ecu re-flashing
- Thread starter boyoboy
- Start date
doubleapex
Well-known member
Which bike?
It depends on the bike/ECU but fueling/ignition/limiters are all possibilities. On the car side, the user gets to play with very little, all parameters are set by the provider of the tune. I haven't played around with much bike tuning. @Brian P (as usual) is probably one of the best resources on GTAM. I'm not sure how much he knows about those bikes specifically.
What's available depends on how thoroughly the specific ECU in that bike has been "hacked" by someone, and that's bike specific.
http://www.woolichracing.com/
2014 is not given as an available option at all for the SV650. I believe it was off the market (replaced by the Gladius) for a few years and was then re-introduced. Sure about that model year? If it's really a 2007-2012 with a Mitsubishi ECU, here's what is available: http://www.woolichracing.com/produc...-suzuki-sv-650-usb-mitsubishi-v3-package.aspx
Here's the Ninja 400 product page. http://www.woolichracing.com/produc...aki-ninja-400-ex400-usb-denso-v3-package.aspx
http://www.woolichracing.com/
2014 is not given as an available option at all for the SV650. I believe it was off the market (replaced by the Gladius) for a few years and was then re-introduced. Sure about that model year? If it's really a 2007-2012 with a Mitsubishi ECU, here's what is available: http://www.woolichracing.com/produc...-suzuki-sv-650-usb-mitsubishi-v3-package.aspx
Here's the Ninja 400 product page. http://www.woolichracing.com/produc...aki-ninja-400-ex400-usb-denso-v3-package.aspx
Here's the other common choice. https://ftecu.com/
They don't give any detail on what can be adjusted.
They don't give any detail on what can be adjusted.
boyoboy
Well-known member
Thx for the replies. Especially liked the woolich site. a bit overwhelming for me with all the settings/electronics; maybe going to a reputable tuner would be best.
If you were putting on a full exhaust and wanted the fueling right, would you be happy with just a flash tune? It seems shops want to sell electronic tuning "kits" along with different maps available. Would you buy this "kit" or ...? What would you do, and what would be the cost installed?
If you were putting on a full exhaust and wanted the fueling right, would you be happy with just a flash tune? It seems shops want to sell electronic tuning "kits" along with different maps available. Would you buy this "kit" or ...? What would you do, and what would be the cost installed?
doubleapex
Well-known member
Pro 6 Cycle is an authorized Woolich tuning dealer. Give them a call and ask for a technical breakdown of the process and available products.
boyoboy
Well-known member
thanks. Since I started this post, and from looking at some sites, and then re-reading @brianp project bike thread blurp on tuning....and things are slowly sinking in for me.
hack and map - they send you what you need or...
hack and dyno tune a map for best performance...
Yes? in broad terms...
no need to send out your ecu anymore?
Depends on what you are trying to do. Depends how fussy you are.
For most people with a stock bike being used as a street bike, just leaving it alone and spending nothing will be fine. Assuming that's not the case for whatever reason, e.g. you are building a race bike ...
If you have a bike with an ECU that has no provision for a quickshifter (my situation) and you want a quickshifter (my situation) then you will need an add-on box of some sort.
If you want to change something that is beyond the capability of a PowerCommander, e.g. the rev limit, or disable closed-loop operation with the stock narrow-band lambda sensor, or change the rate-of-TPS-change compensation a.k.a. "wall-wetting compensation", then you will have to reflash the ECU.
If you are stuck with having to do both (my situation) then you can get a "canned" reflash that addresses the issues with the stock ECU and a PowerCommander with quickshifter, and use the PowerCommander for fine-tuning, be it on a dyno or otherwise. The "canned" reflash may have fuel and ignition remapped but you will be superimposing the PowerCommander on top of it anyhow, so it really doesn't matter if the canned reflash is super precisely dead nuts accurate. This is the situation with my bike (R3).
