Okay. It's time to kick the manufacturer's in the ass for all these new
bikes having flat spots in their fueling band.

BMW K's have flat spots at 3200 rpm.

Ducati Streetfighters have flat spots from 3500-4000 rpm.

Gold Wings have FI lights come on ( FI=Fuel Injection issues).

Harley, without exception. Morseo on their older carb'ed ones with infinite
needles and jets. Cripes!

There should be no need for extra chips, substitute lambda sensors, Power
Commanders, whatever, to make them run without flat spots.

Come on manufactures: Get on the stick and make your bikes run right without
a lot of extra crap that's needed!

If they pulled this sort of fueling crap in cars the public would be
incensed.

</rant!>

B~

B. Peg <bent_peg@att.net> wrote:

>
> BMW K's have flat spots at 3200 rpm.
>
> Ducati Streetfighters have flat spots from 3500-4000 rpm.
>
> Gold Wings have FI lights come on ( FI=Fuel Injection issues).
>
> Harley, without exception. Morseo on their older carb'ed ones with infinite
> needles and jets. Cripes!

They do? Ridden all of the above, have you?


--
BMW K1100LT Ducati 750SS Honda CB400F & XBR500 Triumph Street Triple
Suzuki TS250ER
If you don't know what you're doing, don't do it. And RTFM.
chateau dot murray at idnet dot com

B. Peg wrote:
> Okay. It's time to kick the manufacturer's in the ass for all these new
> bikes having flat spots in their fueling band.
>
> BMW K's have flat spots at 3200 rpm.
>
> Ducati Streetfighters have flat spots from 3500-4000 rpm.
>
> Gold Wings have FI lights come on ( FI=Fuel Injection issues).
>
> Harley, without exception. Morseo on their older carb'ed ones with infinite
> needles and jets. Cripes!
>
> There should be no need for extra chips, substitute lambda sensors, Power
> Commanders, whatever, to make them run without flat spots.
>
> Come on manufactures: Get on the stick and make your bikes run right without
> a lot of extra crap that's needed!
>
> If they pulled this sort of fueling crap in cars the public would be
> incensed.

Bikes have a high power to weight ratio relative to cars which makes any
fueling issues easier to feel. I suspect some bike FI systems, no make
that most bike FI systems are less sophisticated than car FI systems.
And meeting emissions regulations means bikes have to run leaner than
most of us would like, which is where the problem really lies. What
would be nice is a factory EFI system that was as easy to remap as a
Power Commander, and would let you retain closed loop operation for
great mileage yet allow you to remap everything when in open loop mode
when you whack the throttle open.

Some bikes are renowned for having great FI systems already, eventually
they will all get better.

Mark Olson <olsonm@tiny.invalid> wrote:

> Some bikes are renowned for having great FI systems already, eventually
> they will all get better.

Now complaints whatsoever about the two FI bikes I run.


--
BMW K1100LT Ducati 750SS Honda CB400F & XBR500 Triumph Street Triple
Suzuki TS250ER
If you don't know what you're doing, don't do it. And RTFM.
chateau dot murray at idnet dot com

"B. Peg" <bent_peg@att.net> wrote in message
newsss1m.7226$Dx2.3238@flpi146.ffdc.sbc.com...
> Okay. It's time to kick the manufacturer's in the ass for all these new
> bikes having flat spots in their fueling band.
>
> BMW K's have flat spots at 3200 rpm.
>
> Ducati Streetfighters have flat spots from 3500-4000 rpm.
>
> Gold Wings have FI lights come on ( FI=Fuel Injection issues).
>
> Harley, without exception. Morseo on their older carb'ed ones with
> infinite needles and jets. Cripes!
>
> There should be no need for extra chips, substitute lambda sensors, Power
> Commanders, whatever, to make them run without flat spots.

Well a carbed model (any of them) wouldn't benefit in the slightest from a
PC, substitute Lambda sensor or even a "whatever" would it/they?
>
> Come on manufactures: Get on the stick and make your bikes run right
> without a lot of extra crap that's needed!

