Flyectomy

[Sea Level]

An alternative is to keep the flies (which are a component of traction control in 2010 and later bikes) and get the ECU reflashed.  There are many postings on this site and the COG site that tout the advantages of ECU reflashing, especially for 2010+ bikes (my 2010 is very happy with its Guhl reflash).

It's amazing the amount of contradictory opinions one little motorcycle can generate. I've read dozens of times here that the fly removal has no affect on the traction control. I've read that the slip-on will have a noticeable affect on low-end torque in conjunction with the fly removal. Realizing that some of the wow factor is subjective, maybe all of it with out a direct apples-to-apples dyno graphing, there's not much a person can do other than experiment for themselves.

I deliberately did not go with the reflash because my dealer/mechanic told me that he thought any warranty issues which might arise could be negatively impacted by messing with the ECU.

[katata1100]

It's amazing the amount of contradictory opinions one little motorcycle can generate. I've read dozens of times here that the fly removal has no affect on the traction control. I've read that the slip-on will have a noticeable affect on low-end torque in conjunction with the fly removal. Realizing that some of the wow factor is subjective, maybe all of it with out a direct apples-to-apples dyno graphing, there's not much a person can do other than experiment for themselves.

Opinions are one thing, facts are another- don't confuse them. It is a fact that a slip on will not improve your hp/tq. This fact is supported by the following details:
1) There are no dyno tests showing that a slipon does improve power
2) There is no evidence suggesting that the stock can is restrictive
Any dynotests showing a gain with a slipon ALSO include a different tune. When evaluating performance, you ALWAYS go with one mod at a time.A 6hp gain with a slipon and a tune? How do you know that it isn't ALL due to the tune? It is like the commercial for a diet herb supplement where the person says that with daily excercise, 1500 calories a day and the "fat burning" supplement, that they lost 30lbs. Gee, what role did adding daily exercise and cutting down on calories play?
Power from ditching the flies? That has been proven, acknowledged. Read up on the zx10r and you'll see that the U.S. bound bikes got overally aggressive fly action to meet noise regs, probably the same reason why our bikes are so constricted.
Does it affect tc? I haven't seen anyone post that it didn't at all.
More facts- changes in the exhaust can only potentially allow for more power if they remove restrictions. The restrictions in the C14 are in the header pipes and (maybe) hidden cat converter. Just as the fat chick rather paint her toe nails than lose 100lbs, it is much easier and cheaper to change the exhaust can than to replace the entire exhaust. And, this is a case where two mods (exhaust and tune) should be done as the same time- the aftermarket exhaust will flow so well that the bike is now out of tune with stock tuning.

[marku8a]

When evaluating performance, you ALWAYS go with one mod at a time...

Agreed. This is taught in high school chemistry class. When experimenting, change one variable at a time.

Mark

[martin_14]

Opinions are one thing, facts are another- don't confuse them. It is a fact that a slip on will not improve your hp/tq. This fact is supported by the following details:
1) There are no dyno tests showing that a slipon does improve power
2) There is no evidence suggesting that the stock can is restrictive

I agree with both points and in particular with the opening sentence. However, in a recent German magazine (they are NOT subjective) they took some bike (R1, Bandit 1250, or whatever, I can't remember) and fitted it with 16 different slip-on's to make a comparison regarding noise, power and torque gain, looks, and weight. 14 of them offered between 0,3% and 2,6% power/torque increase (peak), 2 of them actually reduced it. Weight was between 15% and 60% less. Looks is subjective.
In my opinion, the weight and looks difference were more than enough reason to go for the Remus Hexacone Ti. I love it, and the noise it makes is intoxicating. That article quoted a gain of around 1,4% or something like that. I don't notice nor care. What I love the most about that can is the same that I don't have to see that eye sore that the OEM exhaust was, and have a piece of beauty instead (to my eyes anyway).

[katata1100]

I agree with both points and in particular with the opening sentence. However, in a recent German magazine (they are NOT subjective) they took some bike (R1, Bandit 1250, or whatever, I can't remember) and fitted it with 16 different slip-on's to make a comparison regarding noise, power and torque gain, looks, and weight. 14 of them offered between 0,3% and 2,6% power/torque increase (peak), 2 of them actually reduced it. Weight was between 15% and 60% less. Looks is subjective.
.

If it's not a C14 they tested, it is irrelevant.

[Son of Pappy]

If it's not a C14 they tested, it is irrelevant.

How so?  If they had used a train I would be in complete agreement.  The numbers quoted are very broad ranged and since we dont bench race around here I would say his statement is quite relevant.  I will however stand by my "Neutron Silver is faster" statement

[katata1100]

How so?  If they had used a train I would be in complete agreement.  The numbers quoted are very broad ranged and since we dont bench race around here I would say his statement is quite relevant.  I will however stand by my "Neutron Silver is faster" statement

It's pretty obvious why it is irrelevant- it is a different bike! It is made by a different company, with a different engine, with a different exhaust. Is the flow rate of the Bandit exhaust the same as that of C14? How about the header pipes?  Comparing the dyno results of a C14 to another different bike is like comparing apples to twinkies.
"If they used a train..." is very simplistic. I gained 12hp by replacing the exhaust on my '96 Impala SS. With your logic, I should gain at least that much by replacing the stock exhaust on my '06 GTO, right? I mean hey, they are both fric'in cars, right? Guess what, there is no gain. Why? Because the stock exhaust on the GTO flows pretty good, the stock exhaust on the '96 Impala SS is shared with the caddy fleetwood and it is extra quiet at the expense of hp (it is restrictive).

[Son of Pappy]

SORRY, IT'S NOT OBVIOUS.  UNLESS YOU ARE A GP RIDER WHAT MATTERS THE MOST IS WHAT THE RIDER FEELS.

Did you miss the smiley?   And Neutron Silver is still quicker

[ZG]

And Neutron Silver is still quicker

    

[martin_14]

    

Don't freak out, ZG. Clearly, he doesn't know what he's talking about...

[Son of Pappy]

Don't freak out, ZG. Clearly, he doesn't know what he's talking about...

Well, I would say he is approaching Harley crazy   If we used Harleys as an example of pipes as a power adder we could safely assume they slow them down, but then again, they want to look loud and cool, if they went as fast as the Silver ones they wouldn't be seen for near as long

And, FWIW, a slip on IS lest restrictive, but there are those pesky cats doing a bunch of strangle moves in the collectors.  So, much of the gain is in the mind of the rider, where it really counts on the street.