Fuel Nanny Warranty Discussion/Fuel Nanny Technical Discussion (Abridged):
Relevant Technical Posts extracted from http://bmwrt.com/
edited by Kristian #562
This was posted to the "Chain Gang" list. "200+ fault codes stored before it died ...." "BMW was very clear .... voiding my warranty." Now it may all turn out to be a false alarm, but, but notice the BMWNA reaction. Stan
Stan... a bit more info would be helpful here. I don't have a ****in clue as to what you're talking about"! Bill Mensch
For what it's worth, the full message is at f650.com. apparently the "fuel nanny" device is affecting the computers on the f650gs. nanny blew up a computer!?!? "(SNIPPED ed) BMW just called me and said that another customer blew up his computer and they think it's the fuel nanny. He had 200+ fault codes stored before it died. They want me to come in and let them check my computer as I'm the only other person they know that's running the nanny. Part of me thinks they're just trying to blame the box for the problems and want to use me as evidence, but part of me wants to know if my bike is racking up the same sort of errors... what to do? They also told me that BMW was very clear in that what I'm doing is voiding my warranty, but we already knew that. Hmm... ride an unsafe and un-fun bike or risk a computer? They sure make it tough to own these damn things. SCOTT in NJ
Gee, what am I missing. Someone puts on an questionable aftermarket device that fries the original computer and BMW doesn't want to fund free repairs for everyone. What disgusting business practices. And then the original poster thinks it is just fine and honorable if he happens to blow it up knowing he has voided his warranty - but everything is great if you can hide it from BMW and get the stupid bastards to replace it for free. One more for modern personal responsibility. Sorry for the rant but some of this BMWNA stuff is ridiculous. Ford R
Here is a link to a owner/manufacturer discussion (you need RealPlayer to hear it, btw) on on the Fuel Nanny on a stalling/surging F650. It is from David Park's site and his discussion on the Fuel Nanny on his page. It is a 2.8 meg download for RealPlayer and has much of the explanation of the Fuel Nanny covering: Surge, mapping, operation, O2, stalling, humidity, altitude, etc. Running time of the discussion is 22 minutes. No surprise to me either that BMWNA wiped out the customer's ECU warranty if it was setting too many fault codes. I'd be curious as to the dealer standing (maybe far, far behind ) the customer if he (i.e. dealer) did the install. Does anyone know if the Motronic Fault Codes, not rider characteristics, are erasable if the power (fuse) is disconnected - or is it stored in the EPROM only for the BMW Diagnostic machine to read and clear? G. McCurdy
If (Snipped ed.) BMW believes the Techlusion 83i caused damage to an ECU, they are either misinformed or misquoted, or trying to place the cost of repairs on the customer. I would like to think they are either misinformed or misquoted. The 83i adds no real power to the electrical system, so it can't damage the ECU. Working off the power side of the left fuel injector, the 83i operates by using a power inputs measured in the milliamps and millivolts, or thousandths of an amp or volt. The BMW injectors are ground-triggered devices. This means that the injectors have 12 volts of power supplied to them at all times. The 83i box simply provides a ground circuit to continue power flow through the injector even after the motronic has turned its transistor off. Since the 83i is extending the length of time the injector circuit has a ground, it is extending the length of time the pintle is open, therefore increasing the amount of fuel flow. It’s important to note that the 83i never sends an electronic signal to motronic. The 83i is not an input device. It's mounted on the output side. So, there’s no possibility that an 83i can damage your motronic. So what happens if an 83i fails? There are only two possibilities. The first is the box fails to operate. If this happens, an R1100 series motor will operate as if the 83i wasn’t hook-up up. The second possibility is the 83i sends too high a voltage to the fuel injectors; causing a very rich fuel mixture. The worst that can happen is the bike floods the plugs. This is very unlikely, since the 83i operates at a very low voltage. Since there is no possibility that an 83i can harm a BMW’s sensitive electronics, BMW dealers are now selling the 83i. They are Engle Motors in Kansas City, MO and Gina’s BMW in Iowa. By now, there may be more. My dealer, Engle Motors, installs 83i on customer bikes. The owner for the past 40+ years is Norman Jones. Norman, a trained BMW mechanic would not install an aftermarket product on a customer's bike if he thought it could damage its sensitive electronics. He would have nothing to gain other then eating the cost of a very expensive repair. One correction on the following sentence I wrote, "The second possibility is the 83i sends too high a voltage to the fuel injectors; causing a very rich fuel mixture." The 83i sends no voltage to the fuel injectors. Again, they remain at a constant 12 volt. The 83i only extends the time the injector circuit has a ground, extending the length of time the pintle is open, therefore increasing the amount of fuel flow. Ken Krumm.
relentless pursuit of the truth, Stan. Members with surging problems may
conduct a search as I did, and draw the wrong conclusions based on false
After my RT began to surge at 25K, I decided that it was an unacceptable condition and found a safe fix. The only problem is it cost money and takes some mechanical ability to install and setup. I could sit back and say the hell with everyone else, and let them figure it out on their own. However, that’s not my nature. Instead, I’m willing to help anyone that asks and that has been a fairly large number. This is all about getting the most out of our bikes and that requires flawless operation.
