power commander mapping - zx10r
Discussion
Since having my zx10r dyno'd power commander ,akrapovic fitted the fuel consumption has gone insane - 70 miles from a tank!!
~I'm just about to go back to the dyno people and get them to create a map which I can use when commuting then switch back to the other map when I'm going for a blast.
Before I do, anyone here got a similiar set up akrapovic can(road legal but baffle removed), K&N and got mapping for fuel eceonomy rather than power??
~I'm just about to go back to the dyno people and get them to create a map which I can use when commuting then switch back to the other map when I'm going for a blast.
Before I do, anyone here got a similiar set up akrapovic can(road legal but baffle removed), K&N and got mapping for fuel eceonomy rather than power??
nords said:
Why would anyone do that????
I have a K3 GSXR with a yoshi, panel filter and tuned on Crescent dyno for power (160 at the rear wheel) and the fuel consumption is the same, 120-125 from a full tank. Are you using 98Ron fuel?
I want to do it! When I'm commuting to work I hardly get out of third gear due to the traffic so why not get a fuel efficient map for when you're commuting and use the full power map when going for a blast? - it takes about a minute to swap the maps over when hooked upto a laptop.
I use 97 fuel but only get about 70 miles from a 17 litre tank - as far as ~I'm concerned thats sh1te.
Scotty, I meant this particular question.... I can't see anyone buying a ZX10 (blade perhaps!!! :joke!flamesuiton: ) adding an Akrapovic and then dynoing it for fuel economy?!!....
scotty2dogs said:
Before I do, anyone here got a similiar set up akrapovic can(road legal but baffle removed), K&N and got mapping for fuel eceonomy rather than power??
Your idea of 2 maps is different and a good idea I expect, but will different maps make much difference??? I don't know but doubt it so how....
Mapping can be created for balls out power,fuel economy,low down grunt & mid range grunt.
You have to get the mapping done by a pro as the hardest thing to create is a balance between any of the above scenarios and the correct fuel/air ratio.
If you go to www.powercommander.com you can download various maps for various bikes with varying set ups - give it a go - its v.worthwhile.
You have to get the mapping done by a pro as the hardest thing to create is a balance between any of the above scenarios and the correct fuel/air ratio.
If you go to www.powercommander.com you can download various maps for various bikes with varying set ups - give it a go - its v.worthwhile.
Surely mapping is done to give the greatest efficiency - effectively more go from less throttle so if you ride at the same speed you should use less fuel, however if you ride at full throttle it will go faster - but use more fuel accordingly.
My bike has had a 'remap' and I've not seen any noticable difference in fuel economy (unless I ride it harder), it might even consume less, than before but there's no such thing as a free lunch
that said 70 miles from a tank is pretty 'poor'
>> Edited by catso on Sunday 11th December 23:02
My bike has had a 'remap' and I've not seen any noticable difference in fuel economy (unless I ride it harder), it might even consume less, than before but there's no such thing as a free lunch
that said 70 miles from a tank is pretty 'poor'
>> Edited by catso on Sunday 11th December 23:02
[quote=catso]Surely mapping is done to give the greatest efficiency - effectively more go from less throttle so if you ride at the same speed you should use less fuel, however if you ride at full throttle it will go faster - but use more fuel accordingly.
quote]
Mapping is only done for greatest efficiency if you specifically ask for it. I , along with 99.99% of other motorcyclists ask for power - not fuel efficiency - but thats my point, these bikes and the technology a la' power commander allow us to have a choice - ~
(a) for when we are commuting - fuel efficiency is the key not power.
(b) when we go "balls out," we want more power throughout the rev range which results in more fuel being used.
And yes 70 miles a tank is ridiculous.
quote]
Mapping is only done for greatest efficiency if you specifically ask for it. I , along with 99.99% of other motorcyclists ask for power - not fuel efficiency - but thats my point, these bikes and the technology a la' power commander allow us to have a choice - ~
(a) for when we are commuting - fuel efficiency is the key not power.
(b) when we go "balls out," we want more power throughout the rev range which results in more fuel being used.
And yes 70 miles a tank is ridiculous.
Scotty,
70 miles is taking the proverbial. My Blade (2005MY) has an Akrapovic and PCIII and has been mapped both at SDC performance in Stevenage and latterly I downloaded a map from the PC website for it. I had an issue with the custom map, so reverted to a standard one from the net.
