Triumph Rat Motorcycle Forums banner

21 - 40 of 44 Posts

·
Registered
Joined
·
50 Posts
Discussion Starter #22
After a couple hundred miles, I can report the ECM remap definitely feels like it's effective. The overall fueling feel smoother and more responsive (and it was pretty good to begin with) and it feels like it's pulling harder sooner in the torque curve. I think I the motor sounds different too, but I don’t know to attribute to the change in fueling, or the MWR air filter and velocity stacks.

Also worth noting, I did not see an real changes in fuel economy.

The post-mods dyno pull should be on Tuesday or Wednesday this week. I do need to note something I heard from Hilltop at the end of last week.

"You won't be able to see gains from our software on a dyno. It's designed to be hidden."

“You shouldn't see any difference on the dyno between the before and after runs for the Triumph.”​
I’m going to go ahead and do the dyno pulls. At a minimum, we should see the impact of the air filter and velocity stack changes.

Hilltop is aware of this thread and maybe chiming in later.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
50 Posts
Discussion Starter #23
One other thing to point out, I asked about the dyno results I have seen from bikes done in their shop (versus the "Post in option" that I used), this is what Hilltop mentioned.

"When we run bikes on our dyno we can defeat the hiding process (because it's our software)."
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
559 Posts
Okay...that just doesn't make sense at all.

A dyno pull is a dyno pull (is a dyno pull). "Hiding something within the software" either has a real-world effect on the actual power and torque being put down to the belt (referenced to the RPM of the engine and subject to environmentals, etc.), or it doesn't. If the gains are hidden such that they don't show up on a normal dyno pull, then there are no gains. Stat.

I just don't get that set of statements from them at all.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
50 Posts
Discussion Starter #26
Okay...that just doesn't make sense at all.

A dyno pull is a dyno pull (is a dyno pull). "Hiding something within the software" either has a real-world effect on the actual power and torque being put down to the belt (referenced to the RPM of the engine and subject to environmentals, etc.), or it doesn't. If the gains are hidden such that they don't show up on a normal dyno pull, then there are no gains. Stat.

I just don't get that set of statements from them at all.
All this sounds like a placebo effect LOL
It would be pretty easy to check data from the accelerometer to see if the bike is moving. A first line of code that uses that condition is not difficult to imagine. Also worth pointing out that Hilltop is remaping my BMW F800GS ECU. Regarding that software they said, “Your GS will show the changes since it's different software that goes on that.” There is no accelerometer in that ECU.

Another important consideration. I think a main customer of Hilltop is going to subject to ongoing Euro 4 emissions test. Having a way to improve fueling that is not visible when the bike is standing still would be desirable in that context. Some new model Ducati’s require the rear wheel sensor to be disconnected for dyno tuning due to similar reasons.

Finally, as this thread might suggest, I am a skeptic by nature when it comes to these performance mods. That said, I’m pretty certain what I have experiencing is not placebo effect.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
559 Posts
I'm interested in the Hilltop re-program for two reasons: 1) a cooler running engine, and 2) the curve they posted on a stock remap (massively more rapid torque curve onset that stayed relatively stable from 3-9K rpm).

The problem with the statements above is that it just isn't logical. A dyno measures power and torque direct to ground (belt) as referenced against RPM and taking into account (or not) environmentals, etc.

That's it....it's not a "software hideable" thing. It would take an *extremely* intricate software suite to 'tell' the dyno different RPM values (instead of actual) as well as limit the actual power 'put down' when connected to that dyno controller (computer interface). That would take more predictive and adaptive coding than is available on a simple ECU. It literally would take *way more effort and expertise than doing what the Hilltop software allegedly does just to learn and adapt to a given configuration.

I'm really hoping that your dyno pull shows differently (and you get something like the Hilltop published map). That would make sense. If not, then nothing happened (other than hopefully adding a bit more fuel for each RPM/throttle cell so that the engine runs cooler). That would be disappointing to hear.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
559 Posts
Thinking this through, the only way this is 'doable' is for the ECU to be programmed to default to stock fueling when connected to any offboard computer. That's it. That's not 'hiding', it's disabling whatever changes have been made such that any dyno (other than Hilltop's) simply measures the stock fueling with whatever configuration of exhaust, etc. is on the bike.

That MUST be what's going on here. In other words, your butt dyno is the only result that you're going to be able to relate to others. It keeps Euro 4 and emissions/power testing folks happy (as once the bike is plugged into a diagnostic or other port, it defaults to stock fueling). On their dyno, they have the 'other half' of the software key so that the ECU recognizes its "home" and allows the remapped cell values to be in play for the dyno run.

Hate to say it, but your dyno pull for tomorrow or whenever is only going to show the venturi/air filter results. Your bike is just going to be running on a stock fuel map.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
109 Posts
hold on guys.

volkswagon have done it with thei TDI right.
emission friendly when test on a dyno but a different story on the road....

i doubt it is this way but who knows?

