Save your stock airboxes!!!

[BentRod]

I will back the stock air boxes. I don't have pods, hell, I'm not even fully licensed, but I will tell you that there is more to an engine and performance than air/fuel intake. If you want to put on pods and up the performance, you, depending on what you want from you bike, and how much you care, also have to harmonize, not just your carbs, but:

1: plugs/electricle (heat, timing, gap size, and even spark plug type)
2: compression (yup. you screw with the air fuel mix, screw with how it compresses in the engine)
3: stroke length (unless of course you want to damage the crank shaft)
4: opperating temperature (you may need it warmer in some places, cooler in others. if you are air cooled, you can adjust this with a drill and coverings. if you are liquid cooled, well.. let me know what you come up with)
5: exhaust (take into account the volume and nature of the gasses coming out)

6: (I leave this one slightly seperate) depending on how the engine responds, you may need to change the shape of both the cams and the followers.

there is a lot more I can put on this list, and I can easily justify any of the ones here. the reason the whole thing doesn't blow up or tear it self to shreds is the high level of redundancy built into these great engines and the rest of the drive train, but you are knocking off engine life. we are lucky to have such tough engines, and dispite my list, there is DEFINATELY a lot you can do to the engine before any significan't damange starts to take place. the key is just knowing where that is. don't believe me? go for a lot more horse power. fill your tank with Quick Start and see what happens.

Personally, I would take an air box bike over one with pods, no matter how well jetted.

 

[49er]

Bentrod & bill72
We shouldn't be encouraging everyone to keep their stock airboxes. There are going to be less available as replacements for our rusting units. The ones that do become available on Ebay will be highly sought after and cost us an arm and a leg, because of there rarity.
Seriously though, you are absolutely right about the need to balance all the modifications to your modified engine. Without this balance, the ultimate performance and reliability is compromised. When we venture past the parameters set by the manufacturer, longevity is always compromised. For many tuners, that is a small compromise. I am one who accepts this reality.

 

[RJ]

OK, let's see. An engine is a glorified air pump. Putting pods on your carbs causes you to have to increase the amount of fuel that the carbs spray into the airstream created by said air pump in order to maintain optimal air to fuel ratio=the air pump is pumping more air with the pods=more power. Dynojet kits make for easy rejetting of CV carbs with pods to take care of part throttle issues=what is the problem?

 

[Guest]

WHAT ARE YOU TALKING ABOUT!!!

who here likes to run the 100 meter with a tie on and a donut in their mouth?

LET MY MOTOR BREATH!!!!!!

Ok, I feel better now.

 

[Joe Nardy]

OK, let's see. An engine is a glorified air pump. Putting pods on your carbs causes you to have to increase the amount of fuel that the carbs spray into the airstream created by said air pump in order to maintain optimal air to fuel ratio=the air pump is pumping more air with the pods=more power. Dynojet kits make for easy rejetting of CV carbs with pods to take care of part throttle issues=what is the problem?

Nicely put RJ!

I know the POD crowd is a minority around here but on these older bikes there isn't a better bang-for-the-buck performance increase than (QUALITY) PODs/pipe/jet kit. Granted, it takes some time and effort to get the jetting dialed in but it isn't that tough. Newer bikes have much larger airboxes and don't benefit much, if at all, from PODs but just about any '80's or older bike will realize a healthy horsepower increase with the increased airflow of PODs. My '83 GS1100E (CV carbs) starts, idles, and runs better than ever with K&N PODs, Supertrapp Stainless 4-1 system and Dynojet Stage III jet kit.

