Remap by Hilltop Motorcycles

[oldnfat]

Strange then that virtually no-one that had posted has mentioned anything about a staggering performance difference, only the smoothness, because there isn't one.

Bring your bike over to the Isle of Man for TT week 2014 and show me just how staggering it is, not only that we will put a few bikes on a dyno with yours and you can guess which power output is yours - because in my humble opinion the remap is somewhat underwhelming on the performance increase front - and the dyno figures do a lot less than prove a point; they suggest something is amiss.

Hi all, I have been following this thread with interest. Having had my 09 GSA remapped last year I think the comments on here about real power gains may have a point in terms of where the power is delivered. The other issue I guess it the difference between what is advertised and what you get from a remap from Hilltop.

For me, the element that attracted me were the comments about tractability and smoothness. Having covered about 8K on the bike I can say the following:

1. It "feels" faster or to be more accurate..eager. This may be as a result of the torque being delivered lower in the rev range in gear. Top end power may not be affected much but then I don't ride on the throttle stop as much as I used too so not relevant for me.

2. The overrun popping has gone, as has the 4500 pronounced flat spot....which was a PITA

3. MPG about the same....may be marginally better at 49 up from 47 but probably down to changed riding style I.e. More short shifting

4. Ride ability is sooo much better, particularly out of slow corners....just crack the throttle and away you go....instant drive delivered in a very controlled way....allot less feathering the clutch.

5. Smoothness.....frankly astonishing that it is the same motor. Virtually eliminated bar vibes at the usual vibes 4.5-5K rev range....worth it just for this.

So, is the bike faster.....don't know and don't care. Is this a problem...only for those who want a faster bike as I think the gains quoted are hard to comprehend and do take Wilsdorf point. My advice here would be buy a KTM 1190.

I have recently bought a new TC....from memory I think the fuelling on the TC is better than the stock single cam. However, it is no where near as good as my remapped SC therefore I will be off to Hilltop in the spring....no power increase needed.

 

[Goose]

Whose dyno?

We had the bikes checked and tested in Cape Town with a company called Superbike Solutions.

The main reason we did this was because there was a massive issue we were having with the bikes - riding in hot Temps using poor fuel, the engines were "pre detonating" like crazy, make horrible noises as if someone forgot a can of bolts inside the engines. Overheating was a huge thing and we realised that the engines were setup according to EC3 Regs over in Germany and not set or mapped for use in SA. We tried really hard to get BMW-SA to admit there were issues and we wanted (as per their sales spec and documentation) to load the "Optional Poor Fuel Mapping" as offered by BMW-GA, which they refused...........methinks it would have opened a can of worms because they admitted some bikes had blown engines due to running too lean!

Fitment of a PC-V did the job for most - but we had new bikes and were warned that they would void the warranty on the bikes immediately - in fact they even tried threatning us that on the Dyno day - they'd take the VIN numbers of the bikes on the Dyno and void their warranties... right bunch of twats!

I have PDF files with most of the tests done to prove that most were running exceptionally lean........

Look imo a PC does the job ......... Geoff does the same as the PC, however he sorts out the mapping that the bloody factory put on the ECU to comply with the emission regs.... and I personally would prefer the bikes ECU being setup to provide the correct mapping than having to add a PC, performance pipe, Decat etc. etc. to try and get it to do what it should in the first place.

 

[Wilsdorf]

Hi Wilsdorf,
This is something I've been looking at doing for a while now, and my lad wants to do it on his 1150 too, so have been watching this thread with interest. We have over 50 pages saying how good this remap is. I'm guessing you've had it done and it hasn't improved the bike very much is that the case? I haven't read all the bloody pages, but yours is the only real negative post(that I've seen) regarding the remap.What I really want to know then, is who did yours, and what changes with your bike did you notice and I'm guessing you didn't think it was worth the cost........Cheers

One of my bikes was remapped by Hilltop - there is no difference between that and a non-reamapped twin cam we also have. In addition, my older single cam with full system and power commander was faster.

The remap did not improve my twin cam very much at all - it made it smoother, but it most certainly did not provide an additional 30% more bhp, regardless of what the dyno figures say. Side by side acceleration of a mapped bike and non-remapped bike were virtually identical up to 125mph - simple calcs would suggest that's impossible. likewise the difference between the remapped bike and my then standard single cam was nowhere near where the power figures would suggest; and then a power commander and full system made the single cam quicker than the remapped TC.

