Power Commander / Chip - Feedback...

[Chris Geuting]

Like I posted my bike (04/TS) wasn't running that great and I was wondering if it was running too lean with the Remus pipe.Did anybody stick an CO sniffer in the tailpipe to see how rich/lean it really runs?
Theoretically it shoud run right with the Power Commander even if the Chip is probably the "cleaner" solution.Anyone having real experience with the power commander or rhinewest chip?Good or bad?My bike is running right again all it needed some new plugs at 7K miles...
Chris

[repoe3]

fuel use is up, but i am more aggressive with the throttle now becuase it is so much fun to spin. but the overall ridability of the bike has improved 10 fold. and thats a PCIII on top of a laser twin spark chip.

repoe3

[Steve Carlton]

Curious. If driveablility is much improved, then perhaps the Laser chip wasn't so good? Unless there were some other mods that ruined driveability?

[Chris Geuting]

That is interesting a P-C on top of a chip.
The chip if it works right is probably the more elegant solution since you don't have additional wiring and a box under the seat.
Any reliability issues or sliced wiring with the P-C?Or is it only plug in and where does it plug in and if they have it dialed in for an open Remus it should run perfect,no need for chip or otherwise around with a perfect programmedchip no need for the P-C since the chip sets the fuel/ignition mapping while the P-C only modifies the fuel injection duration signal.
As for the Laser chip not beeing good I totally agree.On my R1150RS with Laser pipe and chip it did nothing (good).It ran and later it cut the engine out above 4000 rpm.
On the Boxercup bike tested years ago by MCN it mde the bike run leaner as with the stock chip.Not good...The pipe itself broke too;3 times at the hanger;Spieglers warranty department is awful on top of that...
On my old single spark R1100S I left the motronic box unmolested and it ran fine with the Laser pipe.But the pipe frailed the aluminum frame at the bottom connecting flanges thanks to Lasers "Quality" manufacturing or better very "tight" tolerances.The bottom hanger piece never fits either and either needs to be heated and re-bend or grind down or better completely left off,not good...At least the dutch make good cheese...;-)
Chris

[repoe3]

Originally posted by Steve Carlton
Curious. If driveablility is much improved, then perhaps the Laser chip wasn't so good? Unless there were some other mods that ruined driveability?

yeah, and i bet that could be talked/debated about for a while. but nothing changed. the bike has run with that setup for 30k miles. just recently it had been having a lean misfire, it stumbled and surged. while the laser setup is the "hot" setup, it was still for racing conditions and was lean in other places down low. the PCIII on top of it (no splicing wires, all plug and play) added more fuel in the closed loop area as well as the open loop area. so it goes more faster and burns more go juice...seems logical to me, the idiot at the controls.

the difference is 14.7:1 targeted by the motronic versus 13.8:1 targeted by the PCIII (in close loop). open loop has been fattened up as well.

and our fuels are now cut with ethanol and i think that has some affect as well.

repoe3

[repoe3]

Originally posted by Chris Geuting
That is interesting a P-C on top of a chip.
The chip if it works right is probably the more elegant solution since you don't have additional wiring and a box under the seat.
Any reliability issues or sliced wiring with the P-C?Or is it only plug in and where does it plug in and if they have it dialed in for an open Remus it should run perfect,no need for chip or otherwise around with a perfect programmedchip no need for the P-C since the chip sets the fuel/ignition mapping while the P-C only modifies the fuel injection duration signal.
As for the Laser chip not beeing good I totally agree.On my R1150RS with Laser pipe and chip it did nothing (good).It ran and later it cut the engine out above 4000 rpm.
On the Boxercup bike tested years ago by MCN it mde the bike run leaner as with the stock chip.Not good...The pipe itself broke too;3 times at the hanger;Spieglers warranty department is awful on top of that...
On my old single spark R1100S I left the motronic box unmolested and it ran fine with the Laser pipe.But the pipe frailed the aluminum frame at the bottom connecting flanges thanks to Lasers "Quality" manufacturing or better very "tight" tolerances.The bottom hanger piece never fits either and either needs to be heated and re-bend or grind down or better completely left off,not good...At least the dutch make good cheese...;-)
Chris

PCIII on top of chip is not that uncommon. the aprilia folks have been doing it for some time as certain chips enable feature in the ECU they want, then the PCIII allows for addtional fine tuning of the fuel map.

repoe3

[JonyRR]

one can debate, master-debate or even masturbate over this subject endlessly, but the bottom line is that the PCIII can modify the af ratio both richer and/or leaner than the stock map or any mapped chip and will do this on top of the chip; chips are close but not perfect and burning a custom chip is a spendy proposition that's hard to get correct. The box is a much more elegant solution as you can change most all of your fueling parameters to suit your personal state-of-tune.
of course, your results are only as good as your information is accurate, so you CAN screw it up, but one must try pretty hard...and yoou can always go back to a baseline map setting. Best driveability accessory out there.