You've obviously spent a lot of time researching the reasons why FI bikes
have these holes in the fuelling I see. Maybe you should start your research
again, but this time begin with "Emmisions"
>
> If they pulled this sort of fueling crap in cars the public would be
> incensed.

And you think they don't? I wonder why the 'Vette decided to go from a nice
healthy 400bhp to a massive 200bhp (if you're lucky) usiont essentially the
same engine? Maybe it was just coincidental that he Cali's didn't like
snorting gasoline fumes as much as they like snorting coke.


--
Beav

VN 750
Zed 1000
OMF# 19

"The Older Gentleman" <totallydeadmailbox@yahoo.co.uk> wrote in message
news:1j1zi4m.rftubgt4l2wcN%totallydeadmailbox@yaho o.co.uk...
> Mark Olson <olsonm@tiny.invalid> wrote:
>
>> Some bikes are renowned for having great FI systems already, eventually
>> they will all get better.
>
> Now complaints whatsoever about the two FI bikes I run.

Not much of a problem for the Zed either, although it does have a hole in
the power delivery to meet Euro II emission requirements. It's certainly
smooth enough, i.e non snatchy, and if the revs are above 4000, the hole is
barely noticable.


--
Beav

VN 750
Zed 1000
OMF# 19

On Jun 28, 4:46*am, "Beav" <beavis.origi...@ntlwoxorld.com> wrote:

> And you think they don't? I wonder why the 'Vette decided to go from a nice
> healthy 400bhp to a massive 200bhp (if you're lucky) usiont essentially the
> same engine? Maybe it was just coincidental that he Cali's didn't like
> snorting gasoline fumes as much as they like snorting coke.

heh, it's JUST a cage so who cares. Granted I don't think a REAL
Buggati is ever a waste. ;^)

--
Keith

On Jun 27, 11:23*am, "B. Peg" <bent_...@att.net> wrote:

I putter around on a 09' EX250...no flat spots in the fueling at all
altitudes and speeds.

On Jun 27, 1:23*pm, "B. Peg" <bent_...@att.net> wrote:
> Okay. *It's time to kick the manufacturer's in the ass for all these new
> bikes having flat spots in their fueling band.
>
> BMW K's have flat spots at 3200 rpm.
>
> Ducati Streetfighters have flat spots from 3500-4000 rpm.
>
> Gold Wings have FI lights come on ( FI=Fuel Injection issues).
>
> Harley, without exception. *Morseo on their older carb'ed ones with infinite
> needles and jets. Cripes!
>
> There should be no need for extra chips, substitute lambda sensors, Power
> Commanders, whatever, to make them run without flat spots.
>
> Come on manufactures: Get on the stick and make your bikes run right without
> a lot of extra crap that's needed!
>
> If they pulled this sort of fueling crap in cars the public would be
> incensed.

Both of my cars have lousy low end throttle response. IIRCC, Krusty
said it had to do with the fact the at no throttle opening FI
dispenses no fuel, whereas a carb continues to dispense small amounts
leading to smooth on/off throttle transitions.

Since you can only design one intake and exhaust system, that *system*
will have an optimal point of operation. Yamaha has recently improved
this somewhat by having variable length throttle bodies that change
their length with rpm.

Of course, the common knowledge that bikes are delivered lean from the
factory to satisfy EPA inspectors plays a big role too. Manufacturers
could make them run right, but often would never get them to the
showroom floor.

Two notable exceptions are the new Harleys and BMW R models. Both
have primo throttle response sans the jerkiness associated with FI.

I have a Cobra FI enhancer on my Warrior and with the low rpm setting
set to 7 out of 10 have just about eliminated the low end jerkiness.
On my FJR I've added loads of richness to the bottom end of an
otherwise terrific FI map, but it still jerks around a lot at low
throttle openings.

In a car it isn't as big a deal since you're not leaned over when the
power hits like a bucking bronco and most people are driving them
aggressively to notice it anyway.

saddlebag <saddlebag@aol.com> wrote:

> IIRCC, Krusty
> said it had to do with the fact the at no throttle opening FI
> dispenses no fuel,

Krusty's, as usual, hasn't got it entirely right. FI systems do dispense
small amounts of fuel on a closed throttle[1][. They do this precisely
because the manufacturers know what happens when no fuel is being fed:
you get a jerky power off/power on transition.

