waxhead
wannabe backflipper
- Location
- gold coast
Yes just put it in. Simple
DIY Total loss or MSD TL upgrade box 270USD?
- Thread starter Christian_83
- Start date
Quinc
Buy a Superjet
- Location
- California
what is the 32t unit? Also anyone have any info on running these on a kawa or yama 1100?I haven’t had problems yet, but definitely it seems that the old style cable port is the instant failure point for these units with water in ebox.
I was talking to Borut and he explained that the new style port on the 62t and 32t units is more suitable to watercraft applications and will be featured on all watercraft units in future.
As for the wax curve I think yes, but that’s a question for wax
My first gen zeel came with a rubber plug that fits in the port.
- Location
- England
32t is the unit for kaw1100
I’ve supplied a couple now and great results. One guy picked up 5mph on the dash on a total stock stx1100 using my stage 1 curve! Awesome
Im just waiting for a couple more units to come in
I’ve supplied a couple now and great results. One guy picked up 5mph on the dash on a total stock stx1100 using my stage 1 curve! Awesome
Im just waiting for a couple more units to come in
Quinc
Buy a Superjet
- Location
- California
Do you have the curves and setup posted anywhere? Mine would be going into a zxi1100. Want to run two curves one for sea level and one for 5000ft.
- Location
- England
I don’t but send me a pm and we can talk
waxhead
wannabe backflipper
- Location
- gold coast
Can you post it up here so we can all see, Maybe a screen shot of the curve and static angle etc
waxhead
wannabe backflipper
- Location
- gold coast
I guess that's a no then.
- Location
- England
sorry for slow reply. I don’t have any details of the curves to hand which I could post up. So far 1100 seems good, yet to test on a kaw 1200
waxhead
wannabe backflipper
- Location
- gold coast
Can you post what you have so far for the 1100, this thread is all about development. We will all run with it
- Location
- England
Ok next time I am plugging some units in I’ll try get a decent picture
Curious how the PDCIS-32Ts are holding up in the 1100 triples... I have an Advent on my 1100, but if there are any problems with it I'd make the switch to Zeel.
The PDCIS-02T is still kicking in my 550 750.
Haven't heard much about them in the 1100, and I don't see a PDCIS-32T on the Zeel product page. Just PDCI-32.
The PDCIS-02T is still kicking in my 550 750.
Haven't heard much about them in the 1100, and I don't see a PDCIS-32T on the Zeel product page. Just PDCI-32.
Last edited:
So there really is no benefit to running a 3D map in a ski? I'm bulding a 650 X2 with a zeeltronic setup and was thinking of wiring up the TPS. Was wondering if it made sense to do something with the timing when you let off the throttle at high rpm to help with cooling/not over reving?
I am a bit of a tinkerer, so often the answer to the "why" question is "because I can" for me. That said, I have very little engine tuning/building experience, although I have a strong and broad engineering background (electrical and mechanical). Unless I started adding EGT and lambda sensors, I'm not sure I have any good way to directly quantify how well a 2D map is working, other than seat of the pants acceleration data. The most obvious advantage to me is being able to react to a high RPM throttle cut, for example coming off a wave and the pump unloading and revving. What I am really asking is, do any of you more experienced folks have any ideas you'd like to see proven out that involve a TPS sensor, because I have one and I have the zeel and if there is any educational value I'd be happy to try and fit it up.
Often on a ski with a good pipe there will be a spot in the rpm where the ski just doesn't want to run, it wants to either surge ahead or fall back but not run steady, and it's usually right at the speed of kind of a casual cruise just above planning speed, typically at a very low throttle position. A lot of people never ride that way and couldn't care less, but I have thought about using a TPS and trying to pull a bunch of timing out (or maybe add it in, not sure) at that rpm point to try and get rid of that annoying spot. It's something that most people probably don't care about at all, and evidently I don't care enough to actually do anything about it.
Also I think some motors with 3d maps actually use a bunch more advance at low throttle positions because cylinder pressure is low, exhaust gas contamination is high, so burn rate is low. I think it's done to slightly improve response and possibly even emissions and fuel mileage at part throttle. Speculation on my part it's pretty hard to find examples of 3d ignition maps.
