let them have at it.

fuzzybutt

  • Guest
Re: pods v standard air box.
« Reply #63 on: July 24, 2007, 05:22:35 PM »
i'm more than happy to do that

Offline edbikerii

  • Master
  • *****
  • Posts: 2,128
    • Gallery
Re: pods v standard air box.
« Reply #64 on: July 24, 2007, 06:05:49 PM »
First hit with thermometer after riding home from tool store.  This was not a particularly hard ride, either.  Maybe 4 miles of regular suburban traffic.  I left it idling, removed the thermometer from my tank bag, aimed it at #4 cylinder from the front, reading on the thermometer was "Hi", indicating that it was over 230F, the maximum that this cheap thermometer can handle.   So, I'm going to return the thermometer and get a higher-range unit, I'm going to richen up the mixture on the Idle mixture screw, I'm going to try raising my floats from 14mm to 12.5mm, and I'm going to check the timing on my Dyna S statically.

If all that doesn't solve it, then I'm back to pods and jetting.  Based on ilbikes' post in the oil cooler thread, over 230F is too high.  Anybody else have any thoughts on how hot is too hot for an air-cooled bike?  Anybody have any thoughts on my temperature taking technique, or care to post their own method?

Along with lean, make sure your timing isn't too far advanced. I've set mine with a bit more base but I also run premium as a result.

It's a shame that we can't get an A/F ratio from a dyno...the headaches it would solve.
SOHC4 #289
1977 CB550K - SOLD
1997 YAMAHA XJ600S - SOLD
1986 GL1200I - SOLD
2004 BMW R1150R

Jetting: http://forums.sohc4.net/index.php?topic=20869.msg258435#msg258435
Needles:  http://forums.sohc4.net/index.php?topic=20869.msg253711#msg253711

Offline neil young

  • striving to be an
  • Expert
  • ****
  • Posts: 931
  • A penny saved..is obviously a government oversight
Re: pods v standard air box.
« Reply #65 on: July 24, 2007, 11:56:24 PM »
First hit with thermometer after riding home from tool store.  This was not a particularly hard ride, either.  Maybe 4 miles of regular suburban traffic.  I left it idling, removed the thermometer from my tank bag, aimed it at #4 cylinder from the front, reading on the thermometer was "Hi", indicating that it was over 230F, the maximum that this cheap thermometer can handle.   So, I'm going to return the thermometer and get a higher-range unit, I'm going to richen up the mixture on the Idle mixture screw, I'm going to try raising my floats from 14mm to 12.5mm, and I'm going to check the timing on my Dyna S statically.

If all that doesn't solve it, then I'm back to pods and jetting.  Based on ilbikes' post in the oil cooler thread, over 230F is too high.  Anybody else have any thoughts on how hot is too hot for an air-cooled bike?  Anybody have any thoughts on my temperature taking technique, or care to post their own method?

Along with lean, make sure your timing isn't too far advanced. I've set mine with a bit more base but I also run premium as a result.

It's a shame that we can't get an A/F ratio from a dyno...the headaches it would solve.
hey Ed what did you set the dyna s at.i know some here set the advance at just over 3000 rpm's.i set mine at the recomended.my 77 550 runs really hot.i  rode it about 300 miles the other weekend on a pretty cool night (all highway).after i arrived and had a few beers (about an hour)i went to retrieve my knapsack off the back of the bike and the engine was still hot.
1972 CB500 k1
1974 CB550
1977 cb 550
82 suzuki GS 750tz.......16  valves  baby
2008 Triumph Scrambler

Offline edbikerii

  • Master
  • *****
  • Posts: 2,128
    • Gallery
Re: pods v standard air box.
« Reply #66 on: July 25, 2007, 05:32:55 AM »
Last night I set the timing statically, using a test light and following the procedure that Dyna recommends in their installation instructions http://www.dynaonline.com/english/instruct/DS1-1_1-2.pdf.  I found that my timing was a couple degrees too advanced.  I seem to recall thinking that I'd get a little more power when I installed that Dyna S more than a decade ago.  Back then gas was a lot cheaper, so I didn't mind using premium.  I guess now that the timing is back to stock, I'll switch back to regular and save some dough.