On long, hard decelerations, yes, they shut off completely. Typically,
this may take a few seconds to come about.

You can actually feel this happening on my own K. Shut the throttle and
after perhaps four seconds' strong deceleration with the throttle closed
there's an almost imperceptible change in engine behaviour as the fuel
is cut off completely.

[1] There may be some that shut off entirely, every time you close the
throttle, mind, but the ones I'm familiar with aren't among them.


--
BMW K1100LT Ducati 750SS Honda CB400F & XBR500 Triumph Street Triple
Suzuki TS250ER
If you don't know what you're doing, don't do it. And RTFM.
chateau dot murray at idnet dot com

I agree.

3500 - 4000
Kaw ZX1100

"Schiffner" <stevenkeith2@hotmail.com> wrote in message
news:b4703482-1578-4f73-9a32-7e457a34b988@y17g2000yqn.googlegroups.com...
On Jun 28, 4:46 am, "Beav" <beavis.origi...@ntlwoxorld.com> wrote:

>> And you think they don't? I wonder why the 'Vette decided to go from a
>> nice
>> healthy 400bhp to a massive 200bhp (if you're lucky) usiont essentially
>> the
>> same engine? Maybe it was just coincidental that he Cali's didn't like
>> snorting gasoline fumes as much as they like snorting coke.

>heh, it's JUST a cage so who cares. Granted I don't think a REAL
>Buggati is ever a waste. ;^)

I don't think ANY Bugati is a waste.

--
Beav

VN 750
Zed 1000
OMF# 19

On Jun 29, 12:57*pm, "Beav" <beavis.origi...@ntlwoxorld.com> wrote:
> "Schiffner" <stevenkei...@hotmail.com> wrote in message
>
> news:b4703482-1578-4f73-9a32-7e457a34b988@y17g2000yqn.googlegroups.com...
> On Jun 28, 4:46 am, "Beav" <beavis.origi...@ntlwoxorld.com> wrote:
>
> >> And you think they don't? I wonder why the 'Vette decided to go from a
> >> nice
> >> healthy 400bhp to a massive 200bhp (if you're lucky) usiont essentially
> >> the
> >> same engine? Maybe it was just coincidental that he Cali's didn't like
> >> snorting gasoline fumes as much as they like snorting coke.
> >heh, it's JUST a cage so who cares. Granted I don't think a REAL
> >Buggati is ever a waste. ;^)
>
> I don't think ANY Bugati is a waste.

Indeed, it'd break my heart to own a couple of their pre-war race
cars...yeah, I'd race fracking wheels off them. I mean they ARE race
cars.

Beav wrote:

>I wonder why the 'Vette decided to go from a nice
>healthy 400bhp to a massive 200bhp (if you're lucky) usiont essentially the
>same engine? Maybe it was just coincidental that he Cali's didn't like
>snorting gasoline fumes

Huh? I think not. Proof?

dizzy wrote:
> Beav wrote:
>
>> I wonder why the 'Vette decided to go from a nice
>> healthy 400bhp to a massive 200bhp (if you're lucky) usiont
>> essentially the same engine? Maybe it was just coincidental that he
>> Cali's didn't like snorting gasoline fumes
>
> Huh? I think not. Proof?

Proof of what, that the horsepower ratings of American cars plummeted when
the Clean Air Act went through? I doubt you'll find a Web site with
evidence going back that far, but find a library with a collection of car
magazines going back into the late '60s and you should be able to find the
information right quick. Part of it was a paper change, going from the SAE
gross method to the SAE net method, which used a different procedure for
measuring horsepoer, but part of it was the lean carburetion, heavily
retarded timing, and reduction in compression ratio all of which went with
the new emissions laws.

