Remap by Hilltop Motorcycles

[APE]

The water cooled bike will be heavier. I also don't think they'll increase the power by more than 5 or 10 bhp. They could have put the HP2 engine in the GS but they choose not too.

 

[Wilsdorf]

I would assume they will only add 10bhp to allow for steady evolution of the new engine and increase sales as much as possible.

 

[neoviper]

is it bhp that pulls you up the road or is torque ?? just a quick thort

 

[Wilsdorf]

Indeed - but all the maps/results posted show/state a sizeable increase in both bhp and torque.

 

[Rusty Bolts]

I had mine done a few weeks ago. For me it's a huge improvement. But it's about fuelling, throttle response, smooth pick up, rolling on in a higher gear smoothly ... Does my bike go any faster? I dunno, and I don't really care.
Is the throttle crisper, a bit more precise ? Yeah .. loads.

The real benefit is stuff like town work, driving out of a roundabout, a little squirt her and there in third passing traffic.

It's not about speed, it's about blunt scissors v sharp scissors.

Had mine done recently and I share Giles's view. My initial figures were not to bad (82 bhp and 68ft/lbs). Afterwards the figures were 99bhp and 83 ft/lbs. The air/fuel was not too bad at 15:1. It is now all within 13-14:1. So I would not expect to be experienceing a huge difference in overall feel.
The engine does feel stronger not 'tear your arms off' but more linear and available earlier and overtakes seem quicker and easier (=safer?). Max power is now about 600 rpm lower at 6900. Also it feel like it now needs a higher 6th gear.
I did not do a tps reset and found that my MPG whilst traveling down the Fosse Way was down by about 4 MPGs. However, I was trying out the new found power and torque. I have reset my TPS and now and on my normal commute it is about 4MPG better after the remap. Still getting used to it so will report back.

 

[Wilsdorf]

My initial figures were not to bad (82 bhp and 68ft/lbs). Afterwards the figures were 99bhp and 83 ft/lbs. The air/fuel was not too bad at 15:1. It is now all within 13-14:1. So I would not expect to be experienceing a huge difference in overall feel.

With those increases, I am afraid I would expect a huge difference - we are talking over 20% increase in both torque and bhp - that would be a fairly huge difference in overall feel in most people's books.

 

[Rusty Bolts]

I suppose a lot is how you ride it. If you don't normally visit the upper end of the performace envelope I imagine you would experience a big difference. However, I seem to potter about in the mid-range and it does feel smoother, stronger and more willing. As I mentioned it is not 'pull your arms off' but then we are only talking about 100 BHP. I suppose feel is very subjective. What is better is the way the power is delivered and the drivabilty-which in itself is another subjective term. That, in my opinion, is how feel manifests itself for a significant number of riders, especially if they do not regularly ride against other riders and so have no direct comparison.
I have not noticed any increase in road presence though

 

[cookie]

The engine does feel stronger not 'tear your arms off' but more linear and available earlier and overtakes seem quicker and easier (=safer?)

not really IMO - you still have to do the speed/distance calculation in your head, just the figures are different.

loud pipes don't save lives either.

 

[Rusty Bolts]

not really IMO - you still have to do the speed/distance calculation in your head, just the figures are different.

Agreed and less time on the other side of the road has got to be better

 

[Wilsdorf]

I suppose a lot is how you ride it. If you don't normally visit the upper end of the performace envelope I imagine you would experience a big difference. However, I seem to potter about in the mid-range and it does feel smoother, stronger and more willing. As I mentioned it is not 'pull your arms off' but then we are only talking about 100 BHP. I suppose feel is very subjective. What is better is the way the power is delivered and the drivabilty-which in itself is another subjective term. That, in my opinion, is how feel manifests itself for a significant number of riders, especially if they do not regularly ride against other riders and so have no direct comparison.
I have not noticed any increase in road presence though

The graphs show increased torque and bhp throughout the rev range. With those figures you would experience the increase almost everywhere. A lot of people say their car/bike has run better after a service, sometimes I am sure this is true with fresh filters/oil change whatever - but for the most part they feel better about their bike because it has been freshly looked at by a professional.

At the end of the day the GS is a great bike that can be used for many different riding styles - I wanted to see if I could get rid of my sports bikes and just ride the GS for all uses - the answer is no. However, if it had an extra 20bhp and commensurate torque I honestly think it would be a different answer. Now I am seriously considering selling a few of my bikes and replacing them with a more modern sports bike to partner the GS.

All I can go on is my own tests and for me and my own bike - there was no performance gain against an identical but standard, which is not what I expected to see.

 

[The Sea Dog]

The graphs show increased torque and bhp throughout the rev range. With those figures you would experience the increase almost everywhere.

However, if it had an extra 20bhp and commensurate torque

All I can go on is my own tests and for me and my own bike - there was no performance gain against an identical but standard, which is not what I expected to see.

Been following this thread with great interest as the on paper gains sounded great and something I think would make the bike near as dam-it perfect and I was intending getting done. That said I don't recognise my bike from some of the descriptions on here of dog rough running, terrible jerkiness etc etc. My TwinCam is smooth and has good power with absolutely none of the jerkiness that apparently afflicts so many of the bikes that have been done, but more drive would always be welcome.