I'm struggling with the same issue. I bought a "Motronic Tuning Chip" from Laser and I just can't get myself to crack the Motronic box open. Voiding the warranty or frying the Motronic worries me ($$$$$$!!!!). Now as for this Fuel Grandma thing it might create some electromagnetic interference (EMI) issue which craps out the CPU. Why would anyone put in one of these things? I work at a lab that tests everything from fuel pumps to radios to ferret out EMI problems. You'd be surprised what improper grounding or shielding can do to ECUs. Was this thing (and the popular Dynojet Power Commander) ever tested for EMI? Doubt it. CarlosT
CarlosT...Changing a chip in the motronic (tuning chip) is a far cry from intercepting a signal on the output side of the ECU and extending the duration a fuel injector is open (Techlusion 83i). Since there is no electrical input to the ECU, there is no potential for damage. If an 83i fails, it will most like short and fry itself like any other transistor unit. If this happens, the 83i will simply fail to work and bike will operate as if nothing was attached. Ken Krumm
Quote: "Originally posted by Ken Krumm: Since there is no electrical input to the ECU, there is no potential for damage." There may be no direct hard-wired electrical input to ECU from the nanny, but that does not mean there is no possibility for damage. Carlos is absolutely right about EMI. Lord knows what's going on inside the brain of the Fuel Nanny, but unless it's been thoroughly tested, then there's a possibility that it emits Electro-Magnetic Interference (EMI) that could potentially scramble the Motronic's brain. The airline industry makes people shut off cell phones, CD players, laptops and other gear during takeoff and landing for exactly that reason: EMI from those devices could mess with the aircraft's electronic systems during those very critical flight periods. EMI has the potential to make signals in the Motronic come or go at the wrong time, which could cause symptoms as mild as the occasional misfire, or as major as letting the smoke out of the chips. Odds are pretty slim, but if BMWNA sees any sort of pattern at all, I guess I wouldn't blame them for voiding the ECU's warranty. Yeah, it's lame that their super-touchy ECU makes people feel the need to buy devices like the Fuel Nanny and then they crap on people that buy them, but those are the breaks. If someone's bike can't be cured of surging after a few trips to the dealer, then the bike should be replaced or severely reworked under warranty; if BMWNA won't honor that commitment, then yeah, they are bungholes. Mitchell P. Patrie
Although there is no voltage input from the nanny itself, since the nanny has become part of the fuel injector's circuitry, doesn't it still present a load to the motronic which the motronic may find intolerable? I would assume that, at the frequencies the injectors operate at, load plays an important part of the circuitry. Seems to me a better way to go would be a different EEPROM in the motronic device itself. Then, there'd at least be NO question regarding violation of your warranty. Ted
Interesting discussion on EMI; however, I'm not hearing the same concerns when members of this forum attach aftermarket 50w driving lights, turn signal cancellers, GPS, radio, CBs, etc. to their bikes. All theses items ground to the bike with much higher voltage. The 83i works in millivolts and milliamps. I don't know how much clearer I can make this, but the 83i never adds voltage to the fuel injectors that are continuous 12 volt ground-triggered devices. If it somehow did, which it doesn't, the motronic would not maintain its map. The bike would go into the learning mode and the run erratic. This doesn't happen! Stan...your initial assumption that "BMW was very clear .... voiding my warranty" assumes that (Snipped ed.) BMWs response is the official policy of BMWNA. This is not the case. BMWNA, for obvious liability concerns, is neutral on endorsement. Endorsing any fix to lean fuel surging would admit liability to a problem BMWNA has denied existed since 1996. (Snipped ed.) BMWs response is simply one dealers response. However Stan, to answer your question, "Does this mean that you will pay for repairs on any bike where the warrantee claim is disallowed by BMW because of the Fuel Nanny?" I'm not a dealer, nor do I have any financial stake in the success or failure of Techlusion. I just know that this simple and relatively safe product makes my bike run great and I'm willing to take the chance that it won't harm my system based on the research I have done. A good many members of this forum agree and are using this product with great success. But if you are concerned about warranty, take your bike to Engles BMW in Kansas City, and they will install an 83i and guarantee it won't void your warranty. Norman Jones, owner of Engles BMW, has 40+ years of experience with BMW electronics and he told me personally the 83i's extremely low voltage on the output side is no threat to the motronic. Ken Krumm
