Page 1 of 2 1 2 LastLast
Results 1 to 10 of 16
  1. #1
    ksalles's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2009
    Location
    Slidell, La.
    Posts
    1,786
    +1
    304

    Rev limiters (revisited)

    I'm starting the topic because I can't seem to find a definitive answer regarding this, or maybe I just never searched long and hard enough. I've heard some say not to run the X skis in the 8100 range and to stay in the 8000 range. I've read where the X skis start cutting fuel in the 8100 range. If this is the case, to me makes absolutely no sense regarding the safety of these motors in this application. I would think the initial rev limit would be controlled by ignition retard or cutting spark to particular cylinders. In the event this was to happen it would reduce hp progressively. With the the soft limiter is engaged, the engine will still make a significant % of its power and hold rpms so the pump could still proces the water if in fact it had the nuts to pull through this. I'm assuming, and I use that term lightly, the hard limiter comes in at 8200 on the X skis and 8300 on the standard 215 models. If this is the case, there should be no concern of damaging anything IF IN FACT ONLY TIMING OR SPARK is being altered at or above the 8100-8180 range on the X models and 8200-8280 on the 215 models. I understand banging 8200/8300 is not healthy and how it would cause a lean condition that would end up being detrimental over time. In reality the ski would make less power and be richer relative to A/F up until the actual hard limiter @ 8200 or 8300 depending on the model ski. In a nut shell, I'm trying to find out how the rev limiters are introduced (hard and soft), and at what rpm and for each specific model. Thanks in advance for any input.


  2. #2
    Eric Ocman's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2008
    Location
    Cataula, Georgia, United States
    Posts
    4,700
    +1
    77
    Quote Originally Posted by ksalles View Post
    I'm starting the topic because I can't seem to find a definitive answer regarding this, or maybe I just never searched long and hard enough. I've heard some say not to run the X skis in the 8100 range and to stay in the 8000 range. I've read where the X skis start cutting fuel in the 8100 range. If this is the case, to me makes absolutely no sense regarding the safety of these motors in this application. I would think the initial rev limit would be controlled by ignition retard or cutting spark to particular cylinders. In the event this was to happen it would reduce hp progressively. With the the soft limiter is engaged, the engine will still make a significant % of its power and hold rpms so the pump could still proces the water if in fact it had the nuts to pull through this. I'm assuming, and I use that term lightly, the hard limiter comes in at 8200 on the X skis and 8300 on the standard 215 models. If this is the case, there should be no concern of damaging anything IF IN FACT ONLY TIMING OR SPARK is being altered at or above the 8100-8180 range on the X models and 8200-8280 on the 215 models. I understand banging 8200/8300 is not healthy and how it would cause a lean condition that would end up being detrimental over time. In reality the ski would make less power and be richer relative to A/F up until the actual hard limiter @ 8200 or 8300 depending on the model ski. In a nut shell, I'm trying to find out how the rev limiters are introduced (hard and soft), and at what rpm and for each specific model. Thanks in advance for any input.
    mine ran best around 8160-8180 when I had my stock ECU.

  3. #3
    ksalles's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2009
    Location
    Slidell, La.
    Posts
    1,786
    +1
    304
    Good, I'm not crazy then. Thats exactly what my X ski seems to like as well.
    Quote Originally Posted by Ocman View Post
    mine ran best around 8160-8180 when I had my stock ECU.

  4. #4
    Banned User
    Join Date
    Aug 2009
    Location
    Discovery Bay, CA
    Posts
    3,048
    +1
    336
    ...

  5. #5
    Banned User
    Join Date
    Aug 2009
    Location
    Discovery Bay, CA
    Posts
    3,048
    +1
    336
    way over thinking it. put it at 8140-8180 you'll be fine! you put it up there against 8200-8300 it will pull everything back timing and fuel

  6. #6
    Mod less, ride more! troyheb's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2007
    Location
    Nederland, Texas
    Posts
    8,725
    +1
    1,267
    Quote Originally Posted by Ocman View Post
    mine ran best around 8160-8180 when I had my stock ECU.
    +1 mine was the same.

  7. #7
    richrxp's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2006
    Location
    Netherlands
    Posts
    949
    +1
    1
    Quote Originally Posted by troyheb View Post
    +1 mine was the same.
    Mine run also it's best speed at 8180 when i had the stock ecu.
    I would like to know what the afr's are,since we are on the limiter.

  8. #8
    ksalles's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2009
    Location
    Slidell, La.
    Posts
    1,786
    +1
    304
    Thats basically what I was thinking... I just wanted to explain in more detail in my initial post regarding how the soft limiter is being introduced. As I mentioned, if its basically ignition retard up until the actual hard limiter, I'm not nearly as concerned as if it were strictly pulling fuel as I read on other posts on here. (thats what I find hard to believe) I would think when you begin retarding timing in these applications, being its forced induction, they would possibly make more horsepower as a result of the retarded timing. This would basically allows the charger force or blow more fuel and air into the cylinders before the spark. In essence, this would also lessen the chance of detonation.

    Quote Originally Posted by richrxp View Post
    Mine run also it's best speed at 8180 when i had the stock ecu.
    I would like to know what the afr's are,since we are on the limiter.

  9. #9
    Mod less, ride more! troyheb's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2007
    Location
    Nederland, Texas
    Posts
    8,725
    +1
    1,267
    Quote Originally Posted by richrxp View Post
    I would like to know what the afr's are,since we are on the limiter.
    +1 Add me to that list. I bet we might be surprised.

  10. #10
    mrbtd's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2005
    Location
    Lindenhurst, Illinois, United States
    Posts
    4,309
    +1
    2
    No question on mine it makes the most power @ 8100 when using the 83mm nozzle. After that there was very little difference. Simply no reason to take it past there. I will say it helps being here in the midwest where water and air temps are much cooler.

Page 1 of 2 1 2 LastLast

Thread Information

Users Browsing this Thread

There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)

Similar Threads

  1. RPM - Rev Limiter - Mods...
    By majundecid in forum 4-Tec Performance
    Replies: 1
    Last Post: 07-10-2006, 04:31 PM
  2. RPMs specs say rev limiter @ 8000?
    By meirvin in forum 4-Tec Performance
    Replies: 12
    Last Post: 03-07-2006, 12:32 PM
  3. Stock Rev Limiter Question
    By Sirhc7897 in forum 4-Tec Performance
    Replies: 6
    Last Post: 02-03-2006, 07:26 PM
  4. Did I hit the rev limiter or a fish?
    By Mark S in forum 4-Tec Performance
    Replies: 1
    Last Post: 09-03-2005, 10:48 PM
  5. Bouncing off the rev limiter, Yay or Nay
    By Gforce in forum 4-Tec Performance
    Replies: 11
    Last Post: 05-29-2005, 01:26 PM

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •