dan
Team suckass
- Location
- socal palmdale
ok here is my set up so far works rp, r@d intake grate factory dry pipe, pro-tec pump gas head, solas 13/17 impeller i think thats about it, i need more braaaap help me:arms:
low end punch
- Thread starter dan
- Start date
- Location
- Lake Havasu City, AZ USA
You can get some freestyle porting, bore your nozzle or get a freestyle pump cone...
the WaTeRhAwK
fryin' up a/m electrics..
- Location
- okc
a flow control valve in between the headpipe and the stinger will help to keep the waterbox dry at idle, and you can also advance the ignition timing a bit.
what carb setup are you using?
what carb setup are you using?
waderhawk just learned about flow control valves the other day. ask him about extractor exhaust systems too.
:haha:
:haha:
wildman326
Who else?
- Location
- Kansas
How about trading that dry pipe for a factory b?
Porting will do wonders!
Sorry if this was already mentioned, but what motor are you running?
Porting will do wonders!
Sorry if this was already mentioned, but what motor are you running?
the WaTeRhAwK
fryin' up a/m electrics..
- Location
- okc
Big Kahuna
Administrator
- Location
- Tuscaloosa, AL
Big Kahuna
Administrator
- Location
- Tuscaloosa, AL
The Dry pipe is geared more towards racing, it does not give as good as bottom end as a wet pipe would..........., but it does have a good midrange hit. you could try a flow control valve, but it not going to help too terribly much........ I would look into lowering your prop pitch to about a 12/16 or so, IMPROS can modify this for you.
the WaTeRhAwK
fryin' up a/m electrics..
- Location
- okc
yeah Dan, just let the waterbox fill on up with water at idle,along with your rear exhaust tube(if you have one) your engine won't have to work extra hard on clearing it while it's trying to wind up or anything..... as crammit442 doesn't say: "it's nearly always advantageous to dry out the waterbox for low-end response", thats why pro freestylers don't actually replace their rear exhaust tubes with side front outlets to avoid needing to push all that extra water out the exhaust tube when trying to get our engines to wind up good on the bottom or anything...LOL
:smile:
Last edited:
the WaTeRhAwK
fryin' up a/m electrics..
- Location
- okc
sorry charlie, here ya go just incase you missed it.....
http://www.x-h2o.com/gallery/displayimage.php?pos=-4699
the WaTeRhAwK
fryin' up a/m electrics..
- Location
- okc
everybody knows that it provides better low-end response from the engine if the exhaust doesn't have to push extra water out of the exhaust. ask ANY pro freestyler, they will tell you the same thing.
, seriously.
waxhead
wannabe backflipper
- Location
- gold coast
Dude your making an idiot out of yourself let it rest
The book was written by some guy back in 1995 that was trying to talk about drying out a pipe to get more power
And you have based a whole argument about it
IF you really understood what the guy was talking about then you would know it not called an extractor its called a water bypass out the side of the hull
If you read the performance section you can tell his understanding at that time was very limited at best
Last edited:
the WaTeRhAwK
fryin' up a/m electrics..
- Location
- okc
.... there you go again wax, you totally misunderstand whats being said and why, for which I'm SOOO not surpised at all. I already told you a million times that it's NOT called an extractor just because of the siphoning effect of the stinger fitting, the only thing that makes that stinger fitting relevant to the thing being called an extractor is the simple fact that by it pulling the extra water off of the headpipe and not letting it all flow into the chamber with the bypass, it lets the chamber help the engine produce more power, if all the cooling water was dropped into the chamber (like the old mod pipes) the expansion area of the pipe would be less, it would be cooled more so the reflex waves that make backpressure would be slower, thereby hampering the amount of HP the engine is allowed to make with the pipe.
now, do I need to disect it further with numbered sections? or is the above written/typed format understandable the way it is?
if you recall, wax, the entire discussion was based around if the thing was EVER called an extractor in the first place.
now, do I need to disect it further with numbered sections? or is the above written/typed format understandable the way it is?
if you recall, wax, the entire discussion was based around if the thing was EVER called an extractor in the first place.
the WaTeRhAwK
fryin' up a/m electrics..
- Location
- okc
and, I'll tell ya, what REALLY cracks me up about you guys is that for the longest time I tried to tell you that the thing is called an extractor, you swore up and down I was full of it, NOW that I've showed you proof of the thing being called an extractor...LOL.... unbelievably.... NOw you're gonna swear up and down that not only am I full of crap, but the guy that writes the clymer manual is full of crap as well, that friggin' clymer manual has only been published since 1995, we were calling the damned thing an extractor in the mid '80's ....LOL
waxhead
wannabe backflipper
- Location
- gold coast
No i think you need to explain it more
seems i am totally confused on how a jetski engine works
Much like your total loss ignition system you desgined in your head
your thoughts are to much for me
does my 550 pull 9k
waterhawks brainless R.A.D. total loss system......
lets not forget the "calling all jet ski wizards...... "
where no one even wanted to go there to try and support your other world theroies
oh and of course there is the 650 to 800 pjs conversion one as well
Gee didnt you even say to Harry Klemm that there was an extractor system and he answerd back like he thought you were kind of strange
You may also need to read what i wrote and when you do you will understand i am talking about a water dump over the side of the boat
I am in no way talking about your "extractor system" that defies physics ( on this planet anyway)
seems i am totally confused on how a jetski engine works
Much like your total loss ignition system you desgined in your head
your thoughts are to much for me
does my 550 pull 9k
waterhawks brainless R.A.D. total loss system......
lets not forget the "calling all jet ski wizards...... "
where no one even wanted to go there to try and support your other world theroies
oh and of course there is the 650 to 800 pjs conversion one as well
Gee didnt you even say to Harry Klemm that there was an extractor system and he answerd back like he thought you were kind of strange
You may also need to read what i wrote and when you do you will understand i am talking about a water dump over the side of the boat
I am in no way talking about your "extractor system" that defies physics ( on this planet anyway)
waxhead
wannabe backflipper
- Location
- gold coast
Oh wasnt it clymer that tells you to put the rear seal in a yamaha engine with the tangs on the inside and not the outside
Gee i wonder how many engines they have destroyed like this
I also wonder how many people they have sent of on a wild theroy (read extracor exhaust plumbing)
Are they also the guys that told you how to wire up your ignition
Or did you dream that beauty up on your own
Gee i wonder how many engines they have destroyed like this
I also wonder how many people they have sent of on a wild theroy (read extracor exhaust plumbing)
Are they also the guys that told you how to wire up your ignition
Or did you dream that beauty up on your own
the WaTeRhAwK
fryin' up a/m electrics..
- Location
- okc
yeah, you're right man, again, I am wrong, it was never called an extractor, sorry for being so nice, wax...LOL
waxhead
wannabe backflipper
- Location
- gold coast
Its fine
I am glad you finially understood what ever one was talking about
its not a bad thing to be wrong
but its a sad thing to not to learn from it
I guess now we can all get on with things huh
I am glad you finially understood what ever one was talking about
its not a bad thing to be wrong
but its a sad thing to not to learn from it
I guess now we can all get on with things huh