BitchenBanshee Posted September 20, 2004 Report Share Posted September 20, 2004 Has anyone here ran the t-5's or t-6's and swaped to the rocket pipes? I am thinking about swaping, but I like the low end I get with the T-5's. Do the rocket's have compairable low end to the T-5's or are they just a high RPM pipe? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
locogato11283 Posted September 20, 2004 Report Share Posted September 20, 2004 on sunday for the hell of it we put my rockets on my brothers banshee. he has t5's. he lost all midrange and really couldnt rev out that well on top. hes got a woods port so i dont think he noticed so much on th bottom but it really hurt the midrange and top. go figure. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
txblueshee Posted September 20, 2004 Report Share Posted September 20, 2004 (edited) Has anyone here ran the t-5's or t-6's and swaped to the rocket pipes? I am thinking about swaping, but I like the low end I get with the T-5's. Do the rocket's have compairable low end to the T-5's or are they just a high RPM pipe? That's funny I've never heard/witnessed about any kinds of low-end outa the T5's..... they're a top-end pipe. Basically any other pipe besides cpi's or a drap pipe is gonna have more low-end....Especially the rockets. Mike Edited September 20, 2004 by txblueshee Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BitchenBanshee Posted September 20, 2004 Author Report Share Posted September 20, 2004 That's funny I've never heard/witnessed about any kinds of low-end outa the T5's..... they're a top-end pipe. Basically any other pipe besides cpi's or a drap pipe is gonna have more low-end....Especially the rockets. I'm not saying that the T-5 has loads of low end. I like the amount of low end that it has, I just don't want to have any less low end. I only ride sand and I can't stand having to shift every other second. The t-5's allow me to lug it around when needed. I just want to make sure the rocket's would allow this as well..... Also, Anyone have any opinions on the chrome on the rockets. The quality of chrome makes the pipe!!!!!! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
fixitrod Posted September 20, 2004 Report Share Posted September 20, 2004 Once again I'm impressed with paul turner mids. I'm telling you guys. mrmatt has them, banchetta has them and they both smoke. mrmatt has stock cylinders and I'm running a stroker. He was tickin me off how hard it was to drag him when I had all the money in mine. He's fast. Minkia had his rockets on and it was real fast on top. I didn't ride it so I can't say much for bottom and mid but he had no problems riding like everyone else. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BitchenBanshee Posted September 21, 2004 Author Report Share Posted September 21, 2004 (edited) Nope... A buddy of mine had a set of of PT Mids and the T-5's produced 2.3 HP more on top on the Cascade innovations dyno. They were almost identical from beginning to mid then the T-5's took over. We tested the PT's, T-5's and FMF's that day all on the same dyno and on my shee. The jetting was kept the same throughout the test so I don't know if that was the difference or not. The PT's definatley get 1st place for looks!!! I plan on doing the same Dyno with the Rocket's, however none of my friend's have a set to try. Thus I'm gonna be the guinea pig!!! If any of you were wondering, the FMF's were horrible on top and gave up 3.1 hp to the PT's and 5.4 to the T-5's!!! They all were close throughout the low to mid and if I remember correctly, the PT's had about a 1 hp gain from low to mid was all over the T-5's Edited September 21, 2004 by BitchenBanshee Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
fixitrod Posted September 21, 2004 Report Share Posted September 21, 2004 You have to jet for each pipe or your wasting your time. I have fatty's and the topend would suprise the crap out of you. There are a lot of factors. A biggie is porting. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BitchenBanshee Posted September 21, 2004 Author Report Share Posted September 21, 2004 You have to jet for each pipe or your wasting your time. I have fatty's and the topend would suprise the crap out of you. There are a lot of factors. A biggie is porting. The only factor is jetting. All of the other factors were taken into consideration. Same temperature, same dyno, same bike, same porting, same bike temperature ETC. All I know is that with the same jetting, the T-5 outperformed the PT's and they both wasted the FMF's. I'm sure your topend with Fattys may "Suprise the crap" out of me, but it would definatley suprise even more with a set of PT's or T-5's for top! Based on what I saw, I would put a grand down on the fact that T-5's would smoke FMF's on mid to upper horsepower..... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
sredish Posted September 21, 2004 Report Share Posted September 21, 2004 (edited) Well, the jetting isn't always gonna be the same. While they may have tried all those pipes on the same bike without changing the jetting, to have the pipes run to their full potential, they very well should've been rejetted or some adjusmtents might have been in order. From my little bit of experience, the FMFs like another size or two on the main from the Toomeys, but every single bike is different and who knows. But just to throw on a set and go, even if it's jetted for a different type of pipe, isn't completely accurate. My fatties will hang and then some with any comparable T5 setup, dunes, mx, whatever. In fact, let me grab a couple dyno I have comparing the two and a few others. These runs are on a 370 long rod, but you can see the comparison between the two pipes. They're very similar in hp, though the T5 is a little higher and more overrev, but the Fatty torque is stronger. First is hp, second it torque. Edited September 21, 2004 by sredish Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