By the way, I'm not just talking about risk to the Motronic of which there is at least some. You are mucking with the fuel/air ratio to your engine. If something goes wrong and the engine overheats and seizes, or burns a valve, or burns a hole in the top of your piston, I would NOT expect BMW to pick up the tab. On a bad day, they may not even try to prove it was caused by the Fuel Nanny, they may just say "Fuel Nanny, your problem". IMHO. If your going to f*** with it, be prepared to pay the piper. Don't get me wrong. This may indeed be a great solution. It may never cause problems for you. BMWNA may bend over backwards if it does and eat the cost. BUT..... there is no guarantee of any of this and there is at least some risk. Stan Walker
Regarding the addition of electronic accessories such as a GPS, CB, heated underwear, etc, none of these are hooked directly to the Motronic system. The 12 volt battery does a great job of supplying these devices with their proper current requirements. It appears, however, that the fuel nanny DOES have a DIRECT connection to the injectors AND the Motronic. I personally think it's a great idea, but, if there are failures of the Motronic and there are a lot of error codes showing up on multiple RT's that have this device installed, I might tend to be a bit apprehensive about using it. Like everything else, time will tell. Please keep us informed as the miles pile up. Ted
Well Ted...you have to ground those devices to something, don't you. The 83i does connect to a fuel injector, but again, that's not an input device to the motronic. Sorry if I'm being condescending, but let's go back to basics. Input devices include the hall-effect sensors, oil temperature sensor, oxygen sensor, air intake temperature sensor, and throttle position sensor. The amount of fuel injected is controlled by the injector open time period of 1.5 to 9 milli-seconds and is controlled by an OUTPUT signal from the motronic. An 83i intercepts this signal and extends the time the injector is open without the knowledge of the ECU. Like any transistor, if it fails it most likely will fry. The 83i will fail to operate and the bike will run lean. The worst that can happen is transistors fail and complete the ground (as you know Stan, transistors will usually burn up not completing a circuit) the injectors will stay open and THE BIKE WILL FLOOD. That's an extremely rare WORST CASE. The motronic DOES NOT ACCEPT AN INPUT SIGNAL FROM THE FUEL INJECTORS. Even if it could, the completed ground is a constant 12 VOLTS. Now Stan....When you set up an 83i, the motronic defaults to a LEANER setting then an RT normally uses. By setting the center and right pots, you flatten the fuel curve providing no extra fuel then normal. The last tank of gas averaged 47 MPG! Does that sound like I'm dumping an excessive amount of fuel into the motor. By the way Ted, my bikes running COOLER in traffic and it no longer pings over six bars. Doesn't surprise me. A properly tuned motor will last longer and is much safer to ride. My RT after never surging, began to surge at 25K. Even after a proper tune up (which will not help a lean-fuel surge) the bike still surged. I was on the verge of selling it since it was no fun to ride. Engle motors changed my mind and the 83i has my bike running so well, it's now my favorite bike. Even to my flawless running LT. I now longer avoid cities and look forward to the next ride. Make you own choice. However, spreading false information about a product you know little about, serve nobody on this forum. Ken Krumm
I had a really cool response, but, decided to erase it. You're correct, Ken - The fuel nanny could do absolutely no harm to the Motronic. Ted
Any electronic device including simple things like relays, switches and additional wiring can introduce noise into the electrical system...the whole system. The fact that the GPS unit or PIAA light or CD player is far from the Motronic ECU does not predict how it may affect the ECU. Good ECUs have some degree of EMI "hardening" or immunity. EMI is both a problem of what the unit puts out in terms of noise but also how much it can take before reading fault codes or failing. BMW has its own standards for noise emission and you can bet your assch Garmin had to go through serious testing before BMW relabelled its GPS unit as a genuine BMW accessory. I'll give you an example of how easily EMI can happen. We were testing speaker systems for passenger airplanes and part of the test involved playing loud music for a few hours inside a shielded room as measurements were taken. The techs used an old boombox and played a tape over and over (the boombox was outside of the shielded room). I asked why they didn't just use a CD player and I was told that the CD player put out too much noise through even the speaker cables and would increase EMI readings inside the shielded room. I'm not trying to scare anyone and I'm not a technical person but unless the Nanny is tested in a whole vehicle test while the engine is running and then without it, you can't tell if it's introducing noise or creating other electrical problems. In some ways, an aftermarket Motronic chip like those from Laser or BBPower are simpler in that they don't introduce any new wiring or grounds. Here are 2 related questions: 1- Couldn't a redesigned or aftermarket Motronic chip take care of the surging problem without introducing additional wiring and grounds like the Nanny? 2- Is surging not a mechanical problem due to the compromised TB actuation and synch? CarlosT
