| Author | Message | ||
     Jerseyguy |
I wonder if those folks who feel that they have experienced a power loss allowed the ECM to relearn its AFVs before performing the second set of dyno runs. That is to say if you did baseline runs, reflashed while on the dyno, and then immediately did final runs, it wouldn't be a proper comparison. | ||
| Pariah |
Tas, just to echo Xbswede... why don't you go back to the stock exhaust, and see if you gain back some horsepower? | ||
| Buzzie |
Tas... There is the difference.. You said.I paid nearly $20,000 for a bike that had 131.55 rwhp 75.47 ftlb of torque dead stock. I de-noided it and added a D&D pipe and got 134.33 rwhp and 78.30 ftlb of torque. Post reflash no 3 i now have 123.48 rwhp and 72.12 ftlb of torque this is not what i paid 20 grand for and i dont think it is acceptable. Actually you are mistaken. Reflash number 3 was created for a stock bike. Your bike is no longer stock. Perhaps its just a simple misunderstanding that you have. The previous reflash may have worked better with your configuration of accs., and the third reflash doesn't. Hence your loss in the numbers...if your dissatisfied with the dealer....well maybe they just didnt explain it right. | ||
| Fresnobuell |
I read the Wiki article on "air-fuel ratio" and it raised a question. Maybe it is a silly one, but I will put it out there anyway...forgive my ignorance. Could we be interpreting our Adaptive Fuel Value backwards? From Wiki: AFR The Air fuel ratio is the most common reference term used for mixtures in internal combustion engines. It is the ratio between the mass of air and the mass of fuel in the fuel-air mix at any given moment. For pure octane the stoichiometric mixture is approximately 14.7:1 or ë of 1.00 exactly. In Naturally Aspirated engines powered by octane, maximum power is frequently reached at (richer) AFRs ranging from 12.5 - 13.3:1 or ë of 0.85 - 0.901 Lambda Most practical AFR devices actually measure the amount of residual oxygen (for lean mixes) or unburnt hydrocarbons (for rich mixtures) in the exhaust gas. Lambda (ë) is the measure of how far from stoichiometry that mixture is. Lambda of 1.0 is at stoichiometry (14.7:1), rich mixtures are less than 1.0, and lean mixtures are greater than 1.0. (Message edited by fresnobuell on December 10, 2008) | ||
| Doerman |
Thank you Harlan. Very helpful! I found the Wiki article myself and read it. Got totally lost in the big equations. And who knows what a mole is anyway. Now the question for me is: Why aren't the readings 100% (or 1.0 lambda) for both front and rear if indeed the ECU is reacting to the O2 sensor input and correcting? Mine is 90 front and 100 rear. That presumes correctly functioning O2 sensors. | ||
| Hogs |
More or less fueling per head, Maybe Timing But most likely HEat issues for cooling,etc... http://ukbeg.com/downloads/ATwinter08-09.pdf Little link I just posted ..Got an article on the 1125`s (Message edited by hogs on December 10, 2008) (Message edited by hogs on December 10, 2008) | ||
| Fresnobuell |
Now the question for me is: Why aren't the readings 100% (or 1.0 lambda) for both front and rear if indeed the ECU is reacting to the O2 sensor input and correcting? Asbjorn, that is the magic question. WHY are the values different between machines--esp. machines that are operated in similar environments. It will take some help from BMC to enlighten us. But, back to my silly question that might have gotten lost in my last post... It it possible that we have assumed that a AFV value over 100% is a rich condition and under 100% a lean condition? COuld it be opposite? Is there documentation anywhere? And does that documentation cover all the measurements in Diag. Mode? | ||
| Doerman |
I am going to put on a new O2 sensor and see if that makes a difference. That is so I can "somewhat verify" or dispel my notion that a "drifting" O2 sensor affects the diag mode values. As to the meaning of > 100 < and which relates to lean or rich, I have no clue. Judging from the Wiki text, you might be correct! | ||
| Xbswede |
IMO - not all motors come out exactly the same some run a little tighter and some a little looser. A reading of 105% would indicate a lean Condition based on the default table values and 5% extra fuel is being added under closed loop to hit the optimum 100% for the ECM. If the reading is 95% then the bike is running richer then the parameters want and 5% is subtracted while running under CL. This can also cause some issues when you go into WOT because the same 5% is scaled over the whole OL region and subtracted. Again this is just my Opinion and I am sticking to it unless proven otherwise.  | ||
