Removed Air box Inlet

I 've had my swing for almost a year now. Basically, I've gotten it up to respectable specs in terms of fuel mileage. Some of you may remember how I reported 35 MPG on the interstate last year going between 70-75 indicated which was disappointing. Since then, I've learned that a clean air filter is vital, and that Dr. Pulley Sliders and a power commander are helpful as well. With all of these things, I would generally run at between 40-42 on the interstate depending on temp, grade, and headwinds riding at 70-75 indicated. HOWEVER...... I had decided to put on a large GIVI windscreen and it went back down to about 40 at best in the fall and I couldn't even crack 41 or 42. 40 was the best I could muster with the new screen. Anyways.... I got to thinking how putting in a clean air filter was the single most effective improvement I have made (before I had bought my bike, it had been sitting in a barn and the air filter had become kegged in dust). So today.... I decided to test out my hypothesis to see if the Swing could benefit from increased airflow. I simply removed the entire air filter inlet cover and reassembled the tupperware. The first thing I noticed was a different sound and a definite increase in power. Using my counting method, I estimate the 0-60 to have gone from 6.5 to about 6.0 seconds flat. I'll admit that this is not very scientific but I am certain that there is at least some benefit. But what really amazed me and is scientific is the fact that I was able to run 44 miles to the gallon running between 70-75 indicated. Given the air temperature of 55 degrees which is colder than when I ran my previous best back in late spring, and given the fact that I am running the tall GIVI, this is a nice little improvement. I am going to run 2 or 3 tanks of fuel through the bike to confirm my previous test and if so.... I'll be making some modifications to the air inlet to allow increased airflow to pass through. I will likely leave the back and bottom portions to help protect from nasties getting in but will cut the front portion to allow more air in. Maybe something for others to try and see if you can replicate my results.

I have been running a drilled air box for years on all my bikes & sport quads. Of course, on the older ones It necessitated also running fatter main jets in the carbs to compensate for the increased air flow. Usually not needed with EFI unless more improvements are made. I never did it with gas mileage as a goal but with the J Costa and Vince pipe I average between 50 & 52 mpg with mostly highway riding at 70 or higher. You didn't mention totasl mileage on the scoot, but at 10 K, mine seems to have improved.

ronjr009 wrote:

I 've had my swing for almost a year now. Basically, I've gotten it up to respectable specs in terms of fuel mileage. Some of you may remember how I reported 35 MPG on the interstate last year going between 70-75 indicated which was disappointing. Since then, I've learned that a clean air filter is vital, and that Dr. Pulley Sliders and a power commander are helpful as well. With all of these things, I would generally run at between 40-42 on the interstate depending on temp, grade, and headwinds riding at 70-75 indicated. HOWEVER...... I had decided to put on a large GIVI windscreen and it went back down to about 40 at best in the fall and I couldn't even crack 41 or 42. 40 was the best I could muster with the new screen. Anyways.... I got to thinking how putting in a clean air filter was the single most effective improvement I have made (before I had bought my bike, it had been sitting in a barn and the air filter had become kegged in dust). So today.... I decided to test out my hypothesis to see if the Swing could benefit from increased airflow. I simply removed the entire air filter inlet cover and reassembled the tupperware. The first thing I noticed was a different sound and a definite increase in power. Using my counting method, I estimate the 0-60 to have gone from 6.5 to about 6.0 seconds flat. I'll admit that this is not very scientific but I am certain that there is at least some benefit. But what really amazed me and is scientific is the fact that I was able to run 44 miles to the gallon running between 70-75 indicated. Given the air temperature of 55 degrees which is colder than when I ran my previous best back in late spring, and given the fact that I am running the tall GIVI, this is a nice little improvement. I am going to run 2 or 3 tanks of fuel through the bike to confirm my previous test and if so.... I'll be making some modifications to the air inlet to allow increased airflow to pass through. I will likely leave the back and bottom portions to help protect from nasties getting in but will cut the front portion to allow more air in. Maybe something for others to try and see if you can replicate my results.

You probably have the stock air filter cause I believe the kn filter wont stay on unless the cover is on

I currently have 12k on the scoot. When I bought it, it had 5k on it.