CarlosT, the 83i wasn't designed for R259 series motors. It was designed for all fuel-injected motorcycles as a fuel-injection tuning device, mainly for the racetrack. Eventually, it was applied to an oilhead and along with performance, came the reduction and elimination of surging. Techlusion didn't design this product for oilheads and some of the Techlusion techs have told me that don't like to apply the product to BMW Oilheads because of the variance from bike to bike. To answer your two questions, here's and portion of an article that I wrote for future publication in two national/international magazines (names withheld). "For some American oilhead owners, performance has been hindered due to surging or hunting between 3000-4000 revolutions per minute (RPM). As an American BMW owner, our bikes use a different motronic (M2.2), along with a catalytic converter, O2-sensor and a special CAT Code Plug (CCP) to meet some of our states tough standards on emissions. Although the cause of surging or hunting may be mechanical adjustment, mechanical surging is common in the 2000-3000 RPM range. Surging or hunting between 3000-4000 RPMs is usually the results of lean fuel delivery as seen in many of the American R1100 series bikes. Although the effect (surging) between 3000-4000 RPMs is usually caused by lean fuel delivery, the real question is why is the fuel delivery lean in the 3000-4000 RPM range? The motronic uses an O2 sensor in a closed loop control mode during idle and cruising. If the closed loop mode using the O2 sensor gives adequate fuel from 2000-3000 RPM and 4000-5000 RPM during cruise, why is it not adequate fuel in the 3000-4000 RPM range? Trying to eliminate the surging in this range by adding fuel is more difficult, since the closed loop 02-sensor motronic interface is in theory would actively adjust the fuel leaner or richer to compensate for any modifications made to the fuel during closed loop operation. So, why do some R1100 series motors develop lean fuel delivery problem? BMW’s motronic operates in a closed loop mode to maintain the fuel curve during idle and cruise. In theory, any additional fuel added to the fuel curve would be reduced by the 02-sensor sensing change, decreasing the fuel timing to the stock fuel curve. However, this is not what happens during acceleration. During acceleration, R1100 series motors operate as an open loop system, where emissions exceed the 3% CO limit of the O2-sensor. Although the 02-sensor continues to monitor the oxygen content of the exhaust gases, relaying that information to the motronic, the motronic will not make adjustments based on 02-sensor input until after the mapping returns to a closed loop system. This occurs when the bikes is operating at a steady state or cruise, where emissions must stay below 3%. It’s at this point where the motronic has a problem determining whether the motor now operating between 3000-4000 RPMs is in neutral or under a steady state or cruise, resulting in surging or hunting for the appropriate lean fuel mixture." I hope this helps to understand the basic problem with lean fuel surging. Understanding why the bike surges is key to fixing the problem. Ken Krumm.
I have the 83i on my bike (2000 miles). it works. It is worth the risk to me, an ECM is not that expensive (recall that I race - TZ250, RC51 - so I may be a bit jaded). I doubt there is any potential for burning pistons etc. since you are adding fuel to the stock default lean map. So far only the one bike has reported any problem. I have not seen any follow up as to whether the warranty claim was indeed denied. If I have problems I will pay for it. I hope people who have done the 0=0 know that BMW may deny their claim. BrianM
not to beat a dead horse here, but I'm another happy 83i customer. I put up
with surging for 36,000 miles. I did a 0=0 on my bike just before the 36K
service (at 36,200). The 0=0 really helped the surge problem. When I took my
bike in for the last service. They synched the TBs with their computer and
technique and it ran even better. When I got my bike back, I put on the 83i
and couldn't believe the improvement even after the 0=0 and a dealer service.
The bike is singing.
