A bit of a gripe
Discussion
Hi All,
I started talking about this on a biker forum, but I think it will interest you guys as well:
A few years ago I bought a Kawasaki and as it was only a 250cc engine it was restricted by 'legislation' for emissions and so forth, being an old man who's had a full bike license for more years than I care to remember there was no need for me to adhere the power restrictions that were imposed upon the vehicle: Therefore I looked around on the internet and found that there was an alternative ECU available which took the bike back to Kawasaki's factory spec.
With the original 'eco. friendly' British government ECU the bike was restricted to 60MPH and could only manage 60MPG!
With the replacement ECU the bike could do 95MPH and achieve 90MPG!
Therefore a 180 mile journey with the emissions controls in place would take three tank fulls of petrol, whereas in the original factory spec. the same 180 mile journey would only take two tank fulls of petrol!
How is this saving the planet, with regard to emissions levels?
How is this preserving the planets' scarce natural resources?
Any similar observations with car engines?
Any thoughts?
I started talking about this on a biker forum, but I think it will interest you guys as well:
A few years ago I bought a Kawasaki and as it was only a 250cc engine it was restricted by 'legislation' for emissions and so forth, being an old man who's had a full bike license for more years than I care to remember there was no need for me to adhere the power restrictions that were imposed upon the vehicle: Therefore I looked around on the internet and found that there was an alternative ECU available which took the bike back to Kawasaki's factory spec.
With the original 'eco. friendly' British government ECU the bike was restricted to 60MPH and could only manage 60MPG!
With the replacement ECU the bike could do 95MPH and achieve 90MPG!
Therefore a 180 mile journey with the emissions controls in place would take three tank fulls of petrol, whereas in the original factory spec. the same 180 mile journey would only take two tank fulls of petrol!
How is this saving the planet, with regard to emissions levels?
How is this preserving the planets' scarce natural resources?
Any similar observations with car engines?
Any thoughts?
Yeah it was certainly restricted to the A2 class, but it seems to be emissions controls that are destroying performance and fuel economy.
Because of emissions controls my Z125 has been restricted to 72mph; and a modern 125 four stroke could in reality do a lot more than that. The fuel consumption isn't too great either!
You should try overtaking with a top speed of 65MPH and no more acceleration no matter how many gears you try to knock down, you'd soon want to be able to o 95MPH as well!
Because of emissions controls my Z125 has been restricted to 72mph; and a modern 125 four stroke could in reality do a lot more than that. The fuel consumption isn't too great either!
You should try overtaking with a top speed of 65MPH and no more acceleration no matter how many gears you try to knock down, you'd soon want to be able to o 95MPH as well!
How fast could a 4 stroke 125 go without these so called emissions controls then? I've never known a 125 to do much more than 75mph, the old twin Honda Varadero thing was the quickest top end I think.
Even back in the day of tuning them, it was always easier to put a bigger engine in or a piston kit, surely everyone would be mapping these 125s and gaining the missing power?
Even back in the day of tuning them, it was always easier to put a bigger engine in or a piston kit, surely everyone would be mapping these 125s and gaining the missing power?
There was a Honda 125 back in the 80's that did over 80MPH, and before they started strangling them to death a couple of years ago those Suzuki's were getting well over 80MPH.
The point I'm making is in order to reduce emissions, fuel consumption is being reduced!
So how much are emissions really being reduced?
It's alright saying "I've reduced a gallon of petrol to this many emissions".
But if each gallon of petrol is only covering two thirds the mileage....
The point I'm making is in order to reduce emissions, fuel consumption is being reduced!
So how much are emissions really being reduced?
It's alright saying "I've reduced a gallon of petrol to this many emissions".
But if each gallon of petrol is only covering two thirds the mileage....
By the very definition the emissions and mpg and inextricably linked (hint: they calculate economy by measuring the emissions)
Realistically there is a small deficit by asking for cleaner emissions, carrying a cat around and running lean for example, but it's not normally night and day.
The A2 engines might struggle if they're designed for much more power, as low throttle openings do effect economy through extra pumping losses... But again it shouldn't be too dramatic, maybe 5-10% at worst
The 125s of old were designed for max power and restricted down, but since the power restriction to 11kW came in during the 90s the manufacturers have designed the engines specifically to produce that power by design.
Realistically there is a small deficit by asking for cleaner emissions, carrying a cat around and running lean for example, but it's not normally night and day.
The A2 engines might struggle if they're designed for much more power, as low throttle openings do effect economy through extra pumping losses... But again it shouldn't be too dramatic, maybe 5-10% at worst
The 125s of old were designed for max power and restricted down, but since the power restriction to 11kW came in during the 90s the manufacturers have designed the engines specifically to produce that power by design.
