I have no idea, but you pays your money and you make your choice. I have no experience of the tuning firm that you mention, and i wouldn't use one anyway. Each to his/her own.
Booster plug
- Thread starter stick
- Start date
I have no idea, but you pays your money and you make your choice. I have no experience of the tuning firm that you mention, and i wouldn't use one anyway. Each to his/her own.
Roger 04 RT
Registered user
The reason that we are still talking about this five pages in is because a) some still don’t understand how the BMW ECU works, or b) because my experiment to measure the negation wasn’t fully read, or it wasn’t understood, or c) because you believe that if 45,000 units have been sold (nearly $7M US) that it must work.
There is no need for logic or feeling in the case of BoosterPlug. It’s claim that it shifts the IAT 20C (if the probe is positioned properly) is true. You can use a GS-911 and directly measure that. I have published the results many times
Boosterplug’s claim that a 20C shift in the IAT causes BMW bikes to enrichen the mixture 6% is true. I have measured the effect and published the results many times.
BoosterPlug’s claim that the BMW ECU doesn’t have Short and Long Term Trims is FALSE. I have set up experiments (read all the experiment steps in the link), measured the results and published them.
BMW’s claim that is uses Long Term Trims is TRUE. The Long Term Trims are in various GS-911 logs, you can see them for yourselves. BMW ECUs calculate a table of Multiplicative and Additive Long Term Trims.
If you disconnect the O2 sensors at the same time you install the BP, the added fuel will be permanent. But as soon as you connect the O2 sensors the effect goes away.
Here is the link with the concrete measurements that show the existence of Long Term Trims: https://advrider.com/f/threads/2004...-af-xied-for-bmw.749080/page-40#post-23675190
I repeat: understanding that the BP has no long term effect (more than a tank of gas) does not require any sophisticated or tricky logic. It is easily measured and not with one’s feelings or seat of the pants (the calibrated asshole theory
) but with simple measurement instruments (a Wideband O2 sensor/datalogger).I have no idea, but you pays your money and you make your choice. I have no experience of the tuning firm that you mention, and i wouldn't use one anyway. Each to his/her own.
yes big problem, with this is you pay money, and tuning laffs in face.
That is a good question actually. @Roger 04 RT has explained how it all holds together.
But why?
Here's a bit nerdy stuff. If you don't have time to read it all, go to the last line
------------------------
It's a bit complex, but I'll try to narrow it down.
If the fueling relied it's fueling entirely on O2 feedback, keep in mind that at any condition, the fueling first decides the amount of fuel to be delivered, then the fuel is delivered to the cylinder, the fuel ignites, and THEN the verdict of the prediction is given from the O2 sensor. I'e the sensor at best will tell you how it WAS, not how it WILL BE.
In steady riding conditions this one-step-behind approach will work, sort of. But in order to make the engine run half way decent, there would be need for some extra fuel, and with current emission regulations the engine would not meet the standards.
And there is one more issue. The engines with a CAT uses the CAT to convert the CO from the exhaust into CO2. For this to work, the Cat needs oxygen from somewhere to tie the extra Oxygen molecule to each of the CO molecules in order to make it a CO2.
It's mentioned that the ideal combustion is AFR 14,7, and this is where ALL the fuel is burned using ALL the oxygen from the air. But if the engine ran at a steady 14,7, there would be no oxygen left over for the cat to convert the CO into CO2.
In order to provide excessive oxygen into the CAT, the fueling needs to slightly vary the mixture rich/lean in order to make the AFR oscillate between AFR 14.0 and 15.0 (or there about). If the fueling was to rely on the feedback alone, it would be like and endless chase, a bit like a dog chasing it's tail. Instead the ECU takes the readings and calculates an average that it uses to compensate on the fly. Since the fueling is more or less accurate already, the adjustments called for by the feedback from the O2 are relative modest, hence they call it trim. And since it's continuously adjusted, it's called the Short Term trim (STT).