BMW VOIDS THE WARRANTY FOR EVERYTHING! You guys all know this. Here's a potential scenario...someone pulls the CCP and the o2 sensor plug and doesn't hook up the ground to the 83i. Now the bike is running in this consistently lean curve all the time. Then, they put regular gas in and go on an extended tour across Kansas in the middle of July. The pistons fry and they want a new engine. Well, the 83i isn't the real reason the engine fried, but BMW can't have a warranty that excludes idiots, so instead they exclude this engine because of the 83i. It's a legal thing. There's nothing wrong with 0=0 either, but it increases emissions ever so slightly and BMW has worked very hard to get the emissions down and has made promises to the EPA and to the Green Party and the Save the Whales Liberation Fund etc. and they can't go around endorsing that might potentially increase emissions even if it means their product will finally work the way it was originally designed to work. It's up to us to be smart and to use good judgement and good fuel fuel and to recognise the dangers of a lean fuel condition and the dangers of a very rich fuel condition and not drive the whiz out of our bikes when they are obviously not right. The engines will not fail from an 83i or from a 0=0 procedure. In fact they'll probably get better mileage and emissions because they are running properly...but it's on us to see that they are running properly. They can fail if these procedures are done horribly wrong or if a bad condition is not attended to promptly. This is the point of BMW's voiding of warranties. By the way, the same sort of discussions occur about BMW car modifications as well. Very few problems ever come up and there is nearly always some other mitigating factor that someone wants to hide. I'd be very surprised if the 83i caused the problem on this F650's Motronic. It's probably a bad wiring job, a bad intake mod or something else that was unhooked or cut or otherwise disturbed while a non-technical person tried to install the PowerBox without reading the instructions. Also, running the 83i in "Stealth" mode makes the box kick in and out of straight Motronics. Each change requires resetting Motronic by unhooking the juice for a minute. The wrong settings can confuse the Motronics although I doubt it would break it. A simple reboot should clear it. Then just follow instructions for Control Mode, which has an infinitely higher rate of success. If Techlusion made a mistake, it's offering up this stealth mode thing in the first place. Control mode just flat works. Unhook the 02, pull the CCP, put in the jumper wire, reset the motronic, hook up the box. Set the dials for 11 - 3 - 3 and put a big smile on your face. Sweeten further only if needed. tbrown.
Wow Ken, writing articles?!? I sure hope you're going to publish data with that, I'm quite interested in how you determined that the Motronic hunts between closed loop and an open loop accel-enrichment mode. Looks just a repeat of what the Fuel Nanny folk have on their web site...no? Steve Knapp
Quote: "Originally posted by CarlosT: 1- Couldn't a redesigned or aftermarket Motronic chip take care of the surging problem without introducing additional wiring and grounds like the Nanny?" If ya want to change fuelling, IMHO inside the ECU, in it's maps, is the place to do it. But it's expensive and difficult to do from an supplier point of view. The 83i can be wired into any bike with non-sequential fuel injection. MAYBE a small number of different models calibrated a bit differently. Nothing like a chip tho. It's easier and cheaper for them to make one box than many chips. Still the BBPower chip isn't that much more expensive IMHO. ALSO opening the ECU is a whole new can of worms. At least outside the ECU you've got whatever protection bits were designed into it. Inside? Nope. Plus you're breaking a seal that might not have been designed to reseal. Not sure the specs on the ECU in this regard. I don't agree with Ken about FI theory, the archives are rich with info with regards to that opinion. I am looking forward to his article, hoping it's got data, not just the same babble repeated over and over. That being said I also don't like the fuel nanny. Anything that uses 3M scotchlocs to connect into the ground path of an injector is BS IMHO. I can't tell you for fact that it can fail the ECU, but no one, without knowing what the injector drivers look like can. I can tell you that that injector is a coil, and it has a good amount of stored energy. The ECU is designed to dissipate that energy when the injector closes. I'm not sure what would happen with a bad connection through the 83i. My other gripes with it can be found elsewhere as well. Ya do what ya want to do, ya take your chances. If you have a problem, start easy, work your way to the more aggressive solutions. Chips and fuel-nanny's are both pretty aggressive. Steve Knapp.
I'd have to agree with Steve, the fuel nanny seems like an aggressive measure to take based on the fact you are altering how the injection system functions outside what the factory designed. From a money standpoint an non cat exhaust and CO pot mod is more expensive, but at least the engine would be outfitted similar to what the factory supplies for some markets. And all the posts I have read say this is a definite surge fix. Wayne Dowers