Edited by Krikkit on Saturday 9th May 21:33
2 stroke 125s of old were a lot of fun, im sure you can still search them out if you dont mind riding a 30 year old bike ....
In 1989 I had one of the first Aprilia 125s that came with a power valve kit that derestricted it, basically took them up to 28bhp ish. Naturally if you were a learner you were supposed to leave the kit in the box. I went home and fitted it the next day of course. It was one of the first 125s you could see an indicated 100mph on whilst still a teenager on L plates.
I also had a derestricted KMX125, they were even easier to get full power out of, just knock a washer out of the exhaust header. Would just rev out at the stop of the 80mph speedo. Think they were around 22-24bhp.
Never ridden a modern 4 stroke 125, cant imagine they are very interesting even if you are on L plates
In 1989 I had one of the first Aprilia 125s that came with a power valve kit that derestricted it, basically took them up to 28bhp ish. Naturally if you were a learner you were supposed to leave the kit in the box. I went home and fitted it the next day of course. It was one of the first 125s you could see an indicated 100mph on whilst still a teenager on L plates.
I also had a derestricted KMX125, they were even easier to get full power out of, just knock a washer out of the exhaust header. Would just rev out at the stop of the 80mph speedo. Think they were around 22-24bhp.
Never ridden a modern 4 stroke 125, cant imagine they are very interesting even if you are on L plates
bogie said:
2 stroke 125s of old were a lot of fun, im sure you can still search them out if you dont mind riding a 30 year old bike ....
In 1989 I had one of the first Aprilia 125s that came with a power valve kit that derestricted it, basically took them up to 28bhp ish. Naturally if you were a learner you were supposed to leave the kit in the box. I went home and fitted it the next day of course. It was one of the first 125s you could see an indicated 100mph on whilst still a teenager on L plates.
I also had a derestricted KMX125, they were even easier to get full power out of, just knock a washer out of the exhaust header. Would just rev out at the stop of the 80mph speedo. Think they were around 22-24bhp.
Never ridden a modern 4 stroke 125, cant imagine they are very interesting even if you are on L plates
125 2 strokes were brilliant back in the day. I had a gilera 125 sports rep to start with that kept blowing up. I then moved onto the Aprilia's arch nemesis, the cagiva mito 125 and regularly saw, like you say 100mph indicated on the speedo. In 1989 I had one of the first Aprilia 125s that came with a power valve kit that derestricted it, basically took them up to 28bhp ish. Naturally if you were a learner you were supposed to leave the kit in the box. I went home and fitted it the next day of course. It was one of the first 125s you could see an indicated 100mph on whilst still a teenager on L plates.
I also had a derestricted KMX125, they were even easier to get full power out of, just knock a washer out of the exhaust header. Would just rev out at the stop of the 80mph speedo. Think they were around 22-24bhp.
Never ridden a modern 4 stroke 125, cant imagine they are very interesting even if you are on L plates
It took a bloody long road to get there mind and it sounded s
te, but still at 17 years old with only jeans and trainers for protection it felt fking ballistic. Coby1 said:
With the original 'eco. friendly' British government ECU the bike was restricted to 60MPH and could only manage 60MPG!
With the replacement ECU the bike could do 95MPH and achieve 90MPG!
Therefore a 180 mile journey with the emissions controls in place would take three tank fulls of petrol, whereas in the original factory spec. the same 180 mile journey would only take two tank fulls of petrol!
How is this saving the planet, with regard to emissions levels?
How is this preserving the planets' scarce natural resources?
Any similar observations with car engines?
Any thoughts?
Gas emissions from an engine aren't just 1 thing, there are different gases, particles, all sorts of stuff. In trying to capture the harmful stuff, or not produce it in the first place, power and mpg are lost. With the replacement ECU the bike could do 95MPH and achieve 90MPG!
Therefore a 180 mile journey with the emissions controls in place would take three tank fulls of petrol, whereas in the original factory spec. the same 180 mile journey would only take two tank fulls of petrol!
How is this saving the planet, with regard to emissions levels?
How is this preserving the planets' scarce natural resources?
Any similar observations with car engines?
Any thoughts?
You have more power with your new ecu, but it doesn't mean your bike just produces more of the same exhaust gases now...
Coby1 said:
There was a Honda 125 back in the 80's that did over 80MPH, and before they started strangling them to death a couple of years ago those Suzuki's were getting well over 80MPH.
The point I'm making is in order to reduce emissions, fuel consumption is being reduced!
