Bazzaz or PC5 | Page 2 | GTAMotorcycle.com

Bazzaz or PC5

Am I right to think the stricter emission laws is restricting/locking up the bike true potential in power, smoother fueling or optimal riding condition for the engine?

Is there such a thing as unlocking/unrestricting stock motorcycle purely through programing(flashing, PC etc) the software "ECU?"
Keeping everything stock, stock exhaust, stock headers etc. So no mechanically changes
 
Lots of great info here and I've been doing some more research on the subject, I'm thinking the flash is the way to go and if need be then add a fuel controller.

I've been communicating with David at vcyclenut ( nice guy BTW, super quick to reply and very informative) about the flash and he said something that surprised me. I mentioned that I only use ethanol free fuel (shell or CT) and he said he doesn't recommend it because it affects the fuelling and he doesn't tune for it.

My question to those here experienced with such things, would running ethanol free be bad if it isn't tuned for it? Or am I misunderstanding/reading into it too much?

Here is the excerpt from the email, his reply is in quotes:

2. Does the flash affect just fuelling or does it tweak timing as well? I only run ethanol free 91 octane on my bikes if that matters for the flash. It's not going to be a track bike, it's used for commuting and "enthusiastic" weekend runs. I just want to safely maximize performance and improve rideablity.

"It adjusts both, yes running ethenol free fuel does change all the fueling parameters. Other then storing your bike for the winter I do not recommend ethenol free fuel simply because i do not have fuel changes set up for it "
 
Michael0124 said:
Lots of great info here and I've been doing some more research on the subject, I'm thinking the flash is the way to go and if need be then add a fuel controller.

I've been communicating with David at vcyclenut ( nice guy BTW, super quick to reply and very informative) about the flash and he said something that surprised me. I mentioned that I only use ethanol free fuel (shell or CT) and he said he doesn't recommend it because it affects the fuelling and he doesn't tune for it.

My question to those here experienced with such things, would running ethanol free be bad if it isn't tuned for it? Or am I misunderstanding/reading into it too much?

Here is the excerpt from the email, his reply is in quotes:

2. Does the flash affect just fuelling or does it tweak timing as well? I only run ethanol free 91 octane on my bikes if that matters for the flash. It's not going to be a track bike, it's used for commuting and "enthusiastic" weekend runs. I just want to safely maximize performance and improve rideablity.

"It adjusts both, yes running ethenol free fuel does change all the fueling parameters. Other then storing your bike for the winter I do not recommend ethenol free fuel simply because i do not have fuel changes set up for it "
Click to expand...
Interesting. Ethanol does have lower specific energy but I havent heard of people caring about 10% blends before. E30 or E85 definitely need a different tune (lots more fuel dumped in).

I guess if he has the tune at the ragged edge with e10, ethanol free could cause issues but I doubt they would make a canned tune like that.

My suspicion is more fear of the unknown and the canned tune was made for e10 as that is the most common fuel in north America.
 
If he tunes for E10 then non-ethanol will be fine. There is a theoretical 3% difference in energy content, but unless you are tuning on the ragged edge (which should never be the case for a street bike), you will never notice the difference.
 
Good way to know if your street bike is right -> fuel consumption (before and after changes)

:sneaky: should be fairly obvious that if you set your motorcycle up for track performance and ride it on the road, it's not going to perform like a road bike it's going to perform like a track bike out of its element. "safely maximize performance and improve rideablity" sounds very much like what the factory was aiming for, was it ever good, did they fail badly or did you modify the bikes exhaust and induce the fueling problem, or do you just have a fueling problem
 
Trials said:
Good way to know if your street bike is right -> fuel consumption (before and after changes)

:sneaky: should be fairly obvious that if you set your motorcycle up for track performance and ride it on the road, it's not going to perform like a road bike it's going to perform like a track bike out of its element. "safely maximize performance and improve rideablity" sounds very much like what the factory was aiming for, was it ever good, did they fail badly or did you modify the bikes exhaust and induce the fueling problem, or do you just have a fueling problem
Click to expand...
Manufacturers have the giant hammer of emissions and the smaller hammer of fuel economy hanging over their heads. The chance of that hammer dropping on an end user not being a complete idiot (eg. rolling coal) is tiny. You can improve power, rideability and often fuel economy if you are not constrained by a hard line on emissions.
 
Factory calibrations frequently compromise driveability in the interest of emissions ... overly aggressive deceleration-fuel-cut being a common offender. I remember taking a 2003 Yamaha R6 (first year of EFI) out on a track day at Shannonville not long after they came out, and a chap lent me one to try. I brought it in after three laps ... awful.

Factory calibrations are frequently restricted, too, although this is more of an issue with the litre-class bikes. They're all restricted ... every one of them. My understanding is that one of the EPA noise tests is to blame for this. The noise level at (IIRC) wide open throttle and half of peak-power RPM is the official test. So ... they restrict power at high RPM in order to bring the peak-power RPM down, and then do wierd things at half of that RPM in order to bring the noise down in that specific test. Drive-by-wire makes this easy - rider-requested throttle position 100% might not give drive-by-wire commanded throttle position anywhere near 100% ...