Since there is a desire for the best possible fueling at any condition, preferably without the need for adjustment based on the feedback from O2 (remember, O2 is always one step behind), the value for the STT is also stored for later use, in case it's a lasting condition (like an air leak or clogged airfilter). The STT is therefor compared to the value of the long term trim (LTT) in the LTT table, and the LTT trim table is adjusted accordingly, by small steps each time. The ultimate goal for the ECU is to obtain 0 correction from the STT. The LTT trim value is ALWAYS part of the calculation of fuel.
But even LTT values are corrected in small steps each time, over time it has the capability to make fairly rich/lean mixture. Hence, the BP may work to begin with in some engines.
When I developed my own O2 manipulator, my first prototype was built with the ability to falsify the readings manually, and I could easily make the engine run riche enough to where the exhaust went smoking black.
----------------
Soo... Why do they do it the way they do?
It's done in order to make an engine drivable and at the same time meet emission standards.
Roger 04 RT
Registered user
Great explanation as usual.
Yes but when you do not want to sea you are blind.
How does the saying go?
"You can lead a horse to water, but you can't make it drink"
But you can trick it and make believe water is not water.
The reason that we are still talking about this five pages in is because a) some still don’t understand how the BMW ECU works, or b) because my experiment to measure the negation wasn’t fully read, or it wasn’t understood, or c) because you believe that if 45,000 units have been sold (nearly $7M US) that it must work.
There is no need for logic or feeling in the case of BoosterPlug. It’s claim that it shifts the IAT 20C (if the probe is positioned properly) is true. You can use a GS-911 and directly measure that. I have published the results many times
Boosterplug’s claim that a 20C shift in the IAT causes BMW bikes to enrichen the mixture 6% is true. I have measured the effect and published the results many times.
BoosterPlug’s claim that the BMW ECU doesn’t have Short and Long Term Trims is FALSE. I have set up experiments (read all the experiment steps in the link), measured the results and published them.
BMW’s claim that is uses Long Term Trims is TRUE. The Long Term Trims are in various GS-911 logs, you can see them for yourselves. BMW ECUs calculate a table of Multiplicative and Additive Long Term Trims.
If you disconnect the O2 sensors at the same time you install the BP, the added fuel will be permanent. But as soon as you connect the O2 sensors the effect goes away.
Here is the link with the concrete measurements that show the existence of Long Term Trims: https://advrider.com/f/threads/2004...-af-xied-for-bmw.749080/page-40#post-23675190
I repeat: understanding that the BP has no long term effect (more than a tank of gas) does not require any sophisticated or tricky logic. It is easily measured and not with one’s feelings or seat of the pants (the calibrated asshole theory
But one tank of gas (petrol) then a coffee the theory may repeat its self , I’m not after long term gain , just the time the plugs adjusts the initial performance and does the same correction again ,time after time ..like I say I will ride it , swap bikes , coffee and discuss
Roger 04 RT
Registered user
Stick, man, I’m sure you’re a great guy, but now you’re just making stuff up. There is no scenario under which you ride, stop, have coffee or not, get gas or not, take a piss or not ... and the process restarts itself or repeats itself. The theory and practical tests are conclusive. But by all means, get one and have fun. One nice thing about the BP is that it does no harm, making it one of the best do-nothing products.
This is the first post.
OP ask if anyone have tried the BP or similar external products that will enrichen the fuel on the 1250.
By now, most people will have understood that the BP will not work on the 1250.
To my knowledge, there is no current products available that will hook up to the 1250 and make the engine run richer.
There is however one way of doing it, but that's the route that OP will not go.
I do not have the company in mind that is a sponsor of this forum, but rather tuners that actually explain what they are doing, and they show it on the dyno. They explain what they are doing, and it makes perfectly sense.
During the environmental test of the bike (noise and pollution), the bikes are tested at some given RPMs. In order to meet the standards, the engine is restricted in this range. And this restriction shows up on a dyno chart as a dip in performance, and sometimes you as a rider may even feel it.
In order to keep the fueling in closed loop and still restricting the engine, the ECU is loaded with an AFR map, thus, in the restricted range, the AFR map contains a extra lean value (It is probably followed up with ignition and the general map as well).
