Yes, keep us informed please 
Remap by Hilltop Motorcycles
- Thread starter Roberto
- Start date
- Status
Interesting change in air/fuel ratio between the two charts, looks seriously lean as stock across the entire rev range.
My brothers was even leaner, Geoff said it was close to doing damage.
Now ridden 1250 km back to my home in France, fitted fresh plugs as advised before i set off and all I can say I"m totally bold over by the transformation the re-map has made to my bike. Without doubt the best £360 I have ever spent on any bike except for the £360 my FS1E cost back in 1976
Just out of interest, do you have to comply with the supposed 100BHP law for motorcycles if living in France? Could they dyno your bike in the event of a spill and prosecute you (unlikely I'm sure) ?
Did you have the exhaust catalyst removed prior to the remap ?? I notice your earlier post states standard pipe and cans, but did you decat the headers or are they totally standard ?
I can feel the looseing of my wallet already, I'm not after more power just a smoother throttle response and at £360 its a good deal, especially if the standard exhaust catalyst can remain without a risk of long-term cat damage through over fuelling.
How did you get on?
Is your GS a twin cam? I am wondering how much the twin cams are transformed with the remap
SiBorg
Registered user
The remap went well, for me at least. My friend (K13GT) discovered that his bike was only running on 3 cylinders, thanks to Geoff, and so had to cancel his remap in favour of getting his bike back to the dealer who serviced it last. It's all under warranty still, so fingers crossed it will go well and he'll book himself back in with Geoff in the near future.
My remap went a whole lot better though. Short version: My bike is a 2010 R1200GS, DOHC. Standard exhaust, still with cat, standard air filter. First dyno run gave 80.41bhp at 6,117rpm, and 69.51 ft/lb 5,990rpm. I was a little surprised at that, because I always thought the engine was pretty good, and if I had had to guess, I would have said 90+bhp. Oh yeah, and mine was also running really lean, as in 17 to 19:1 air/fuel ratio up to 3,500rpm. It improved some after that, but still lean throughout the rev range.
After the remap, the first run gave 104.05bhp at 7,702rpm, and 79.86 ft/lb at 6,303 rpm. Geoff then had a little fettle, which gave the final result of 105.06bhp at 7,513 rpm, and 79.53 ft/lb at 6,075 rpm.
That's a 25bhp (or 31.25%) increase in horsepower, and 10ft/lb (or 14.42%) increase in torque, at the rear wheel. Geoff reckons that this would be something like 130bhp at the crank, by the way.
I didn't get a chance to find out what it felt like on the way home, as it was pouring down the whole way. But this afternoon it was dry.... the character of the bike feels the same, it's just like it's got a whole lot more 'pep', especially in the upper reaches of the rev range. The bike feels really fit and responsive, and cruising at speed feels far less stressed.
I'm really looking forward to getting to know the bike all over again and finding out what it will do, and what the effect on fuel economy will be.
Oh, and when my mate goes back I plan to tag along; I'll give an update on how the K bike does (once it's got a four cylinder engine again).
My remap went a whole lot better though. Short version: My bike is a 2010 R1200GS, DOHC. Standard exhaust, still with cat, standard air filter. First dyno run gave 80.41bhp at 6,117rpm, and 69.51 ft/lb 5,990rpm. I was a little surprised at that, because I always thought the engine was pretty good, and if I had had to guess, I would have said 90+bhp. Oh yeah, and mine was also running really lean, as in 17 to 19:1 air/fuel ratio up to 3,500rpm. It improved some after that, but still lean throughout the rev range.
After the remap, the first run gave 104.05bhp at 7,702rpm, and 79.86 ft/lb at 6,303 rpm. Geoff then had a little fettle, which gave the final result of 105.06bhp at 7,513 rpm, and 79.53 ft/lb at 6,075 rpm.
That's a 25bhp (or 31.25%) increase in horsepower, and 10ft/lb (or 14.42%) increase in torque, at the rear wheel. Geoff reckons that this would be something like 130bhp at the crank, by the way.
I didn't get a chance to find out what it felt like on the way home, as it was pouring down the whole way. But this afternoon it was dry.... the character of the bike feels the same, it's just like it's got a whole lot more 'pep', especially in the upper reaches of the rev range. The bike feels really fit and responsive, and cruising at speed feels far less stressed.
I'm really looking forward to getting to know the bike all over again and finding out what it will do, and what the effect on fuel economy will be.
Oh, and when my mate goes back I plan to tag along; I'll give an update on how the K bike does (once it's got a four cylinder engine again).
Call me cynical but can a remap result in a 30% increase in power
. Does it feel 30% more powerful on the road ? I find these results difficult to believe - can somebody please explain how this sort of power increase is possible with no other modifications ...
Call me cynical but can a remap result in a 30% increase in power
Does it feel 30% more powerful on the road ? I find these results difficult to believe - can somebody please explain how this sort of power increase is possible with no other modifications ...
I can understand your cynicism and would be asking the same questions ...