Thanks,
Joe

 

[Commodus]

I will back the stock air boxes. I don't have pods, hell, I'm not even fully licensed, but I will tell you that there is more to an engine and performance than air/fuel intake. If you want to put on pods and up the performance, you, depending on what you want from you bike, and how much you care, also have to harmonize, not just your carbs, but:

1: plugs/electricle (heat, timing, gap size, and even spark plug type)
2: compression (yup. you screw with the air fuel mix, screw with how it compresses in the engine)
3: stroke length (unless of course you want to damage the crank shaft)
4: opperating temperature (you may need it warmer in some places, cooler in others. if you are air cooled, you can adjust this with a drill and coverings. if you are liquid cooled, well.. let me know what you come up with)
5: exhaust (take into account the volume and nature of the gasses coming out)

6: (I leave this one slightly seperate) depending on how the engine responds, you may need to change the shape of both the cams and the followers.

there is a lot more I can put on this list, and I can easily justify any of the ones here. the reason the whole thing doesn't blow up or tear it self to shreds is the high level of redundancy built into these great engines and the rest of the drive train, but you are knocking off engine life. we are lucky to have such tough engines, and dispite my list, there is DEFINATELY a lot you can do to the engine before any significan't damange starts to take place. the key is just knowing where that is. don't believe me? go for a lot more horse power. fill your tank with Quick Start and see what happens.

Personally, I would take an air box bike over one with pods, no matter how well jetted.

heh, you're complicating things, dood. Pod it, jet it, ride it. Do the second step properly and the third is not a problem.

 

[Mike McNaney]

Joe, Your 83' E has CV carbs? I thought all these have the Mikuni BS 34's or is that the same? Sorry, I never had any probs with mine. And I dont delve into the technical jargon stuff unless I hit a roadblock. I upped to BS 36's and when I rebuilt them it was pretty basic. For jetting, I did little more than walk the mains jets up till the sag went away on accel. The End.
I thought I read somewhere on here that CV carbs have the push/pull style cables. My KZ550 has that kind of setup and those are TK carbs.
Does CV stand for constant velocity?

Im glad I dont have any carb issues.
I'd recommend a big bag of Mikuni BS, Pod filters and a zero restriction exhaust. Worked for me. No hiccups.

dont mean to twist the thread but another thing i noticed was that my 34's had a step ridge on the inlet bore side and the 36's dont. Is this the "smoothbore" you hear about?

 

[Deesel]

For sale : Stock GS air box $400. Wine corks are included for each exhaust pipe for those "tuners" who desire even smaller than stock main jets.
Use 40:1 premix of gas/snakeoil for best performance.

 

[Joe Nardy]

Joe, Your 83' E has CV carbs? I thought all these have the Mikuni BS 34's or is that the same? Sorry, I never had any probs with mine.

Mike,

You're mixing terminology. There are two basic types of carbs on the GS series, VM and CV. VM carbs work by pulling the slide open with the throttle cable. CV carbs work by opening a butterfly valve downstream from the slide with the throttle cable. The slide raises and lowers according to the level of intake vacuum. This keeps the intake velocity relatively constant, hence the name CV (constant velocity).

Yes, my '83 E has Mikuni BS carbs. This is the brand and model of carb. They are CV type carbs.

I hope this helps,
Joe

 

[KEITH KRAUSE]

Stock airboxes are useless. They're too big for paper weights and plants look funny in 'em.
Pod people...unite and educate these disbelievers. Pods forever.

 

[Joe Nardy]

Stock airboxes are useless. They're too big for paper weights and plants look funny in 'em.
Pod people...unite and educate these disbelievers. Pods forever.

Keith Krause! The Great Communicator.........Beloved leader..............I'd follow you into HE*LL, sir!:-D

Joe Nardy PFC
1st POD Division

 

[Road_Clam]

Stock airboxes are useless.

Yea for drag racing, and holding your throttle WIDE OPEN 100% of the time.

For the other 99.999% of the time, most of us just want good RELIABLE, CONSISTANT performance, and the stock airbox is the perfect compramise of performance and rideability in all conditions. Ever get caught in torrential rains with a K&N podded bike? I did!! You won't make it 30 mi before the oiled paper elements become saturated from water and completely gag your engine of air, to the point the engine won't even run. To each his own.... and yes there is top end performance to be had from pods (at the expense of low end throttle response). I have drive both podded and non, and a podded bike is a sackless terd, until 7000K+, then and only then do pods really show their gains... Strictly my just my opinions.

 

[Joe Nardy]

Yea for drag racing, and holding your throttle WIDE OPEN 100% of the time.