If any of that matters to you, and you agree with my wild speculation (and I can assure this is all based on real sketchy speculation), then it might be worth tinkering with.
For most I think they would not put up with the added complication for probably very minimal benefit if any at all.
As far as actual real world performance from the ski, you'll probably get more out of playing with pipe temp and pump tuning.
Also I think some motors with 3d maps actually use a bunch more advance at low throttle positions because cylinder pressure is low, exhaust gas contamination is high, so burn rate is low. I think it's done to slightly improve response and possibly even emissions and fuel mileage at part throttle. Speculation on my part it's pretty hard to find examples of 3d ignition maps.
If any of that matters to you, and you agree with my wild speculation (and I can assure this is all based on real sketchy speculation), then it might be worth tinkering with.
For most I think they would not put up with the added complication for probably very minimal benefit if any at all.
As far as actual real world performance from the ski, you'll probably get more out of playing with pipe temp and pump tuning.
This is great insight, sketchy as it may be. Thank you! I'll see how easily I can adapt the TPS I have to a carb shaft.
The pipe temp tuning was the initial reason I wanted to switch to a zeal from a stock unit. I'll be playing with ECWI and pipe temps, and pretty sure I can get an -11T to handle my water injection needs.
waxhead
wannabe backflipper
- Location
- gold coast
I cant see the benefit
So I am working on setting up this PDCIS-11T. Unfortunately, what I have here at my bench is not a complete motor, but a set of cases and a crank taper cut off at the first bearing. I have no way to measure TDC until I am in front of an engine.
Right now, we are building a kawi 650, so everything I am asking here involves a stock kawi 650s crank. My flywheel options are a stock small pin flywheel, a big pin flywheel with the taper chamfered to allow it to seat on the 650 crank, or a (750?) jetnetics total loss flywheel, which also appears to seat nicely. Like this:
I've read that people running 750's have swapped on 650 electronics, so I am assuming that the woodruf/timing of a 650 and a 750 flywheel (and inversely, the crank) are the same? If this is true, then the magnet location on the jetnetics is wildly different the lobe location on the 750 flywheels. Reading the zeel manual, it says you don't want excessive static angle, so if I understand this right, I would need to move the pickup location somewhere more suitable timing wise if I want to use the jetnetics, to bring the static angle back to 35-45 degrees or so?
I think the real question I am asking here is: Are 750 and 650 cranks timed the same? Does the woodruff key location usually represent TDC?
Edit to add:
Also... what do you all think about running the 750 flywheels with charging vs the jetnetics flywheel as total loss?
Right now, we are building a kawi 650, so everything I am asking here involves a stock kawi 650s crank. My flywheel options are a stock small pin flywheel, a big pin flywheel with the taper chamfered to allow it to seat on the 650 crank, or a (750?) jetnetics total loss flywheel, which also appears to seat nicely. Like this:
I've read that people running 750's have swapped on 650 electronics, so I am assuming that the woodruf/timing of a 650 and a 750 flywheel (and inversely, the crank) are the same? If this is true, then the magnet location on the jetnetics is wildly different the lobe location on the 750 flywheels. Reading the zeel manual, it says you don't want excessive static angle, so if I understand this right, I would need to move the pickup location somewhere more suitable timing wise if I want to use the jetnetics, to bring the static angle back to 35-45 degrees or so?
I think the real question I am asking here is: Are 750 and 650 cranks timed the same? Does the woodruff key location usually represent TDC?
Edit to add:
Also... what do you all think about running the 750 flywheels with charging vs the jetnetics flywheel as total loss?
I had a 650 running 750 electronics with a zeel for a while (I thought I might be the only person to ever bother with a zeel on a 650). All I had to do was put a bit of taper on the back of the flywheel so it would fit on the 650 crank as you described, and the flywheel went right on and a 750 mag cover went right on and the static angle was the same as a 750. My measured number was off by a degree or two from what people say the 750 static angle is, but it was off the same amount when I later switched the same flywheel and cover to a 750. So, you can run the stock 750 stuff on the 650 no problem, but also always check the static angle yourself.
speedysprocket
Alex
- Location
- Chesapeake, VA
I believe I’m lightening a flywheel for you and I actually had a small pin that was already clearances.