Steve wrote, "I'm quite interested in how you determined that the Motronic hunts between closed loop and an open loop accel-enrichment mode." ????? Actually, lean fuel surging occurs after the bike returns to a closed loop when the bike is operating at a steady state or cruise. Sounds like Techlusion? Ya think!!! Steve, we've had enough conversations on this BBS for you to know that I've had numerous and detailed conversations with Mike Dobeck, one of the inventors of the 83i from Techlusion Performance Group. The draft portion above was collaborated by Mike Dobeck last summer. So it should sound familiar. If you want to know how a device works, doesn't it make sense to discuss the subject with the inventor. By the time this article goes to print, it won't resemble anything above. A third author is currently working on it. This author I'm sure you read monthly. I will leave his name out of it for now. You wrote, "I don't agree with Ken about FI theory, the archives are rich with info with regards to that opinion." Can you explain what you disagree with? Do you disagree that the system during acceleration, operates as an open loop system, where emissions exceed the 3% CO limit of the O2 sensor? I know you have a lot of knowledge on ECUs and 02 sensors. I would be interested in hearing your theory why lean fuel surging only occurs in the 3000-4000 RPM range. As for the BBPower Chip. Come now Steve....you know the inventor, Bernard Bludau, will be the first one to tell you that this is a performance chip that will provide no noticeable performance on a standard BMW motor. To get anything out of it, you also have to change exhaust plus air-intake systems. Considering the chip is $342 alone, you talking real money when you're done for only a few more ponies. Since I've never used this chip, I don't know if will eliminate surging. Does anyone know? Unlike the 83i, this will void your warranty. Several BMW dealers are now installing the 83i. You also wrote, "I'm not sure what would happen with a bad connection through the 83i." Steve....Can you explain to me how a transistor device slaving off a few millivolts from an output device that intercepts a signal without the knowledge of the ECU can cause damage? Aggressive?? Extreme?? I would be more concerned with the long term affects surging has on a motor and the danger this condition creates in traffic. Ken Krumm
Wayne…totally agree. Currently, the best fix to totally eliminate surging is a European BMW exhaust or Remus with a pot. However, your talking a lot of money and a louder exhaust. If Remus made an exhaust that operated at the same decibels as a stock BMW exhaust, I would consider it. You stated, "the fuel nanny seems like an aggressive measure to take based on the fact you are altering how the injection system functions outside what the factory designed." Although I would disagree that it's aggressive, it is outside the factory design. However, the fuel injectors are designed to operate at a constant 12-volts with an open time of 1.5 to 9 milliseconds. The 83i never adds voltage or exceeds the 9 millisecond limit. Ken Krumm
CarlosT…The best fix would be a BMW chip fix. Steve and I agree on this. However, one doesn't exist and it doesn't appear BMW is in any hurry to create one. The performance chips are just that. They are designed for the racetrack with bikes heavily modified. Correct me if I'm wrong, but no chip currently manufactured is designed to eliminate surging. BMW has numerous CCPs, however none eliminate surging in American versions of the type 259 motor. The 83i is the simplest way to eliminate surging at a relatively low cost. Ken Krumm
Ken, when I was in Brazil earlier this year I saw a lot of BMW's - they are popular there in some circles. Anyway, in that market the BMW exhaust is non cat and no O2 sensors on the bikes - the exhaust looks exactly the same as ours here, including the box section under the tranny that is our cat converter and the noise level is the same so there is a factory solution that looks and sounds stock since it is. As for the nanny - I am not against fitting it but I would try all the other things first. So aggressive is the wrong term, last resort is maybe more appropriate. Wayne Dowers
Ken, I thought you wanted to close the thread! I'll try to keep this short, too the point. Please excuse my spelling and whatnot, I'm writing this over multiple sessions. Exhaust: FWIW, F*sh's Remus Street exhaust wasn't loud at all. As quiet as stock...well, a different sound. But needing an cat-less exhaust for the CO pot is about as needed as running the nanny in "control mode," which seems to be the preferred way to go from most of the posts I've seen. In both cases ideally you don't want the cat, but many have it and are OK. Maybe a hammer and a stick are all ya need to "convert" your stock exhaust? Wayne, FWIW, were any of the bikes of the Motronic 2.4 family (1150s and the R1100S)? To the best of my knowledge these bikes are delivered the world over with cats and O2 sensors. Talking to the inventor: I agree that talking to the inventor is a good way to go. But isn't this the same person trying to sell the unit as well. Salt should be taken. I heard an audio interview with one of the fuel-nanny guys and wasn't impressed. It was like watching star trek. Some of the right words, strung together in ways that sounded good .. but didn't make sense "we've diverted the power from the flux drive to the magna shields"... I'm interested in reading the article, but hope it's got more meat to it than just PR stuff. We'll see I guess. Most people have posted good luck with the unit when using it in control mode which also seems odd and against the basic theory of the nanny as a surge fixer. Another thought is that even talking to the inventor are you going to get the full story. I doubt it, first off it would tell 100% what the nanny does and IP is what's worth money. Second many people would not understand. BB Power: Actually the chip has 8 selectable tunes...from a "stage1" which is a totally stock bike up to stage 4, heavily modified. If memory serves there are "bad fuel" maps for each stage. All selectable using the CCP jumper. Bernard, for the 1150RT, claims that the stage1 chip fixes surging. Tho he also says that if you get an exhaust (stage2) to disconnect the 02 