What these tuners have done is that they have located the AFR map, and reloaded it with new values, and the result is an engine that runs at AFR 13.0 (give or take) at the entire range.
Their charge is the same as 'some other' company have been charging. If anyone is serious about getting the 1250 run even better, I suggest to look them up. Check 'Treetop Tuning' on FB. More descriptions at 'treetoptuning.com'
If this message causes this thread to be locked up or moved, I do apologize.
Roger 04 RT
Registered user
Let’s leave this as a BoosterPlug thread ...
Let’s leave this as a BoosterPlug thread ...
Maybe buttplug is better sound.
Managed to get out today on the bike , felt bloody great . Then rode back on another bike (1250) and I was surprised on the difference , mine seemed better , the latter not. Maybe a placebo pill , but I asked the the other owner to try the same , and he agreed with me . I know some will disagree but it felt better and sharper .
The bike swap was due to a new bike , so these two bikes are similar same year , same end cans , same style of rider except the plug ……I may have not have published a paper on this but two fellow riders chatting seemed to make me think different.
The bike swap was due to a new bike , so these two bikes are similar same year , same end cans , same style of rider except the plug ……I may have not have published a paper on this but two fellow riders chatting seemed to make me think different.
I'm happy for you that you like the BP.
As for how the engine react to it, it's a different story.
I'll show the readings from my 1200LC GSA (the 1250 is more complicated to read due to the wide band sensor, however since both ECU's acts in the same way, the information is relevant)
Here is the fueling in closed loop, warm engine, no modifications.
The throttle is blipped at 3 seconds and opened at 6 seconds and held to 10 seconds.
---------------
This curve shows the voltage to AFR values from the O2 sensor.
--------------
Then we added the Boosterplug, and this reading is from the very first run, with the BP freshly installed, (i.e hardly any adaptions at this point)
The engine is warm, and the throttle is opened up at 10,5 seconds and helt until 18 seconds.
In both cases the fueling oscillates between rich/lean, and no visible difference in the fueling.
-----------------
Sooo, what does a real richer fueling looks like?
Here is the very same engine with an O2 manipulator added:
Red curve is the voltage from the O2 sensor, while the blue curve is the signals sendt from the O2 manipulator to the ECU in order to make the ECU deliver a richer fueling.
I have no idea what you are saying.I'm happy for you that you like the BP.
As for how the engine react to it, it's a different story.
I'll show the readings from my 1200LC GSA (the 1250 is more complicated to read due to the wide band sensor, however since both ECU's acts in the same way, the information is relevant)
Here is the fueling in closed loop, warm engine, no modifications.
The throttle is blipped at 3 seconds and opened at 6 seconds and held to 10 seconds.
---------------
This curve shows the voltage to AFR values from the O2 sensor.
--------------
Then we added the Boosterplug, and this reading is from the very first run, with the BP freshly installed, (i.e hardly any adaptions at this point)
The engine is warm, and the throttle is opened up at 10,5 seconds and helt until 18 seconds.
In both cases the fueling oscillates between rich/lean, and no visible difference in the fueling.
-----------------
Sooo, what does a real richer fueling looks like?
Here is the very same engine with an O2 manipulator added:
Red curve is the voltage from the O2 sensor, while the blue curve is the signals sendt from the O2 manipulator to the ECU in order to make the ECU deliver a richer fueling.
I said the plug from riding the bike (1250 gs ) seems to make a difference , sharper , I have no graphs etc just feels better , and it was not only me.
Your wiggly lines may mean something to some but not to me , sorry but apricate the reply , but I cant work out if its good or bad.
Roger 04 RT
Registered user
Knut is saying and showing that the BP has no effect. See how effective the power of suggestion is. You think that the BP will make a difference, you spend some money, and then your senses feel something non-existent. That’s the placebo effect.
I don't mind explaining the meaning of the curves in details if it's of any interest. But if no-one cares, I'll spare you
Now you try placebo 1 you can try placebo 2 you will still get same result.
Similar threads