One thing that Pro 6 tipped me off to, is that if you are going to tune on a dyno, every time you have to change even the slightest thing inside the ECU, reflashing the ECU takes 10 or 15 minutes. Changing a cell on a PowerCommander and rewriting the PowerCommander map takes 2 seconds. Dyno time is by the hour. At the hourly rate for the dyno, it doesn't take long for a PowerCommander to pay its own way because of the delays involved with reflashing. The counterpoint is that any extra box or gizmo or electrical connector is another point of failure. Reflashing the stock ECU preserves the stock wiring harness and hardware with no extra gadgets or connections to fail.
There's no point buying the reflashing hardware itself if you are only doing one bike. The mail-in ECU will only get you the standard "canned" reflash. If you are going to get a shop to do it then you might as well get them to put it on the dyno and let them deal with it.
Mine is at the point where I've had the bike running in the shop, and learned a thing or two about it, but it hasn't been to the dyno yet.
One thing I found out about the "canned" reflash for mine - which I believe is FTECU - is that it may have disabled the diagnostics and fault code for the oxygen sensor, but it didn't properly remap part-throttle operation for open-loop. It's obnoxiously rich down there. I suspect it's waiting for the O2 sensor signal that will never come. Leaning out the part-throttle part of the map (which I did via PowerCommander) makes it a bit unhappy about cold starting and warm-up, i.e. the times when it would normally be in open loop. For a race bike - which ought not to be spending much time down there - it's not much of an issue, but you really would not want to run with this reflash on a street bike. I suspect that if the O2 sensor were to be hooked back up, it would run normally.
For most people with a stock bike being used as a street bike, just leaving it alone and spending nothing will be fine. Assuming that's not the case for whatever reason, e.g. you are building a race bike ...
If you have a bike with an ECU that has no provision for a quickshifter (my situation) and you want a quickshifter (my situation) then you will need an add-on box of some sort.
If you want to change something that is beyond the capability of a PowerCommander, e.g. the rev limit, or disable closed-loop operation with the stock narrow-band lambda sensor, or change the rate-of-TPS-change compensation a.k.a. "wall-wetting compensation", then you will have to reflash the ECU.
If you are stuck with having to do both (my situation) then you can get a "canned" reflash that addresses the issues with the stock ECU and a PowerCommander with quickshifter, and use the PowerCommander for fine-tuning, be it on a dyno or otherwise. The "canned" reflash may have fuel and ignition remapped but you will be superimposing the PowerCommander on top of it anyhow, so it really doesn't matter if the canned reflash is super precisely dead nuts accurate. This is the situation with my bike (R3).
One thing that Pro 6 tipped me off to, is that if you are going to tune on a dyno, every time you have to change even the slightest thing inside the ECU, reflashing the ECU takes 10 or 15 minutes. Changing a cell on a PowerCommander and rewriting the PowerCommander map takes 2 seconds. Dyno time is by the hour. At the hourly rate for the dyno, it doesn't take long for a PowerCommander to pay its own way because of the delays involved with reflashing. The counterpoint is that any extra box or gizmo or electrical connector is another point of failure. Reflashing the stock ECU preserves the stock wiring harness and hardware with no extra gadgets or connections to fail.
There's no point buying the reflashing hardware itself if you are only doing one bike. The mail-in ECU will only get you the standard "canned" reflash. If you are going to get a shop to do it then you might as well get them to put it on the dyno and let them deal with it.
Mine is at the point where I've had the bike running in the shop, and learned a thing or two about it, but it hasn't been to the dyno yet.
One thing I found out about the "canned" reflash for mine - which I believe is FTECU - is that it may have disabled the diagnostics and fault code for the oxygen sensor, but it didn't properly remap part-throttle operation for open-loop. It's obnoxiously rich down there. I suspect it's waiting for the O2 sensor signal that will never come. Leaning out the part-throttle part of the map (which I did via PowerCommander) makes it a bit unhappy about cold starting and warm-up, i.e. the times when it would normally be in open loop. For a race bike - which ought not to be spending much time down there - it's not much of an issue, but you really would not want to run with this reflash on a street bike. I suspect that if the O2 sensor were to be hooked back up, it would run normally.
It depends on what you want out of it. Everyone is going to have a different experience.
