Remus & Y - so who's blown up an engine then?

My engine needs a greater range of adjustment, (because of different pistons,camshafts), than the Motronic can supply,I'm not going any further with it because of my proposed carb and ignition modification this winter.
I've read on here on numerous occasions of the lean running which has been found on 1150s after can/exhaust changes,this over-leanness being shown on dyno printouts.
This leads me to believe there is not that great a range of 'self-adjustment' within the Motronic system.
Obviously playing with other curves accessible by different coding plugs changes the limits,but the variables are incredible,a dyno is the only safe answer,if only to confirm that what you believe is O.K. is O.K.
 
I'll agree with that! :beerjug:

Maybe I should have used the words 'should be able to' in the original post!
 
gowenwilliams said:
Any modern engine management system is capable of automatically adjusting the fuelling itself - it does this by monitoring the amount of oxygen in the exhaust system (Lambda Sensor). If the exhaust has too much/little oxygen, the system will correct this by adding more/less fuel.
Click to expand...

the closed loop controlled by the CO/lambda sensor is only used in lower rev range. after that it goes open loop and the engine management has no effective way of adjusting the fueling.

i would be loath to call it a "modern" engine management system anyway.
no MAF so ECU is clueless about how much air is going in, doesn't even have a knock sensor so ignition timing must be guesswork :confused:

has similarities to digifant system VW used in the 80's, only less sophisticated.
 
Hi Cookie,

I guess that it cannot make altitude adjustments in that case? only at low rpm?

Or does it have alternative means to stop it running rich at higher RPM at higher altitude?
 
gowenwilliams said:
Hi Cookie,

I guess that it cannot make altitude adjustments in that case? only at low rpm?

Or does it have alternative means to stop it running rich at higher RPM at higher altitude?
Click to expand...

outside my knowledge of the system there. can't see how it could adjust for altitude.

there's a pressure(?)sensor on the airbox, what does that do?
 
That would do it I expect.

I guess its a Manifold Air Pressure sensor (MAP) as oppose to MAF. So at high altitude, the pressure is lower, so it would work out the fuelling from that.

Suprised that it doesn't run closed loop lambda at higher rpm though!
 
remus

Ok its not the same bike but you will get my point as you read on I owned a 600 early fazer that had the crappy black downpipes on which I replaced with some nice shiny stainless ones from micron & looked really good also fitted a micron can & had it dyno,d the bike ran great at the top end but crap from bottom to mid range I tried the standard can with the downpipes & was even worse.
So I put my bike back to standard trim & ran great apart from the black downpipes (tough shit)

On the other hand I put a race can on an early R reg 1200 bandit & it improved it no end I then bought a K2 model & it ran like a dog yet its the same engine?????


I was telling my friend an ex bike mechanic who put a very valid point across.

Why do manufacturers spend thousands designing an exhaust system for a bike/car to make it work correctly then some company can come along & improve it.

But admitedly some systems will improve things e.g bandits,

Sorry but I agree with him so Im sticking with the stock system & cause of past experiences with aftermarket exhausts


But thats just my opinion
 
Big Lad said:
I went out a took a pic 5 mins ago. Since the last photo, I have added the techlusion r259. CAT code yellow plug IN and the 259 on standard factory settings. This is the photo. It looks a nice light brown colour on the core, compared with pure white before. ( about 40 miles since fitting the 259 ). I'm assuming this means the 259 works and has made the bike run less lean ??????????
Click to expand...

Maybe the photo doesn't do a lot but I can't see any significant difference in the colour of the plugs :confused:

Also how does the fact that my GS1150 gave about 15 more miles per tankful after I refitted the cat just prior to sale. Previously it had just a remus y piece with std end can. If it had been running weaker with the y fitted surely it should have used more gas when I refitted the cat - or is that an oversimplification. :mmmm

Ade
 
I think it just, once again, shows the variation between one bike and the next.
 
~ 10K for a bike
~ 1k for a system
~ £30 for a Dyno run

Don't need to be a particle physicist, now do you? :thumb
 
Might have missed this but anyone had a Remus /y piece dyno run? If so what did it show? My 2002/3 1150 has had that set up from new (still got cat/std pipe unused) and 20k done so far. Pops and bangs like a good 'un (steptoe setup now but no cat code from early on). Should I be worried? wasn't til now.
 