It still does 120-140 on a tank, as it did when standard.
There is certainly something amiss with yours. Save your map, and then use a standard one from the PC website or CD that came with the bike. Try that and see if it makes a difference.
Cheers
Matt
70 miles is taking the proverbial. My Blade (2005MY) has an Akrapovic and PCIII and has been mapped both at SDC performance in Stevenage and latterly I downloaded a map from the PC website for it. I had an issue with the custom map, so reverted to a standard one from the net.
It still does 120-140 on a tank, as it did when standard.
There is certainly something amiss with yours. Save your map, and then use a standard one from the PC website or CD that came with the bike. Try that and see if it makes a difference.
Cheers
Matt
[quote=nords]
Scotty, I meant this particular question.... I can't see anyone buying a ZX10 (blade perhaps!!! :joke!flamesuiton: ) adding an Akrapovic and then dynoing it for fuel economy?!!....
[quote]
Matt, can't believe you're still being nice to me after comments like the above!
Hehehehehe
Scotty, I meant this particular question.... I can't see anyone buying a ZX10 (blade perhaps!!! :joke!flamesuiton: ) adding an Akrapovic and then dynoing it for fuel economy?!!....
[quote]
Matt, can't believe you're still being nice to me after comments like the above!
Hehehehehe
scotty2dogs said:
Since having my zx10r dyno'd power commander ,akrapovic fitted the fuel consumption has gone insane - 70 miles from a tank!!
~I'm just about to go back to the dyno people and get them to create a map which I can use when commuting then switch back to the other map when I'm going for a blast.
Before I do, anyone here got a similiar set up akrapovic can(road legal but baffle removed), K&N and got mapping for fuel eceonomy rather than power??
When a power commander is mapped on a Dyno it can be done in 2 different ways.
It can be mapped manually where the figures are entered using the supplied control centre software or it can be mapped using Tuning Link which has the option of running the bike slightly leaner or richer depending on the throttle position or rpm, i.e. up to 60% throttle you can set the a/f to 13.5-1 and then 60% and above to 13.0-1.
Early next year Dynojet are changing the powercommanders so that you can have two maps on the pc111 at the same time which are switchable on the move, so this might be what you are after.
Simon
Carbon Can Co
simon-c said:
It can be mapped manually where the figures are entered using the supplied control centre software or it can be mapped using Tuning Link which has the option of running the bike slightly leaner or richer depending on the throttle position or rpm, i.e. up to 60% throttle you can set the a/f to 13.5-1 and then 60% and above to 13.0-1.
I thought the whole Tuning Link sales spiel is that it takes the skill of the operator out of equation. Is this an admission by Dynojet that this system isn't the be all and end all of mapping a bike?
Many of the more renowned and established dyno places don't use Tuning Link and individually map each data cell and this just confirms to me that a good dyno operator is essential.
moto_traxport said:
It can be mapped manually where the figures are entered using the supplied control centre software or it can be mapped using Tuning Link which has the option of running the bike slightly leaner or richer depending on the throttle position or rpm, i.e. up to 60% throttle you can set the a/f to 13.5-1 and then 60% and above to 13.0-1.
I thought the whole Tuning Link sales spiel is that it takes the skill of the operator out of equation. Is this an admission by Dynojet that this system isn't the be all and end all of mapping a bike?
Many of the more renowned and established dyno places don't use Tuning Link and individually map each data cell and this just confirms to me that a good dyno operator is essential.
Most of the Tuning centres don't use Tuning Link because of the high price of renewing the software licence every year. Tuning Link wasn't designed to map the power commander for you, it just does a lot of the part throttle donkey work which takes a long time manually, I still tweek the individual cells manually after using Tuning Link.
Some bikes you can do the complete map in Tuning Link (ZX6R 03>
, others like the latest GSXR600/750 have a real peaky torque curve which Tuning Link struggles to hold on the brake so it's easier to map manually. The skill of the operator is using and combining the two methods to get exactly what the customer wants. To tell you the truth from what I've seen of a lot of dyno centres there are a lot that really don't know what they're doing.
Simon.
Gassing Station | Biker Banter | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff