Remap by Hilltop Motorcycles

[Devil]

PS, Some Jockenese Welsh bloke pinched my spot

Who arrived late, and blamed it on tractors..... Maybe now you've had the remap, you will be able to over take them.

Was a great day out, Met some great tossers, and a big fat Bastard

I will post my results, later, along with some pics, etc. If Medicman did not break the camara.


Was it worth it, Hell Yes.

 

[Wilsdorf]

And also... Me!

When I finally got there, no thanks to Google Maps and many thanks to Geoff who had to come and find me (on his R1). To be honest the way I effortlessly overtook Geoff on the by-pass he wondered why on earth I wanted or needed a remap doing at all!

Anywho, When I did get there it was good to meet up with the other Tosser's where they all looked in amazement at my bike and Devil offered me double whatever I paid for it.... Errrr, note to self - Take your medication, every day!

Sorry guys, and here are my figures:

Before:
Max Power - 82.63bhp @ 8186.5rpm
Max Torque- 61.23Ft/lb @ 6355.8rpm

After:
Max Power - 100.87bhp @ 7403.8rpm
Max Torque- 78.72Ft/lb @ 5996.6rpm

As the rest of you the most obvious and most noticeable was how smooth the bike felt and (even though it was pelting down) how much low down grunt the GS now has. can't say I noticed any better appreciation in fuel economy but that's early days yet and even if there's none or even slightly less, the way the bike feels now will be well worth the trade off.

Here's the graphs:

The figures just don't add up to me. Mine showed a slightly better increase in both BHP and Torque than yours - however, our non mapped Triple Black is exactly the same acceleration and speed wise - plus it is regularly 3-4 mpg better than both the mapped TB and the 2009 model.

Additionally, we have put a full remus on the 2009 model bike and it is quicker accelerating than the TB - this week/next week we will add a Power Commander to the 2009 model bike and I am guessing it will be a lot smoother and a bit quicker again.

When you can see a clear increase in performance from a full exhaust, which is adding around 5bhp maybe, and I can't see any performance increase in the twin cam after a remap and a recorded over 20bhp and a sizeable chunk of torque, then it doesn't make sense to me. In fact all these figures, if correct would be comparatively better than the new liquid cooled bike - but that happens to be a lot quicker than the twin cam .

Everyone that says it's all at the top end, or the end of the throttle is also mistaken - we ride throttle to the stop (it's a GS after all - there aren't that quick or powerful in real terms) and there is no, noticeable or otherwise, increase in performance against a standard bike.

I would highly recommend riding the same models with and without a map back to back and compare for yourself - if you can.

 

[Devil]

The figures just don't add up to me. Mine showed a slightly better increase in both BHP and Torque than yours - however, our non mapped Triple Black is exactly the same acceleration and speed wise - plus it is regularly 3-4 mpg better than both the mapped TB and the 2009 model.

Additionally, we have put a full remus on the 2009 model bike and it is quicker accelerating than the TB - this week/next week we will add a Power Commander to the 2009 model bike and I am guessing it will be a lot smoother and a bit quicker again.

When you can see a clear increase in performance from a full exhaust, which is adding around 5bhp maybe, and I can't see any performance increase in the twin cam after a remap and a recorded over 20bhp and a sizeable chunk of torque, then it doesn't make sense to me. In fact all these figures, if correct would be comparatively better than the new liquid cooled bike - but that happens to be a lot quicker than the twin cam .

Everyone that says it's all at the top end, or the end of the throttle is also mistaken - we ride throttle to the stop (it's a GS after all - there aren't that quick or powerful in real terms) and there is no, noticeable or otherwise, increase in performance against a standard bike.

I would highly recommend riding the same models with and without a map back to back and compare for yourself - if you can.

Hi

I'm not an expert, so I will only state what I found on my 320 mile ride home. I rode as normal. sticking to the speed limits most of the time.

My Figures showed and increase similar to others +22BHP & +19 torques.

I will say this,
Is my bike is smoother. YES.
Is it quicker off the mark YES.
Does it accelerate quicker when moving YES.
Is it better on fuel. NO

Finally, I would have a guess, that Geoff makes a backup of you old Map. and i'm sure he could put the old one back free. if you asked for it.

 

[Beemerman59]

I would highly recommend riding the same models with and without a map back to back and compare for yourself - if you can.

That's exactly what I did. I rode the bike there without a map and rode it back with a new map. I've had the bike over 4 years and 30K miles so I know how it responds in all situations. The increase in bhp I'm not that fussed about (although 20bhp extra probably puts it into the area of a standard Wasserboxer) - its the massive increase in torque at 2K lower revs which is just unmissable. I can pull a higher gear in slower speed situations, it pulls cleanly away from low revs without any hesitation - this really showed itself to me yesterday in some very heavy rain when smoothness is all important. I don't need the dyno maps to tell me what's happening underneath me, the way it pulls out of corners is addictive. Top speed is irrelevant but the way it gets up the rev range is staggering compared to an OEM setup. This is on an '08 single cam bike with I think is particularly well suited to a remap - others can chip in about the twin cam models.

The only downside for me is going to be the extra cost of new rear tyres but hey, its supposed to be fun right?

 

[The Grey One]

Nice to meet you chaps there today. I was on my my "tractor" (R1150GS Adv).
I had guessed it would be about 65BHP to start with, Beemerman59 was less optimistic
with a guess of 55 BHP Not many figures posted her for the 1150 so here u go ...

Before
Max Power 68.3 BHP
Max Torque 55.94 Ft/lb

After
Max Power 83.01 BHP
Max Torque 72.59 Ft/lb

As I set off from Hilltop through Earl Shilton it was immediately obvious the bike was smoother. Previously there was some slight surging at low speed - this has now gone.
Because I caught some heavy rain and strong winds I couldn't really stretch its legs on
the way home, but when I get a few miles on it I will post if there has been on impact
on fuel economy and if I notice the extra Torque with a pillion on board.

Geoff is a great laugh. If you're reading this Geoff I want a go on that R1

Oh Bugger! I look at this tread from time to time seeing all the 1200s going through. Now you tell me they can do 1150's .
Bugger, Bugger, Bugger!

Anyone know of a similar service a bit nearer to where I live?

John

 

[ebbo]

Now you tell me they can do 1150's .
Bugger, Bugger, Bugger!

And 1100's so I'm told, bad news isn't it

 

[ebbo]

I would highly recommend riding the same models with and without a map back to back and compare for yourself - if you can.

We did, riding 1200RT's around the Kielder Forest with Bluetooth intercoms.

My mate riding my remapped 1200RT was constantly 1 to 2 gears higher than me following on his unmapped bike. He loved it, I was shocked how poorly his bike performed in comparison, he had his remapped soon after

 

[Norfolk Tiger]

I had mine done Wednesday and the figures on the paper work were: before 93.6 bhp and 75.41 ft/lb after 110.82 bhp and 86.15 ft/lb so a definite increase on paper. The real difference is on how much smoother the bike feels and how it will pull cleanly from low down the rev range.

 

[ghost-rider]

I had mine done a week ago, and like I said before im chuffed to bits with the results and it wasn't really about the figures on paper, more a case of wanting it to run sweeter and smoother, but looking at most of the figures that are coming out for single cams and twin cams on paper mine seems down on power well the bhp side anyway?? mines a 2011 twin cam gsa,running de-cat headers and an an akra can

before was: 88.68 [email protected]
69.91 [email protected]

And after was: 97.6 [email protected]
79.68 [email protected]

now like I say ive no complaints atall, its transformed the bike full stop, but looking at majority of the figures that are coming out mine are lower on the bhp side

 

[Norfolk Tiger]

I had mine done a week ago, and like I said before im chuffed to bits with the results and it wasn't really about the figures on paper, more a case of wanting it to run sweeter and smoother, but looking at most of the figures that are coming out for single cams and twin cams on paper mine seems down on power well the bhp side anyway?? mines a 2011 twin cam gsa,running de-cat headers and an an akra can

before was: 88.68 [email protected]
69.91 [email protected]

And after was: 97.6 [email protected]
79.68 [email protected]

now like I say ive no complaints atall, its transformed the bike full stop, but looking at majority of the figures that are coming out mine are lower on the bhp side

I have the same set up as you on the same model bike not sure why the figures are different. But at the end of the day it's about how the bike feels and goes after the remap not some numbers on a piece of paper.

 

[ghost-rider]

I have the same set up as you on the same model bike not sure why the figures are different. But at the end of the day it's about how the bike feels and goes after the remap not some numbers on a piece of paper.

I know, and like ive said the bike is awesome now, the power delivery is real smooth especially out of corners etc. and it teks off in fourth gear, one theory I had, dunno whether theres any weight in it, is mileage the engine has done, more miles etc. the looser it will be, mines only done 9k, but like I say probably nothing in that theory

 

[Wilsdorf]

Hi

I'm not an expert, so I will only state what I found on my 320 mile ride home. I rode as normal. sticking to the speed limits most of the time.

My Figures showed and increase similar to others +22BHP & +19 torques.

I will say this,
Is my bike is smoother. YES.
Is it quicker off the mark YES.
Does it accelerate quicker when moving YES.
Is it better on fuel. NO

Finally, I would have a guess, that Geoff makes a backup of you old Map. and i'm sure he could put the old one back free. if you asked for it.