Some of them are restricted in order to achieve power-output limitations or power-to-weight limitations associated with a licensing class, too. And then there's insurance companies, and lawyers, and the warranty department.
 
Trials said:
. "safely maximize performance and improve rideablity" sounds very much like what the factory was aiming for, was it ever good, did they fail badly or did you modify the bikes exhaust and induce the fueling problem, or do you just have a fueling problem[/I]
Click to expand...

I bought it with a slip on with the baffle in, stock air filter and no other "performance" mods on it. From what I understand it's pretty common on Yamaha's of this generation, some worse than others.
 
Sounds like you can thank the previous owner for the performance problem, if they didn't provide you with the complete street bike, or finish modifying it for the track. but I imagine it sounds great and eats more fuel now.
 
OP - have you heard of Rapid Bike?
I've had my eye on this module - apaprently it piggy backs on your current OEM setup and learns/adjust as you drive.

Rapid Bike fuel management systems with built in adaptive tuning.

Official USA distributor of Rapid Bike fuel injection / ignition management systems with adaptive auto tuning technology for almost all motorcycles. Closed course / racing use only. Not C.A.R.B or EPA approved product
rapidbike.us


I suppose if you are looking for a one-time set it and forget it tune after a couple of dyno runs, this may not be a good option for you.
 
Michael0124 said:
Lots of great info here and I've been doing some more research on the subject, I'm thinking the flash is the way to go and if need be then add a fuel controller.

I've been communicating with David at vcyclenut ( nice guy BTW, super quick to reply and very informative) about the flash and he said something that surprised me. I mentioned that I only use ethanol free fuel (shell or CT) and he said he doesn't recommend it because it affects the fuelling and he doesn't tune for it.

My question to those here experienced with such things, would running ethanol free be bad if it isn't tuned for it? Or am I misunderstanding/reading into it too much?

Here is the excerpt from the email, his reply is in quotes:

2. Does the flash affect just fuelling or does it tweak timing as well? I only run ethanol free 91 octane on my bikes if that matters for the flash. It's not going to be a track bike, it's used for commuting and "enthusiastic" weekend runs. I just want to safely maximize performance and improve rideablity.

"It adjusts both, yes running ethenol free fuel does change all the fueling parameters. Other then storing your bike for the winter I do not recommend ethenol free fuel simply because i do not have fuel changes set up for it "
Click to expand...

I have over 50,000km's running his flash on my bike. I just use regular gas. His tune is more about making the bike more rideable, can't say i noticed any more power.
 
I have a switch on my handlebars to alter the map on the fly, it only has 2 settings, runs good and runs slightly mellow. I've yet to find a use for the runs slightly mellow setting. Maybe it saves on gas or something :LOL:
 
Trials said:
I have a switch on my handlebars to alter the map on the fly, it only has 2 settings, runs good and runs slightly mellow. I've yet to find a use for the runs slightly mellow setting. Maybe it saves on gas or something :LOL:
Click to expand...
The fz09 has three settings A-B and Standard. The bike was so snatchy in A mode, was a real nut crusher against the tank, and from the factory it always defaulted to B mode when starting.,(pain in the arse) Flash fixes the snatch, and defaults to A mode automatically, also got rid of the 225 km/h speed limiter.
 
Is "snatchy" throttle a significant hesitation in acceleration followed by a surge, or something different ?
 
On/off behaviour at small throttle openings as opposed to smooth take-up. Deceleration fuel cut at a too-high load or too-open throttle-position threshold is a common culprit.
 
The A-Std-B settings on the FZ-09 / XSR900 act more like a quarter-turn throttle in A mode, a half-turn throttle in Standard mode, and regular throttle in B mode. I wouldn't be surprised if all three modes used the same fuelling map (at least as delivered from the factory), and just compressed that curve based on throttle position.

A-mode is therefore very sensitive to off-on throttle transitions, and is even a bit abrupt on steady-throttle-to-acceleration transitions. It's good for entertaining yourself by goosing the throttle on long straight stretches, or for training your fine throttle control. Not a good choice on rough roads or in slow traffic though.
 
I think I see the problem, your throttle body has one too many butterflies in it
jzak-4b7dbd61be3d7fa6db8e742099772564.jpg

the one you open and the one that you have no control over :|
 
Would I need a fuel/air controller (PC, Bazzaa etc) if I get a aftermarket header (MSJ headers) and kept my stock exhaust with the EX-UP?
This for a 2015 R6
 
Keeping your "stock exhaust with the EXUP" is incompatible with installing an "aftermarket header" - because the aftermarket header (the part with the 4 pipes going down the front of the engine to the collector to the point where it merges to a single pipe) completely replaces the "stock exhaust" (which implies the entire exhaust system front to back). The EXUP valve is built into the collector of the stock header pipe assembly. It's one or the other.

Do you really mean installing an aftermarket "slip-on muffler" onto the stock header with EXUP valve? That's possible (and very commonly done) ... and if that's what you really meant, that in itself doesn't warrant doing anything about the tuning, because it won't change how the engine runs to any meaningful amount.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Back
Top Bottom