The twin cam fuelling is a lot better standard than the single cam standard. A lot of people are not comparing like with like.

Now, there is one point I have made a few times - I've never stated that the remap does not make a difference to the buke, only that the power figures quoted, or rather the difference between them, are questionable, and imho there is something not quite right here.

Goose, thank you for your comments and clarification. You will note that your figures are generally 10bhp up on a lot of the Hilltop figures to begin with [I appreciate that different dynos etc. give different figures - but still...], then you have the warmer air issue - a GS in the UK should be making a little more power than a GS in SA.

For an example, a 10bhp gain (and a little more than half of that on torque) on my old CBR600 made a world of difference to the acceleration in comparison to the standard bikes ridden by friends - why would more than double that be (A) nowhere near as noticeable, and (B) provide no performance gain over an identical bike without the remap?

If you want a remap, buy a remap - it will smooth the fuelling on an 04-09 bike very well, and make a little difference to the twin cam - it would also be an alternative to having a Power Commander and dyno set up, if you are adding exhausts etc. - I just don't want anyone expect the sort of performance gains that the figures suggest and being disappointed that it just isn't the case.

As I have stated previously, we live on the IOM and have no blanket speed limit, so our week in week out riding is probably a lot different to most people. I simply prefer to ride the GS for the riding position etc. but have access to my old Blade and my R1200s anytime I like - I'd like a GS with a little more performance, but prefer the TC to the LC at the minute, so I guess I am stuck with taking a faster bike out when I want the performance - when I got the reamp, I truly believed, from looking at the power gains, that the GS would be all the bike I needed - unfortunately that didn't prove to be the case and I bought the R12S to go with the TC, instead of buying an LC and having that remapped and being dissapointed again.

 

[kevmean]

That last post from Wilsdorf is exactly what I was getting at when I asked if anybody that had gone down the remap route had done there own independent dyno tests BEFORE and AFTER . I know from experience with Buells that remaps make hell of a difference in the tractability and smoothness of some bikes but Peak power does not increase by a massive amount. Remapping tends to get rid of the troughs in the power curve at the points where emission testing is carried out so manufacturers have altered timing and fuel at those points to meet the regs.
By all means have your bikes remapped as for a lot of people the smoothness alone would make it worthwhile and the peace of mind that it's not running too lean but how many of you that had it done would have paid the money if they advertised only maybe a 5bhp gain ???????????

 

[Yonkyo]

One of my bikes was remapped by Hilltop - there is no difference between that and a non-reamapped twin cam we also have. In addition, my older single cam with full system and power commander was faster.

Thanks for that very detailed and informative post. As before reading this, i was on the cusp of getting the Hilltop treatment on my TC.

My standard 2013 TC GSA feels much nicer (smoother and better fueled) than my 09 GSA anyway.
I was also suspicious about the quoted Dyno figures from Hilltop, so maybe when i fit the full Akra system, i'll go the PC V route instead.

 

[Blackal]

Thanks for that very detailed and informative post. As before reading this, i was on the cusp of getting the Hilltop treatment on my TC.

My standard 2013 TC GSA feels much nicer (smoother and better fueled) than my 09 GSA anyway.
I was also suspicious about the quoted Dyno figures from Hilltop, so maybe when i fit the full Akra system, i'll go the PC V route instead.

I mostly agree with Wilsdorf, and Yonkyo above.

The way I see it - is that a remap (with dyno set-up) is merely a more elegant method of fuel augmentation than the "traditional" PowerCommander/RapidBike method. If you don't carry out any of the traditional improvement methods (headers, decat, free-flowing cans, filter etc) - then there is a limit to what either method can achieve. With no other modifications - I would expect either method (remap or PC) to show similar improvements - slightly "fatter" midrange, but smoother on/off throttle action.

In choosing which way to go - there are a few considerations (to me - anyway)

Would you inform/would you have to inform your insurer of a remap? Possibly not.
The remap is less temperamental than the Power Commander (with respect to the many connections required for the PC)
The remap is not re-sellable if you sell the bike on. The PC can be removed, and sold separately and can perhaps show a 50% return on investment?

You pays your money - etc

I plan on remapping my R1100s which has been temperamental with a PC3 (a well-explored starting issue - not completely resolved in many cases).