I corrected the timing by rotating the Dyna-S base plate a couple degrees clockwise.  Then I doublechecked that the timing for both coils was spot-on.  Then I took the bike for a midnight spin.  Power felt about the same, engine ran about the same.  Idle seemed a little lower, so I adjusted it back to about ~1200.  When I was done riding, I did the same temperature check on #4, and the thermometer read "Hi" again.  Mind you, this was at midnight, and the ambient air was maybe 60F, at least 20F cooler than my previous check.

Unfortunately, I have no way of knowing whether the timing change made any improvement in the temps because the thermometer only reads "Hi" over 230.  So, it is possible that it was running much hotter with the timing advanced.

So, next steps are to richen up the idle mixture screws, replace the missing airbox drain hose, clip off the missing pinch hose, raise the floats to 12.5mm, and finally re-consider pods and rejetting.

Any other ideas?

hey Ed what did you set the dyna s at.i know some here set the advance at just over 3000 rpm's.i set mine at the recomended.my 77 550 runs really hot.
SOHC4 #289
1977 CB550K - SOLD
1997 YAMAHA XJ600S - SOLD
1986 GL1200I - SOLD
2004 BMW R1150R

Jetting: http://forums.sohc4.net/index.php?topic=20869.msg258435#msg258435
Needles:  http://forums.sohc4.net/index.php?topic=20869.msg253711#msg253711

VitaminCB550

  • Guest
Re: pods v standard air box.
« Reply #67 on: July 25, 2007, 07:36:59 AM »
You guys who are successfully running pods should set up some type of chart that lists what bike you have, any modifications, and what carb settings and jetting you're using, so when this question comes up we can point the person to the chart and let them have at it.

I second that! I bought my bike with pods installed and 115 mains... Huge flat spot when goose'n the throttle and it must be feathered. Definitively installing stock airbox (which came with  ;D ).

A chart would be awesome, guys.

Offline TwoTired

  • Really Old Timer ...
  • *******
  • Posts: 21,805
Re: pods v standard air box.
« Reply #68 on: July 25, 2007, 10:58:27 AM »
Unfortunately, I have no way of knowing whether the timing change made any improvement in the temps because the thermometer only reads "Hi" over 230.  So, it is possible that it was running much hotter with the timing advanced.

So, next steps are to richen up the idle mixture screws, replace the missing airbox drain hose, clip off the missing pinch hose, raise the floats to 12.5mm, and finally re-consider pods and rejetting.

Any other ideas?

You probably won't like these, either.

I switched to the Uni filters for much the same reasons you did.  Cost.  Uni cleaning is much cheaper over the years than the stock paper filter.  However, I do feel it is less restrictive than the stock paper one, and should make lean burning carbs moreso.

One experiment that would cost you the price of a Honda filter, would be to install one. See, if your unknown temps seem cooler. 
Even cheaper is the cost of some duct tape. I don't think I would apply the glue side to the foam.  But, by partially doubling or folding it over on itself, you can narrow the filter area inlet of the uni filter.  As a guess, block  3/4 to 1 inch along eachouter edge near the plastic support.  Or, between the foam and screen on the inside of the filter.  This will increase restriction, and deepen the pressure drop in the carb throats, drawing more fuel through the jets.
You could also temporarily plug the plenum drain hole to eliminate that as a potential leaning source.  Then test for temp changes.

You could also try retarding the spark full advance by a say 5 degrees, to see if percieved temps are more acceptable to you.
Here's something maybe...
CB750 ignition timing (Shop manual pg 22) 6 degrees at 1000 RPM, 40 Degrees at 2500 RPM.  (Presumeably K0 timing.)  The K8 (pg 278) says Max advance is 35 degrees with the F mark at 10 degrees.
So, the 750 K0 has a 34 degree timing advance change and the 750 K8 has a 25 advance change. 
The Cb550 K3 was designed for about a 25 Degree advance change.
I wonder what DYNA's advance range is?

I'm skepical that a 230 degree head temperature is a realistic goal.  Particularly, when I know that combustion temps are in the 1300-1400 range, and the oil temps are supposed to be above 180.  I try to visualize the temp of a cooling fin and it will certainly be hotter at the base of the fin than near the tip.  A "looking" device will have a spot size.  Is the spot looking at the fin or the cylinder wall area?  Is yours seeing the IR radiation from the nearby exhaust headers?  Just some thoughts.