I had a bazzaz TC + ZFI + QS on a 2008 CBR 1000RR + autotune + stock ECU. Never went to the dyno, but always worked well and could pull with any bike < 10k. It never had the top end. That was just fueling and honestly, I would call it good enough. A stock 2016 BMW S1000RR was pretty good right out of the box.
The 2015 R1 I picked up this year (from an AFM racer) has a full RapidBike Racing controller, FTECU flash, auto blip, etc., tuned by EDR. They clearly spent a fair bit of time on it given how smooth the graphs are, including ignition timing and the works. It works well, but if I was doing it from scratch, for the cost I don't know its worth spending the time for the extra few %. If you are racing, sure.
Doozerdave has a ZX-6R Scott Miller spent a good amount of time on that's crazy smooth, but again, unless your racing or seriously into track days its a diminishing return on investment spending more than a couple hours on the dyno.
My experience, autotune gets 95% of it, go to the bench for the last few. YMMV
I had a bazzaz TC + ZFI + QS on a 2008 CBR 1000RR + autotune + stock ECU. Never went to the dyno, but always worked well and could pull with any bike < 10k. It never had the top end. That was just fueling and honestly, I would call it good enough. A stock 2016 BMW S1000RR was pretty good right out of the box.
The 2015 R1 I picked up this year (from an AFM racer) has a full RapidBike Racing controller, FTECU flash, auto blip, etc., tuned by EDR. They clearly spent a fair bit of time on it given how smooth the graphs are, including ignition timing and the works. It works well, but if I was doing it from scratch, for the cost I don't know its worth spending the time for the extra few %. If you are racing, sure.
Doozerdave has a ZX-6R Scott Miller spent a good amount of time on that's crazy smooth, but again, unless your racing or seriously into track days its a diminishing return on investment spending more than a couple hours on the dyno.
My experience, autotune gets 95% of it, go to the bench for the last few. YMMV
boyoboy
Well-known member
The reason I asked about flashing an ecu ...was because I thought it would be req'd for keeping the air/fuel ratio safe (not lean) with a pipe or . slip on. Sounds like it might not be necessary? will the stock oem ecu correct a lean condition from using a pipe? this info raised me eyebrows. hmm.
Mainly looking for good drivability, (smooth at throttle off/on) with the engine air/fuel ratio in a safe range. Not looking to use a Q shifter.
This would be for a td/maybe race bike.
So, a mail in ecu flash is reasonably inexpensive, and should be better than a stock oem ecu- but might not be perfection. I could live with that.
Guess this the tech today; I'll try not to whine too much, but I think Im already missing going to winners circle for a handful of jets...lol.
Thanks everyone for taking the time to reply.
EDIT- looking at this ad, it states 2014 sv 650, ~ 8000kms, - $3500. been up a few weeks and thinking of maybe taking a look. believe its no different than a 2012. https://www.kijiji.ca/v-sport-touring/barrie/suzuki-sv650/1393946018?enableSearchNavigationFlag=true
Mainly looking for good drivability, (smooth at throttle off/on) with the engine air/fuel ratio in a safe range. Not looking to use a Q shifter.
This would be for a td/maybe race bike.
So, a mail in ecu flash is reasonably inexpensive, and should be better than a stock oem ecu- but might not be perfection. I could live with that.
Guess this the tech today; I'll try not to whine too much, but I think Im already missing going to winners circle for a handful of jets...lol.
Thanks everyone for taking the time to reply.
EDIT- looking at this ad, it states 2014 sv 650, ~ 8000kms, - $3500. been up a few weeks and thinking of maybe taking a look. believe its no different than a 2012. https://www.kijiji.ca/v-sport-touring/barrie/suzuki-sv650/1393946018?enableSearchNavigationFlag=true
Last edited:
Chip tuning magic really happens in a vehicle equipped with factory forced induction. You can get 30-50% hp gains by playing with the ones and zeroes. In the past, those kind of gains took a lot of parts, money and time to achieve.
