Just to add. Yes pretty sure the ecu makes changes in the open loop mode because of the AF-XIED. This is certainty a positive thing for the lower rev range. The negative side of the story will be the possibility of extra unwanted fuel at the high end rev range and I'm in this area allot. Probably explains why the consumption figures get real bad, which may also provide evidence of adaptions in open loop. Around half of this 170km loop is hilly narrow track with blind corners crests and creek crossings. There is allot of going back to 2nd gear then getting back up to 120km/hr before the next corner or creek. Hard fun work really. It's not your usual cruise. Cheers, Q
So… does this mean a PCV would be a better choice because it can be accurately programmed for different RPM ranges?
It is a good choice but just one choice. I am liking the AF-XIED but I'm still testing it. Yes the PCV is programable but you need to add auto tune to have it make changes on the fly. You are looking at somewhere between $400-$550 for the PCV. and around $200 for the XIED. I'm retired military, I'd rather be doing some ground work and getting the bike running cheaper. Besides, maybe I can help some others by doing this.
The thing I like about the PCV is you can have two tunes loaded with a switch on the bars. Mainly I will use one tune for performance and one for highway cruise with better fuel mileage. But I have not tried the Af-Xied so I have only the knowledge from this thread. I have the Wukka and I believe anything is better then stock. Heck I mess with everything I own.
I am the same way Baddrapp...if it's stock it gets messed with. The XIED was dialed to 6% richer AFR today and I dropped from 55 mpg at 4% to 52 mpg at 6%. But the bike was silky smooth across the power band. I am getting closer to saying this device is going to work but I still have slight lean stumble when the engine is cold from a cold start. I am riding about 200 miles on Saturday so that should be enough time for the device to dial in any changes. After that I want to try a 2% richer setting and see how it behaves.
Well maybe your right. Wasn't there an issue with PCV's causing our bikrs to idle high for no apparent reason until the battery was disconnected or something? On my 1200 I went from a PC-V to the AF-XIED. The power comander was great. Can't be sure, but if you change altitudes, humidity, fuel grade and or temprature do you get the most ideal fueling adaptions? The pcv no doubt works but does it really work and harmonise with the ecu's received data and so on with those changing parameters. I also didn't have the best of luck with the autotune and removed it early on. Todays loop. Restricter in, #3, it's certainly smoother running and i didn't miss all the noise or the power delivery difference. 21.59km/litre. Cheers, Q
I'm all for saving money Charlie and I'm eagerly awaiting the final verdict on this thing. I'm also hoping it takes care of the problems permanently rather than just temporarily like the spoofers. Quirky - that's the first I've heard of anyone removing the autotune due to problems. That really surprises me. But the PCV works well without it??? Weird...
The only reports I read about the PCV and auto tune is that fuel consumption went up a lot. I read where someone got only 40 mpg using it. But it did work apparently.
The AT I had wasn't the ideal model due to the PCommander website listing my model needing a single lambda model. I should have got the Harley Davidson version. The PCV worked fine but thought my bike run rich at say 1000metres elevation. No big deal for me until a planned trip for 2 weeks in the high country. The AF-XIED had just been released so I grabbed one to try out. I remember a suggestion on advrider, for the f800gs's snatchy lean stumble problems. I think it went like, do yourselves a favour and take a new XTZ for a test ride, then see how quickly your bike becomes smooth again. Ha Ha. I haven't tried this idea yet.
Charlie, I understand you have had direct communications with Roger and you are trialling a new model. The AF-Xied I fitted is the stock BMW F800 model. From my reading of the thread on ADVrider, I concluded that the bike is most likely operating in open loop (75%) particularly when the bike is cold. While the AF-Xied's effect is immediate in closed loop, it takes several tanks of gas to 'adapt' the open loop mode. I guess my question is if you do an ECU reset after each of your trial rides are you likely to see any AF-Xied effect on the open loop mode?
