Custom Chip Setup - Page 2

Bob in Tucson · 10-07-2003, 02:00 PM

To provide a little context, when Shannon and I met up to ride, I had never run with another S, and I was curious to see what his mods meant in terms of performance.

So what we did was a kind of roll-on test, his bike with modifications and mine with none (bone stock).

To do the best we could to eliminate the rider as a source of variation, we rode along in the same gear at the same speed, counted down from 3, then punched it. My bike pulled away from his consistently. Not amazingly so, just a little, but consistently. Of course, it should have gone the other way, which is what I expected to happen.

So, as Jeff suggested, I wondered what about his set up (that clearly moved more air than mine) was holding things back.

Of course, when he gets it sorted, it will be even harder to catch him.

roger albert · 10-07-2003, 02:26 PM

I wish I had a good answer for this one. Max flexibility come with the PC3, but every change requires significant time/money/expertise on the dyno. My only point, in the midst of all my over analyzing, is that if you're going to get a chip mapped for a combo other than what you have, the get one that's mapped for the one closest to what you have.
FIM has them mapped for both of the basic pipe topologies out there, and with and w/o duct improvments, so they seem to have things best covered. You might as well get a chip where the baseline is closest.

If you don't anticipate ever using an intake duct, then laser is fine.

Two other good options are BBPower, which was developed for specific known configs (ok, some of them are specific) and the RhineWest, which is known to play with spark.

Personally, if I were starting from scratch, I'd be sorely tempted to just get a PC3. The next best (and even better in some respects) is to use a PC3 fuel map on top of a Rhine West chip, which gives you some improvements in spark mapping too - but that's a whole new can of worms.

Brad's advice of getting the FIM chip for the pipe that is closest to yours, and either w/ or w/o induct support (depending on your plans for that mod) is the best plug-n-play option.

hth

shannonnunley · 10-07-2003, 02:28 PM

Joe,

well, Boxer Cup Performance Induct and K&N Air filter as mentioned in my first post. Again, 2bros cat eliminator and muffs.

Please.. anyone... closest match?

acidburn · 10-07-2003, 03:09 PM

Just talked to Chris at San Jose, we will do some R&D dyno runs on my bike in a few weeks, with PC3 and lazer, and stock chip, he has some good ideas.
PC3 set up for your bike, plug and play, 400$, i dont think you will go wrong here, i would not do a chip if the PC3 can be had for your set up.
I am very familiar with pc3's from my gsxr adventures, one is current, its the way to go for sure.
This program is just beginning, its time to go slow and do it right, PC3.

acidburn · 10-07-2003, 03:12 PM

http://www.sjbmw.com/

Check service, see dyno chasrts, check it out.
These guys appear to have a good program and be very honest and straight up.

acidburn · 10-07-2003, 03:13 PM

BTW,
Foster Design, Robert Foster is the same, excellent resource and great guy to get help and products form.

shannonnunley · 10-07-2003, 06:55 PM

I appreciate everyone's time and thoughts... I will take the feedback and process it accordingly.

Joe · Joe's Garage

Quote:

Originally posted by shannonnunley
Joe,

well, Boxer Cup Performance Induct and K&N Air filter as mentioned in my first post. Again, 2bros cat eliminator and muffs.

Please.. anyone... closest match?

The closet match would be the FIM.chip... made for a open pipe and intake tube.

shannonnunley · 10-07-2003, 07:42 PM

thanks Joe.... any good suppliers?

EZ-RIDER · 10-07-2003, 09:51 PM

Hey Acidburn;

Been there done that, Like I said before if you are planing to do more mods. Down the road then the Power Commander is the way to go.
Look at what the Bike dyno'd at 100.3 hp and 72.3 ft lbs of torque.
When I do the heads etc. I won't have to change the chip again.
Chris has some maps for different setups and is planning to add more.

johnnydanger · 10-07-2003, 11:28 PM

Just a note. Without weighing both you guys with your motorcycles, it's not really an exact comparison doing rollons as a weight difference of 10 or 20 lbs could very well cause the slight acceleration differences. Not to mention other things like wheel weight. Did both bikes have the 5.5" rims? A slightly heavier wheel has suprisingly large power sapping characteristics. Just gives the engine work that much harder to make things go.

Bob in Tucson · 10-08-2003, 07:38 AM

I agree that short of a dyno, its very difficult to do a completely fair test. That said, I was hoping his mods were worth maybe 5-10%, which I hoped would be evident no matter. Plus, roll-on power is what matters most to me in terms of real world riding.

We both have 5.5" rear wheels, we probably weight about the same; Shannon was carrying more gear than me, but had Ti cans that are 10 pounds lighter than my stock cans, and so on...

My point was that even if the bikes were not matched exactly, with all those add-ons, I expected a noticeable benefit in the thrust department relative to mine and it wasn't there. So I wondered if a remapped chip would help.

I don't care much about the performance benefit per dollar; for me, this is a hobby and I ride because it is fun. If I or anyone esle want to fling a few dollars at the bike for no useful reason aside from increasing the hooligan factor, I'm fine with that. So I was really looking for a rough comparison between Shannon's particular set of mods versus stock as I had started to consider what mods I might do having ridden stock for 10,000 miles or so...

acidburn · 10-08-2003, 08:42 AM

"""I don't care much about the performance benefit per dollar; for me, this is a hobby and I ride because it is fun. If I or anyone esle want to fling a few dollars at the bike for no useful reason aside from increasing the hooligan factor, I'm fine with that. """

My Brother!!!!
Joe you getting this?

Joe · Joe's Garage

Quote:

Originally posted by acidburn
"""I don't care much about the performance benefit per dollar; for me, this is a hobby and I ride because it is fun. If I or anyone esle want to fling a few dollars at the bike for no useful reason aside from increasing the hooligan factor, I'm fine with that. """

My Brother!!!!
Joe you getting this?

I have more time and gadgets in my bike then most.............do you think I've been riding for over 35years because I have to get someplace

shannonnunley · 10-08-2003, 09:54 AM

Quote:

Originally posted by Bob in Tucson

We both have 5.5" rear wheels, we probably weight about the same; Shannon was carrying more gear than me, but had Ti cans that are 10 pounds lighter than my stock cans, and so on...

I had like... a case of beer in one saddle bag though.

roger albert · 10-08-2003, 10:00 AM

> Please.. anyone... closest match?

Again, FIM

Bob in Tucson · 10-08-2003, 10:17 AM

Quote:

Originally posted by shannonnunley
I had like... a case of beer in one saddle bag though.

Thought I am sure you carried the beer in a titanium container cooled with liquid nitrogen... anything else would mean unnecessary (through sprung) weight...

shannonnunley · 10-08-2003, 10:26 AM

Actually... no, I'm not that high-tech. My strategy is to drink one every time I stop... that way, I keep getting faster and faster as the ride progresses... right?

acidburn · 10-08-2003, 10:36 AM

LMFAO!!!!!!