Altogether everyone....'GET IT ON A DYNO!'.
Second thoughts...don't bother,save the £30 and keep worrying.
 
1150dave said:
Pops and bangs like a good 'un (steptoe setup now but no cat code from early on).
Click to expand...

There is a theory that the popping and banging is caused by there being no 'chamber' in the exhaust in which pressure differences can be absorbed. The cat acts as this chamber normally, and there is a non-cat expansion chamber available (from Wunderlich, I think) which is claimed to eliminate popping and banging without imposing the flow restriction of the cat. But it's around £300 so no-one seems to bother. Popping happens the same with a Remus Titanium, Remus Revolution or standard can if no cat is present. These in combination with standard chip or BB Power chip (claimed to reduced popping but doesn't) in various stages of tune. Plugs are a very healthy colour so I've given up worrying about it.
 
1150dave said:
Might have missed this but anyone had a Remus /y piece dyno run? If so what did it show?
Click to expand...

Dave, every single engine will react differently to any given modification due to tolerence differences in the engines, the cans, the Y pieces..... even (if you want to take it to extremes) the fuel source.

Certainly, a lot of people run bikes with cans etc. without doing a Dyno run and with no problems. But is it really worth saving ~£30 for the potential issue of a major engine rebuild, of even the risk being chucked off infront of a truck if something does go wrong. Yes it's a remote chance of either happening. It's also a fairly remote chance you'll ever need all the protective gear you wear, but you still wear it.
 
I read this post last week as it seemed to be about exactly what interested me: Thereal impact of a y piece and can combination on a GS. Have to say I went with the "get it dyno'ed" lobby as I agree with the cost/benefit rationale.

So, following the purchase and installation of Snoopy's Y piece and the fitting of a Remus revolution less baffle, I took it to Double-take Dyno, in Southampton for a power run, under the undertanding that I could slip the baffle in half way through to see if it made any difference. And here are the results. I should point out that I have no dyno run for a y-piece and standard can set up.

BHP and Torque W/O baffle:

Power Run:76.43 BHP. Roll-on 6th: 77.03BHP, 68.25 ft/lb

BHP and Torque with baffle:

Power Run:75.75BHP. Roll-on 6th: 76.81 BHP, 68.50 ft/lb

bit of a dip in power and torque at about 4750 rpm, otherwise pretty linear.

Bit disappointed with power out put, but as Margus says, Torque is the key!! :D

Mixtures? Well on the chart there is one graph that shows a red line depicting the optimum fuel/air ration which is set at "13" on the Y axis. The close you figures are to that, the better yourr mixture. Above is lean, below is rich.

Mine was a tad above at about 13.5 with one or two points where it just touches the 14 mark. Adding the baffle made little difference. The only point where the mixture was spot on was at about 5K rpm, just after the flat spot: typical...

But, overall the guy said that he didn't think that deviation was any concern and, were it his bike, he'd run on that mixture all day, so I'm pretty relieved. Despite the extra pony, I think I'll leave the baffle in as it really is stupidly (beautifully) loud on the open can. And when it comes to the big Argnetina trip, I'll whack on the standard can to get is as close to the optimum as possible.

So, HTH anyone thinking about a Y-piece. My advice, don't go by my details, but get your own power run done as each bike is different and my minor lean, may be someone elses holed piston!!
 
This must be an 1150..... right?

I just got back from the IOM TT last night & must say, the Powercommander I had fitted a while back made a massive difference to the acceleration, to the point that one mate on a CBR600 couldn't outdrag me from the slower corners. He stuffed me on the straights, mind you...... (but then I passed him in the bumpy bits so it was honours even). He was mightily impressed but at 9st & 5'7" with an inside leg at 28", he'll not be rushing to his nearest B*W dealer. :thumb

Figures:
87.79 bhp @ 6800rpm
72.94 ft-lbs @ 5900rpm
 

Attachments

  • GS dynoprint 28-3-2006 STD V PC.jpg
    GS dynoprint 28-3-2006 STD V PC.jpg
    40.8 KB · Views: 318
Nippy Normans supply Touratech, Wunderlich, Desert Fox and many other makes of accessories.
You must log in or register to reply here.


Back
Top Bottom