Stock ECU will not automatically correct for a lean condition in open loop (e.g. near full throttle). In most cases, a slip on muffler makes so little difference that it doesn't matter. High flow air filters, same. Full exhaust (different header pipes), large changes to intake runner length or diameter, camshaft changes etc., you had better deal with it.
boyoboy
Well-known member
when I hear the term open loop or closed loop - I don't know what it means. Could you try to explain that to me?
Preface to define terminology and components:
"Lambda" is engineering-speak for whether you have a rich or lean condition. It is the ratio of the oxidizing part of the chemistry (i.e. air or oxygen) to the reducing part of it (fuel). "Lambda" is independent of the type of fuel being used. The common terminology "air/fuel ratio" is not (the commonly referenced "14.7" is only valid for gasoline or similar hydrocarbons). In engineering terms, lambda = 1 represents a stoichiometric charge, the oxidizers precisely balance the fuel so that there is (theoretically) no excess air and no excess fuel. That is what an "oxygen sensor" is actually measuring, hence its engineering term, "lambda sensor".
The common type of catalytic converter in use is called a "three way catalyst" because it simultaneously oxidizes CO and HC and reduces NOx. In order to do this, you can't have excess oxygen because that would impair conversion of NOx, and you can't have excess fuel because you need oxygen from somewhere to oxidize the CO and HC. So, the effectiveness of a 3-way catalyst is very dependent on an engine-out exhaust stream very close to lambda=1. Remember, compliance to emission standards is behind all of this.
Now ... "Open loop". Various temperature, pressure, crank position (infers RPM), and throttle position sensors provide inputs to the ECU which then combines all those through various "maps" and calculations to arrive at a "wild guess" for the pulse duration to provide to the injector(s). The computer does not "actually know" if the resulting estimate of air/fuel ratio was accurate.
"Closed loop". See above, except that in addition to all that, there is a "lambda sensor", a.k.a. "oxygen sensor", which actually measures the exhaust gas coming out of the engine for oxygen content (which is related to air/fuel ratio. Significant excess oxygen = lean, very low oxygen content = rich). The computer then feeds that back into the algorithm to make corrections to the "wild guess" so that subsequent firings will be closer to the setpoint. Thus, if there is a slight deviation in a measurement, or something is slightly out of calibration, it will zero in on the target air/fuel ratio anyhow. This "closes the loop" on the fuel delivery algorithm.
Why not operate in closed loop all the time given that it is a more accurate strategy?
The ability to operate in closed loop is contingent on having a sensor that accurately changes state very closely to the target air/fuel ratio. Lambda sensors have to be in a certain temperature range in order to function. On cold start, that's not the case. Also, cold engines generally don't operate well at lambda=1 for the first few seconds of operation. So ... cold start, and for some period of time until the lambda sensor starts giving a signal, is in open loop.
The other problem is that lambda=1 conditions also give very close to the highest combustion temperature inside the engine. When the engine is lightly loaded, this is not a problem, but at high power output, this can exceed thermal limits of pistons, exhaust valves, and the catalyst itself. So, under load, generally operation is open-loop and at around lambda 0.8 to 0.85.
"Lambda" is engineering-speak for whether you have a rich or lean condition. It is the ratio of the oxidizing part of the chemistry (i.e. air or oxygen) to the reducing part of it (fuel). "Lambda" is independent of the type of fuel being used. The common terminology "air/fuel ratio" is not (the commonly referenced "14.7" is only valid for gasoline or similar hydrocarbons). In engineering terms, lambda = 1 represents a stoichiometric charge, the oxidizers precisely balance the fuel so that there is (theoretically) no excess air and no excess fuel. That is what an "oxygen sensor" is actually measuring, hence its engineering term, "lambda sensor".
The common type of catalytic converter in use is called a "three way catalyst" because it simultaneously oxidizes CO and HC and reduces NOx. In order to do this, you can't have excess oxygen because that would impair conversion of NOx, and you can't have excess fuel because you need oxygen from somewhere to oxidize the CO and HC. So, the effectiveness of a 3-way catalyst is very dependent on an engine-out exhaust stream very close to lambda=1. Remember, compliance to emission standards is behind all of this.