Just as someone can get into to the magical workings of the 'bike computer then I'm sure that maybe the 'graphs' produced thereby can be 'sorted'
30% more powerful on the road? Dunno! Extra opening of the throttle can compensate for that maybe
My little G650XC, according to the graphs, produced a considerable increase in power and torque ... were the graphs 'fixed' by computer wizardry? Dunno!
I do know that in real terms the likkle 650 was smoother, picked up better, and returned better mpg .... adding a further 20 mile to it's meagre 11 litre tank range (on average)
It's also made it a fucking hoot to ride
Don't get me wrong it sounds like the remap does make a difference and i wouldn't rule it out myself - have had previous bikes chipped / dynoed etc.
Sounds like theres something funny going on with the dyno runs though and I'd want to know the 'real' improvement before splashing the cash. I believe atmospheric conditions can have an impact for example.
If someone can prove these claims (not sure how) I'm going to join the queue - maybe the guy who does this and posted earlier can explain these substantial gains.
Sounds like theres something funny going on with the dyno runs though and I'd want to know the 'real' improvement before splashing the cash. I believe atmospheric conditions can have an impact for example.
If someone can prove these claims (not sure how) I'm going to join the queue - maybe the guy who does this and posted earlier can explain these substantial gains.
Call me cynical but can a remap result in a 30% increase in power
Does it feel 30% more powerful on the road ? I find these results difficult to believe - can somebody please explain how this sort of power increase is possible with no other modifications ...
Slightly at a tangent here , many Td5 Discoverys have been remapped due to claims of up to 40% power increase. The cost of this remap/flash originally started circa £425 but once it became commonplace others were offering a so called 'bespoke' remap for just over £200.
Arguably it came at a further cost in respect of reliability in so much as many of the mapped vehicles were suffering exhaust manifold warpage and had to have a ceramic update to the manifold as well as an upgraded manifold bolt kit.
Whilst obviously not having race car performance many owners were staggered by how much better the Discovery felt both off the mark and mid range acceleration. The biggest power issue with the Td5s is the initial hesitation off the mark - the remap cured this.
Manufacturers of all vehicles deliberately set their vehicles up in an underpowered state of tune. Reliability is more important than all out power. LR could have tuned the Td5 to do exactly what the remap does, increase the power and have a 2 ton flying brick unleashed upon the public!
They didn't, simply because they would have had untold warranty claims, besides , why would they produce a 2.5Td that would leave their own V8 embarrassed at the lights?
In short, they have already done the homework.
I am not suggesting that this would be the case for all vehicular remaps BUT - it may be prudent to ask oneself why doesn't the manufacturer do this for the vehicle YOU own during manufacture, and any other vehicle for that matter. It's not all about emissions!
I'm a bit surprised by the claimed gains. They're commonplace on turbocharged engines where it's relatively easy to add more fuel and get the turbo to huff a bit harder but the percentage gains quoted here are off the scale in comparison with what can be gained on normally aspirated engines in the car world.
Having said that, it's obvious that current BMW motorcycle engines run leaner than a very lean thing. 19:1 is certainly a long way from the stochiometric "ideal" of 14.7:1. However, I believe that some modern car engines are running as lean as 22:1.
It's not so much the figures that matter, particularly for a GS. I'd be much more interested in a nice flat torque "curve" rather than a peaky engine with high maximum power output. It's how the bike feels and goes on the road that's the important thing.
I know a couple of car tuners who in the past have tuned turbo diesels for me on the basis that if I didn't like it they'd put it back to standard. That's always worked to convince me to buy the software and one of those remaps with a DMS file was £500 in 2003. However, it did result in 150 bhp on the rollers from a previous 115 and another 40 lbs-ft. That car's still going as strong as ever 110K miles later, for many of which it's been driven very hard. Having had those kind of performance gains from turbo diesel cars, I'd be very interested in riding a GS which has been remapped by Hilltop to see how it compares with standard.
Tempted as I am to find out, my current GS is on a PCP deal and I haven't decided whether or not to keep it at the end of the contract. However, if I do, I can see a full exhaust system and a remap in its future......
Having said that, it's obvious that current BMW motorcycle engines run leaner than a very lean thing. 19:1 is certainly a long way from the stochiometric "ideal" of 14.7:1. However, I believe that some modern car engines are running as lean as 22:1.
It's not so much the figures that matter, particularly for a GS. I'd be much more interested in a nice flat torque "curve" rather than a peaky engine with high maximum power output. It's how the bike feels and goes on the road that's the important thing.
I know a couple of car tuners who in the past have tuned turbo diesels for me on the basis that if I didn't like it they'd put it back to standard. That's always worked to convince me to buy the software and one of those remaps with a DMS file was £500 in 2003. However, it did result in 150 bhp on the rollers from a previous 115 and another 40 lbs-ft. That car's still going as strong as ever 110K miles later, for many of which it's been driven very hard. Having had those kind of performance gains from turbo diesel cars, I'd be very interested in riding a GS which has been remapped by Hilltop to see how it compares with standard.