Maybe later today I'll take my 550 down to South Bay Cycles.  Tom's got an IR temp gun, I'm sure he'll let me borrow.  I think it's got a laser on it, too.

About the drain hose.  Have you seen the stock drain hose shape?  It is a molded affair with one end belled significantly to fit over the plenum nipple.

Hmmm, nipples.....

Lloyd... (SOHC4 #11 Original Mail List)
72 500, 74 550, 75 550K, 75 550F, 76 550F, 77 550F X2, 78 550K, 77 750F X2, 78 750F, 79CX500, 85 700SC, GL1100

Those that learn from history are doomed to repeat it by those that don't learn from history.

Offline TwoTired

  • Really Old Timer ...
  • *******
  • Posts: 21,805
Re: pods v standard air box.
« Reply #69 on: July 25, 2007, 11:08:09 AM »
AAAUUGGGHHHH!!!! Twotired you Bastard!!

Hmmm, don't think so.  I had a mother and father who both claimed throughout their lives I was their progeny.  Though they were reluctant during those "special" times.

But, I'm thinking you've certainly been wrong at least twice in your life.
1 - Declaring incorrect lineage.
2 - Assuming pods will make an automatic performance improvement to your machine.


I wonder why isn't "form follows function" a universal mantra?


Cheers,
 ;D ;D ;D

Lloyd... (SOHC4 #11 Original Mail List)
72 500, 74 550, 75 550K, 75 550F, 76 550F, 77 550F X2, 78 550K, 77 750F X2, 78 750F, 79CX500, 85 700SC, GL1100

Those that learn from history are doomed to repeat it by those that don't learn from history.

Offline edbikerii

  • Master
  • *****
  • Posts: 2,128
    • Gallery
Re: pods v standard air box.
« Reply #70 on: July 25, 2007, 02:09:48 PM »
You probably won't like these, either.

Nah, they're really not as bad as I expected.  You didn't go so far as to recommend changing back to the stock exhaust!

Thanks for spending your time considering this!

I switched to the Uni filters for much the same reasons you did.  Cost.  Uni cleaning is much cheaper over the years than the stock paper filter.  However, I do feel it is less restrictive than the stock paper one, and should make lean burning carbs moreso.

One experiment that would cost you the price of a Honda filter, would be to install one. See, if your unknown temps seem cooler. 
Even cheaper is the cost of some duct tape. I don't think I would apply the glue side to the foam.  But, by partially doubling or folding it over on itself, you can narrow the filter area inlet of the uni filter.  As a guess, block  3/4 to 1 inch along eachouter edge near the plastic support.  Or, between the foam and screen on the inside of the filter.  This will increase restriction, and deepen the pressure drop in the carb throats, drawing more fuel through the jets.
You could also temporarily plug the plenum drain hole to eliminate that as a potential leaning source.  Then test for temp changes.

Yes, or putting some duct tape over the airbox snorkel might do the same thing.  BTW, my temps aren't completely unknown.  I know that they are over 230F, assuming that the cheap thermometer is somewhat accurate (see below).

You could also try retarding the spark full advance by a say 5 degrees, to see if percieved temps are more acceptable to you.
Here's something maybe...
CB750 ignition timing (Shop manual pg 22) 6 degrees at 1000 RPM, 40 Degrees at 2500 RPM.  (Presumeably K0 timing.)  The K8 (pg 278) says Max advance is 35 degrees with the F mark at 10 degrees.
So, the 750 K0 has a 34 degree timing advance change and the 750 K8 has a 25 advance change. 
The Cb550 K3 was designed for about a 25 Degree advance change.
I wonder what DYNA's advance range is?

Yes, good idea, but the Dyna S uses the stock advancer mechanism.  It just replaces the points.  Maybe down the road I'll scribe the current location on the plate, and then try retarding the timing a bit just to see if there is any improvement.

I'm skepical that a 230 degree head temperature is a realistic goal.  Particularly, when I know that combustion temps are in the 1300-1400 range, and the oil temps are supposed to be above 180.  I try to visualize the temp of a cooling fin and it will certainly be hotter at the base of the fin than near the tip.  A "looking" device will have a spot size.  Is the spot looking at the fin or the cylinder wall area?  Is yours seeing the IR radiation from the nearby exhaust headers?  Just some thoughts.