fixitrod Posted September 21, 2004 Report Share Posted September 21, 2004 (edited) Anything that revs high can get you hp. That's just how it work. The torque will get you off the line faster and up a hill faster. It's all give and take. That's why each rider likes a different set up. I'm having a hard time on this monitor telling what colors are what on the charts. Did you jet for each of these pipes. Looks like the fatty's made more power and torque, but they are very close. If I'm looking at the curve right... I still can't tell the colors, the t5 looked smoother on your bike than the fatty's. I have a stroker and I can tell you the fatty's work well on it. Edited September 21, 2004 by fixitrod Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
theeechozen1 Posted September 21, 2004 Report Share Posted September 21, 2004 I'd like to see how the rockets compare to the CPI and Shearer's, I've been wanted to go to some inframes but just can't decide Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Banchetta Posted September 22, 2004 Report Share Posted September 22, 2004 Dynoing w/o jetting is worthless. I have over 100 hours of dynoing on my quad between my stock stroke and my 4mil stroker. There is a 2hp difference for every jet size....So if you were off 1 jet size from one pipe, then there is your 2hp...never mind if your 2-4 sizes off.... The T5's like a lean needle, where the Pt mids like the richest clip position the needle offers. So given that, your jetting will be way off and the dyno comparisons aren't accurate. I've ridden about every pipe on the market. The Pt mids will outpull any other pipe besides the 2 into 1 off the lower rpms by far...The T5's probably and should make a little more hp since they allow the shee to rev a little higher. Given this, you'll get more hp out of more rpms...they go hand in hand. But its not always how much hp you have, but where you put it...As far as the rocket pipes having low end...I rode Minkias and it didn't have much low end at all, his jetting was off to so that wasn't helping. But he also has drag porting and a stroker, so as far as a normal port, I couldn't give an honest oppinion. They may work better.... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
sredish Posted September 22, 2004 Report Share Posted September 22, 2004 Banchetta, can you post a dyno sheet with PT's sometime? I'd love to see a comparison between those and the Fatties. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ducman Posted September 22, 2004 Report Share Posted September 22, 2004 We'll for what it's worth, I went from FMF Gnarlies (low to mid pipe) to the Rockets on a stock port motor and for the small amount of low end I lost, the huge top end that I gained was well worth it. It seriously didn't even cause me to have to clutch it more or anything. Most of the riding near my house is trail with decent open areas in creek bottom. It definitly had a lot more lag before hitting the band than before but power came on fairly smooth and strangely it seemed like it still had decent torque down low, just as good as before, just didn't get on the pipes quite as fast or as low of RPMs. But on a loose sandy/gravely creek bottom surface (my drag strip) that I always do my plug checks on near my house, typically when I launch it just spins the tires (nobbies, stock gearing) untill I hit 4th gear where it would finally bog down and require a little clutch feathering, with the rockets it would spin 4th and not bog utill 5th. Basically getting my wheel speed way faster than my actual speed untill it was pulling as much or more wheel spin friction than the motor could handle. The best part is that it wouldn't pull 6th strong at all, bearly able to rev out, and with the rockets it would rev to the moon in 6th easy pulling like a Mo Fo. The FMFs were jetted near perfect at 280/290, I only ran the Rockets for a month or two before sending off the motor for mods and it was even jetted a little too rich at 320 on the mains the whole time. I don't know how true this is, but I think that if you construct a pipe that is shaped so that it fits under the stock fenders, bends down to allow easy access to the spark plugs and fuel clock then the shape, even if it works pretty good, is still a compromized shape that could have been made better if it weren't constrained to a shape that fits those non performance needs. If you aren't worried about fitting the fenders, exc. then the shape of the expansion chamber is much less compromized, even less with out of frame pipes. If you could make the Ideal pipe and expansion chamber it would be straigt and symmetrical, not fifty different cureves and 5 A-semmetrical bubbles merged together. It seams like a big advantage in creating a better pipe to not end up with a better pipe. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
John19 Posted September 22, 2004 Report Share Posted September 22, 2004 I got my rockets on and like them alot, Ive had toomey and fmf's and I like rockets the best by far. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.