351 with stock carb - a detailed review
#61
05-10-2017, 01:56 AM
Bryan, you can use JB Weld to plug the hole and then redrill it to whatever size you want..
You feelings about getting all the power possible for the money spent is exactly my thots too.. However, afaik, you are the only one to have experienced "standard setup" power vs "lidless w big jet" power on a 351..
You feelings about getting all the power possible for the money spent is exactly my thots too.. However, afaik, you are the only one to have experienced "standard setup" power vs "lidless w big jet" power on a 351..
Last edited by Klxster; 05-10-2017 at 02:19 AM.
#62
05-10-2017, 02:44 AM
CanKLX, lid on requires a "standard setup" and can be made to run "perfectly fine" with little main jets.. It is also quite restrictive compared to lidless with a large loss of "upper mid - top end" power.. This is a power "loss" that you'll never miss if you never "taste" the "dark side" of a well fueled lidless setup..
Last edited by Klxster; 05-10-2017 at 02:50 AM.
#63
05-10-2017, 02:51 AM
Join Date: Dec 2009
Location: Clearwater Bay, Ontario
Posts: 286
To answer the question about running at redline.... I'm not looking for redline power, I'm looking for as much power out of this bike as I can get. That includes power down low, in the middle, and up top. I know that everyone loves the bottom end power that this bike has, but there is a top end too. I have the SF version so riding low in the tach isn't always an option. Even if I had the S model, I'd want to be able to scream if need be. I have to say that if I paid all the money for the 351 kit and just did the standard and ran the dj132, I'd be angry at the loss in top end performance. I didn't spend all that money to go slow faster or do 2nd gear wheelies. I want all the power available to me. Even with a DJ140 there is a big flat spot from 6500 to redline. Now with the 148 the flat spot is very momentary and then it takes off and cranks the whole way to redline. I feel that I'm getting more for my money.
Does anyone know how much a new diaphragm costs and where to buy it? I think that klxster is right about the slide coming up too quickly. If that is the case, the stock slide hole will make this thing a linear beast.
Does anyone know how much a new diaphragm costs and where to buy it? I think that klxster is right about the slide coming up too quickly. If that is the case, the stock slide hole will make this thing a linear beast.
I'm waiting for larger jets to arrive so I can start experimenting. Looking forward to the results.
#64
05-10-2017, 02:52 AM
Join Date: Dec 2009
Location: Clearwater Bay, Ontario
Posts: 286
CanKLX, lid on requires a "standard setup" and can be made to run "perfectly fine" with little main jets.. It is also quite restrictive compared to lidless with a large loss of "upper mid - top end" power.. This is a power "loss" that you'll never miss if you never "taste" the "dark side" of a well fueled lidless setup..
Even with my current "standard" 351 set-up it is night and day more powerful than the stock 250 with everything else being the same.
Bigger jets are on the way.
Last edited by canklx; 05-10-2017 at 02:55 AM.
#65
05-10-2017, 02:56 AM
I've never felt a full stock setup. I bought my bike with the full exhaust and dynojet kit and the lid off. A lot of people here seem to be scared to take the lid off. My bike sat out in the rain 4 nights in a row last October when I went on our annual upstate NY (Old Forge and Tug Hill) ride. There is a plastic catch on the end of my air box drain tube. It never filled up with water. Also, if the bike gets into 4 feet of water, it's getting swamped no matter what contraption you have on the top of your air box. Not sure if anyone here has ever heard of the Blackwater 100, but I used to go to that as a kid. If anyone has seen that race, then you'll know that water can be pumped into an engine and it can be pumped right back out with the right amount of a$$ pain.
It surprises me that no one here has looked into fatter jetting for the 351. I know that the standard way to go is the TM36, but there has to be a lot of people with the cvk setup. It was obvious on the first ride with the big bore that there was something wrong with the top end of the power band. The new piston is exactly 2.7 oz heavier than the stock one. That's not enough weight to make the engine hit a brick wall at 7500 rpms. The only thing left is the carb. Hopefully I can help people jet the bike properly in the future and not accept the old norm and wives tales. I know that when dyno results get posted here, they end up on google images. hopefully people will see that in a search and be directed this way.
