Bob, Thanks for taking the effort and time to post the additional maps. Does something seem odd about the other two maps? They certainly don't appear to be anything I'd dare run on my 630.
The FMF map looks like something I'd try. It's taking out a little more fuel thru the low/midrange and not adding quite as much on the big end (compared to the stock map). Should give better mpg than the stock map as long as driveability doesn't suffer. These maps would lead you to believe that neither the FMF or LEO are flowing as good as the stock duals (they're asking for less fuel). I don't know, I might be able to believe that... ?? I think I will give the FMF map a shot on the dyno sometime. .
Those results were certainly shed some light on the accuracy of the FMF map especially at full twist.
Been playing a bit more with the IBeat settings and leaning out the low and mid-range and slight change on the top end. Set now at 102,105,118 with stock air box and full Leo Vince exhaust system (sparky removed). After riding 500 miles this week through endless turns requiring constant down shifting and accelerations up to 80 mph I think I've got it dialed in.. Will be out for another test coming up and know for sure.
Just imagine a good 250 miles of them non-stop just like the pics.. I've put together a special route and over the last week have done it 4 times. During the first time out we came across a car club containing some pretty high priced machinery that were unable to hang on the back of the 630. Then on the second time out I took my sport car around the loop and confirmed that the Sumo is king on these roads. Braking and acceleration into/out of the corners is superb on a Sumo. Plus you can apex corners easier with the bike. Confirmed today that I like the 102.105,118 setting on my bike the best so far.
Reset another 630 with the FMF slip on (no sparky) and EHS airbox mod to 102,105,116 and the owner much prefers this fuel setting than his previous which was 108,108,116. We tested during a 230 mile ride of tight curvy roads with constant acceleration out of corners. The 630 will start much better with 102 on the low end and the 105 provides improved performance and throttle response during acceleration when twisting to 1/2 or so throttle position.
If I get a slight popping at deceleration, which part of the map would need to be tweaked? I'm currently at 100,108,116 with powercore 4 with large db killer, and EHS airbox. (My bike was harder to start with 102 at the bottom)
Did you use any sealant/gasket maker on the head tube and slip on joints to ensure no air leaks? Air leaks in the exhaust system can cause popping. If sealed correctly, I'dd bump the 100 to 102 and drop the 108 down to at least 105 however I have no idea what type of DB killer you have.. Give it a try and find out with the new settings.
Yes, I did use sealant (the same copper silicon gasket maker I have been using forever) As far as DB Killer, I guess I'm not running one right now, I lost it during a ride yesterday I thought the bike got noticeably louder (annoyingly so) but didn't check until this morning. So for now I'm back to the spark arrestor the muffler originally came with.
I wouldn't be concerned about a little pop. Back in the carb days we tuned for a little bit instead of none. .
I went 102,105,116 and the bike ran very well. It cleaned up a bit in the middle. And it works very well down low. This is the first time I take if off-road, and I had no trouble riding a gear high.
Hello all! What are your thoughts on whether using the iBeat to change fueling settings over a JD tuner? I ask because i have the iBeat for diagnostics only and have been using the JD tuner since '11 on my TE630. I have a FMF Q4, O2 delete(OEM PU kit), and get about 35-42mpgs depending on the mood i am in. i I have no issues at all with the JD, just feel like simplifying things. Any thoughts are appreciated. Thanks, Vince
I have no experience with a JD tuner, but my gut feeling is a lot of people are running them too rich in low and midrange, hence the poor fuel economy. I just avg'd 48mpg over 2600 miles on our Sept trip. In fairness though, it could be you ride the bike in the upper ranges of it's performance more than I do. All the results from Dynojet's mapping efforts (three different maps) point to our bikes needing: leaned down or little to no fuel added down low, a little added thru the midrange, and a lot added at high rpm. Like I've said before, I believe you can get to pretty much the same results with iBeat, JD, or PCV. If you want to try simplifying, pull the JD and try the iBeat, won't cost anything to try. I'm sure a bunch on here would like to hear your opinion between the two. .
Thank you for input! I like the JD, and you were right on, i did have it rich early on. After I really messed around with it a bunch I really dialed it in and have had no issues ever since. I just want to simplify whats going on and maybe see if i can squeeze a little mpg out of it. I will advise when i experiment backwards to the iBeat. Thanks again! Vince
For reference below is a map created by autotune for a bazzaz zfi for te630 .The data was gathered over a week of sedate riding and hiway use.I can't remember what i set the afr at but i pretty sure it was the safe recommended level.All co settings were 100.Standard airbox , gutted stock pipes and o2 eliminator.The base maps that come with the zfi unit for slip on won't run smoothly on my setup.I get 20km/l running the map below ,economy doesn't fluctuate much whether riding sedately or hard.When i get another laptop i will mess around afr and tuning .
After Will helping me with iBeat settings here is what i found . I have power up done , snorkerkel removed , twin barretts with spark arreestors . Bike was running lean , a little rough to start and running hot . We went with 108/110/118 The test ride and subsequent rides has to big running well to me ( i can only compare to pre i beat ) . It starts easy and pulls hard. My question is around mpg . It is chewing 6ltr per 100km si just under 40mpg . This is testing on mostly twisty mountain roads . Does this seems a little thirsty . I do want to maximise economy without loosing too much power as i am trying to avoid going down the safari tank route . Thoughts ? Might see will and bring back setting a tad ? Or get jd tuner .
Edit above - sorry typing on iphone and just realised I can not edit post ----The test ride and subsequent rides it seems to be running well to me
Try 102/105/118 and see how it starts. If you are a hard, full-throttle rider than your mileage isn't bad. Just cruising around you should be able to get 45+ mpg. .
thanks dyno bob . Am i correct in understanding if i left my ibeat setting at 108/110/118 . Added a jd tuner and dropped the low and mid by one, on that i would end up with an equivalent i beat setting 103 /105/118 . I am figuring this out from past posts suggesting that each change on a jd is about 5%. And if i install the jd does the standard setting increase or decrease the fuel ? If so should i tweak i beat pre install . Thanks for everyone help just trying to get my head around it all .
