Ducati.ms - The Ultimate Ducati Forum banner

1 - 20 of 22 Posts

·
Registered
Joined
·
12 Posts
Discussion Starter #1
Hello,
I'm new here, and after searching high and low for an answer, I've decided to join the forum to see if anyone here has found a solution to what I find as being very odd. Simply put, how the heck do the plastic grilles get installed onto the upper fairings air duct openings? There are 4 holes at the corners of each egg crate style grilles, but there are no screw bosses or any other provisions to secure the grilles to the faring.
Looking at the grilles, why do they have what is obviously a means to install them, but nothing to drive any screws into? What am I missing?
Im really anxious to see what you guys have to say about this, because I'm really stumped with this one.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
12 Posts
Discussion Starter #3
Yeah, thats what I originally thought too, but this upper fairing doesn't have any sort of plastic pins. Its a new fairing (upgraded to the later model without the additional air ducts), and I thought it was a genuine Ducati part. I purchased it from a dealer. Actually, now that I think of it, the bag it came in did have the ducati part number, but it was suspiciously in a trash bag. I'll have to check the part to see if it has the part number on the inside. I might have to confront the dealer on this.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
12 Posts
Discussion Starter #4
Ok, I just checked the faring. It does have the oem part numbers on the back side of the fairing. I think I'm going to have to glue some plastic pins onto the faring myself. I thought about using stainless wire to tie the grilles to the faring, but I don't think there's anywhere I can drill tiny holes without them showing on the outside of the faring. Very odd situation.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
1 Posts
Mine is the face lift style....(no upper air ducts...only the two for the ram air tubes). The grilles on it aren't the egg crate style with the four holes on the corners. Mine are simply thin expanded steel mesh which have tabs on the sides that are just bent over. It came like this...so not sure that the egg crate grilles are meant for the later model fairing...
They are secured in place by thick double sided tape.
Hope that helps.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
12 Posts
Discussion Starter #6
Mine is the face lift style....(no upper air ducts...only the two for the ram air tubes). The grilles on it aren't the egg crate style with the four holes on the corners. Mine are simply thin expanded steel mesh which have tabs on the sides that are just bent over. It came like this...so not sure that the egg crate grilles are meant for the later model fairing...
They are secured in place by thick double sided tape.
Hope that helps.
Ok, thanks. The double sided tape with the folded mesh is a great idea, but I think I want to stay true to the orginal styling in this respect. Definately something to keep in mind.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
929 Posts
oem cowl has 4 plastic molded "pins" that position the black grills.as Belter stated the pin tips are melted to secure the grills.don't know how you can stay true to oem if there are no pins.rather than double sided tape I used a dab of black silicone adhesive on the corners after thoroughly cleaning the mount areas.much better at holding them securely w/zero movement.no fan of the "R" style screens?
 

·
Premium Member
Joined
·
5,108 Posts
2003-4 had the intake screen held in by a pin and then melted as belter said. 2005-6 had a metal screen held by double sided tape.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
12 Posts
Discussion Starter #9
Thanks Xracer, I didnt know that regarding the difference between the early and later models. I like the look of the metal screeens, though I would prefer a thicker wire with larger gaps between them. I think I want to stay with the egg-crate style orginals beacuse their black color should go better with the theme of the bike. The bike is painted a Lamborghini grey with gold accents.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
12 Posts
Discussion Starter #10
Installation of the wire style would be easier given the circumstances. Now you have me reevaluating. Thanks again Xracer.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
12 Posts
Discussion Starter #11 (Edited)
By the way, I've read that those can limit the air flow by up to 50%. Anyone who has seen a screen door billow in the wind knows how limiting they can be. So for you guys with the wire mesh, you might want to consider replacing your wire with a thicker wider spaced wire grid. The spacing should be about the same as the egg-crate style. I personally think it would look better too.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
929 Posts
By the way, I've read that those can limit the air flow by up to 50%. Anyone who has seen a screen door bellow in the wind knows how limiting they can be. So for you guys with the wire mesh, you might want to consider replacing your wire with a thicker wider spaced wire grid.
if mesh screen is good enough for K&N filters..........
 