It surprises me that no one here has looked into fatter jetting for the 351. I know that the standard way to go is the TM36, but there has to be a lot of people with the cvk setup. It was obvious on the first ride with the big bore that there was something wrong with the top end of the power band. The new piston is exactly 2.7 oz heavier than the stock one. That's not enough weight to make the engine hit a brick wall at 7500 rpms. The only thing left is the carb. Hopefully I can help people jet the bike properly in the future and not accept the old norm and wives tales. I know that when dyno results get posted here, they end up on google images. hopefully people will see that in a search and be directed this way.
#67
05-10-2017, 02:58 AM
Well that's great news canklx, sooner of later we will know how to fuel a lidless 351.. With enough Dyno butt testing, we will have setups that can be fine tuned with Dyno testing..
#68
05-10-2017, 02:59 AM
Join Date: Dec 2009
Location: Clearwater Bay, Ontario
Posts: 286
I've never felt a full stock setup. I bought my bike with the full exhaust and dynojet kit and the lid off. A lot of people here seem to be scared to take the lid off. My bike sat out in the rain 4 nights in a row last October when I went on our annual upstate NY (Old Forge and Tug Hill) ride. There is a plastic catch on the end of my air box drain tube. It never filled up with water. Also, if the bike gets into 4 feet of water, it's getting swamped no matter what contraption you have on the top of your air box. Not sure if anyone here has ever heard of the Blackwater 100, but I used to go to that as a kid. If anyone has seen that race, then you'll know that water can be pumped into an engine and it can be pumped right back out with the right amount of a$$ pain.
It surprises me that no one here has looked into fatter jetting for the 351. I know that the standard way to go is the TM36, but there has to be a lot of people with the cvk setup. It was obvious on the first ride with the big bore that there was something wrong with the top end of the power band. The new piston is exactly 2.7 oz heavier than the stock one. That's not enough weight to make the engine hit a brick wall at 7500 rpms. The only thing left is the carb. Hopefully I can help people jet the bike properly in the future and not accept the old norm and wives tales. I know that when dyno results get posted here, they end up on google images. hopefully people will see that in a search and be directed this way.
It surprises me that no one here has looked into fatter jetting for the 351. I know that the standard way to go is the TM36, but there has to be a lot of people with the cvk setup. It was obvious on the first ride with the big bore that there was something wrong with the top end of the power band. The new piston is exactly 2.7 oz heavier than the stock one. That's not enough weight to make the engine hit a brick wall at 7500 rpms. The only thing left is the carb. Hopefully I can help people jet the bike properly in the future and not accept the old norm and wives tales. I know that when dyno results get posted here, they end up on google images. hopefully people will see that in a search and be directed this way.
#69
05-10-2017, 03:01 AM
For what it's worth - I live mostly on the south side of 7k rpm. This has always been the way I ride all bikes. Not going to change.
Some unintended benefits - engine life, gas mileage, traction in the dirt.
351 kit, 300 exhaust with 1.3 dia hole in the cap, 38 pilot, DJ needle - 3rd slot, recent change to 124 DJ main, lid with KDX snorkel.
I'm not feeling much change in low end torque. Still way fun to ride.
Some unintended benefits - engine life, gas mileage, traction in the dirt.
351 kit, 300 exhaust with 1.3 dia hole in the cap, 38 pilot, DJ needle - 3rd slot, recent change to 124 DJ main, lid with KDX snorkel.
I'm not feeling much change in low end torque. Still way fun to ride.
#70
05-10-2017, 03:22 AM
Eric is obviously happy with fueling his 351 with a DJ132 and now a DJ124 near sea level.
He is running the "standard setup" from the "histories" - most 351 owners (with the CVK) seem to be doing the same.. I'm sure he is getting great fuel mileage.. It is, once again, a testament to just how well the CVK will "operate" our KLX's with almost anything you throw into it.. And, right now, we don't know how much HP and TRQ he is giving up with that setup - only Bryan is qualified to make that guess..
He is running the "standard setup" from the "histories" - most 351 owners (with the CVK) seem to be doing the same.. I'm sure he is getting great fuel mileage.. It is, once again, a testament to just how well the CVK will "operate" our KLX's with almost anything you throw into it.. And, right now, we don't know how much HP and TRQ he is giving up with that setup - only Bryan is qualified to make that guess..