Maybe later today I'll take my 550 down to South Bay Cycles.  Tom's got an IR temp gun, I'm sure he'll let me borrow.  I think it's got a laser on it, too.

That would be great!  Thanks!  Then I'd have a real baseline.

If your suspicion about 230F is correct, then setting the timing back to stock last night might have fixed the problem.  If your readings are above 230F, I'll return this thermometer and buy the more expensive laser unit to make the apples-to-apples comparison.

But which 550 will you bring?  The 78 or one of the possibly cooler running earlier bikes?  I've been basing the temp measurements on ilbikes's measurements in the oil cooler thread.  The cheap thermometer doesn't have the laser, so I'm shooting in the dark.  I have no way of really knowing whether it is reading from the base of the fin or the tips, really.  But, even from the side (not near the header), I had the same "Hi" reading.

Harbor Freight had that $9.99 unit in the store for $19.99, and told me that I'd have to print out the web page and they'd honor the price.  So on the way home I stopped at Pep Boys, and ended up buying their unit for $19.99, but it is in a container labeled "Try Me!" that allowed me to use the unit without opening it, thereby facilitating returning it to the store when done.  I thought I had found the zero-cost option!

About the drain hose.  Have you seen the stock drain hose shape?  It is a molded affair with one end belled significantly to fit over the plenum nipple.

Onle seen it on the fiche.  I guess I'll just put a vacuum plug over it temporarily and go for a ride.

Hmmm, nipples.....

Alright, now this is getting racy.  Maybe we'll compete with BobbyR's boob thread for longevity, if not technical content.

Thanks again, TT
SOHC4 #289
1977 CB550K - SOLD
1997 YAMAHA XJ600S - SOLD
1986 GL1200I - SOLD
2004 BMW R1150R

Jetting: http://forums.sohc4.net/index.php?topic=20869.msg258435#msg258435
Needles:  http://forums.sohc4.net/index.php?topic=20869.msg253711#msg253711

Offline TwoTired

  • Really Old Timer ...
  • *******
  • Posts: 21,805
Re: pods v standard air box.
« Reply #71 on: July 25, 2007, 05:15:02 PM »
Quote
Yes, good idea, but the Dyna S uses the stock advancer mechanism.  It just replaces the points.  Maybe down the road I'll scribe the current location on the plate, and then try retarding the timing a bit just to see if there is any improvement.

Yes, of course you are right.  Pretty obvious I don't have a Dyna, eh?  I know there are some of these points replacement units that have electronic advance, though.

Anyway, I did collect thermal test data on my 77 CB550F.  These have the earlier style carbs, not PD, with #98 mains, the smallest to appear on these earlier carbs in the US.  The bike is stock except for a National windscreen, a luggage rack w/backrest and a Uni air filter.  Its got just over 20K miles on it and Spectro 4 MC 10/40 oil about 100 miles ago.  It has had Honda HP4 10/40 in it in the past.  But, I was wary of the new bottles with moly printed on them.

Tom's IR thermometer is a LaCrosse Infrascan 7N3.  There is no calibration data.  No laser, either.

Today's riding temp was about 80 degrees.  It took me 15-20 minutes in city stoplight traffic to arrive at his shop and I let it idle outside pointing into the 10-15 mph winds for about 5 minutes, while I gabbed with Tom and begged his thermometer.

Right side bank cylinder 4 -  Peak reading 268F right at head gasket junction, 230F at base gasket.
Left side bank cylinder 1 -  Peak reading 270F right at head gasket junction, 224F at base gasket.

Pointing at head between exhaust header flanges 1&2 - 299F
Pointing at head between exhaust header flanges 2&3 - 287F
Pointing at head between exhaust header flanges 3&4 - 312F

The engine "felt" or perceived radition heat level seemed warmer than usual to me, probably because of the stationary operation, but I've certainly had it hotter when the weather and traffic were unco-operative.   I've decided to go back to a synthetic blend on the next oil change.  But, I'll find one without moly in it.  I believe some synthetic will add protection when things get hotter than I'd like.