So how much are emissions really being reduced?
It's alright saying "I've reduced a gallon of petrol to this many emissions".
But if each gallon of petrol is only covering two thirds the mileage....
Honda CB 125 T2 - my first bike ORF 12W! It would rev to Nippon Seiki at the bottom of the tacho and as you say was a genuine 80+ 125. I was stopped by a local Police bike for speeding at 82 mph on the A500, luckily the rider was my grandparents next door neighbour and he just told me to keep a better eye in my mirrors as he'd been there for about 4 or 5 miles......The point I'm making is in order to reduce emissions, fuel consumption is being reduced!
So how much are emissions really being reduced?
It's alright saying "I've reduced a gallon of petrol to this many emissions".
But if each gallon of petrol is only covering two thirds the mileage....
KLX250 took almost exactly a gallon before the fuel light came on.
It was restricted in performance terms by limiting the maximum revs progressively in each gear; red-line in first, a thousand rpm short in second, two thousand short in third etc. six thousand rpm being the maximum in top.
I found overtaking terrifying as no matter how many gears you knocked down you couldn't accelerate!
Therefore changed the ECU which then allowed it to red-line in all gears and push the red-line in top.
In changing the ECU I also inadvertently removed the emissions restrictions and as a result gained a 50% increase in fuel efficiency!
It was restricted in performance terms by limiting the maximum revs progressively in each gear; red-line in first, a thousand rpm short in second, two thousand short in third etc. six thousand rpm being the maximum in top.
I found overtaking terrifying as no matter how many gears you knocked down you couldn't accelerate!
Therefore changed the ECU which then allowed it to red-line in all gears and push the red-line in top.
In changing the ECU I also inadvertently removed the emissions restrictions and as a result gained a 50% increase in fuel efficiency!
To try and summarize:
If we are, as it would appear, using 50% more fuel; how can we be gaining a 'net reduction' in emissions from fuel use?
How can we be preserving the worlds' finite natural resources?
Have the Oil companies simply hijacked the best intentions of people worried about the affects of using fossil fuels and turned a huge profit out of it?
If we are, as it would appear, using 50% more fuel; how can we be gaining a 'net reduction' in emissions from fuel use?
How can we be preserving the worlds' finite natural resources?
Have the Oil companies simply hijacked the best intentions of people worried about the affects of using fossil fuels and turned a huge profit out of it?
Rushjob said:
Coby1 said:
There was a Honda 125 back in the 80's that did over 80MPH, and before they started strangling them to death a couple of years ago those Suzuki's were getting well over 80MPH.
The point I'm making is in order to reduce emissions, fuel consumption is being reduced!
So how much are emissions really being reduced?
It's alright saying "I've reduced a gallon of petrol to this many emissions".
But if each gallon of petrol is only covering two thirds the mileage....
Honda CB 125 T2 - my first bike ORF 12W! It would rev to Nippon Seiki at the bottom of the tacho and as you say was a genuine 80+ 125. I was stopped by a local Police bike for speeding at 82 mph on the A500, luckily the rider was my grandparents next door neighbour and he just told me to keep a better eye in my mirrors as he'd been there for about 4 or 5 miles......The point I'm making is in order to reduce emissions, fuel consumption is being reduced!
So how much are emissions really being reduced?
It's alright saying "I've reduced a gallon of petrol to this many emissions".
But if each gallon of petrol is only covering two thirds the mileage....
Coby1 said:
KLX250 took almost exactly a gallon before the fuel light came on.
It was restricted in performance terms by limiting the maximum revs progressively in each gear; red-line in first, a thousand rpm short in second, two thousand short in third etc. six thousand rpm being the maximum in top.
I found overtaking terrifying as no matter how many gears you knocked down you couldn't accelerate!
Therefore changed the ECU which then allowed it to red-line in all gears and push the red-line in top.
In changing the ECU I also inadvertently removed the emissions restrictions and as a result gained a 50% increase in fuel efficiency!
Then they did a terrifyingly bad job of "restricting" it, because something like an A2 bike should rev out quite happily.It was restricted in performance terms by limiting the maximum revs progressively in each gear; red-line in first, a thousand rpm short in second, two thousand short in third etc. six thousand rpm being the maximum in top.
I found overtaking terrifying as no matter how many gears you knocked down you couldn't accelerate!
Therefore changed the ECU which then allowed it to red-line in all gears and push the red-line in top.
In changing the ECU I also inadvertently removed the emissions restrictions and as a result gained a 50% increase in fuel efficiency!
Gassing Station | Biker Banter | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff