are pod filters better than a box on csr 1000?

Try this thread for tips LINK

Fact is, the fuel induction systems on these bikes is hardly rocket science - nor are the Kawasaki designers and engineers any sort of "Gods", whose various systems cannot be modified, and possibly improved upon - and that includes the OEM airboxes and exhaust systems!

I have serious problem and disagreement with the notion that "PODS simply can NOT be made to function properly - and CERTAINLY not as well as the OEM setup"...

That's pure BS - and most likely all it takes is the proper mix of time, knowledge and resources to make them work, and most likely work BETTER than the OEM system they replace. And I sure hate to ashcan my own effort just because some pimply-faced high school kids with nothing more than a hammer and screwdriver weren't able to get it done!

Gary - K7GLD wrote: Fact is, the fuel induction systems on these bikes is hardly rocket science - nor are the Kawasaki designers and engineers any sort of "Gods", whose various systems cannot be modified, and possibly improved upon - and that includes the OEM airboxes and exhaust systems!

I have serious problem and disagreement with the notion that "PODS simply can NOT be made to function properly - and CERTAINLY not as well as the OEM setup"...

That's pure BS - and most likely all it takes is the proper mix of time, knowledge and resources to make them work, and most likely work BETTER than the OEM system they replace. And I sure hate to ashcan my own effort just because some pimply-faced high school kids with nothing more than a hammer and screwdriver weren't able to get it done!

Chill brother! and remember - pods suck

Some people with pretty impressive credentials (and incidentally some have spent decades without a pimple) are of a completely different opinion. You say they need to spend time, gather knowledge and spend resources. Some people just want to ride. Nothing has yet been said of weather conditions influence or leaning out the bank by either side winds or passing a truck. You should also fab a holder to take the stress off the carb connectors. Again most people want to just ride. Those engineers are pretty smart and the box is a clever design. I admit that removing an airbox is a PITA job but re-installing one seems like a PITA X 4 if you end up doing that. And worse if you got frustrated removing it and wrecked it and now have to buy one to replace it because you don't want to spend the time, do the research or spend the resources. Not to mention doing it all for a little performance improvement that most data disproves anyway. One more thing is if you add pods be sure to wire those sidecovers on! They seem to make it easy for the wind to get behind them and blow them right under a semi or at least F them up nicely. Box or pods it's your choice but don't say you weren't warned.

I pod. But I don't Ipod.

Many people believe air filters are only there to stop dirt from reaching the engine and that air boxes are added to quell noise only.

Not true.

Air boxes do quell noise, and the air boxes fitted to the old KZs are not of an ideal design compared to current standards (too restrictive) but they are still in general much better overall and pods.

An air box produce a pocket of still air from which the carb(s) can suck. This air is virtually undisturbed by water and winds and turbulences. The air flow behind an engine is "dirty" and will also affect each carb differently. The conditions also change with speed and wind directions and rider position (legs spread or knees against the tank etc.).

In addition, an air box add length to the intake. Properly designed, this helps fill in torque dips otherwise produced by the exhaust system in conjunction with cam timing. Street bikes are generally designed to deliver as even a torque curve as possible with the least amount of dips in the torque curve. A racing bike, especially in the old days, are tuned mostly for top end performance. Short intakes and short headers works best for that. The downside is usually a massive dip in torque in the midrange - just where most streetbikes are ridden the majority of the time.

There is, in my opinion, no way you can make pods work as well as a decent air box from idle to redline. They can, usually, be made to deliver a little more power at certain rpm, with a corresponding loss at other rpm. You will end up with a much more erratic torque curve using pods than an air box. For perfomance gains on an old KZ, it is better to open up the restrictive inlet and jet accordingly than starting with a total redesign. If you can be bothered, that is.

Gary - K7GLD wrote: Fact is, the fuel induction systems on these bikes is hardly rocket science - nor are the Kawasaki designers and engineers any sort of "Gods", whose various systems cannot be modified, and possibly improved upon - and that includes the OEM airboxes and exhaust systems!

I have serious problem and disagreement with the notion that "PODS simply can NOT be made to function properly - and CERTAINLY not as well as the OEM setup"...

That's pure BS - and most likely all it takes is the proper mix of time, knowledge and resources to make them work, and most likely work BETTER than the OEM system they replace. And I sure hate to ashcan my own effort just because some pimply-faced high school kids with nothing more than a hammer and screwdriver weren't able to get it done!

Every site needs a comedian for others to ridicule, that you for providing that service.

Gary - K7GLD wrote: Fact is, the fuel induction systems on these bikes is hardly rocket science - nor are the Kawasaki designers and engineers any sort of "Gods", whose various systems cannot be modified, and possibly improved upon - and that includes the OEM airboxes and exhaust systems!

I have serious problem and disagreement with the notion that "PODS simply can NOT be made to function properly - and CERTAINLY not as well as the OEM setup"...

That's pure BS - and most likely all it takes is the proper mix of time, knowledge and resources to make them work, and most likely work BETTER than the OEM system they replace. And I sure hate to ashcan my own effort just because some pimply-faced high school kids with nothing more than a hammer and screwdriver weren't able to get it done!

