M109 Rider Forums banner

1 - 20 of 21 Posts

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,013 Posts
that's not really to bad of a price. Add a couple of spacers to lower the compression turn it up to 10 pounds and you should be over 200 hp and torque
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
2,057 Posts
Ill be happy when I get my nitrous set up. Turbos just look too damn ugly on these bikes.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
378 Posts
But Ugly!!!!!!!

If you run the track, yes go for it but I find it hard to understand why guy are trying to get so much horse power out of a v-twin. it has enough alread... If you want more power get a zx14 or a busa... mod your bike and make it look good to your liking but all this performance add on to the 9 is ridiculous the bike is perfect with just a few dollars in mod.....just my 2 cents
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
6,984 Posts
Ill be happy when I get my nitrous set up. Turbos just look too damn ugly on these bikes.
As ugly as they may be, a turbo set up is a lot easier on the motor than nitrous.....just saying.

I personally agree, with GeorgiaRoller.....get a sportbike and wind that sucker out!
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
110 Posts
I'm curious to hear from the member who has a turbo installed -- whether he feels this kit is sufficient/safe.

turn it up to 10 pounds and you should be over 200 hp and torque
Are the factory M109 pistons hypereutectic? Unless they are forged, 10psi will likely blow the piston's ring lands.

And without knowing the lbs/hr specs, I doubt factory fuel injectors would support 200hp without maxing out their duty cycle -- you generally want to keep it below 85-90% DC to prevent the solenoids from locking up. You can cheat by bumping up fuel pressure, but I'm not certain how that would be done on an M109.

Done properly, there's a lot more to forced induction than just strapping it on and cranking up the boost. I built a 10-15psi twin-intercooled / D1sc procharged LT1 corvette engine in my car, and had to rebuild the engine to drop compression (keep the dynamic compression levels within safe levels), while maintaining a .035" quench. Fueling becomes vital -- running lean can melt holes in the piston. Stock MAP sensors are typically only rated for 1 bar (cant sense boost), and turbos don't produce linear boost -- it's more load-based, which can make tuning difficult (whereas superchargers are more linear with respect to RPM). Automotive kits usually take care of this with an FMU, of which I'm not a huge fan due to unreliability. Heat is also an issue, as compressing air causes it to heat up drastically, which can cause detonation, which will destroy a forced induction engine. That's why ethanol injection and intercoolers are used, in conjunction with ignition control boxes that retard ignition timing with respect to boost.

Probably more info than anyone cares to know, and while I'm new/unfamiliar with the M109, I'd personally be afraid to put that turbo on my bike -- unless I was ready to spend another $2-4K on a rebuild in a year or two. And people are apparently breaking driveline components at stock power levels.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
5,843 Posts
Which is why when Ford produced the Generation II LIGHTNING, they replaced the cast crank, cam, connecting rods and pistons of the 5.4 motor, with forged components.

And exactly why I will not put a turbo on my nine.

Aside from that, it is FUGLY! Wheres the thumbs down smilie?
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
254 Posts
I solved the speed issue with this bike by getting a R1 to sit next to it in the garage.
 

·
Banned
Joined
·
108 Posts
extremely overpriced for that itty bitty turbo,

theyre just tryna capitalize because they have the only one available.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
2,057 Posts
As ugly as they may be, a turbo set up is a lot easier on the motor than nitrous.....just saying.
Well yes and no. Both n2o and turbos/superchargers are kinda doing the same thing. turbos/superchargers are forcing more air into the engine which means adding more fuel. n2o adds oxygen to the engine so it can burn more fuel. All the videos and people you see with fuel puddling aka "nitrous backfire" scare people away from nitrous. fuel puddling is ONLY caused by a wet kit, not a dry kit like most people run on our bikes. If/when you see a "nitrous backfire" dont blame it on the nitrous, blame it on the driver. Its usually caused when the fuel jet is too fat. Fuel lays in the intake manifold and then ignites. Mainly caused by spraying in the very low RPMs and/or bouncing off the rev limiter. You can also start blowing apart throttle bodies and blowing out butterflies with a dry kit from bouncing off the rev limiter, but then again thats the drive not the nitrous. bottom line is, all power adders have its ups and down. intake exhaust pc3 and such are not power adders. they just free up whats been there.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
423 Posts
True that they all have the same result, but each in a much different process. Things can go wrong way to easy with nitrous in my opinion. I love turbos, have had turbo cars for the last 5 years. They are easy to tune and have incredible potential, yet things still can go wrong ie wastegate failing to open causing over boot mixed with lean burn = :edit:. Safest setup is a roots blower, as it is a fixed amount of air for a given rpm, making fuel mapping very simple, and as long as you didnt buy to big a blower and/or too small a pulley, then your golden. I am curious how the fuel management works with this setup, as I dont believe our bikes have MAF sensors and are based purely off of RPM/throttle position sensors, correct me if Im wrong. With a turbo you want a system that will detect the increased airflow as the turbo spools up and dont understand how our bikes could be tuned properly.