For the other 99.999% of us that just want decent RELIABLE, CONSISTANT performance the stock airbox is the perfect compramise of performance and rideability in all conditions. Ever get caught in torrential rains with a K&N podded bike? I did!! You won't make it 30 mi before the oiled paper elements become saturated from water and completely gag your engine of air, to the point the engine won't even run. To each his own.... and yes there is top end performance to be had from pods (at the expense of low end throttle response). I have drive both podded and non, and a podded bike is a sackless terd, until 7000K+, then and only then do pods really show their gains... Strictly my just my opinions.

Road Clam,

I certainly respect your opinions but my experiences are different. My '83 1100E has run PODs for at least 15 years. I have almost 40,000 miles and the bike runs better than it ever has. I have ridden in all kinds of weather including a frog-strangling torrential downpour a couple years ago at the Brown County Rally. Anyone who has ridden my bike will tell you it is anything but a 'sackless terd' anywhere in the powerband. I can loft the front wheel from under 3K RPM and my throttle response is as crisp as any GS I have ever ridden. I think a lot of people who install PODs don't take the time to get the carbs dialed in and don't keep them clean and oiled properly. Keep in mind that a 4-1 pipe will usually also tend to add top-end power at the expense of midrange power but hardly anyone says 4-1 pipes are a waste of time and turn your bike into a sackless terd.

While I agree that there are other factors to consider, like RJ said, an engine is basically an air pump. When you put PODs on you move more air. When you move more air (and jet correctly) you also move more fuel. More air + more fuel=more horsepower, regardless of RPM.

Like you said, this is just my opinion based on my experiences. Your results may vary.............

Thanks,
Joe

 

[Deesel]

Yea for drag racing, and holding your throttle WIDE OPEN 100% of the time.

For the other 99.999% of the time, most of us just want good RELIABLE, CONSISTANT performance, and the stock airbox is the perfect compramise of performance and rideability in all conditions. Ever get caught in torrential rains with a K&N podded bike? I did!!

So, airboxs work good for bracket racing in the rain?

 

[Road_Clam]

Road Clam,

I certainly respect your opinions but my experiences are different. My '83 1100E has run PODs for at least 15 years. I have almost 40,000 miles and the bike runs better than it ever has. I have ridden in all kinds of weather including a frog-strangling torrential downpour a couple years ago at the Brown County Rally. Anyone who has ridden my bike will tell you it is anything but a 'sackless terd' anywhere in the powerband. I can loft the front wheel from under 3K RPM and my throttle response is as crisp as any GS I have ever ridden. I think a lot of people who install PODs don't take the time to get the carbs dialed in and don't keep them clean and oiled properly. Keep in mind that a 4-1 pipe will usually also tend to add top-end power at the expense of midrange power but hardly anyone says 4-1 pipes are a waste of time and turn your bike into a sackless terd.

While I agree that there are other factors to consider, like RJ said, an engine is basically an air pump. When you put PODs on you move more air. When you move more air (and jet correctly) you also move more fuel. More air + more fuel=more horsepower, regardless of RPM.

Like you said, this is just my opinion based on my experiences. Your results may vary.............

Thanks,
Joe

Joe, here is my point: you and Keith represent a TINY percentage of the generall motorcycle "performance junkie". You two individuals are obviously highly skilled tuners. You can systematically tune an engine to reap gains that are on the table when swapping to pods. Pods are NOT a simple "bolt on and fly" performance gain. If they were, every biker out there with a GS would have them. You can NOT gain any hp by simply bolting on pods. (here is the "air pump" theory which BTW I do agree with). When I negitively comment against pods, I am speaking for the far more common novice engine tinkerer. Like I said, to each his own. But again, as a generall rule pods kill performance, sorry I will maintain this opinion. I always tell people if you need more performance buy a bigger bike. It's far more simple.

 

[49er]

Road Clam,

While I agree that there are other factors to consider, like RJ said, an engine is basically an air pump. When you put PODs on you move more air. When you move more air (and jet correctly) you also move more fuel. More air + more fuel=more horsepower, regardless of RPM.