Sent from my SM-G920W8 using Tapatalk
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
4 Posts
Regarding the visibilty or otherwise of changes caused by our software:

On some bikes it's impossible to hide the changes because the systems we require in order to do so are not present.

On some bikes the necessary systems are present but we haven't bothered to hide it for various reasons.

On the bikes we do make the effort to hide the changes from showing on another dyno it's because that particular software was developed with secrecy in mind. Now that doesn't mean that we are particularly trying to be cloak and dagger with your individual bike, it's just a legacy of the original development process.

A dyno is an artificial environment and with the amount of sensors on modern bikes it's actually fairly straightforward for a computer program to determine whether the bike is actually on the road/track or not. I'll leave it to you to work out the details.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
559 Posts
That all makes sense - I can (and did per my last post above) read between the lines once I did some thinking on it.

That said, I personally wouldn't bother at all with a second dyno (unless my buddy was providing the run free of charge).

I am *very interested in whether or not the bike is running cooler after the Hilltop magic....
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
50 Posts
Discussion Starter #32
That all makes sense - I can (and did per my last post above) read between the lines once I did some thinking on it.

That said, I personally wouldn't bother at all with a second dyno (unless my buddy was providing the run free of charge).

I am *very interested in whether or not the bike is running cooler after the Hilltop magic....
I'm going to go ahead with the second dyno pull because I'm a nerd like that. Going to try a couple of things. At a minimum, it will be a good test of the velocity stacks and air filter.

Regarding running temp, I didn't see anything different than I have since I purchased the bike last fall. Normal running temp seems to be right in the middle. As the temps increase this summer here in Austin, I would expect a properly fueled bike to run cooler than a very lean bike.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
559 Posts
Agreed.

I've noticed (as we've moved into summer), that my R is running hotter - combined with what I think is a (very slightly) more lean set of running conditions with the Exan pipe.

As a result, I'm super interested in your perspective on the running temp post-Hilltop download. All my other bikes have been "tunable", especially the carbureted ones...easy to change jetting. Slightly richer than stoich (not overly rich) jetting or tuning is *always better than EPA mandated stoich values for the longevity of the engine. It also happens to have the side benefit (again if not *too rich) of mitigating gaps in power curves (especially for slip-on pipes, etc.).

Thus my interest in tuning. I've never been worked up over peak power. I'm not a good enough rider to take advantage of it, and I simply don't care about a 'number'. I do like smoothness of power and (more importantly) torque through the usable/normal range of an engine - and I want it to run in a healthy (i.e. not lean) manner.

If Hilltop's magic does that, I'm sold (just wish they were on this side of the ocean).
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
50 Posts
Discussion Starter #34
Ok folks, here is the graph from today's second dyno pull. As predicted by Hilltop, nothing visible from their remap. Blue line is the baseline. Red line is today. These are from a sweep pull.

The bump around 7500 and 10000 is attributed to the velocity stacks and air filter changes.

We did a pull with the bike as is, and also one with the rear wheel sensor disconnected. Zero difference, so that is not the data being used to determine if the bike is stationary or actually moving. I suspect they are using something from the IMU.

As stated above, even without verified dyno data, I am happy with the Hilltop remap for the 765. Pulls harder from earlier in the RPM range, and throttle is crisper.

If you are interested in following along with my full Hilltop journey, you can see the F800GS story here. Second dyno run with that bike will be next week sometime.
http://advrider.com/index.php?threads/f800-gsa-remap-results.1256285/page-3#post-34983867
 

Attachments

·
Premium Member
Joined
·
1,486 Posts
...
We did a pull with the bike as is, and also one with the rear wheel sensor disconnected. Zero difference, so that is not the data being used to determine if the bike is stationary or actually moving. I suspect they are using something from the IMU.
...
The only input that can be used to detect a dyno is the difference between front ABS sensor and rear. There are no inertia sensors, and you can't "detect a computer being connected" because most dyno's use at-most a primary or secondary ignition detection clip, and don't link to the OBD2 at all.
Given that, linking the front to the rear sensor would simulate normal riding, so any gain would be demonstrable on the dyno. My guess is that you'll still see no difference, but I would be delighted if I was proved wrong.

Edit:
By the way, I have a magic bean you can wave over the chain that will remap your gearbox to give you a 20% boost in mid-range torque.
I can predicted that nothing will be visible from the remap :D
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
41 Posts
Hmmm. It doesn’t set well with me that the fact the tune and/or A/F ratio is hidden on a dyno. Have you tried running a wide brand while riding it around? I know it would be a little bit of a PITA to do, but that would tell the story right there.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
50 Posts
Discussion Starter #40
Hmmm. It doesn’t set well with me that the fact the tune and/or A/F ratio is hidden on a dyno. Have you tried running a wide brand while riding it around? I know it would be a little bit of a PITA to do, but that would tell the story right there.

Nah, at this point that’s not important to me. Plus it would be a lot of extra expense and hassle. The impact while riding is very apparent, and the similar work they did on my F800GS is visible on the dyno.



Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
 
21 - 40 of 44 Posts
Top