Now ... "Open loop". Various temperature, pressure, crank position (infers RPM), and throttle position sensors provide inputs to the ECU which then combines all those through various "maps" and calculations to arrive at a "wild guess" for the pulse duration to provide to the injector(s). The computer does not "actually know" if the resulting estimate of air/fuel ratio was accurate.
"Closed loop". See above, except that in addition to all that, there is a "lambda sensor", a.k.a. "oxygen sensor", which actually measures the exhaust gas coming out of the engine for oxygen content (which is related to air/fuel ratio. Significant excess oxygen = lean, very low oxygen content = rich). The computer then feeds that back into the algorithm to make corrections to the "wild guess" so that subsequent firings will be closer to the setpoint. Thus, if there is a slight deviation in a measurement, or something is slightly out of calibration, it will zero in on the target air/fuel ratio anyhow. This "closes the loop" on the fuel delivery algorithm.
Why not operate in closed loop all the time given that it is a more accurate strategy?
The ability to operate in closed loop is contingent on having a sensor that accurately changes state very closely to the target air/fuel ratio. Lambda sensors have to be in a certain temperature range in order to function. On cold start, that's not the case. Also, cold engines generally don't operate well at lambda=1 for the first few seconds of operation. So ... cold start, and for some period of time until the lambda sensor starts giving a signal, is in open loop.
The other problem is that lambda=1 conditions also give very close to the highest combustion temperature inside the engine. When the engine is lightly loaded, this is not a problem, but at high power output, this can exceed thermal limits of pistons, exhaust valves, and the catalyst itself. So, under load, generally operation is open-loop and at around lambda 0.8 to 0.85.
You can flash, or go piggy back. Flashing allows modification of the stock fueling tables in addition to modifications such as RPM limit changes, kick stand switches, lights, PAIR valves, etc, but typically is tuned for a specific setup, i.e. pipe, filter, etc. Most available are probably pretty close and its the cheapest option usually. The pigggy-back controller + autotuner, allows you to tune for your specific conditions + setup, typically for a fixed point in time.
I ran the Bazzaz auto tuner a couple times over a 10 year period on the CBR, but things never changed much. I largely left it alone and it worked fine. The RapidBike controller in the R1 is an active piggy-back controller that utilizes an O2 sensor while it operates to make further adjustments on the fly. It's really just a feedback loop. It seems to work... but I can't say for sure what decisions the controller is making to the fuel real-time. It goes fast, so I assume its working.
The 08+ CBR1000RR was a closed ECU and was not usually flashed by owners. I'm sure some ECUs were killed by those that tried. The Traction Control feature in the fuel controller detects RPM spikes and interprets them as wheelspin. Modifying the injection in the same manner, it backs off the power. It's primitive but actually works reasonably well for what it is.
At a high level, adding a piggyback controller (which ties into the injector and a few other places) takes an injector signal, routes it into the aftermarket controler and uses this + RPM + gear position (sometimes) + other sensor tye-ins to say "oh you asked for this much fuel, I'm going to change it a little bit based on my table/calculations".
Hopefully that helps.
I ran the Bazzaz auto tuner a couple times over a 10 year period on the CBR, but things never changed much. I largely left it alone and it worked fine. The RapidBike controller in the R1 is an active piggy-back controller that utilizes an O2 sensor while it operates to make further adjustments on the fly. It's really just a feedback loop. It seems to work... but I can't say for sure what decisions the controller is making to the fuel real-time. It goes fast, so I assume its working.
The 08+ CBR1000RR was a closed ECU and was not usually flashed by owners. I'm sure some ECUs were killed by those that tried. The Traction Control feature in the fuel controller detects RPM spikes and interprets them as wheelspin. Modifying the injection in the same manner, it backs off the power. It's primitive but actually works reasonably well for what it is.
At a high level, adding a piggyback controller (which ties into the injector and a few other places) takes an injector signal, routes it into the aftermarket controler and uses this + RPM + gear position (sometimes) + other sensor tye-ins to say "oh you asked for this much fuel, I'm going to change it a little bit based on my table/calculations".
Hopefully that helps.
boyoboy
Well-known member
this, and the entire thread has been great. merci.