Well, I can categorical state the following:

Is it smoother - maybe - there is close to damn it nothing in it between out mapped and not mapped Triple Blacks.

Is it quicker off the mark - NO.
Does it accelerate quicker when moving off - NO,

I don't know what you are basing your differences on - but mine are based on weekly back to back rides, over a course of months.

As stated above the figures (if real rear wheel figures) after a map are on a parr, throughout the rev range with a stock Water Cooled GS - ride them side by side and tell me which one is quicker. Then tell me why the LC is so much quicker - because my mathematical brain doesn't compute.

 

[Wilsdorf]

That's exactly what I did. I rode the bike there without a map and rode it back with a new map. I've had the bike over 4 years and 30K miles so I know how it responds in all situations. The increase in bhp I'm not that fussed about (although 20bhp extra probably puts it into the area of a standard Wasserboxer) - its the massive increase in torque at 2K lower revs which is just unmissable. I can pull a higher gear in slower speed situations, it pulls cleanly away from low revs without any hesitation - this really showed itself to me yesterday in some very heavy rain when smoothness is all important. I don't need the dyno maps to tell me what's happening underneath me, the way it pulls out of corners is addictive. Top speed is irrelevant but the way it gets up the rev range is staggering compared to an OEM setup. This is on an '08 single cam bike with I think is particularly well suited to a remap - others can chip in about the twin cam models.

The only downside for me is going to be the extra cost of new rear tyres but hey, its supposed to be fun right?

"Unmissable"? Well I am missing it, and I've been riding since I was 4 years only and notice a sizeable difference of old dynojet needle jets or power commander and pipes - whereas I am not noticing what is 20% and 30% more power - with sizeable increases across a rev range. "The way it gets up the rev range is staggering" I'm sorry, but I have compared 2009 model bike (Standard), 2009 Model Bike (Full Pipe), Triple Black (Standard) and Triple Black (mapped) - there is nothing staggering about the difference between any of them. In fact the mapped Triple Black isn't even staggering compared to our full piped 2004 GS!

The 20bhp more should have the bike competing very nicely with the new liquid cooled bike on speed and acceleration - it doesn't!

 

[MEDICMAN]

"Unmissable"? Well I am missing it, and I've been riding since I was 4 years only and notice a sizeable difference of old dynojet needle jets or power commander and pipes - whereas I am not noticing what is 20% and 30% more power - with sizeable increases across a rev range. "The way it gets up the rev range is staggering" I'm sorry, but I have compared 2009 model bike (Standard), 2009 Model Bike (Full Pipe), Triple Black (Standard) and Triple Black (mapped) - there is nothing staggering about the difference between any of them. In fact the mapped Triple Black isn't even staggering compared to our full piped 2004 GS!

The 20bhp more should have the bike competing very nicely with the new liquid cooled bike on speed and acceleration - it doesn't!

So what are you trying to say (and no I'm not looking for an argument)???

Granted, you're an experienced rider but so are most of the people posting on this thread. If you think we're all deluded and its a case of the emperors new clothes then please say so and move on.

 

[Devil]

Wilsdorf, send me your address, I will send you a new dummy for Christmas.
Because whatever it is your not happy about, your crying like my 3 week old great grand child.

We are happy with our results.

 

[Mr Bean]

I think Wilsdorf has a point.

My RT is definitely better than it was before the remap - does it really pump out 20% or so more power, I suspect not.

The evidence to support the remap is provided in the form of dyno graphs - in my instance there are two correction standards used. Not sure why.

Regardless of what the numbers say (and I am suspicious) I am happy that the money I spent was was good value.

 

[Wilsdorf]

So what are you trying to say (and no I'm not looking for an argument)???

Granted, you're an experienced rider but so are most of the people posting on this thread. If you think we're all deluded and its a case of the emperors new clothes then please say so and move on.

I thought I was being quite clear. The on road experience, acceleration etc. does not reflect a 20% and 30% increase in power.

I have no issue with the other benefits that a remap may provide - there are probably a few - better fuelling, smoother response etc. - however these are farily well sorted on the Twin Cam compared to the earlier bikes.

Although, I do think it is well worth having this debate, so that owners thinking about having a remap done to their bikes can consider ALL options and decide which is best for them. As I am lucky enough to live somewhere where you can exploit the full power and acceleration of the majority of bikes - it is an important consideration for "me" how much more power and therefore performance "I" can expect when spending money on a "performance" upgrade - especially one which has such on paper benefits.

Wilsdorf, send me your address, I will send you a new dummy for Christmas.
Because whatever it is your not happy about, your crying like my 3 week old great grand child.

We are happy with our results.

