Suzuki Shop says NO to rejet

[hmmmnz]

k&N jets and a exaust you can get up to 12 hp or so abot a 25% increase in power over stock.   

I've got dyno sheets that say otherwise, 50 horses at the wheel is a huge improvement.  My '01 with individual pods, Jardine full exhaust, V&H advancer, and two hours on the dyno netted 45 at the wheel (albeit at 4500ft elevation).  The next 5 horsepower are going to be tougher and moer expensive to get.

just curious what jets your running with the individual pods? 
sorry im busting in on this thread

[aplitz]

just curious what jets your running with the individual pods? 
sorry im busting in on this thread

Sorry bro, I never got those numbers.  They did numerous jet changes during the two hours on the dyno, and we were just stoked to see a good curve and good hp numbers.

[The Buddha]

No Power gains ... rich from factory ...
WTF ... rejet it and do it right ... you will swear its a different bike ... Add a pipe and the filter you like and set it to that and trust me it will be a different bike.
Cool.
Srinath.

[lachie]

gonna bust in here with another q'n...

with my bike getting the unifilter pods and the remus exhaust, i was wondering if the dynojet kit will have enough for the 05...

[The Buddha]

Do a mikuni DIY jetting. That way you have plenty of room to go up or down if needed.
Cool.
Srinath.

[ballyhoo]

The likelihood of the hotdoggers on this forum out-engineering Suzuki and Honda engineers is just laughable. No, it's hysterical. No, it's gut-wrenchingly silly. After 26 years on a Suzuki GS400, the 2 years on a 2001 GS500 that runs perfectly and gets 70+mpg, all I can say is, don't fuc* with the carbs. Unless you just like to needlessly screw around with stuff.

Cheers,

[ballyhoo]

Let me add a little bit to my last rant. The GS500 engine is nearly identical to the old GS400-425-450, which also used the twin Mikuni carbs, starting up in 1977. What I like best about the new GS500 (I have a 2001) is the electronic ignition, and the fact that it gets up to 75mpg, which beats the old 400 which got maybe 50 mpg.

So here we have a twin Suzuki motor virtually unchanged for about 30 years, giving Suzuki's engineers plenty of time to tweak the carbs, ignition and other components. Everything is in balance. The Japanese are not fools. Their automotive and other engine technology is second to no other. Why in the world would they market a motorcycle that delivers less than the best possible worlds of economy, reliability and performance? A clean-burning, low emmissions vehicle is not running lean, it's running just right. Just ask the folks at Honda who make the cleanest, most fuel-efficient and most reliable vehicles on the planet. The Suzuki dealer who told you to leave the carbs alone is giving you sound advice. Ignore these hot dog wrench-benders who haven't a clue.

Cheers,

[Chuck]

The likelihood of the hotdoggers on this forum out-engineering Suzuki and Honda engineers is just laughable. No, it's hysterical. No, it's gut-wrenchingly silly.

I don't think anyone's saying that Suzuki engineers suck.  Just that they've been put in a difficult position and were forced to make compromises that riders don't agree with.  People on this forum are pretty quick to cut through the BS, and I haven't seen anyone yet say that the emperor has no clothes (in this case "I did a rejet and it sucks.")  I'm sorry, but if I hold up your firmly held (seemingly untested) belief against the experience of a dozen or so people who have done it and seen the benefits, I have to believe the dozen or so.  And they can rejet without insulting the honor of the engineers who designed the bikes that we love so.

[Chris2P]

........"So regardless of what the dyno guy says, I think I'm going to go ahead and rejet."...................


I say go for it!!   In the worst case scenerio you can always put the stock jets back in.  Either way, it'll be a great learning experience working on your bike.


Chris

[ballyhoo]

I like my bike a lot, and I also appreciate the work of the good engineers who designed the GS500 and its predecessors. I also think of the GS500 as (in it's way) a lot like the 1967 VW Beetle I owned. It was a great car, one that ran fine, was economical, reliable (do the maintenance!) and fun to drive. I suppose there were a handful of afficianados who attempted to hot-rod the 1967 Beetle. Do you suppose they believed the VW engineers were "making compromises that drivers don't agree with?" Granted, the post-1967 Beetled suffered a bit from the imposition of anti pollution fixes, but the 2001 Suzuki GS500 doesn't have that stuff. Unless you count the crankcase vent back to the airbox.

My beliefs are nothing compared to those of the folks on this discussion group. I just go with what makes sense for my bike. The last one I had lasted 27 years and the jets were never altered. I did have to unclog a stuck float needle a couple of times.

Cheers,

[badkarma506]

engineers didn't design these bikes, accountants did.  engineers just fixed the most blatent fuckups. why do you think it took them 5 years to figure out that the heads were crap and that they needed to fix them, or 11 years to go to a three jet carb?

it's all about costs at the factory.

[Chuck]

I suppose there were a handful of afficianados who attempted to hot-rod the 1967 Beetle. Do you suppose they believed the VW engineers were "making compromises that drivers don't agree with?"

