Page 3 of 6 FirstFirst 12345 ... LastLast
Results 33 to 48 of 94

Thread: Standard vs PCV vs AF-XIED

  1. #33
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Aug 2013
    Location
    Midlothian
    Posts
    242
    Blog Entries
    1
    Two months later, are they still performing well? Have you played around with the settings or left them alone? Which setting did you settle with in the end? So many questions! ! Think this is the route I'd like to take for my single cam.

  2. #34
    Subscriber Click here to find out how to Subscribe
    Join Date
    May 2014
    Location
    Downpatrick, N Ireland
    Posts
    771
    TBH I never really think about them now!
    I have adapted to how the bike runs so well that I have just accepted that it's the way it runs now.
    There are 11 graduations of adjustment on each unit, easily adjusted with a small screwdriver. Number 1 is standard and number 11 is reckoned to be an increase of around 8% in the air/fuel ratio in the closed loop of the fuel injection.
    I started off at number 8, which seems to be the most popular and went to 9 when I fitted the sports exhaust. Didn't have the exhaust on long so just put it back to 8 and have left it there since.
    So, how well does it run?
    It's just sooo flexible and smooth now. Frequently, when in slower traffic, I unintentionally find myself letting the revs dip below 2k.
    No dramas, no engine hunting. You feel the engine turning over but more of a low frequency throb than vibration.
    The sweet spot is around 3.5-4.5k rpm which is where I probably spend most time. Need to overtake? Just open the taps in sixth and you're passing quickly without any drama. Drop a gear and I'm glad I have my top box where the passenger seat was!
    I'm currently running de catted headers, the flappy valve and standard TC silencer.
    The de catted headers certainly seem to let it rev a bit more cleanly near the red line, but I do feel that the standard headers make it a bit more punchy in the mid range, so the standard headers may go back on soon.
    I just prefer the flappy valve to keep the exhaust quieter through towns and on longer runs. The TC pipe can be quite loud.
    For real world driveabilty, I just love this bike now.
    They are 'fit and forget' and I would still recommend them as the first modification I would make over silencers, etc.

  3. #35
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Aug 2013
    Location
    Midlothian
    Posts
    242
    Blog Entries
    1
    Cheers for that. I don't think silencers alone make any real difference, in the past I had my old gsxr11 on a dyno and tried several different cans, horsepower exactly the same on all.

    I have a set of decatted standard headers sitting in my garage and a gutted end can and would like to stick at least the headers on. Always worried about it running to lean as they tend to do in standard trim. These things seem to be able to address my concerns.

  4. #36
    Subscriber Click here to find out how to Subscribe
    Join Date
    May 2014
    Location
    Downpatrick, N Ireland
    Posts
    771
    A German magazine did a review on about 20 different cans fitted to a TC, complete with dyno runs for each. Very enlightening.
    Only two produced an increase in power by about two bhp but a massive increase in noise. Most, including the really expensive ones were lucky to produce the same as stock. You can save a couple of kilos weight but have you seen the size of the average tosser?
    You can view the video of the test if you look on you tube and virtually all suffered from that stutter when moving off.
    Like most manufacturers these days, it's difficult to improve on the systems they've developed without a big increase in noise.
    Performance increase is all in the mind.
    You could go ahead and try your de catted headers without doing any harm. The ECU will adapt to them fairly quickly. You won't do any damage. You'll find an improvement higher up the rev range.
    You may lose a bit of mid range depending how much you've gutted the silencer. I would try it with the standard first.
    The guy who developed the AF XiED units has done a lot of measuring, not just his opinion, and has concluded that the ECU is a very clever piece of kit. When you make a modest change to the exhaust, it adjusts the fueling. Can take a tank or so of fuel to do it though.
    So, do that and it'll be a bit quicker higher up the revs, it'll not do your engine any harm but it'll still be harsh with the flat spot and the surging. Simples!
    The AF XiED units work in tandem with the ECU and with the de cat headers or similar, you bike will be a totally different beast.
    Let us know how you get on.