·
Premium Member
Joined
·
5,108 Posts
I don’t bother with mesh in mine. In all my years of riding I’ve not gotten anything bigger than a bee in my filters. I actually like the look of the bigger early style (03-04) mesh. Get some off cuts of mesh and cut to shape with two tabs that can be bent and taped to the fairing as Ducati do with the early superbikes.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
12 Posts
Discussion Starter #14
if mesh screen is good enough for K&N filters..........
Maybe that's why tests have shown that automotive paper element filters flow better than K&N type oiled filters. The former have a widely spaced wire grid on the outside, but usually with a fine mesh wire on the inside, while the K&N style filters have the fine mesh on both the outside and the inside. No doubt a contributing factor.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
12 Posts
Discussion Starter #15
I don’t bother with mesh in mine. In all my years of riding I’ve not gotten anything bigger than a bee in my filters. I actually like the look of the bigger early style (03-04) mesh. Get some off cuts of mesh and cut to shape with two tabs that can be bent and taped to the fairing as Ducati do with the early superbikes.
Yeah, I might just go with the wider spaced wire. The thicker strands of wire along with the wider gaps look better to my eye.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
929 Posts
Maybe that's why tests have shown that automotive paper element filters flow better than K&N type oiled filters. The former have a widely spaced wire grid on the outside, but usually with a fine mesh wire on the inside, while the K&N style filters have the fine mesh on both the outside and the inside. No doubt a contributing factor.
what tests are you referring to & by whom? this one favors K&N; Here's the Difference Between a Regular and a Performance Air Filter
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
12 Posts
Discussion Starter #17
That test was not what I would call scientific, and it was sponsored by a company that whats to sell you something. I've read a test that appeared to be conducted independently, and one of the things it found was that the K&N style of filters tended to allow larger dirt particles into the engine than their paper element conterparts. It also found that they tended to clog-up faster too.
Going directly to the K&N site (Efficiency Testing), they have a test based on the "standard" ISO 5011:2000. That means it was codified in 2000. Why make the change? Dirt hasn't changed. It's right there on their website.

The following report details the results of a test based on the same ISO 5011 standard but with a change in its methodology, and one of the things they've found was when compared to the AC paper element filters, the K&N plugged up almost 3 times faster, passed 18 times more dirt, and captured 37% less dirt. Now add to that my point that the oiled gauze filters utilize a fine wire mesh on the outer surface area of the filter, while the paper element filters have a mesh with much larger spacing on the outside.

Heres the report... K&N Air Filter Review - Debunking the Myths (and why OEM is better)
 

·
Retired Pipe Polisher C2H6O+
Joined
·
19,072 Posts
Every time I tried K&N, BMC, and MWR I ended up with dirt in my air box. And in a stock unmodified air box there is no performance gain.




Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk Pro
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
929 Posts
That test was not what I would call scientific, and it was sponsored by a company that whats to sell you something. I've read a test that appeared to be conducted independently, and one of the things it found was that the K&N style of filters tended to allow larger dirt particles into the engine than their paper element conterparts. It also found that they tended to clog-up faster too.
Going directly to the K&N site (Efficiency Testing), they have a test based on the "standard" ISO 5011:2000. That means it was codified in 2000. Why make the change? Dirt hasn't changed. It's right there on their website.

The following report details the results of a test based on the same ISO 5011 standard but with a change in its methodology, and one of the things they've found was when compared to the AC paper element filters, the K&N plugged up almost 3 times faster, passed 18 times more dirt, and captured 37% less dirt. Now add to that my point that the oiled gauze filters utilize a fine wire mesh on the outer surface area of the filter, while the paper element filters have a mesh with much larger spacing on the outside.

Heres the report... K&N Air Filter Review - Debunking the Myths (and why OEM is better)
my point in your link;

The Flow Restriction response curves for each filter have the same basic shape. However, note how the AC Filter, which passed the smallest amount of dirt and had the highest dirt capacity and efficiency, also had the highest relative restriction to flow. The less efficient filters correspondingly had less restriction to flow.

This illustrates the apparent trade-offs between optimizing a filter for dirt capturing ability and maximum airflow.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
12 Posts
Discussion Starter #20
I don't know who conducted the test which showed the paper element filters as flowing better, but they most likely were a real world comparison of dirty filters, and as the test in the link clearly shows, the K&N filters are really lacking in terms of their filtering capacity, which of course would translate to much worse flow rates.
I mean, if the K&N's limited capacity causes them to clog up much sooner than the paper element filters, not to mention filter less dirt and allow more contaminants into your induction system, what good is a comparison of clean filters in the real world?
 
1 - 20 of 22 Posts
Top