Devil - I am glad you are happy with your results - as are a lot of other people. I am hardly crying. I simply expect a paper increase of 20% and 30% to be translated into actual performance - when an older bike, with considerably less bhp than my paper bhp has better performance than both a mapped twin cam and standard twin cam - I question the power increase - this is the only area I have (strongish) reservations about.

I can only speak from my own experience - and I am limiting it to performance (measurable) - rather than a host of subjective (unmeasurable) benefits - and in that experience a pipe and power commander provides a better (albeit more expensive) performance upgrade; and the re-map added NO noticeable increase in performance for me.

You obviously think that anyone questioning this is throwing their toys out of the pram. I simply want everyone to have a better understanding - if that is wrong, then so be it!

 

[The Grey One]

A 20% to 30% increase in power does not bring with it a 20% to 30% increase in performance. In simply terms if you want a given vehicle to go twice as fast you need 4 times the power.

I have not had a bike re mapped but I have had several cars done, and an updated ECU fitted to a Scooby but that's another story. The fuel mapping on modern vehicles is compromised by the need to meet arbitrary testing regimes. If you really think that in terms of performance they cannot be improved then you do not understand the level of compromise forced on the manufactures.

Incidentaly every car, including the Scooby, returned better mpg after the upgrade.

John

 

[Wilsdorf]

A 20% to 30% increase in power does not bring with it a 20% to 30% increase in performance. In simply terms if you want a given vehicle to go twice as fast you need 4 times the power.

I have not had a bike re mapped but I have had several cars done, and an updated ECU fitted to a Scooby but that's another story. The fuel mapping on modern vehicles is compromised by the need to meet arbitrary testing regimes. If you really think that in terms of performance they cannot be improved then you do not understand the level of compromise forced on the manufactures.

Incidentaly every car, including the Scooby, returned better mpg after the upgrade.

John

??

I have no problem in understanding theoretical returns from performance, when increasing power - however - I am sure you will concede there should be some, shouldn't there? Otherwise you wouldn't have spent the money for performance.

By the way I've spent over £5k having a scooby P1 engine upgraded. Guess what, I noticed the increased performance - funny that. It didn't return better fuel economy though . Also, running two Triple Blacks I can advise that the non mapped bike is better on fuel.

Any way, I'm out on this. I've made my point. Spend your money on what you like - just be sure you are aware of what you are spending your money on, and what you are really getting.

 

[Beemerman59]

I thought I was being quite clear. The on road experience, acceleration etc. does not reflect a 20% and 30% increase in power.

I have no issue with the other benefits that a remap may provide - there are probably a few - better fuelling, smoother response etc. - however these are farily well sorted on the Twin Cam compared to the earlier bikes.

Although, I do think it is well worth having this debate, so that owners thinking about having a remap done to their bikes can consider ALL options and decide which is best for them. As I am lucky enough to live somewhere where you can exploit the full power and acceleration of the majority of bikes - it is an important consideration for "me" how much more power and therefore performance "I" can expect when spending money on a "performance" upgrade - especially one which has such on paper benefits.



Devil - I am glad you are happy with your results - as are a lot of other people. I am hardly crying. I simply expect a paper increase of 20% and 30% to be translated into actual performance - when an older bike, with considerably less bhp than my paper bhp has better performance than both a mapped twin cam and standard twin cam - I question the power increase - this is the only area I have (strongish) reservations about.

I can only speak from my own experience - and I am limiting it to performance (measurable) - rather than a host of subjective (unmeasurable) benefits - and in that experience a pipe and power commander provides a better (albeit more expensive) performance upgrade; and the re-map added NO noticeable increase in performance for me.

You obviously think that anyone questioning this is throwing their toys out of the pram. I simply want everyone to have a better understanding - if that is wrong, then so be it!

I'm quite happy that I understand exactly what's going on with my bike, the fuelling is now sorted and the bike does everything I want it to do. Its faster in roll ons everywhere in every gear. Its smoother and I'm using far fewer gear changes for my riding style. I don't know about outright speed as that's not important to me - its the way it gets there that is and on my bike the differences on paper are translated on the road. Having been out in the dry today to give the bike a harder test from yesterdays wet experience my view has been reinforced in that regard. I could never run baffle out on the Akra before the remap as the engine would stall at low speed - now there's no problem, pick up is very good from idle and I can feel the increase in torque coming in earlier.

For the price, there's nothing else to match it - thats my experience on my bike. It is an '08 single cam and maybe these bikes respond better to a remap than a twin cam - who knows. I do have decatted headers and an Akra can so that probably helps the increases now its properly fueled. Its a shame your're not happy about yours but it seems your're one of the few that has some reason to want to question the validity about the process. If your bike doesn't work any better than before then I can understand you being disappointed, but that doesn't mean everyone else has got it all wrong. I'm in my 35th motorcycling year so please don't assume either that I'm less qualified than you are to tell the difference with my bike.