Joe

This arguement persists. It's never as simple as more air/fuel in equals more HP. Maintaining high air/fuel velocity with the correct fuel atomisation is the key.
Sure your engine is an air pump. Efficiency levels vary at certain rpms because of the multitude of component variables present at any point in the rev range. As Bad Billy B has pointed out, the airboxes are fitted with a very efficient extension to the carb inlet, called a velocity stack/ram tube. These extensions increase the tuned length of the intake track and the shape promotes a ram effect through use of resonance. When these are removed and pods fitted, the resonant assistance is lost and the tuned length is changed, by shortening of the inlet track. This has the effect of reducing the rate of the airflow especially at lower rpms. The effect is loss of torque in the lower/lower mid ranges but a slight increase in top HP through less restriction to airflow.
Check out the efficiency of the renowned air pump, the "Roots Supercharger". Their efficiency factor is less than 50%.
In the end it boils down to this. Are you drag racing every second weekend or riding regularly on the road.
I contend that the difference between pods and airbox in most moderately modified engines is small. The big difference is in the tractibility of your engine across the complete rev range.
Anyone who doesn't believe this should set up their bike with both options and do serious comparitive dyno testing. All parameters must remain identical except for the pods and airbox.

 

[Guest]

This thread is getting wayyyy out of control.

Header, pods, jet it. All three not just one or the other. It is the way of the wild and has been for ever. We know it works cuz it has been working for over 20 yrs now. Forget all the particle and quantum physics and make some power or don't but lets kill this thread before everyone is riding for only the 2 optimum hrs a day becasue the temp and humidity is perfect and don't forget to use the correct fuel hose to get the proper coefficient of drag through the tube and PLEASE PLEASE... stay away from big hills and valleys cuz of the barametric prease fluctuations.....

COME ON!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! ITS AN air filter not a shuttle launch.

 

[Guyver]

My Two Cents

My Two Cents

I've ridden the same model bike with a four into one, pods and a jet kit installed and I've ridden that same bike stock. In comparison the stock form seemed to be highly restricted and definitely lacked the power and response of the modified bike no matter the amount of throttle being applied. I felt the bike breathe better and the performance was much better with the modifications.

You can get crazy and cite other things that you have to change as well but these are the basic three to get the best bang for the buck. It's inane to argue making changes to the valves, the head and so on an so forth. Where do you stop? I stopped where I got the best performance and didn't mess with the stock reliability. Upgrades come in a lot of different forms, you can do the basics such as I recommend or go whole hog and re-engineer the entire bike.

Certain mechanical upgrades such as cams, valves, big bore kits, welded clutch baskets and welded cranks, increase performance dramatically. The problem with these things is reliability. The Japanese engineers that built the bike to begin with are still smarter than most, even though most of them are dead or really old, and they over engineered the bike and designed it to perform within certain parameters. Any mechanical changes beyond basic upgrades can and will increase performance; however, it will come at the sake of a loss of reliability.

The stock airbox was purposefully designed to be restrictive and to work with the bike's intake and exhaust to achieve a certain level of performance. They are much more efficient on today's bikes and still get messed with. If it was the optimum choice when these bikes were built then why didn't any of yesteryear's performance kings ride a stock bike? In two words: better performance. It's just common sense.

A few things about pods in the rain. First off, if it's raining you shouldn't be on a bike; it's dangerous. If you get caught on a bike in the rain then odds are you knew or should have known it was going to rain. I'm not talking misting, sprinkling or anything of the sort. Rain folks, the sky borne droplets of moisture that cause mass confusion here in Southern California like it's a first ever phenom and the next thing that's sure to happen is the heavens opening, angels singing and the second coming.

If you are in a torrential downpour of the biblical proportions that a previous poster must have encountered then yes, pods can get wet and suck moisture into the carbs. In that case please refer to my original two points about bikes and rain. I would think that wet pods would be the least of your worries if you're in that much rain. Typically in a seated position your legs cover the general area where the pods are nestled and not subject to much exposure to the elements other than air. A good puddle splash and they can still get wet though. In that event refer to point number one...you shouldn't be on a bike in the rain.

 

[RacingJake]

Slap some Lectrons on and the only thing you have to worry about is if there's a gas station 40 miles down the road.

 

[Guyver]

Besides...

Besides...

Pods are c@@l!