As you can see from my sig I run the K & N also. It has been so long that I have forgotten exactly how many holes I drilled but it was in the lid

I also drilled holes in my air box and removed the air tube at the left side. I have over 38,000 miles on it now and i think the holes work well for reducing the air restriction. I change the air filter every 12k miles as the manual says and i can still see a little orange color, so it doesn't get overly dirty with the added holes.

below is a picture of my air box, i think you can still get similar benefits with less holes.

http://paulscooter.webs.com/apps/photos/photo?photoid=13347236

Paul

I know people have talked about the sound effect and perceived power increase in the past. Did any of you who drilled notice an increase in Fuel Mileage? It be great if someone can confirm/replicate my results. Any mod that can increase power and fuel mileage that costs nothing is a no brainer. To be safe though.... I will run a couple of tanks of fuel to see if this is for real and no fluke. It it pans out... I can't wait to see fuel mileage in the summer with stock windshield and warmer temps. If I can hit 46-47 MPG on the interstate riding between 70-75 MPH, that would just simply be awesome! I do like the idea of drilling the holes as I don't have to do any cutting. If for any reason I want to recover I could simply use tape. Something I may do in the spring for giggles is to run up to the Bristol Dragway and do some passes down the strip during the street fights. I could do 2-3 with holes in the inlet and 2-3 without. The time slips would confirm/deny my hunch on the difference in power. Can't wait for spring!

I wonder if the low mileage is due to the CVT. My Goldwing which displaces two and a half times the SWs engine and weighs nearly twice as much with a large fairing and windshield gets almost the same mpg at similar speeds. The big 'Wing gets around 42mpg around town and about 40mpg at 70-75mph.

Hey exavid,

Yes, the conventional CVT(not electronic as I can't speak for the Burgman 650's of the world) is responsible for lower gas mileage once you start to get above 55-60. Up to that point though, the conventional CVT is as good as anything. If you are using stock rollers on the Swing, the drop of point is at 55 MPH and If you are using Dr. Pulley Sliders, then the drop off appears to start at around 60. That is one reason why the Dr. Pulleys are such a nice upgrade. With the factory rollers, the belt will not ride at the tip top of the pulley. If you pull your cover off and place your bike on the centerstand, you can crank the throttle and at about that 55 MPH point, you will notice that your belt will no longer ride up the pulley which causes the RPM to increase from that point forward with no gear change taking effect. This is the point where the fuel consumption really begins to go down south. If you do the same procedure with the Dr. Pulley's, The improved shape seems to help the ramp push the belt up to the tip top of the pulley which gives a better gear ratio for top end and lowers cruise RPM by about 400 RPM's. This will increase your fuel mileage slightly and make high speed cruising much nicer on the wing. For those of you who make the upgrade, try the above procedure and you'll see exactly what I'm talking about. Most of the people on here who ride their wings at 55 MPH or less should have no problem averaging in the 50's or maybe even mid to upper based on their riding style (heavy handed acceleration of which I am often guilty) and the particulars of their bike (i.e. big windshields, wind deflectors, weight, air pressure, etc....).

ronjr009 wrote:

Hey exavid,

Yes, the conventional CVT(not electronic as I can't speak for the Burgman 650's of the world) is responsible for lower gas mileage once you start to get above 55-60. Up to that point though, the conventional CVT is as good as anything. If you are using stock rollers on the Swing, the drop of point is at 55 MPH and If you are using Dr. Pulley Sliders, then the drop off appears to start at around 60. That is one reason why the Dr. Pulleys are such a nice upgrade. With the factory rollers, the belt will not ride at the tip top of the pulley. If you pull your cover off and place your bike on the centerstand, you can crank the throttle and at about that 55 MPH point, you will notice that your belt will no longer ride up the pulley which causes the RPM to increase from that point forward with no gear change taking effect. This is the point where the fuel consumption really begins to go down south. If you do the same procedure with the Dr. Pulley's, The improved shape seems to help the ramp push the belt up to the tip top of the pulley which gives a better gear ratio for top end and lowers cruise RPM by about 400 RPM's. This will increase your fuel mileage slightly and make high speed cruising much nicer on the wing. For those of you who make the upgrade, try the above procedure and you'll see exactly what I'm talking about. Most of the people on here who ride their wings at 55 MPH or less should have no problem averaging in the 50's or maybe even mid to upper based on their riding style (heavy handed acceleration of which I am often guilty) and the particulars of their bike (i.e. big windshields, wind deflectors, weight, air pressure, etc....).