All said, I have been waiting for this to come out and would love to see actual results from a fellow member (especially videos).

P.S. Agreed that it seems overpriced for a <$1000 turbo and <$1000 worth of other parts.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,013 Posts
I'm curious to hear from the member who has a turbo installed -- whether he feels this kit is sufficient/safe.

Are the factory M109 pistons hypereutectic? Unless they are forged, 10psi will likely blow the piston's ring lands.

And without knowing the lbs/hr specs, I doubt factory fuel injectors would support 200hp without maxing out their duty cycle -- you generally want to keep it below 85-90% DC to prevent the solenoids from locking up. You can cheat by bumping up fuel pressure, but I'm not certain how that would be done on an M109.

Done properly, there's a lot more to forced induction than just strapping it on and cranking up the boost. I built a 10-15psi twin-intercooled / D1sc procharged LT1 corvette engine in my car, and had to rebuild the engine to drop compression (keep the dynamic compression levels within safe levels), while maintaining a .035" quench. Fueling becomes vital -- running lean can melt holes in the piston. Stock MAP sensors are typically only rated for 1 bar (cant sense boost), and turbos don't produce linear boost -- it's more load-based, which can make tuning difficult (whereas superchargers are more linear with respect to RPM). Automotive kits usually take care of this with an FMU, of which I'm not a huge fan due to unreliability. Heat is also an issue, as compressing air causes it to heat up drastically, which can cause detonation, which will destroy a forced induction engine. That's why ethanol injection and intercoolers are used, in conjunction with ignition control boxes that retard ignition timing with respect to boost.

Probably more info than anyone cares to know, and while I'm new/unfamiliar with the M109, I'd personally be afraid to put that turbo on my bike -- unless I was ready to spend another $2-4K on a rebuild in a year or two. And people are apparently breaking driveline components at stock power levels.
We have done a few Busa's and 1000's at 10 psi but I still wuldnt recomend it. 8 pounds yes, 10 is getting close. My 1000 ran around 26 pounds but there wasnt a stock part except the engine case. I have never done a vtwin but am thinking the rpm's are much lower than an inline 4 so it might hold together. as far as fuel, a power commander might do it but installing larger or adding injectors would help. My 1000 actualy had 8 injectors. I have an intercooled turbo on my shelf of a Busa with 8 injectors also.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
110 Posts
We have done a few Busa's and 1000's at 10 psi but I still wuldnt recomend it.
Well, comparing a GSXR 1000 to the M109R is a bit laborious:

1) The PSI vernacular is relative to the volume containing it -- 1000cc @ 10psi is not the same volume as 1800cc @ 10psi. The M109 would be pushing a lot more air -- and thus would have greater fueling requirements.

2) True, it's fewer RPM to redline, but the M109's oversized 112mm pistons are also significant. The giant pistons might distribute the load over a larger surface area, but the pistons themselves are likely far weaker than the GSXR's ~73mm pistons. Especially if these bikes use lightweight hypereutectic pistons -- as I believe they do -- which have a high silica content, making them very brittle / prone to cracking.

----------
I could keep going, but my previous post wasn't really directed at you -- you have a far more intimate knowledge of this topic than I do. Sounds like we're on the same page anyway.

Bottom line, naturally aspirated engines simply aren't engineered to handle forced induction, so care needs to be taken to set it up safely.
 

·
Radio Active Member
2007 Candy Sonoma Red
Joined
·
22,865 Posts
That makes a mighty expensive crash bar. Imagine how you would feel when it fell over with that hanging off the side. :eek:

I wouldn't pay that much for it either. It would be nice having the extra power, but you're still limited on top speed by the gearing. If you throw the price of the 109 in with the kit price, you could have one screaming fast turbo charged sport bike.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
4,485 Posts
Well, comparing a GSXR 1000 to the M109R is a bit laborious:

1) The PSI vernacular is relative to the volume containing it -- 1000cc @ 10psi is not the same volume as 1800cc @ 10psi. The M109 would be pushing a lot more air -- and thus would have greater fueling requirements.

2) True, it's fewer RPM to redline, but the M109's oversized 112mm pistons are also significant. The giant pistons might distribute the load over a larger surface area, but the pistons themselves are likely far weaker than the GSXR's ~73mm pistons. Especially if these bikes use lightweight hypereutectic pistons -- as I believe they do -- which have a high silica content, making them very brittle / prone to cracking.

----------
I could keep going, but my previous post wasn't really directed at you -- you have a far more intimate knowledge of this topic than I do. Sounds like we're on the same page anyway.

Bottom line, naturally aspirated engines simply aren't engineered to handle forced induction, so care needs to be taken to set it up safely.
nicely put sir.:bigthumbsup:

we need to ride this summer.
 
1 - 20 of 21 Posts
Top