On 28 June, 18:05, totallydeadmail...@yahoo.co.uk (The Older
Gentleman) wrote:
> saddlebag <saddle...@aol.com> wrote:
> > IIRCC, Krusty
> > said it had to do with the fact the at no throttle opening FI
> > dispenses no fuel,
>
> Krusty's, as usual, hasn't got it entirely right. FI systems do dispense
> small amounts of fuel on a closed throttle[1][. They do this precisely
> because the manufacturers know what happens when no fuel is being fed:
> you get a jerky power off/power on transition.
>
> On long, hard decelerations, yes, they shut off completely. Typically,
> this may take a few seconds to come about.
>
> You can actually feel this happening on my own K. Shut the throttle and
> after perhaps four seconds' strong deceleration with the throttle closed
> there's an almost imperceptible change in engine behaviour as the fuel
> is cut off completely.
>
> [1] There may be some that shut off entirely, every time you close the
> throttle, mind, but the ones I'm familiar with aren't among them.
>

As a follow-up, I monitored the FI on the Triumph this morning. Shut
the throttle hard on the overrun and it definitely continues to feed
fuel through for several seconds until it reaches the point where the
computer says: "OK, he's definitely on a long-term deceleration, so
let's shut the fuel off entirely...." and the real-time fuel
consumption gauge jumps to 99.99mpg (which is its most economical
reading).

J. Clarke wrote:

>dizzy wrote:
>> Beav wrote:
>>
>>> I wonder why the 'Vette decided to go from a nice
>>> healthy 400bhp to a massive 200bhp (if you're lucky) usiont
>>> essentially the same engine? Maybe it was just coincidental that he
>>> Cali's didn't like snorting gasoline fumes
>>
>> Huh? I think not. Proof?
>
>Proof of what, that the horsepower ratings of American cars plummeted when
>the Clean Air Act went through?

Oh, he's talking about what happened 40 years ago? That was not
clear. Ancient history.

"dizzy" <dizzy@nospam.invalid> wrote
> J. Clarke wrote:
>
>>Proof of what, that the horsepower ratings of American cars plummeted when
>>the Clean Air Act went through?
>
> Oh, he's talking about what happened 40 years ago? That was not
> clear. Ancient history.
>
And it's still fucking us. Before the CAA cars had high compression motors
that burned fuel efficiently. For example, my 200 HP V8 1966 Fairlane was
bigger than any family sedan today but got 18-21 MPG. Ten years later the
same kind of car got 12 MPG, but made less smog (?). I predicted a gas
shortage ....

dizzy wrote:
> J. Clarke wrote:
>>>> I wonder why the 'Vette decided to go from a nice
>>>> healthy 400bhp to a massive 200bhp (if you're lucky) usiont
>>>> essentially the same engine? Maybe it was just coincidental that he
>>>> Cali's didn't like snorting gasoline fumes
>>>
>>> Huh? I think not. Proof?
>>
>> Proof of what, that the horsepower ratings of American cars
>> plummeted when the Clean Air Act went through?
>
> Oh, he's talking about what happened 40 years ago? That was not
> clear. Ancient history.

And in a wonderful example of "correlation isn't always
causation" - assuming we're talking about the 1970 Clean
Air Act here, the drop in rated horsepower around that
same time was almost entirely coincidental. Remember, this
act had no real impact on American cars until the 1972 *model*
year - which completely by coincidence was also the year that
manufacturers in the U.S. switched from quoting SAE *gross*
horsepower measurements to the much more realistic SAE *net*
horsepower. For one example, the Chrysler 426 Hemi engine
was listed as providing "425 HP" in 1971, but dropped to a
rating of 375 (SAE net) HP in 1972, with NO changes whatsoever
to the engine. In short, the Clean Air Act had basically zero real
impact on the power of engines at the time.

Soon after this in that same decade, of course, engine horsepower
DID take a significant hit, but again it had nothing to do with the
emission controls - it was the result of the manufacturers suddenly having
to chase fuel economy rather that flat-out performance, owing
to consumer preferences changing sharply following the Arab oil
embargoes of 1973-74 and the resulting spiking of gasoline prices.

Bob M.