Slowflyer, This is long so bear with me here. The XIED works by changing the AFR (air to fuel ratio). Stock our bikes come with an AFR setting of 14.7:1 or 1% enrichened. This is to get the bike through emission requirements. It is ostensibly what is causing our bike to have the lean stumble (over simplified, there are other factors). The XIED device allows you to vary the AFR setting from F1 - 14.7:1 or 1% richer (stock) all the way to F9 - 13.5 or 8% richer. So far I have tried F7 - 4% richer an F8 - 6% richer. Both settings got rid of the snatchy throttle and smoothed the engine out across the power curve. It has also provided a more linear feel from the throttle from roll on to speed. I did notice today with the XIED set at 6% there was what I would call a low end bog when rolling on. Only it wasn't a bog was a less responsive throttle but steady if that makes sense? Another thing I immediately noticed on both settings is that there is zero lean pop on decel. None, NADA. The exhaust note is deeper, mellower and richer without being loud. My idle speed went from 1500 rpm to 1600 rpm on both settings. When first using the device I was advised by Roger to leave my Eruption Mod in place and do not reset the BMSK (reset the ECU). I didn't and the device learned quickly. Perhaps in the first 100 miles it had made the bike run smooth as silk. No vibes, just pure riding heaven. However, the down side to the XIED on F7 was that I still had lean stumble when the engine was cold. I did let it cool completely and did three separate rides of 100, 25 and 40 miles. The condition remained. Today I drove just under 200 miles with the device on F8 (6% richer). This time I reset the BMSK and started fresh. I had zero lean stumble when the bike was cold. In fairness and in the interest of a proper evaluation it was 85* F when I left this morning. Cold? mmmmm maybe. The bike had the bog thing. It wasn't and isn't a big deal. It just seemed that I had to roll on more throttle than I did in F7 (4% richer) to get the same torque and rpm. Todays riding was varied from city surface streets (25-35 mph), to dirt roads from 20-65 mph), state highways (55 mph) and superslab (75+ mph). The bike performed flawlessly. No problems except the very minor bog thing and the loss of 3 mpg which would equate to about 10 miles lost per tank over stock. As for mpg on the device. Prior to installation of the device I was getting between 55-58 mpg. On F7 this changed to a rock solid 55 mpg and on F8 it equated to a rock solid 52 mpg. My next test will be done on the F6 setting or 2% richer. I will be doing another BMSK reset for the next run so that I am comparing apples to apples. XIED works by sampling the O2 sensor values. and adjusting the signal. The settings are the approximate AFR and are based on average bias values in the ECM. The bias value is "centering" voltage that the ECM uses to determine if it needs to make injector pulses longer or shorter based on the feedback it receives from the O2 sensor.
Charlie - can you change the settings easily or do you need to connect to a computer to do it. I'm wondering if I could set an F1 on interstate and when I get to my destination change to a richer mixture for the slower, off road riding.
The short answer is yes, sort of. The adaptation process is what I am playing with right now. It isn't instant in all regards. The AFR numbers are "targets" and when you set the device it approximates those targets. The device is small, maybe 3/4" wide and three inches long. It has an adjustable pot on it that you manually set with a jewelers screwdriver. You can change settings but you have to lift the seat to do it. The downside is it needs time for the ECU and the device to interface and do their respective things.
I have been keeping tabs on our comparative voltages and other things in the XIED thread. No, I haven't tried setting 9. why do you feel it is best? What were your results? What's your MPG? I am guessing it is around 50 or 51 MPG?
I was looking at the afr numbers is all. I don't have the xied. I was just helping out with the info. I am comparing the xied compared to the pcv. My budget will allow me to get one in July. It really depends on your reviews on the xied.
Ah, yeah I was looking at the numbers in the book as well. The problem is that you do have to strike a compromise between performance across the board or fuel economy. Normally at home my rides are about 200 miles if we do an 8 hour day. I can just about make it without carrying my rotopax. But on a multi-day, 1000 + mile trip fuel economy and performance together are essential. A setting of 9 assumes an AFR target of 8% richer and moving from one AFR target to the next increases or decreases the richness by 2% (avg. on each step), and decreases or decreases the mileage by about 3 mpg (avg. on each step). I think in the end the mpg vs performance becomes the point of balance. Right now with two of the steps tested the performance goes to F7. F8 is still good on performance but just a little different (I won't say worse) because of the slight bog I had. So, my next step will be to test on F6 or at 2% richer and see where I am.
I have the wukka now. It's good but I need a little more control over the fueling. I live at 3500 ft of elevation. If I go west the ride goes down to 250 ft of elevation. If I go north I am in the mountains to about 9000 ft on some of the trails. The last time I went camping in the mountains it ran great at elevation but coming home it was way lean.
Just remember Baddrapp that while the 6 percent extra fuel is great for the low rpm's in open loop and also good for mid rpm's during closed loop which is fantastic for smooth rideability. However please consider the probable fact that the ecu will be adding extra fuel to the already slightly rich high rpm's in open loop. At least I think this is where my fuel is disappearing quicker than some. This hasn't really become an issue for me with the two twin cylinder GS's, as the need for wide open high rpm's aren't required that much because they have enough punch for most situations.