| Slypiranna |
We've covered the AFV's and o2's in the learning thread earlier this year and prior to the latest flash. It's all in archives and worth a read. We've also covered and have tested four different brands and styles of o2's available, both heated and stocker's non heated. Zero difference. AFVs...100 is off base maps, 105 is base maps plus 5%, 95 is 5% less... The ecu looks at o2 feedback in CL. After so many (?) counts/cycles, the ecu will update the AFV...IF NEEDED. That's important to understand. On the 08's...this is proven to take quite a while in order for new AFV updates...not like the old learning ride for three minutes that many discussed early on and some that still do. Go figure. There is obviously a lot more going on in the ecu than that but for simple terms, not much else to discuss!  If it's fat, she'll trim AFV's lower, lean, then higher, simply put. Faulty o2's may cause an inaccurate AFV response but without testing with a known good one, I'd be lost to call anything proven...(up to 200 miles may be required)...If your within 10% of base maps, meaning 90-110 AFV's...I wouldn't worry about anything...SEA LEVEL... AFR of 14.7:1 is only the target input that the ecu uses (this is the half truth when discussing what the ecu looks for on the 11)...THAT IS NOT the OUTPUT/calculation in pulsewidth to the injectors in CL! Think leaner. (Message edited by slypiranna on December 10, 2008) | ||
| Tasmaniac |
Pariah & Buzzie i probably didn't go far enough last night with my explanations sorry been working some really long days for a while now. since the reflash 3 and 123hp i have added a Remus pipe did around 3000k's and had another dyno run which i dont have a print out of as it was a freebie it was 131hp and some change sorry i cant remember the torque reading,if you put the hp gain of this pipe on top of the stock hp my bike should in theory be close to 139 rwhp emphasize the word theory. In previous posts i have stated that the bike feels stronger in the lower rev range at wot and is definately smoother at low speed and gets better fuel mileage however i would happily sacrifice the smooth and fuel mileage for better hp. On the race track Symonds plains is my local about a mile round my previous best time(stock flash & D&D )was 68.1 seconds last track day new flash and Remus was 63.7 seconds i am still a novice on this track as i never cared for it too much as it is basicaly all left hand corners. some of the improvement will be me and some will be due the new flash. Our last two drag meets have been rained out so i am still waiting to see if there is a loss or gain here. I am not dissatisfied with my dealer Richardsons H-D & Buell i used to be the spare parts and accessories manager there and my cousin is the owner, as far as i know they dont have any way of playing around with the tuning and my 1125 is the only one on the road in Tasmania so they dont have any other data from other bikes to compare it with. Dont get me wrong i love my 1125R and would not swap it for any other brand. The simple fact is it could have been better ( maybe ) Regards Brett | ||
| Hooliagn |
Is it possible that the location of the injectors,(2008 vs. 2009) may account for some of the discrepancies in power in relation to the 3rd flash? Are there any 2008 bikes with relocated injectors ? Is the 3rd flash for the 2008 bikes the same flash as the 2009 bike ? If so, there is seemingly an issue as the injectors were moved to optimize/better the introduction of fuel into the motor and the programing optimized to take advantage of this. | ||
| Xbswede |
"Is the 3rd flash for the 2008 bikes the same flash as the 2009 bike ?" No its not. | ||
| Mustangturbo |