Bob Myers wrote:

>dizzy wrote:
>>
>> Oh, he's talking about what happened 40 years ago? That was not
>> clear. Ancient history.
>
>And in a wonderful example of "correlation isn't always
>causation" - assuming we're talking about the 1970 Clean
>Air Act here, the drop in rated horsepower around that
>same time was almost entirely coincidental. Remember, this
>act had no real impact on American cars until the 1972 *model*
>year - which completely by coincidence was also the year that
>manufacturers in the U.S. switched from quoting SAE *gross*
>horsepower measurements to the much more realistic SAE *net*
>horsepower. For one example, the Chrysler 426 Hemi engine
>was listed as providing "425 HP" in 1971, but dropped to a
>rating of 375 (SAE net) HP in 1972, with NO changes whatsoever
>to the engine. In short, the Clean Air Act had basically zero real
>impact on the power of engines at the time.

Yes, I knew about the change in rating system, to "net". However, if
you are right about the Hemi, I believe it was the exception. Most of
the hot engines disappeared after 1971, and 1972 had only
lower-compression and otherwise detuned motors.

>Soon after this in that same decade, of course, engine horsepower
>DID take a significant hit, but again it had nothing to do with the
>emission controls - it was the result of the manufacturers suddenly having
>to chase fuel economy rather that flat-out performance, owing
>to consumer preferences changing sharply following the Arab oil
>embargoes of 1973-74 and the resulting spiking of gasoline prices.

Well, the detuning started before 73, for sure.

"Schiffner" <stevenkeith2@hotmail.com> wrote in message
news:6e5ba731-8d6d-4f67-9085-bd881eb50109@j9g2000vbp.googlegroups.com...

>> I don't think ANY Bugati is a waste.

>Indeed, it'd break my heart to own a couple of their pre-war race
>cars...yeah, I'd race fracking wheels off them. I mean they ARE race
>cars.

I'd be happy enough with a Veyron.


--
Beav

VN 750
Zed 1000
OMF# 19

"dizzy" <dizzy@nospam.invalid> wrote in message
news:5mri45hgubnkb2ihumcsg2iko6dq43c14v@4ax.com...
> Beav wrote:
>
>>I wonder why the 'Vette decided to go from a nice
>>healthy 400bhp to a massive 200bhp (if you're lucky) usiont essentially
>>the
>>same engine? Maybe it was just coincidental that he Cali's didn't like
>>snorting gasoline fumes
>
> Huh? I think not. Proof?

JFGI


--
Beav

VN 750
Zed 1000
OMF# 19

"dizzy" <dizzy@nospam.invalid> wrote in message
news:vuun459hech07rvrbubrd7cns1tbap8q0t@4ax.com...
> J. Clarke wrote:
>
>>dizzy wrote:
>>> Beav wrote:
>>>
>>>> I wonder why the 'Vette decided to go from a nice
>>>> healthy 400bhp to a massive 200bhp (if you're lucky) usiont
>>>> essentially the same engine? Maybe it was just coincidental that he
>>>> Cali's didn't like snorting gasoline fumes
>>>
>>> Huh? I think not. Proof?
>>
>>Proof of what, that the horsepower ratings of American cars plummeted when
>>the Clean Air Act went through?
>
> Oh, he's talking about what happened 40 years ago? That was not
> clear. Ancient history.

Well I can't see into the future, and as I was talking about the 'Vette and
as it's a fucking old POS, I'd have thought it was pretty obvious. And
ancient history isn't something from 40 years ago. Now I know that's close
to 1/4 of America's life, but it doesn't mean ancient.

--
Beav

VN 750
Zed 1000
OMF# 19

--
Beav

VN 750
Zed 1000
OMF# 19

"Schiffner" <stevenkeith2@hotmail.com> wrote in message
news:6222d8f5-a3b7-4ad6-8651-8519b531161f@g4g2000yqa.googlegroups.com...
On Jun 27, 11:23 am, "B. Peg" <bent_...@att.net> wrote:

I putter around on a 09' EX250...no flat spots in the fueling at all
altitudes and speeds.

Yeahbut that's because it's flat all the time

--
Beav

VN 750
Zed 1000
OMF# 19

"Miss Anne Thrope" <High_Colonic@webtv.net> wrote in message
news:29553-4A47A51B-3051@storefull-3171.bay.webtv.net...
>I agree.

With whom and to what do you agree?