[repoe3]

hypothetical here...pro's and con's to leaning out the closed loop area to say 14:1?

repoe3

[Chris Geuting]

Thanks for the info so far and probably I leave the bike alone since it runs fine now after changing all four plugs at 7K...
More fuel consumption is not good either since the tank is already on the small side.
I was just wondering if the plugs might get bad again early if the bike runs too lean even if they looked really good with a light brown color.The P-C can be adjusted that is right but who has his personal dyno/CO tester?But I guess Rhinewest and SJBMW have a chip/programm set up for the open Remus?
If reliability is not affected with the P-C I might go for it if the plugs go bad early again since I had reliabilty issues with the Laser chip before.Of course if mileage drops from 40 to the low 30's that won't make me too happy with the already small range and gas going towards the $4 level...
Chris

[Raven]

Is it the O2 sensor that makes the real differance?

And then the added mapping on top that?

[repoe3]

40's to 30's is exactly what happened. the PCIII closed loop portion can be adjusted to lean it back out a bit if you want and can be adjusted, real world wise, with the optional AF meter from dynojet. there is a port on the cable harness that makes it too a plug and play deal.

right now, without the AF meter, i have gone so far as to modify a map, based on the base map lower the values in the open loop area as i think it did not need to be that rich and may lower it more. i am not seeing any surging or running issues. may also adjust the AF ration in the closed loop portion as anything richer than 14.7:1 is richer than what the motronic will do.

repoe3

[roger albert]

> hypothetical here...pro's and con's to leaning out the closed loop area to say 14:1?

Better mileage, less power, warmer running, most emissions components reduced, easier pinging.

About what you'd expect.

[repoe3]

Originally posted by roger albert
> hypothetical here...pro's and con's to leaning out the closed loop area to say 14:1?

Better mileage, less power, warmer running, most emissions components reduced, easier pinging.

About what you'd expect.

yep...and without any way of comprehending the difference in 14.7:1 versus 13.8:1, from a way of really understanding it, it is still a shot in the dark for me. meaning, does dropping to 14:1 really increase temps THAT much? considering people throw out 12.?:1 as a perfect world, then there is stoich or whatever...i mean, this stuff is tough to get one's arms around and even begin to understand it. not so much interested in knowing how FI works, i get the whole AF thing that leads to combustion...its the science behind AF ratios and byproducts, as stated above, quantified.

it is interesting to see such stimulated talk over the bike and the PCIII. when i had asked what does the PCIII do at 50% throttle given there is not colum on the map, and hearing it crunches some numbers to figure it out, 40% throttle is in the closed loop and 60% is in the open loop, hence my cornfusion. aside from that, i wont deny it, with the new found responsiveness from the bike, i certainly am not conservative with it.

guess cruising at 80-95 on the higway burns some fuel...wouldnt you think?!

repoe3

[roger albert]

Don't sweat it so much repoe.

The power differences between 12 and 15 % are not even that great, much less between 13 and 14. We're kind of quibbling here. If one way gets you 10% more mileage, and only 1% slower, it's not a bad setting.

Just enjoy the bike. Btw, the same books that teach you FI will also teach you the ratio stuff.

[repoe3]

Originally posted by roger albert
Don't sweat it so much repoe.

The power differences between 12 and 15 % are not even that great, much less between 13 and 14. We're kind of quibbling here. If one way gets you 10% more mileage, and only 1% slower, it's not a bad setting.

Just enjoy the bike. Btw, the same books that teach you FI will also teach you the ratio stuff.

then i suppose i will pick up an FI book for some reading.

if i rode more conservatively and didnt cruise at nearly 100 when on the DC raceway, i mean beltway, i am sure fuel use would be back in the low 40's, heck average is 36 MPG most of the time anyways.. i still (meaning that was what it did before the PCIII) see 125 miles, before the light comes on, while commuting. so that much has not changed so dramatically. i also may be taking the extra time to get more fuel in the tank, maybe.

repoe3

[repoe3]

oops...i was wrong, 40% and 60% are in the closed loop point of the map, so 50% throttle is taken care of that way...

repoe3

[Chris Geuting]

repoe,thanks for the feedback even if I don't know what you are talking about with your %...;-) I'll guess I leave it alone for now and if the stock setup is running too rich then I'm not worried anymore that I might do some damage through excessive heat due to leanness with the open Remus.
As for the P-C how do you know that you actually improve anything without a dyno and no CO sniffer?I would only be interested if someone actually had already done all that bitschwork for me for the right pipe all downloaded into the P-C ready to plug in nowing that the bike runs right and not to lean.36 mpg is not too bad since my light always comes on in the 130 mile range,two weeks ago on the track at 103,topped off really good...I rather save the 450 for the P-C and run it through the tank...
130 gallons=5200 fun filled miles...;-)
Chris

[Chris Canning]

Hi Chris

Over the years i've gone brakes,wheels,suspension,Induct,filter,carbon fibre this that and the other!!! and hardly have a non Ti nut or bolt on the bike,but nothing has improved the bike like the PC has,i've been rideing the bike with it on for some months and still can't beleave the improvement,maybe it's just another piece in the jigsaw puzzle thats been the glue for the rest or maybe my setup drops just right for a PC,who knows!!! but jeeze does it work.

[Chris Geuting]

Chris,if my plugs foul again prematurely I might bite the bullet and go for a premapped one for the Remus pipe from SJ...But right now the bike run good enough not to mess with success and the fuel mileage...;-)
Where does the P-C actually plug in and where/how is the box mounted?
A friendly hallo over the pond
Chris
PS:What is the take on the not sport-toury anymore R1200S in sport-bike crazy GB?

[Raven]

Chris,

I'll show you mine in Boise. It is a real nice set up