  5. #37
    Subscriber Click here to find out how to Subscribe
    Join Date
    Jul 2014
    Location
    Boston & Miami, USA
    Posts
    578
    Quote Originally Posted by comberjohn View Post
    ...
    The guy who developed the AF XiED units has done a lot of measuring, not just his opinion, and has concluded that the ECU is a very clever piece of kit. When you make a modest change to the exhaust, it adjusts the fueling. Can take a tank or so of fuel to do it though.
    ...
    You're right, it took a lot of measurements and research to work out just how sophisticated the Motronics and BMSKs are. They are able to compensate and correct (in other words adapt to) many engine, intake and exhaust changes. The bmsk is even clever enough to work pretty well with one of the O2 sensors disconnected. It uses what it learns on the good O2 and applies it to the other side--not perfectly of course.

    In the most recent revisions of the GS-911 software, the engineers at hexcode have teased out the short term and long term trims for both cylinders. What that means is that we are no longer "guessing" from measurements, but can see the exact structure of the adaptation mechanisms.

    Lambda control factors for each cylinder that keep the short-term, closed-loop fueling set at exactly the lambda setting of the O2 (or O2/AF-XIED if you have it).

    From the short term trims it then develops a table of long term trims. Additive Trims for each cylinder fix problems at small angles, such as injector switch-on speed or vacuum leaks--to name a couple. Multiplicative Trims to take care of fuel pressure, air temp sensor errors (why BoosterPlugs don't work for long), fuel ethanol content and to carry any shifting of the O2 sensor to THE ENTIRE FUEL TABLE, which is why the af-xied works outside the closed loop area.

    These ECUs are really very good stuff but a bit technical. Bottom line though is like comberjohn said, "a very clever piece of kit".

  6. #38
    Subscriber Click here to find out how to Subscribe
    Join Date
    May 2014
    Location
    Downpatrick, N Ireland
    Posts
    771
    That's him! ^

  7. #39
    Subscriber Click here to find out how to Subscribe
    Join Date
    Jun 2007
    Location
    Glenshee
    Posts
    5,445
    And mine arrived this morning...no VAT, no duty, just an envelope in the post....whoopeee!!!

    now to fix on.

  8. #40
    Subscriber Click here to find out how to Subscribe
    Join Date
    May 2014
    Location
    Downpatrick, N Ireland
    Posts
    771
    Just wanted to clarify a point that I made shortly after fitting the AF-XIED units. At that time, I thought that my tickover had dropped slightly, making the engine hesitate when moving off. Now I think it was probably imagination.
    Now I believe what was actually happening was that my throttle bodies were slightly out of sync at the time causing the hesitation.
    I had to sync them last week and realised that the symptoms were the same.

  9. #41
    Subscriber Click here to find out how to Subscribe
    Join Date
    Dec 2015
    Location
    Grantham, England
    Posts
    221
    Quote Originally Posted by Mistacat View Post
    Having run the XIED`s for over 2 years - 20k + miles on an 2009 1200gs.
    My recorded data shows AFR`s of setting 6 = 14.1 , setting 7 = 13.8 , setting 8 = 13.2,
    I know stick with setting 7. The system seems to take 3 tanks of fuel to settle down.( adaptations )
    I have now fitted them on a 2012 GS so will check these results on the twin cam when I get time to hook up the Innovate dual LM2 to the bike and log the data.
    Mistacat, I see you're in Grantham so just up the road from me.
    Maybe we could catch up at some point and have a chat about these Xieds?
    I'm fancying a Set myself.

  10. #42
    Subscriber Click here to find out how to Subscribe
    Join Date
    Jun 2007
    Location
    Glenshee
    Posts
    5,445
    See post in 1200 hexhead section....

    http://www.ukgser.com/forums/showthr...y-sorted/page4

  11. #43
    Subscriber Click here to find out how to Subscribe
    Join Date
    Nov 2011
    Location
    Grantham, England
    Posts
    503
    Quote Originally Posted by DeuceBG View Post
    Mistacat, I see you're in Grantham so just up the road from me.
    Maybe we could catch up at some point and have a chat about these Xieds?
    I'm fancying a Set myself.
    Hi, No Problem. I have now done 30K miles with my AF-XIED`s.
    After 9K miles on my 2012 TC I finally got around to hooking my dual band Innovate LM2 up to the bike to record the AFR`s - setting 7 on the AF-XIED`s is still giving me 13.8 to 1 AFR.
    I am 2 miles south of Grantham I mile past the army camp, around most of the time Pm me for more details.