Sounds to me like your still disgruntled because you still can't get your 1100LTD to make top end hp. (you know... the jetting question you asked over in the other Kawasaki forum). Just for the record, I've been amature tuning carbs and pods for the past 30 years, and i'll step right up to the mic and say PODS SUCK FOR THE STREET (as does predetermined stage # jet kits). I have had awesome sucess learning jetting using OEM optional jets.
Here, d/l this article and read. It's some hardcore dyno data that also states that basically pods are a waste of time. If you want to persue countless hours carb and jet swapping for an extra 6 hp, that your buisiness, but don't bark at us because we share a justified, negative attitude towards pods

www.mediafire.com/?7ttgomzmmjz

Found the test report I mentioned, prinited in issue 8, 1983, of Das MOTORRAD.

Stock GSX1100M Katana, 107.5 main jets, 109 hp @ 9000 rpm
Same Katana but with K&N replacement filter and 112.5 mains, 108 hp @ 9000 rpm
Same Katana but with K&N pods and 140 mains, 103 hp @ 8300 rpm

However, that doesn't tell the whole story. The dyno readings began at 4700 rpm and went to 9200 rpm.

The Stock bike made the most power between 7300 and 7600 rpm and above 8400 rpm.
The K&N replacement filter made the most power everywhere else, but the two were never more than 2 hp apart and mostly well under 1 hp. The stock setup had a dip around 7000 rpm, the K&N at 7500 followed by a peak at 8500 and another dip at 8500, so a bit more bumpy up top. Still, it is unlikely that any seat-of-the-pants dyno would notice much difference between the two.

The individual filtered Katana, however, averaged 6 hp less than it did with the other two filters. And power dropped off rapidly after 8300 rpm. The first dyno run with pods only revealed 84 hp; the 132.5 mains proved way too lean. The 103 hp run came on their fourth try with various jets.

They also tested a KZ750 with pods, but despite a lot of attempts, they never managed to get the engine to run well enough to get a useful dyno reading; even with a constant throttle setting, power fluctuated wildly at high rpm.

faffi wrote: They also tested a KZ750 with pods, but despite a lot of attempts, they never managed to get the engine to run well enough to get a useful dyno reading; even with a constant throttle setting, power fluctuated wildly at high rpm.

Oh i REALLY didn't like that last bit........i'll be using pod's but will not be chasing HP about, i just HOPE i can get it running smoothly!

750steve wrote:
Oh i REALLY didn't like that last bit........i'll be using pod's but will not be chasing HP about, i just HOPE i can get it running smoothly!

If you have the older Mikuni VM carbs, you will probably have decent success with pods. I have read much credible info that those carbs respond much better than the CV type carbs whan adding pods.

faffi wrote: Found the test report I mentioned, prinited in issue 8, 1983, of Das MOTORRAD.

Stock GSX1100M Katana, 107.5 main jets, 109 hp @ 9000 rpm
Same Katana but with K&N replacement filter and 112.5 mains, 108 hp @ 9000 rpm
Same Katana but with K&N pods and 140 mains, 103 hp @ 8300 rpm

However, that doesn't tell the whole story. The dyno readings began at 4700 rpm and went to 9200 rpm.

The Stock bike made the most power between 7300 and 7600 rpm and above 8400 rpm.
The K&N replacement filter made the most power everywhere else, but the two were never more than 2 hp apart and mostly well under 1 hp. The stock setup had a dip around 7000 rpm, the K&N at 7500 followed by a peak at 8500 and another dip at 8500, so a bit more bumpy up top. Still, it is unlikely that any seat-of-the-pants dyno would notice much difference between the two.

The individual filtered Katana, however, averaged 6 hp less than it did with the other two filters. And power dropped off rapidly after 8300 rpm. The first dyno run with pods only revealed 84 hp; the 132.5 mains proved way too lean. The 103 hp run came on their fourth try with various jets.

They also tested a KZ750 with pods, but despite a lot of attempts, they never managed to get the engine to run well enough to get a useful dyno reading; even with a constant throttle setting, power fluctuated wildly at high rpm.

Steady and strong vac signal and the podded carbs will hold steady up and down.

No kz750 I ever saw had any kind of real vac at the intake ports.

If you've got 180psi you can make steady power with pods.

But like I always say, the key is that you gotta have enough jet.

That suzuki sucked on the dyno until it got the gas it needed.

And hey, it's a suzuki.... go figure it's just wrong.

My guess, the suzuki carbs needed to sustain wide open position,

did anyone check for that? Heck no. And so you get screwed up

results, the main result being.... CONFUSION

I don't even run pods or abox on my 1015, and

they open all the way. give the the idle and midrange circuits

enough fuel you'll see a world of difference in the vac signal.

After all what makes vac anyway?

In other words if your slowing down, and your slides are wide open,

you need more fuel somewhere in the range. It's one or the other,

or it's weak vac.

If you install pods and the slides won't lift, you need to be

cutting some spring. But that's not allowed so you simply condem

everything and have a hey confusing everone else?

That's what the masses seemed to have done here.

SO it my turn now! :lol: