This'll tell you more, Stevie: https://www.bennetts.co.uk/bikesoci...improve-a-honda-fireblades-power-and-fuelling
Interesting read , but can’t help think fuelling should be better on a 20k bike without having to spend another £400 , in on my second blade and fuelling is not great after standard pipe changed , slight flat spot between 3-4k not sure if other litre bikes are like this ?
And as I said in another post , took an sp out for a day when mine was being serviced and tickover was shocking , all over the place and that was a 2019 my
^^^ Fair enough Raph, but they seem to have a tolerance zone or performance range where 'minor' modification will not cause ill effect to the idling or running. This might be best illustrated where some of our members have fitted the Arrow or Racefit and reported no difference, but conversely one who fitted Yoshi did experience problems. I remain intrigued by @Stevie_d 's question though, because there might be a case that the Yamaha is either more or less susceptible to change than the Honda.
My decatted MT10 still runs the o2 sensors so the closed loop part of the mapping for the small throttle openings is still governed by the ECU as dictated by the metered fuel /air ratio. That’s my understanding anyway. At full beans you wouldn’t notice it as the O2 sensors are largely not reliant at WOT. If the O2 sensors were removed and replaced with resistors the resultant remap would then dictate the fuel air ratio as it would have been set up on the dyno rig whilst monitoring with a sniffer up its butt. The resistors plugged in to the original O2 cable are just to frig the ECU into thinking they’re still present. That’s why those with the Bazzaz or Power commander auto tune is ideal as you have to install a wide band sensor to monitor all O2 values at all throttle openings which then builds a generic map. An end can change shouldn’t really make that much difference but loss of back pressure I suppose still accounts for something.
Still puzzles me how these days , the bike can’t re learn it’s own fuelling . Even a slip on alters the bike so much that a flat spot is very annoying . Have to live with it or buy a power commander , or full map on a dyno
To an extent it should though @Stevie_d , the ECU should be adjusting the fuel to achieve a theoretical perfect 13:1 or whatever it is based on O2 values providing the O2 sensors are still present. Maybe the factory maps are just set to deliver the mapped values and the O2 sensors are there to verify it’s correct rather than to set the figure. Would make sense I suppose?
The only downside of an autotune is you have to get someone to tig weld an 18mm wideband sensor ring into the headers as the narrowband rings for O2 are only 12mm or 14mm (can’t remember).
Thinking about it, aside from the cost implications designing a system that would cover all aspects and compensate for any idiot adding whatever they felt might be right for the machine, the only concern that the companies have is to keep noise and emissions down to levels dictated by government and legislation and to lock down ECU modifications (Triumph did this back in 2013). Proof (if it was needed) is VWs attempt to fudge the figures in the recent emissions scandal to appease the governments targets and that was just to beat Euro4 emission targets, and now E5 is upon us, and if the main manufacturers with their multi million dollar R&D budgets cannot achieve this how can Joe Bloggs? It would never happen Stevie!
Does a PC5 from a 2012 model fit a 2018? Can’t see if model numbers are different on dynojet website. Just wondering as i took it off my 2012 before trading it in. Not sure if i may need it for the SP2 at some point....
Got a full system fitted so hence why the rapid bike, was recommended by dealer tbh, I'd rather have gone for a reflash but warranty would have been voided it found out.
Bikes do not keep long term fuel trim maps the way cars do - yet, so there is no learning in a stock ECU. The other reason the bikes ECU cannot be configured from the factory to keep enrichening the mixture until ideal is that the emissions output is legislated by way of target and actual AFR. While science has an ideal stoimetric value of about 13:1, world governments feel they have better science and want internal combustion vehicles to operate in the 14:1 and above range. Basically our politicians are forcing us to run lean and risk destroying our engines, but hey at least Greta feels good yeah?