Al

 

[Beemerman59]

Although I have posted up on here about my bike's increased hp and torque gains, it wasn't really that relevant to me in the first place. I had tried for years on my '08 to eliminate the snatchiness of the low speed pickup, the hole in the power delivery at 4.5k revs, a problem with stalling and the issue of longevity with a bike that ran so lean. I switched to open headers/Akra can early on with the addition of an accelerator module. I later changed that to a Wunderlich Power Controller with K&N filter. The open headers made a big difference to the mid range and the PC made a massive difference to the way the bike performed - it was extremely noticeable how much better the bike ran. When I went for a Remap, I removed the PC and put the paper filter back in, I noticed the reverse all over again on the ride to Hilltop. For me, the remap put this all right again with a bit more sophistication and a better low speed pick up than with the PC. Its a more elegant solution and less prone to problems with wiring/connectors etc., which had on one occasion left me stranded when the PC was fitted. For me, its the best £350 I have ever spent on the GSA. Certainly a lot less money than I had already spent on trying to make the bike behave as I wanted it to. In terms of speed its as fast as I will ever want to ride a bike on UK roads and the changes to the torque curve means I spend less time using the gearbox on overtakes. Whether or not I really got the extra 20bhp the dyno told me I had is immaterial to my needs and wants. I'm a very happy punter which at the end of the day is all that matters to me.

I also get the impression from this thread that the '08 and '09 bikes respond the best to the remap. I remember when I got my bike reading on here about how the MU '08 model ran leaner than the previous versions and also how the TC from '10 onwards seemed better fueled. This to me makes some sense into why I have a very perceptible difference in performance (which doesn't have to be max bhp related) in addition to a smoother and easier to live with engine wheras others less so.

 

[Deleted account 211025001]

I intend taking my Husky to Hilltop for a remap in the new year so will report back when done - I'm after better throttle response and a fatter midrange with less surging on a constant throttle. Ultimate power is not an issue.

Andres

 

[Yonkyo]

I also get the impression from this thread that the '08 and '09 bikes respond the best to the remap. I remember when I got my bike reading on here about how the MU '08 model ran leaner than the previous versions and also how the TC from '10 onwards seemed better fueled. This to me makes some sense into why I have a very perceptible difference in performance (which doesn't have to be max bhp related) in addition to a smoother and easier to live with engine wheras others less so.

Good post. I agree about the 08\09 MU bikes, as I had the same issues and did the same mods.
So I'm just a bit unconvinced that a remap is worth doing on my sweet running TC........I used to be indecisive, but now I'm not sure I am.

Hilltop? PC? or leave the Hell alone....

 

[APE]

I'd like a GS with a little more performance, but prefer the TC to the LC at the minute, so I guess I am stuck with taking a faster bike out when I want the performance - when I got the reamp, I truly believed, from looking at the power gains, that the GS would be all the bike I needed - unfortunately that didn't prove to be the case and I bought the R12S to go with the TC, instead of buying an LC and having that remapped and being dissapointed again.

So whats wrong with the LC ? Have you tried the PC V on a TC.

 

[kevmean]

There was a similar type of claimed power increase on Harleys and Buells by one of the big American tuning companys a few years back ........ the problem is once you have told a few porkies then you have to carry on telling porkies ....... because to admit you mislead your customers takes a lot of recovering from, I'm not sure that they ever did. Far better to be honest and sell the product for what it is good at and that is improved drivability normally with a smallish max power gain thrown in ............ I've chatted to our remapping guru on the Buells and his belief is that the only way to see significant BHP increase is with a corresponding increase in revs .

 

[Wilsdorf]

Thanks for that very detailed and informative post. As before reading this, i was on the cusp of getting the Hilltop treatment on my TC.

My standard 2013 TC GSA feels much nicer (smoother and better fueled) than my 09 GSA anyway.
I was also suspicious about the quoted Dyno figures from Hilltop, so maybe when i fit the full Akra system, i'll go the PC V route instead.

I'm not saying don't do it, and I am not saying the Powercommander is any better - but I would predict a similar end result from either, for a similar outlay - and as stated above the Remap is a lot more elegant solution with no connections to keep dry etc.

 

[Wilsdorf]

So whats wrong with the LC ? Have you tried the PC V on a TC.