Absolutely yes.  I suppose the engineers compromised a bit of performance for better reliability and durablility.  As an engineer (software, not cars) I do this all the time, and I would expect the car guys to do the same.  Engineering is balancing a number of conflicting factors to create a product.  If you have a different opinion about the importance of those factors that changes the resulting engineering.

If you bore out a cylinder, for example, you know you're changing the way it will handle heat and stress, but you do it to increase performance.  This is something I know first hand that a lot of reasonable people did on that era Beetle.  If these are your priorities and this is what you decide to do, then way to go.  This is not defiling the engineers' perfection, this is saying "I want something slightly different" and doing it.

[Chuck]

engineers didn't design these bikes, accountants did.

Okay, I could have saved a lot of typing.  That's what I was getting at.

[The Buddha]

67 beetle - very very good ... BTW they made the beetle since 53 ... why the 67 in your argument.
BTW the heads are total crap in the 67 and 68 and the 69 and the 70 even ... when did they go to the 2 letter prefix ... That was the first decent ones.
BTW in the case of the GS ... it does have EPA crap ... its the way the carbs are jetted. They put diffeferent jets in Canada vs US bikes. US being leaner - one of those is a mistake, they put different advancers in the 49 state bike vs the CA bike ... one of those is a mistake ...
Your bike may be running great and giving you great gas mileage, but these were made with such loose tolerances ... Someone else's ... most other people's bikes behave completely differently. BTW how many miles on yours ... you are that lean, it may be running much hotter than the average and hence have effects related to that in terms of life.
You'd rejet mainly to lower operating temp ... aka rich enough to run fine on the hottest day but other than that use up as much gas as possible ... OK OK sounds horrible, but you're still talking under 3-4 mpg max. A real lean bike once hot will actually make more power ... you'd pay for it in longevity ... but power will be there ...
I jet mine always on the coldest day ... and if it runs fine on the hottest day i am happy.
Cool.
Srinath.

[ets_gs500f2004]

Let me add a little bit to my last rant. The GS500 engine is nearly identical to the old GS400-425-450, which also used the twin Mikuni carbs, starting up in 1977. What I like best about the new GS500 (I have a 2001) is the electronic ignition, and the fact that it gets up to 75mpg, which beats the old 400 which got maybe 50 mpg.

So here we have a twin Suzuki motor virtually unchanged for about 30 years, giving Suzuki's engineers plenty of time to tweak the carbs, ignition and other components. Everything is in balance. The Japanese are not fools. Their automotive and other engine technology is second to no other. Why in the world would they market a motorcycle that delivers less than the best possible worlds of economy, reliability and performance? A clean-burning, low emmissions vehicle is not running lean, it's running just right. Just ask the folks at Honda who make the cleanest, most fuel-efficient and most reliable vehicles on the planet. The Suzuki dealer who told you to leave the carbs alone is giving you sound advice. Ignore these hot dog wrench-benders who haven't a clue.

Cheers,

alright maybe you like the gas millage but we dont care as much as you do...... we want to add a lil bit of power in case you didnt realize what were trying to do!!!! and yes they know what their doin but they have restrictions and now we dont so were puting are bikes to how we want it to be

[domas]

2001 GS500 comes stock in US with 127.5 main jets, and in United Kingdom with 115 jets. And they put in such small jets not because they tried to design GS perfectly . Poor engineers are strangled by men in suits. I bet none of suzuki engineers who ride motorcycle dont ride it stock.

They also designed front forks perfectly

[The Buddha]

And the back shock ... and tires ... and the tank that rusted and turned into a seive after 3-4 years ... yea ...  ...
Cool.
Srinath.

[galahs]

Everything is a compromise.

The GS500, is a compromise.


The great designers quote is....


you can have it either cheap, perfect or quickly. Pick Two!


Cars have quiet exhausts, because the have noise limits to pass, and most people don't like loud exhausts. This is done at the compromise of flow. It really depends what you are looking for.

Designers and Engineers try to please the highest common denominator. Buyes may be turned off by a polluting gas guzzling bike, but they know performance tinkerers will be happy buying the fuel efficient, clean running bike and modify it to get better performance.

[ets_gs500f2004]

i agree cause its eazyer to put performance parts and..... most people care about gas consomption...noise....reliability.....and then a lil bit of performance...... in the end they cant satisfy everyone.... if they could then it wouldnt be cheap to by a gs500 any more

[Size_Twelve]

Just as an update, I went ahead and did the rejet. I have an '05 GS500F.

- K and N Lunchbox Filter
- 20 Pilots (Up from 17.5 stock)
- 60 mid mains (60 stock no change)
- 132.5 mains (Up from 130 stock)


This is like a totally new bike. It's unbelievable.    It sounds meaner, runs much better in the low rpm range, and takes off from stops without a stutter.

I just want to thank everyone on here who recommended this adjustment. If I had followed the advice from my dealer, I would not have done this, and would have missed out on a valuable performance upgrade. Anyone thinking about doing this to their bikes, I'd strongly reccommed it, regardless of what you might hear from other sources. Trust the people that have seen it and done it. It's worth it.