Related but not directly relevant.
Lycoming 180 HP 0-360 Boxer type air cooled motor instrumented with CHT monitor.  There are probes embedded into the cylinder casting.  Desired operating temp 375- 425 F at 75% power rating .  I can see 530F on climb out under max power on a 90 knot (104mph) climb.  It will drop back to about 400F during 75% power cruise when up in the cooler air at 130 knots (150 mph).

The average power output levels between the Lycoming and Honda are vastly different.  The Honda spends most of its life in the 25% or under power output level.  The Lycoming spends most of its life in the 65% or over output level.  The cooling fin design is quite different between the two, of course.

Cheers,

Lloyd... (SOHC4 #11 Original Mail List)
72 500, 74 550, 75 550K, 75 550F, 76 550F, 77 550F X2, 78 550K, 77 750F X2, 78 750F, 79CX500, 85 700SC, GL1100

Those that learn from history are doomed to repeat it by those that don't learn from history.

Offline edbikerii

  • Master
  • *****
  • Posts: 2,128
    • Gallery
Re: pods v standard air box.
« Reply #72 on: July 25, 2007, 08:30:25 PM »
Wow, TT.  Thank you very much for collecting that data!

It really puts my mind at ease, especially considering that you measured the 77 CB550F which has the richer carbureted engine, and you are still well over 230F.

Now I really wish I had checked the temps with a better thermometer before I reset the timing to stock.  Then I'd have a good comparison.  I will return that thermometer and get the better one to take some measurements of my bike over the weekend.  I have a feeling we are now pretty close, because I could measure the temp just below the base gasket and came up with numbers near 220F range.  Slowly aiming the thermometer upward quickly jumped the display to "Hi", indicating over 230F.  Measurements anywhere above that base gasket all read "Hi", but that is consistent with your measurements, as well.

Since I am obviously a glutton for punishment, maybe I will scribe the current stock timing location on the base plate, then return the timing to the advanced state and measure it again with the better thermometer.  If the temps are higher, then that will really prove if the advanced timing was the cause of my (perceived) hot running condition all along. 

Your inclusion of the air-cooled airplane engine data is comforting as well. Since reliability is of the utmost concern, the fact that the airplane is expected to run at 375-425F would certainly indicate that it is OK for our SOHC4 air-cooled engines to run hotter than 230F.

Thanks again, TT.  I'll try to get that thermometer issue taken care of and post back my data for comparison this weekend.
SOHC4 #289
1977 CB550K - SOLD
1997 YAMAHA XJ600S - SOLD
1986 GL1200I - SOLD
2004 BMW R1150R

Jetting: http://forums.sohc4.net/index.php?topic=20869.msg258435#msg258435
Needles:  http://forums.sohc4.net/index.php?topic=20869.msg253711#msg253711

Offline nteek754

  • Hot Shot
  • ***
  • Posts: 364
  • 1973 K3/750/836/70 1970 750 chopper 1973 cafe
Re: pods v standard air box.
« Reply #73 on: July 26, 2007, 04:24:26 AM »
Hey all didnt read all the post but jinx got it right  with prob a bunch of others  in my 32 years of playing ,rideing ,fixing, raceing, wheelieing . these old 750s I found  the obvious more air more fuel  now  I also  came up with it was better to  go with the smaller jet and setting needle higher than with bigger jet and setting needle lowwer  just a better match with the smaller jet size now yes it is key to get the needle set right  years ago  me and a buddy did this he running 140s and needle set low (pulling less gas out of a bigger hole) I running 120s needle set higher (puller more gas out od a smaller hole  mine run a bit better now they both  would perform but my set up was a better match  bottom line is  with pods you will get better performance just got to  set it up right  just have to deal with the rain factor with pods  dont  protect like the stock air box if your bike gets caught sitting in the rain but not that big of a deal.hope this helps good luck have fun Craig in Maine
seven fifty four ever its not the destination its the journey Ive been collecting these old dinasours for 33 years . they are quite an ICON

Offline Wheelhorse77

  • She's got some Juice
  • Enthusiast
  • **
  • Posts: 198
Re: pods v standard air box.
« Reply #74 on: July 26, 2007, 06:47:22 AM »
A temperature sticky would be a home run.


Label it; how hot is hot for your CB... or something along those lines

Ambient air temp
time spent idling
standard places of measurement.
Stock or modified air filter---carbs so forth.
77 750F2 ressurected from the dead
ASE Advanced Level Master Tech