"Anyway if you are basing a power loss on mpg increase then maybe you should step back and find some "PROOF" that your bike is now missing power before starting a thread about how your bike is somehow slower than it was before. Sorry, I forgot you have no proof... Carry on" New12r... You don't need to be insulting. I was only stating that i've not met anyone from either company. Don't get started with the whole proof thing. I just wanted to let Buell know that if there is something and they are aware of it then it should be dealt with sooner rather than later. One can't ask folks to believe in a product if things just aren't coming together. Unfortunately there has been one let down after another. I don't ride this bike so that I can meet Eric, and I didn't ride a Gixxer so that I could meet Matt Malladin! I chose it because it was the first attempt an american company made at a legit sportbike. I gave it a try, and will continue to do so if things are dealt with promptly. Otherwise I will go back to Suzuki... The new 09 GSX-R1000 will be hitting show room floors soon and my 1125R can't even begin to compete when it comes to performance. I am also certain that it will run well below 4,000 RPM and that it won't require a re-flash, let alone 3 of them! Thanks for the input though... Keep up the good work! | ||
| Buellborn |
Mustangturbo, don't let these people get to you. I have never seen such defensive people as some of the Hardcore here It's clouds their thinking sort of a love is blind type deal. I have watched from the beginning of the 1125 intro and to some it was a perfect rollout. That perfection makes it hard to explain all the changes Buell has made but those are just facts, but not important ones I guess. This may be why American Products reputation is where its at in the world. You obviously like Buell, you bought one, but that just proof you laid out your money and your trust. | ||
| Fresnobuell |
The new 09 GSX-R1000 will be hitting show room floors soon and my 1125R can't even begin to compete when it comes to performance. Well, did you really expect the 1125r to win the spec sheet battle with the Gixxer 1000--ever? If that's what is important to you, then you made the wrong choice buying the 1125r. Off the spec sheet, is where the 1125r makes up ground quickly against its IL4 counter parts. IMO, in anything other than a straight line, the 2 bikes in question will be on equal performance terms in anyone hands, OTHER than an expert level rider. The 1125r and Gixxer 1000 have way more potential than the vast majority will ever touch. | ||
| Chadhargis |
What no one here has mentioned is that we're talking "peak" horsepower and torque, and no one has posted a power/torque dyno plot pre & post reflash. I know I'd MUCH rather have a bike with a bit less power that ran well than having one that ran like $hit at anything other than wide open throttle. I understand that you want what you paid for. Buell says my Ulysses is supposed to have 103hp, yet no test I've ever seen shows more than 85hp on a dyno. I personally saw one tested once that only showed 69hp. Different dynos, different altitudes, different weather....all that can effect what the read out is. What it boils down to is lap times. Since you had your bike reflashed, have your lap times dropped any? The bike may have less peak power, but if what it does have is more usable across the rev range, then you have a faster bike. | ||
| Slypiranna |
If you want dyno numbers that are the most credible in this entire website, look up Easyrider. He has both the old ecu and the newest flashed one. He is the dyno guru! | ||
| Tasmaniac |
Chad the 103 hp is crankshaft my old Thunderbolt made 85.5 with a Vance & Hines pipe Regards Brett | ||
| Chadhargis |
Yes, I understand that the 103 is at the crank. But still...that's what they advertise, even though that never makes it to the ground. Most manufacturers do the same thing. Shameful if you ask me. Right up there with posting the "dry" weight of a bike. I mean, come on, how many of us ride around with no battery, fuel, oil, and in some documented cases...tires. | ||
| Rfischer |
Those who fixate on peak hp dyno results do themselves, and the bike[s] in question, a great disservice. Smokey Yunick, who when alive forgot more about making hp than any here will ever know, said it best when he offered, "It's the area under the curve, Man..". And had the race results to back it up. | ||
| Mustangturbo |
Buell really seemed to fixate on peak HP, they mentioned it in almost every advertisement they produced. They really wanted everyone to know that this was a legit, water cooled engine. One that promised more power higher revs and real performance. It was Buell that fed the craze for peak HP. Don't blame us power freaks. It's a sickness!  | ||
| Carbonbigfoot |
Guys, guys, GUYS! Listen UP! Do NOT FEED THE TROLLS!!! Enough! Rob | ||
| Badlionsfan |
