Hi guy's, First I tried the MAC on my 750 and hated it enough to return it and go back to stock... It seemed cheaply made and cost's way more than it is worth. Now I use a V&H and it is much better than the MAC in my opinion. First off the MAC was so loud I got pulled over the first time a cop saw me. V&H has much higher quality construction, better performance and a much better sound. It isn't exactly quiet but at least it is legal and the performance is a plus. I have been riding with the V&H and stock jets for a while and I haven't noticed anything bad besides a typical loss on the low end (under 4k) because of reduced back pressure. The low end power loss is noticeable but not unacceptable at all by my standards plus the gain above 4k is fantastic. I still want more power so I am going to re-jet as recommended. I got my V&H pipes off of a craigslist wreck for $150.00 and I don't expect everybody to get lucky like that but I would have paid the $350 for 'em no questions... The MAC... I would take 'em for free but I don't see myself ever buying their products again...
My pipes are nice other than a scratched muffler... Today I masked, sanded and hit the muffler with some high-temp black paint so the damage doesn't look as noticeable. It is drying right now so we'll see how it turns out. I also painted my front rim semi-gloss black this weekend because it was time for a tire change and I wanted them black anyway... not a fan of the grey... I am going to mount and balance the tire tomorrow. My hawk is definately going to look different when I put it back together. I hope I like it ;P I'll send some pictures if it isn't shameful. I'll paint the rear when it is time for a tire change no need to waste my tire I'll be mismatch for a bit. I also ordered a new front fender from JCWhitney mine was cracked from that lady's shiny beemer... o_0 already told you guys about that. I like the classic look and the price of their's. http://www.jcwhitney.com/SPORT_STYLE_FRONT_FENDER_3_WIDE?ID=12;0;1101014385+200008782+1992;0;100003;ProductName;6;0;0;0;2008800;0 Peace & grease ~Aldo > Date: Mon, 28 Sep 2009 11:10:21 -0700 > Subject: [Nighthawk Lovers] Re: Hodge Mod vs. Vance & Hines/MACS > From: althomas...@gmail.com > To: nighthawk_lovers@googlegroups.com > > > Greg, how noticeable was the difference, and would you recommend > spending the $450? > > On Sep 25, 9:16 pm, Greg Holuban <gman...@msn.com> wrote: > > I have a MAC exhaust. No glasspack at all. The inside piece (which can be > > removed with 1 screw) is basically two pipes welded together staggered. I > > have a jet kit and KN air filter. Mine revs smoothly. No flat spots or > > hesitations. The sound? It won't sound like a crotch rochet. For that > > you'll need an Eagle 1 exhaust. Most, people swear by V+H but mine runs > > great. Probably worth the extra money for the quality and craftsmanship. > > > > Date: Fri, 25 Sep 2009 11:48:13 -0400 > > Subject: [Nighthawk Lovers] Hodge Mod vs. Vance & Hines/MACS > > From: althomas...@gmail.com > > To: nighthawk_lovers@googlegroups.com > > > > I did a search of the forum and before posting this so I think it is a new > > topic, sorry if not. Anyway, I am the kind of guy who inspired Tim Taylor, > > I modify everything I own. I have done a lot of street/strip racing with > > cars, and can't resist the temptation to squeeze a few extra ponies out of > > my NH. So I plan on putting in a proper zero loss exhaust, a free flowing > > intake filter, and properly jetting and tuning the carbs. To this end I > > think that if the stock exhaust is a resonator type as opposed to a > > glasspack, and if so it can be modified it to eliminate almost all > > backpressure. Since I haven't taken mine apart I don't know for sure. I > > have done a drawing of what I think the design of the stock exhaust looks > > like before and after the Hodge mod. I would appreciate it if anyone can > > verify if I'm correct on this. Thinking about doing this leaves me > > wondering whether it would just be better to buy the Vance&Hines or MACS > > setup. But I'm concerned that these systems are glasspacks thus poorly > > tuned, or are just too loud. Once again insight from someone who has these > > setups would be appreciated. According to my calculations the ideal setup > > for zero loss and proper scavenging should be 1 1/8 primaries, into either > > 1 1/2 secondaries if a 4 - 2, or 2" if 4 - 1, the secondaries should be > > roughtly17" long to optimize scavenging in the 4K-7K range. I made a > > drawing of a resonator vs glasspack in case some may not know the > > difference. The reason for my concern about glasspack mufflers are because > > they act as an extension of the secondary, and the longer the secondary is, > > the lower the ideal scavenging RPM range. > > _________________________________________________________________ Insert movie times and more without leaving Hotmail®. http://windowslive.com/Tutorial/Hotmail/QuickAdd?ocid=TXT_TAGLM_WL_HM_Tutorial_QuickAdd_062009 --~--~---------~--~----~------------~-------~--~----~ You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Nighthawk Motorcycle Lovers!" group. To post to this group, send email to nighthawk_lovers@googlegroups.com To unsubscribe from this group, send email to nighthawk_lovers+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/nighthawk_lovers?hl=en -~----------~----~----~----~------~----~------~--~---