Tempted as I am to find out, my current GS is on a PCP deal and I haven't decided whether or not to keep it at the end of the contract. However, if I do, I can see a full exhaust system and a remap in its future......
Rodeo Ron
Registered user
Had my 36k miles 10 remapped by Geoff at 7k miles and experienced similar increases in torque and hp. Apart from the feeling of a smoother motor at all times it takes a while to discover when and where the benefits are, and where they are of use in real world riding. Peace of mind in relation to avoiding the dangers of weak fuelling is with you all the time but as for the increases in torque and hp..? they only arrive when you ask for them! and to get at them you need to enthusiastically use the last 25% of the twistgrip.. which you don't normally do in everyday riding. When you are out for a proper play, in a suitable place however... the differences are truly amazing, the bike pulls like train and just gets stronger and stronger right up to about 7500rpm. The danger.. or joy.. of the front wheel rising extends beyond third and into fourth gear especially when there is a friendly ramp in the tarmac to assist or when you are confident enough to use full throttle coming out of a corner. But I repeat.. its all in the last 25% of the twistgrip folks.
My mpg has stayed about the same by the way but tyre wear has increased.
I have a watercooled jobbie in mind for next year and have already put my name down but as soon as there is 2k on the clock I will be back to Hilltop.. guaranteed.
My mpg has stayed about the same by the way but tyre wear has increased.
I have a watercooled jobbie in mind for next year and have already put my name down but as soon as there is 2k on the clock I will be back to Hilltop.. guaranteed.
Rodeo Ron
Registered user
Had my 36k miles 10 remapped by Geoff at 7k miles and experienced similar increases in torque and hp. Apart from the feeling of a smoother motor at all times it takes a while to discover when and where the benefits are, and where they are of use in real world riding.
Peace of mind in relation to avoiding the dangers of weak fuelling is with you all the time but as for the increases in torque and hp..? they only arrive when you ask for them! and to get at them you need to enthusiastically use the last 25% of the twistgrip.. which you don't normally do in everyday riding. When you are out for a proper play, in a suitable place however... the differences are truly amazing, the bike pulls like train and just gets stronger and stronger right up to about 7500rpm.
The danger.. or joy.. of the front wheel rising extends beyond third and into fourth gear especially when there is a friendly ramp in the tarmac to assist or when you are confident enough to use full throttle coming out of a corner. But I repeat.. its all in the last 25% of the twistgrip folks.
My mpg has stayed about the same by the way but tyre wear has increased.
I have a watercooled jobbie in mind for next year and have already put my name down but as soon as there is 2k on the clock I will be back to Hilltop.. guaranteed.
Peace of mind in relation to avoiding the dangers of weak fuelling is with you all the time but as for the increases in torque and hp..? they only arrive when you ask for them! and to get at them you need to enthusiastically use the last 25% of the twistgrip.. which you don't normally do in everyday riding. When you are out for a proper play, in a suitable place however... the differences are truly amazing, the bike pulls like train and just gets stronger and stronger right up to about 7500rpm.
The danger.. or joy.. of the front wheel rising extends beyond third and into fourth gear especially when there is a friendly ramp in the tarmac to assist or when you are confident enough to use full throttle coming out of a corner. But I repeat.. its all in the last 25% of the twistgrip folks.
My mpg has stayed about the same by the way but tyre wear has increased.
I have a watercooled jobbie in mind for next year and have already put my name down but as soon as there is 2k on the clock I will be back to Hilltop.. guaranteed.
Yes to get my bike on French plates I had Coopers BMW set the output on the ECU for France and give me a letter to say it had been done. After I got my plates fitted, well you guess the rest.
My bike is totally standard with the cat. no fancy air filters, nothing.
Hope this helps.
mcinlb
Registered user
This seems to make a lot more sense as far as the real gains achieved, I would also suspect that at this last 25% of the throttle, the fuel consumption would fall through the floor.
Erm - I still don't buy it. The post remap claimed peak power of approx 105 sounds about right but I don't believe a standard twin cam only produces 80 at the wheel.
I reckon the standard power would be closer to 100. 5 to 10% increase in peak power sounds about right to me.
Has anyone experienced a 30% measured increase in power having fitted a power commander - if it's possible with a remap surely the gains would be similar
You might say this is irrelevant and the bike feels better but the measured gains are important and will persuade many to go ahead with this remap imo.
I reckon the standard power would be closer to 100. 5 to 10% increase in peak power sounds about right to me.
Has anyone experienced a 30% measured increase in power having fitted a power commander - if it's possible with a remap surely the gains would be similar
You might say this is irrelevant and the bike feels better but the measured gains are important and will persuade many to go ahead with this remap imo.
Sounds a bit low but I am not surprised. On a chain drive, a 110HP motor would be around 95 at the wheel with losses. There are more losses with a shaft drive. How Hilltop can map 130 or so out of the motor is also surprising, unless BMW have deliberately electronically strangled the engine for some reason. It could be that they fitted the HP2 motor and reduced power electronically, and the Hilltop map lets it back out.
- Status
Similar threads
