Rev or Fatty for most torque

[23jayhawk]

I know this should be a no-brainer. But unless I read the curves wrong on the JustKDX site (under the dyno test section), the K30 pipe creates over 10% more torque than the K35, and appears to have a wider powerband as well. Is that graph right?

 

[BRush]

Maybe acutemp will see this and respond. My take is that you have to look at the rpm at which the torque is developed, and it looks like the K35 pipe has a big advantage below 4000 rpm - but I'm not sure I'm interpreting the chart correctly either

 

[acutemp]

jayhawk,
Yes the k-30 does, at least on my kdx make more peak torque than the k-35. That said, the k-35 is strong and smooth down low and this doesn't really show up on the dyno. I run the k-30 90% of the time and most of my testing is done with this pipe but for really tight, sloppy technical terain the k-35 is a nice option to have as it is smoother and less tiring.--Dan

 

[mlhend1]

Is the k-30 the FMF fatty pipe?

 

[23jayhawk]

k30 is the rev, k35 the other (fatty/torque/etc)

Seems like most people go with the k35 for enduro/woods riding - I thought that was interesting, when I found the dyno curves showing such a difference in torque. But I guess the smoother transition works best in the gooey stuff.

acutemp - do you have your own dyno? too cool...

 

[mlhend1]

I would like to see how the stock kdx pipe with Canadian Dave's Modification does (graph)with the FMF Rev & Fatty Pipe.

 

[jeffw]

Jayhawk,
That dyno chart kind of hints at the grunt you'll find in the 35 pipe at real low off idle RPMs. This can save you in a technical spot. You won't believe the low end gain with the 35 until you ride one. I didn't either since I also was a little "mislead" by that dyno chart. Plus the 35 header section rides so high you might not need a pipe guard.

 

[EBOD]

Acutemp, what other mods were done to your bike when you did the dyno runs? It looks like you've got a really powerful bike.

 

[acutemp]

jayhawk,
Nope, I don't have my own dyno, I wish I did but I am lucky enough to have friend's with them. :confused:
EBOD,
When these run's were made my bike had FRP porting,36mm RB carb, RB head mods, and a rad valve.
Dan

 

[rvguy]

My buddy and I both have 2001 KDX 200's with most of the same mods. He has the Gnarly Dessert (Rev), I have the Gnarly Woods (Torque).
Here's the differences I have found by riding both of them........
The Gnarly Woods broadens and increases power over the stock system. The power comes on sooner but smoother, but hangs in there a little longer. It makes the bike more controllable in the tighter more technical terrain.
The Gnarly Dessert is similiar to the stock system just with more power and revs out a little higher. This set-up is a little unpredictable in the slower - more technical stuff.
We do most of our riding in tight woods and old railroad beds, (with most of the ties still in place), the Woods pipe lets me go through the nasty stuff at a lower rpm without the "snap" of the stock / rev system. Every time I hit somthing hard that caused me to slightly crack the throtle, the bike would stand straight up! The Woods pipe is so smooth that it makes slower riding alot easier.
The "rev" pipe I find better in wide open areas and sand pits......where I use my KX.