The new 09 GSX-R1000 will be hitting show room floors soon and my 1125R can't even begin to compete when it comes to performance. I am also certain that it will run well below 4,000 RPM and that it won't require a re-flash, let alone 3 of them! You're probably right about the re-flash issue, but lets point out a few facts. First, the gsx line of bikes has been around for longer than I can remember. And since the 2009 gsx isn't the same as the first production year bikes, Suzi must have felt the need to make some improvements along the line. The 1125r has been on the street for close to a year now. It's also a complete departure from anything Buell has built to date. Buell could have simply made improvements to the 2009 bikes and left the 08 owners out to dry. Instead, they spent a lot of time (and money I'd think) improving products that were already sold and in customers hands. Suzi has much more resources as they are a much bigger company with r&d engineers all over the planet between factory people and big dollar race teams. Buell on the other hand is smaller company, doing more with less than other companies. The upside is a more personalized ownership relationship between company and consumer. It's been said a million times but I'll say it again-- Buells aren't for every one. If impressing your buddies with spec sheets and dyno graphs are what's important to you, move on. If owning a unique motorcycle with character, top notch handling and makes you grin like retard under your helmet every time you ride it is what floats your boat, throw out the dyno sheet and as they say, "shut up and ride." This is all just my opinion of course. | ||
| Zac4mac |
We "de-crated" mine a year ago tomorrow. Most amazing bike I've ever ridden. #1 satisfied customer. Z | ||
| Sweenyboy76 |
+1 Badlionsfan | ||
| Carbonbigfoot |
+1 Z and Bad R | ||
| Buellborn |
This guy buys a Buell and you call him a troll? I don't see why any two way conversations seem to be quashed when discussing the 1125 series. Its like a board meeting where everyone nods their heads yes and little honesty. Everyone slides their chair away from the guy that says the Emperor has no clothes. Think about this. If there was more honesty within the Buell loyal the poor running 1125's would not have been released. Someone had to be testing these bikes? How could they not see the early ones were not running correctly? They knew, and no-one wanted to talk about it. No one wanted to tell the boss? They let them all be shipped. Early owners that expressed concerns about operability and things as poor gas mileage complainers were chasten and told thats normal, stalling, low rpm stumbles etc. True enthusiast know their competition and don't simply discount their achievements so quickly. If so you will be run over like the American Car industry. | ||
| Bob_thompson |
I agree at least on one very important issue Buellborn has said; we should not try and discount any posts here and we should at least listen to what people have to say. We can then make up our individual minds as to the direction we want to take. Believe or not. The open exchange of ideas is what helps us all learn and enjoy our pursuits all the more. BMC may have rushed the 1125 to sales but has for the most part stood behind their product and have been very pro active in correcting anything that was THEIR fault. The only problem I have with that is a somewhat less then pro active dealership but I along with BadWeb have helped them "get 'er done" And I still would like to know the REAL amount of problem bikes out there. Maybe way less then we perceive from what we read here but still enough to have BMC concerned to improve. Thats good enough for me to throughly enjoy my 1125R for what it is. The best "riding" bike I have ever had, and there have been many. Bob | ||
| Bobup |
What you are forgetting Buellborn, is that BMC DID have problems with the early 1125Rs and held back shipments for nearly 3 months...slow startup of the production line and running out of parts were the "reasons" given. Remember this was THE 2008 model release...not the 2009...if they waited until ALL the issues were fixed, it would have been the 2009 release entirely....and not be a part of the 25th anniversary edition. Will BMC ever say the bike was "rushed" to market?....NO....but the issues the early bikes had (mine had em / Jan '08) were not a "show stopper" most were not even noticeable issues....and ALL of them were addressed and FIXED by BMC. and I totally agree with Zack....it IS an amazing bike...everytime I straddle the saddle....well unless you own one, "you wouldn't understand" |