  12. #44
    Subscriber Click here to find out how to Subscribe
    Join Date
    Nov 2009
    Location
    Wokingham, England
    Posts
    1,178
    Well, I am now 2500 miles in after fitting the AF XIED units. This is my second GSA TC, the first one I had remapped. It is very hard to make an objective assessment against which is better....but won't stop me giving a shot. Overall the AF units are really impressive, wonderful fuelling, especially on a trailing and steady throttle. I used to get surging at a steady 30mph in second...no more.

    The smoothness across the Rev range is incredible and the 4500 hole has gone. I would say that the engine is smoother than the remap across the range by some margin. I am not sure that the motor delivers quite the uplift in wallop the remap did but it is close....and certainly better than standard.

    So on bike effect alone I would go for the AF units over a remap. Add to this the ability to remove and take to the next bike or sell on when you sell your bike and it is a no brainer for me. Very simple to fit as well.

    Highly recommended.

  13. #45
    Subscriber Click here to find out how to Subscribe
    Join Date
    May 2014
    Location
    Downpatrick, N Ireland
    Posts
    771
    You'll burn in hell for that!
    I would imagine that it would be difficult to be objective unless running them back to back. But it's interesting to hear your experiences having used both.
    You pays yer money...

  14. #46
    Proud Tosser Click here to find out how to Subscribe
    Join Date
    Mar 2010
    Location
    Stockport
    Posts
    2,481
    Trouble is if you can't measure any results with a four gas and rolling road it all subjective guess work

  15. #47
    Subscriber Click here to find out how to Subscribe
    Join Date
    Jul 2014
    Location
    Boston & Miami, USA
    Posts
    578
    You actually can measure the results on the road. The method is to take a GS-911, put it into data collection mode take several in-road acceleration samples, and average the results. The chart below is an example of that on a modified bike, compared to a stock dyno run done by a reputable shop. It isn't a perfect comparison, but the improvement in the 2000-3000 rpm range is what many riders report.

    Further, it is well known among pilots of piston engine aircraft, which have a control that directly alters AFR, that engines get smoother as you shift them toward Best Power and they run roughly as you lean the mixture toward Best Economy.

    If you leave the O2 sensors connected, chip remapping cannot alter AFR in those areas where Closed Loop fueling is active. Further, if a chip remapper does change fueling in the closed loop area, long term trims get out of whack in those areas not supported by Closed Loop. Not saying it can't be done to effect in the Open Loop areas (wide throttle angles) but it's tricky on a bike with O2 sensors.

    The second chart below shows an R1200 before and after acceleration done on a dyno using gs-911 data collection.




  16. #48
    Subscriber Click here to find out how to Subscribe
    Join Date
    Nov 2009
    Location
    Wokingham, England
    Posts
    1,178
    Which probably explains why I am experiencing a smoother engine right across the Rev range than I did with a remap....

    .....really done it now...a marked man!

Page 3 of 6 FirstFirst 12345 ... LastLast

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •  

Anyone attending a Ride Out or Event organised through the UKGSer Forums does so at their own risk.
UKGSer.com or anyone organising an event posted here will not be held responsible in any way for damage or personal injury sustained while attending any such events.

Members attending any such event do so at their own risk.

The text, images, graphics, sound files, animation files, video files, and their arrangement on this Website are all subject to copyright and other intellectual property protection. These objects may not be copied for commercial use or distribution, nor may these objects be modified or reposted to other sites without prior written permission.

Disclaimer: Use or depiction of the BMW logo or trademark throughout this web site is for illustrative and editorial purposes only, and to the benefit of the trademark owner, with no intention of infringement of the trademark.

The UKGSer Forums may include adult content for which it cannot be held responsible. Your use of this website constitutes acceptance of the UKGSER network privacy policy

"Its about being a grown up hooligan - and if that means a dark visor, remus open pipe and a bit of speeding out of town then all well and good"