for better rideability. His English isn't good and my German is nonexistent, there may be some confusion there. It was clear that a surging fix is the biggest selling point for stage one and the other programs are there should you desire them. Don't know about the 1100RT. He claimed that the maps had some big "jumps" that needed smoothing. If memory serves there were a handful of 1150 owners who had good results with his chip. One person didn't, but they later discovered they didn't have the stock CCP installed. FI Theory: During accel yeah the bike is going to deliver more fuel. Acceleration enrichment is the name I've heard most often. What I don't buy is this idea that the ECU is switching between acceleration enrichment and "normal" at a steady throttle. I've got no data to back it up, but in other applications it takes a bit of throttle to get this to kick in as the accel enrichment. The "outside the black box" view might look an awful lot like a sharp jump in the map. I don't think anyone knows for sure. Only someone who knows the exact strategy, who knows the exact calibrations, can know *for sure*. IMHO you need to know what's inside the box. That being said there are two theories that seem more likely, make more sense to me, than the fuel-nanny (is it un-PC to call it that? ). - BBPower's statement about large jumps in the maps. This makes sense. Even with interpolation between points a small difference between inputs (say RPM varying 50-100rpm) could result in a big change in fueling. Given he's decoded the maps and understands what's going on inside that box well enough to do so...he might be on to something. Then again he is also trying to sell something. - Closed loop fuel control implemented via a switching O2 is difficult to do properly under light load/idle conditions. I've heard it from the calibration/FI gurus at work. The Bosch Handbook makes a point to mention the issues involved. We've discussed this in detail in the past as well. Why at 3-4k? Perhaps that's when the system resonates, for lack of a better term. - Bits out of sync, like injectors not flowing the same rates. Lentini questioned BMW's suppliers quality control. Scotchloc bad: I'm not a fan of any connector like the scotchloc. It opens the wire up to get wet and corrode, plus a every app where I later removed the scotchloc the wire was partially cut, like when you use too small a gauge of strippers. Long term, on a bike, especially for the injectors, this is not the connector of choice IMHO. The injector is an inductor, a coil. When you turn it on current starts flowing, a magnetic field builds up and opens the injector. When you turn it off that magnetic field decays. The energy wants to go somewhere. Wanting to keep the current flowing, the voltage across the injector will rise. This is typically dealt with as part of the injector driver in the ECU. A diode to VB or something. Don't know if the nanny has a similar circuit. My question/concern would be if/when the scotchloc starts to fail. Ugh...how to describe without another bunch of typing. Ignition, ya ever seen what happens when a plug wire is loose? Maybe it arcs to the plug, maybe it arcs to the chassis...chaos to some extent.. tons of electrical noise. This would be similar but on a smaller scale. That energy wants to go somewhere, voltage would/could rise until it found a path. Intermittent bits would be the worst here. The flyback voltage would rise until it either arced across the small gap, or until the connection got vib'ed back into service (real short time here). Then the ECU would be hit with a spike of voltage. Don't know how the driver would deal with that. If small enough it would probably just get dissipated as normal. If large enough could it, would it, cause a problem? Dunno, for sure. This cycle could also happen multiple times during an opening. I wouldn't install a nanny with a scotchloc long term at least. Given injector plugs are pretty standard I'm surprised they didn't make that connection plug-n-play instead of the scotchloc. Aggressive: I like the term. In short it gives an idea about how far beyond "stock" you're taking things. You have a problem and you keep using a bigger hammer to fix it. I view all these 'hammers' as having some risk. Even the zero-zero, even doing your own TB sync. Steve Knapp
Steve….Great work; really enjoy your technical knowledge. My position has always been whatever works. Although the 83i is really a band-aid on a problem BMW should have fixed with a chip, it works rather well at a relatively low cost. However, I am not convinced the problem of lean fuel surging is an ECU mapping issue. If it is a mapping issue, why is the problem regularly eliminated when the 02 is removed or disconnected? As you know, 02 sensors get lazy or can be fouled by a small amount of silicon or wear. Any change in the 02 sensor is bound to adversely affect mapped ECU settings? In these situations, disconnecting the 02 sensor will default the motronic to its leanest setting. However, the motor has a very hard time idling. With a potentiometer or an 83i, you can add fuel to the idle to bring the bike back to a normal state. A nice feature of the 83i is you can add fuel to the mid and high-ranges. Good information on the BB Power chip. I have read information about Bernard's efforts to eliminate surging with the stage one setting. However, if I remember correctly, this effort was aimed at surging in the European models. Will this chip be able to compensate for American versions with a catalytic converter, 02 sensor and different CCP? If it does, I will be first in line to buy one. Again, whatever works. Like many members of this forum, motorcycles have been my primary transportation for over 25 years. Working flawlessly is not an option. It's a requirement. It should not be an option to BMW. I