Interesting to hear that side by side there was negligible if any gains in real world performance as from the figures shown I would have expected a very noticeable difference in drive from a bike making 20-25% more

I'll continue to read the thread and digest info from people more knowledgeable on the subject than I

 

[neoviper]

its All About the Right Tool for the Right Job .the gs is a mega all round bike ,if its to do fast laps of the tt its not the tool for that job ,the gs is tool for doing 1000s on miles across difrint countres and havin fun at the same time thats y bmw have a s1000rr now thats the tool for the tt im sorry to say it but if you had 150bhp gs its still not the tool for that job .enjoy the bike for what it was made for .well on that note i must go and do sum work as the sun is out

 

[Wilsdorf]

its All About the Right Tool for the Right Job .the gs is a mega all round bike ,if its to do fast laps of the tt its not the tool for that job ,the gs is tool for doing 1000s on miles across difrint countres and havin fun at the same time thats y bmw have a s1000rr now thats the tool for the tt im sorry to say it but if you had 150bhp gs its still not the tool for that job .enjoy the bike for what it was made for .well on that note i must go and do sum work as the sun is out

To some extent it is about the right tool - but I can also ride a real life 150bhp plus Fireblade or CBR600 any day I like and and while each is quicker than the GS round the course - the GS is the most enjoyable at the minute 3 years ago I would have said the Blade was - 2 years before that and I'd have picked the CBR600.

The reason we have lots of bikes is because they all do something a little better than the others - but I find myself riding the GS no matter what these days - they are always the keys I go for.

Well, I have nothing further to add for now.

 

[neoviper]

ok have a good one and ride safe .

ps was it your dad on the other std bike ???

geoff @ hilltop

 

[theaaman]

Having been reading this thread for some time I bit the bullet and had the bike done by Geoff last Staurday. Top bloke and very interesting to talk to. Clearly this guy knows his stuff.
The first run on the bike produced the following figures:
Max Power 82.39 bhp @ 8290 rpm - Max torque 65.59 ft/ib @ 4004 rpm
It also showed that the bike was running extremely lean, not even getting to below 15 parts per whatsname until past 4000 rpm and then holding this all the way to 8300 rpm. Apparently one of the leanest Geof has seen for a while.(unlike the rider)
Once Geoff had swapped the mapping over and set up the other bits (he clearly enjoys his work) the bike was giving the following readings:
Max Power 101.9 bhp @ 7726 rpm - Max torque 134.51 ft/lb @ 2946 rpm
with the fuelling getting below 13.5 parts per whatsname at 2500 rpm and staying solidily between 12.5 and 13.5 right up to 8300 rpm.
What these figures actually mean I am not really bothered about. I now find the bike definitely smoother throughout the rev range. When I use the power it picks up far quicker than before and appears to get around the speedo quicker than before. I went for a 90 mile run today in perfect condition and smiled all the way. Is it faster? I doubt it. Is it quicker? I am sure it is. Is it smoother and generally nicer to ride? definitely. Was it worth it? I am certain it was.
Cheers Geoff and thanks Ian the aa man
PS 2012 TC GS with 4000 miles on the clock
With a 19" Ztechnik adventure model screen and winglets plus a Sargent seat the bike is just about perfect now.

 

[Wilsdorf]

Is it faster? I doubt it.

Why do you doubt it? With almost 20bhp more it should be so much faster.

What was the real torque figure after the map?

 

[theaaman]

I can only tell what is in the last post ie 134.51 ft/lbs @ 2946 rpm.
I doubt whether it is faster mostly because I have no idea how fast the thing will go. Like most of us I drive for a living so will have to wait for a track day to find that out. I am convinced the bike goes quicker as before it went pretty well. Now it goes like the brown stuff that is leaving the digging implement. I like that alot.

 

[Blackal]

I can only tell what is in the last post ie 134.51 ft/lbs @ 2946 rpm.
I doubt whether it is faster mostly because I have no idea how fast the thing will go. Like most of us I drive for a living so will have to wait for a track day to find that out. I am convinced the bike goes quicker as before it went pretty well. Now it goes like the brown stuff that is leaving the digging implement. I like that alot.

How much torque?

I suspect that this is a product of the gearing - a bit like a torque-multiplier for machinery nuts/bolts.

As such - how meaningfull is it?

Al

 

[Deleted account 181015003]

Stock premap after map figures

Stock 88.5 lbft 108.75 bhp BMW specs
pre map 65.59 lbft 82.93 bhp
after map 134.51 lbft 101.9 bhp

Increase of 46 lbft of torque over stock this is more than 50% at less half the rpm of the stock setup?

The numbers dont look right to me

 

[Deleted account 181015003]

Just done a quick calc to make 134.51 lbft @ 2946rpm the engine will be producing about 75 bhp @ 2946 rpm the stock engine is producing about 38 bhp at 2946 rpm.

The numbers dont add up