--
Beav

VN 750
Zed 1000
OMF# 19

"dizzy" <dizzy@nospam.invalid> wrote
> Well, the detuning started before 73, for sure.
>
The law became effective with the 1971 models. Chevy even brought out the
new bodied Camero as a "70 1/2" to avoid the restrictions.

An FDA chemist explained how a car that got 18 mpg one year but only 12 mpg
the next somehow made less pollution. Seems that NO2 was a major buggyboo
in LA - mixes with fog to make nitric acid - but actually comes from
compressing and heating air, hot from burning gasoline per se. Nor is it a
problem where it rains much because rain dilutes it and plants love it. But
all the smog laws started in LA so congress in its usual wisdom required car
makers to reduce compression ratios in order to make less NO2 even though
that meant the cars used a lot more gas.

None of us are as dumb as all of us!

Beav wrote:

>"dizzy" <dizzy@nospam.invalid> wrote:
>>
>> Oh, he's talking about what happened 40 years ago? That was not
>> clear. Ancient history.
>
>Well I can't see into the future, and as I was talking about the 'Vette and
>as it's a fucking old POS, I'd have thought it was pretty obvious. And
>ancient history isn't something from 40 years ago. Now I know that's close
>to 1/4 of America's life, but it doesn't mean ancient.

In terms of automotive technolgy, it's ancient.

On Jul 3, 4:44*am, "Beav" <beavis.origi...@ntlwoxorld.com> wrote:
> "Schiffner" <stevenkei...@hotmail.com> wrote in message
>
> news:6e5ba731-8d6d-4f67-9085-bd881eb50109@j9g2000vbp.googlegroups.com...
>
> >> I don't think ANY Bugati is a waste.
> >Indeed, it'd break my heart to own a couple of their pre-war race
> >cars...yeah, I'd race fracking wheels off them. I mean they ARE race
> >cars.
>
> I'd be happy enough with a Veyron.

No thanks...two words. Spark Plugs. Well that and it is USELESS on any
road I'd care to drive agressively. Recall in my younger days I'd
pitch a 77' GranLemans into 90deg corners with an entry of 80+. 8^)
Rarely off the apex by more than a foot and that depended on the
corner, many had enough weeds as to be blind. Dirt roads are FUN,
especially when the dirt keeps changing.

On Jul 3, 4:50*am, "Beav" <beavis.origi...@ntlwoxorld.com> wrote:
> "Schiffner" <stevenkei...@hotmail.com> wrote in message
>
> news:6222d8f5-a3b7-4ad6-8651-8519b531161f@g4g2000yqa.googlegroups.com...
> On Jun 27, 11:23 am, "B. Peg" <bent_...@att.net> wrote:
>
> I putter around on a 09' EX250...no flat spots in the fueling at all
> altitudes and speeds.
>
> Yeahbut that's because it's flat out all the time


Isn't that how you are supposed to ride the wifes motorcycle when
outside the city limits.
--
Keith

"Schiffner" <stevenkeith2@hotmail.com> wrote in message
news:07423587-0913-4776-a930-5ba2b06d9be6@d9g2000prh.googlegroups.com...
On Jul 3, 4:44 am, "Beav" <beavis.origi...@ntlwoxorld.com> wrote:
> "Schiffner" <stevenkei...@hotmail.com> wrote in message
>
> news:6e5ba731-8d6d-4f67-9085-bd881eb50109@j9g2000vbp.googlegroups.com...
>
> >> I don't think ANY Bugati is a waste.
> >Indeed, it'd break my heart to own a couple of their pre-war race
> >cars...yeah, I'd race fracking wheels off them. I mean they ARE race
> >cars.
>
>> I'd be happy enough with a Veyron.

>No thanks...two words. Spark Plugs. Well that and it is USELESS on any
>road I'd care to drive agressively. Recall in my younger days I'd
>pitch a 77' GranLemans into 90deg corners with an entry of 80+. 8^)
>Rarely off the apex by more than a foot and that depended on the
>corner, many had enough weeds as to be blind. Dirt roads are FUN,
>especially when the dirt keeps changing.


The Dookes of Hazard ride again

--
Beav

VN 750
Zed 1000
OMF# 19