Well stated explanation of Sliders vs Rollers, ronjr. Now all ya gotta do is put on a 'darkside' Sumitomo tire on the rear and the RPM's will drop even further while the MPG's will improve also.

I'm running that "Darkside Overdrive" tire, Dr Pulley 28gm Sliders and the Dr Pulley HiT Clutch. Cruising at 5000 rpms (the magic number for mpg's) my speedo is between 60-70 mph -consistently. The mph variation depends on road conditions, etc. And I'm getting 50 mpg running Interstate Hwy speeds. Aggressive throttle twisting eats into that mpg very quickly though.

Tim

I don't criticize any motorscooter or motorcycle rider who goes darkside on the rear tire of their bike but it's not for me. I believe there's a reason that bike tires are designed differently than car tires and I don't think it's a plot by manufacturers to sell more bike tires. In this case I don't mind spending a bit more money for tires that wear out a bit sooner. In the twisties I tend to ride my bikes to the point something will scrape once in awhile and having a bike tire just makes me feel more secure whether there's a valid reason for it or not.

exavid wrote:

I don't criticize any motorscooter or motorcycle rider who goes darkside on the rear tire of their bike but it's not for me. I believe there's a reason that bike tires are designed differently than car tires and I don't think it's a plot by manufacturers to sell more bike tires. In this case I don't mind spending a bit more money for tires that wear out a bit sooner. In the twisties I tend to ride my bikes to the point something will scrape once in awhile and having a bike tire just makes me feel more secure whether there's a valid reason for it or not.

With all due respect for contrary opinions:

If I coulda still got a those nice sticky, inexpensive, Pirelli GTS's when it was time to replace the rear tire for the umpteenth nail puncture time, I woulda gone that way. But they're NLA, I needed a new tire, and the Sumitomo had recently come on the horizon, so I figured I'd give that one a go.

Considering the gas mileage, handling and tire-mileage benefits I don't thing I'll be going back to a m/c tire any time soon.

That being said, if I do experience a high speed tire-bead seal failure -as feared by many posters- and I get killed I'll be sure to post that info to all. ;-)

Tim

No problem with differing opinions, we all have them. Otherwise we'd all be riding the same make, model and color bike. Sometimes I even have opposing opinions on my own ideas!

No doubt about the fact that the Sumitomo offers a futher improvement in both RPM reduction, longevity, and fuel mileage. I am both envious to those of you who have the guts to have them on as you do enjoy those benefits yet glad that I don't due to my personal comfort level with the unusual profile. It sure would be nice if there were a slightly larger motorcycle tire that had the same dimensions but I don't belive one exists. I've seen the video of the Sumi... in the curves and I must admit that it did look pretty good for what it was. I am okay paying for a new tire every 10,000 but I would love to have that slightly larger diameter. Maybe someone will make one at some point. But as exavid said, it is cool to have people doing a variety of things with our Swings. It is how we learn and innovate and all of these people contribute in positive ways to this board and to our general knowledge of the Swing in general.

I changed to a car tire while I was home and did not use the Sumimoto tire. I ask the local shop if they had any that size and the answer was no but we do have a Mastercraft 175-70-13. I looked at the tire and it looked real good and besides it was american made. I went home and did some measureing because this is bigger than the sumimoto and a lot bigger than factory. It looked like I had plenty of room so I pulled off the rear tire and headed back to the shop. The tire had 8000 miles on it and when we took it off I was astonished how thin the tire was in the center. It was 1/4 inch thick at the most and easily pushed in with one finger. My thoughts were that I had been going 80 mph on that. I am not hard on tires and I was suprised that it was that thin. Any small sharp object would have put me out of business. I mounted the car tire and it went on great. When I put it on the bike it looked so good and had plenty of room left over. Now I have a tire that has three time the thickness of the origonal when new with thicker side walls. I have loged over 400 miles on the car tire and I will not go back. Handling is great and I have driven on wet and curvy Ozark roads. The price mounted with tax was 69.00