Nothing wrong with the bike - but I feel the older bikes look great. So the choice for me was, sell the TC for an LC - bearing in mind, at the time I also had the single cam as well. Or... Buy another bike for faster rides - I decided that a TC and a R12s, which overall cost me less than a new LC would ultimately be a better solution for me. I wanted one bike to fit the gap, and I wanted it to be the BMW R1200GS - but the LC is about 20bhp down at the minute on what I think I'd like. By contrast my standard (about to be Power Commander'd) R12S is a lot lot quicker than the GS (full system and remap), and only has 12bhp more than a standard GS. But the GS is more confidence inspiring on some of the bumpier roads, and ideal for my pillion

 

[Wilsdorf]

I intend taking my Husky to Hilltop for a remap in the new year so will report back when done - I'm after better throttle response and a fatter midrange with less surging on a constant throttle. Ultimate power is not an issue.

Andres

& this is the point - if you are looking for better throttle response and fuelling, then I think you will be pleased with the results.

I am not knocking a remap, far from it. But ultimately any considerable power gains are going to come from more extensive tuning methods (it is not a turbo diesel engine!).

 

[Deleted account 211025001]

& this is the point - if you are looking for better throttle response and fuelling, then I think you will be pleased with the results.

I am not knocking a remap, far from it. But ultimately any considerable power gains are going to come from more extensive tuning methods (it is not a turbo diesel engine!).

Agreed, and, having followed the posts on this thread I'm pretty much agreeing with most of what you've been saying.

Andres

 

[APE]

Nothing wrong with the bike - but I feel the older bikes look great. So the choice for me was, sell the TC for an LC - bearing in mind, at the time I also had the single cam as well. Or... Buy another bike for faster rides - I decided that a TC and a R12s, which overall cost me less than a new LC would ultimately be a better solution for me. I wanted one bike to fit the gap, and I wanted it to be the BMW R1200GS - but the LC is about 20bhp down at the minute on what I think I'd like. By contrast my standard (about to be Power Commander'd) R12S is a lot lot quicker than the GS (full system and remap), and only has 12bhp more than a standard GS. But the GS is more confidence inspiring on some of the bumpier roads, and ideal for my pillion

I might try a PC V on my twin cam in the new year and get it set up properly at BSD. If I go ahead ill post the before and after dyno results to provide a true comparison. Is a smoother throttle response and marginal power gain worth the £300-£400 outlay however ?

 

[Wilsdorf]

It is definitely not worth it for the most part.

But... if a snatchy throttle, and lumpy pick up is affecting your enjoyment, then it is a small price to pay. I think I would definitely have the work done on a 2004-2007 bike - but then again I'd never buy one now, as the first gear riding and pick up is dreadful compared to everything that followed. For the Single Cam bikes 08/09 I'd be slightly swayed to having the work done, as the bike is much improved IME with a Powercommander and full exhaust, I am sure a remap would provide similar (and possibly slightly better) results. For the twin cam, I find the standard bike much improved over the earlier models - the gear ratios are better, throttle response is cleaner and low speed riding is much improved, so I possibly wouldn't bother - but that said once you have the bike and start looking at down-pipes and end cans and tinkering about, then why not have a powercommander or a remap to go with it.

I always see around £1000-£1500 in full systems and then around £500 in powercommander and Dyno set up time and think, is the bike £2k better than standard? That difference for some could buy the next newer model - so you have to want to play.

 

[APE]

Yeah I've owned both models and the TC is a big improvement. I've never had an issue with the fuelling tbh but fancy that 25% power increase Geoff is offering.

 

[Wilsdorf]

I did too

 

[Rushy]

Yeah I've owned both models and the TC is a big improvement. I've never had an issue with the fuelling tbh but fancy that 25% power increase Geoff is offering.

And their it is in a nutshell, the source of confusion. From what I have read he isn't offering that , he is offering to merely fuel the bike correctly across the rev range. This can also improve power & it seems economy too from what many have posted here and other forums from others doing the same work as Hilltop.
Bumming around on a couple of other forums it does seem to be that twins respond so much better than inline 4s to this kind of work. Its almost as if they come out of the factory shit or, most likely, they have to in order to meet noise and emission rules somehow and the bike is set up for that rather than how they (the manufacturer ) would prefer it to be?

My thoughts are only based on reading others experiences as I have not had a bike remapped . I also don't quite understand this closed loop Lambda thing. It seems some twins have this and therefore fitting a P' Commander will only improve/adjust fuelling above 40% throttle opening!? Below 40% , where poor fuelling is often felt, will not be adjusted by the PC unless you have also had someone like Hilltop playing with the ECU too. I was going to fit a PC until I found out my MG has a closed loop, does the GS too?