also see your point on the connectors. Since my RT fuel-injector wires are covered, it's not much of a worry. However, there are better connectors and Techlusion should consider other methods. I may suggest this to them. I would be more concerned if I was using an 83i on a GS. A little water in this connector could short the connection and leave you in the middle of nowhere. I think the arching issue you mentioned would probably fry the 83i. One of the reason I don't think the 83i is much of a threat to the bikes electronics is the very low voltage used to power the box. In theory, the box could run off a single AAA battery. But you would be changing batteries regularly. Any arching would fry the 83 components before it fries the electronics designed to use 12 volts. On the Bosch 4418 issue. Not convinced a spark plug will make any different on a bike that has a lean fuel surging problem between 3000-4000 RPMs. You simply have to have fuel to light. The best plug in the world won't fix an irregular fuel curve. I would agree that a 4418 makes a difference on a motor experiencing a mechanical surge from out of synch TB, TPS, etc. However, if this is the case, simply adjust the components. But all bikes are a little different. If they work for you, I'd use them. Ken Krumm
Don't knock the 4418's if you haven't tried them. Remember I said that you have to fool the computer with the old plugs. I think this works because the 4418's give a larger yield of spark, and the computer is supplying a fuel load thinking its using the old plugs. Thus, you get more out of less. My bike was adjusted probably as well as could be when these were put in. As I said, there is not just the difference in the surge, but a snappier feel throughout the entire power band. It's a very cheap fix if it works and if it doesn't you aren't out much. Tom Collins
Tom...wasn't knocking the plugs. I have several sets myself and regularly swap. My response is in reference to the different types of surging. For a mechanical surge, a 4418 may provide some relief. IMHO, it won't help at all if the surging is a lean-fuel surge. Ken Krumm
Ken, The Motronic V2.4 bikes to which I have the most exposure, to the best of my knowledge, are sold worldwide with 02s, cats, and the like. The CCP in the bike that later got the LGB was pink, just like ours in the good 'ol USA. And as far as the connectors go, I'd also be concerned for the ECU not just the nanny. The connectors may be free of water (what doesn't get wet even on the RT?) but the mechanical issues bug me. Scotchlocs are just plain bad IMHO. FWIW, I asked a friend who used to do plug testing about why a four prong plug would help. He was a bit surprised, the four prong design in his opinion gets you more life and little else. It does shield the flame core which he thought would make things worse...then shrugged his shoulders and said it might help as well...FWIW! Steve Knapp
I have tried the 4418 plugs, if anything, they made my bike run worse. I use the Autolite plugs. As far as the FI theory, the problem as stated by Techlusion (at least what I have read) is not hunting between open and closed modes, but hunting between cruising and idling - the motronic has a difficult time distinguishing between light throttle load while riding and holding the throttle while in neutral. Scotchloc connectors - no they are not my favorite choice, I did think about soldering the wires in place, but didn't really see a good place to do that either. When I use scotch loc connectors I fill them with RTV before connecting them. I tried this on a truck for the wiring connectors for a trailer. After 4 winters (Wisconsin, yes they like to use salt) there was no corrosion and the connectors were not loose. The 83i works at solving the surging problem. AFAIK there have not been any failures from it either. Have there been any other failures besides the one 650? Did BMW prove (as is required by law) that the 83i caused the failure? Was the ECM replaced under warranty or not (I have not heard either way)? I don't like the idea of the pipe and pot for 2 reasons. I have only heard of one aftermarket pipe that was as quiet as stock (it was actually quieter) and the pot needs to be checked which has to be done by someone with an exhaust gas analyzer (the dealer in most cases). I am not interested in a louder than stock pipe and I certainly don't want to have to rely on the dealer for anything other than parts. BrianM
Before installing the 83i on my RT, I asked my dealer if I could simply disconnect the 02 sensor, add a pot, and change CCPs to get rid of the lean-fuel surge. The problem is there is no way to adjust the pot with a stock exhaust with catalytic converter since you would have to get the exhaust gas analyzer in front of the catalytic converter to get a proper reading. No problem with aftermarket exhausts without catalytic converter. While at Engle BMW in Kansas City last week, I noticed Techlusion has switched to a more watertight connecter. However, I agree with BrianM that there are way to waterproof earlier connectors and for the most part, is not a problem. I would be more concerned with a GS. Ken Krumm.
Quote: Originally posted by Ken Krumm: "The problem is there is no way to adjust the pot with a stock exhaust with catalytic converter since you would have to get the exhaust gas analyzer in front of the catalytic converter to get a proper reading" Ken, I believe there is a way: This is what I use to set the pot and I have the stock exhaust. Ray Downes
Quote: Originally posted by BrianM: "nip I don't like the idea of the pipe and pot for 2 reasons. I have only heard of one aftermarket pipe that was as quiet as stock (it was actually quieter) " This has really left the "does the nanny screw up your bike" topic... Ken: When I contacted Bernard about my 1150RT and it's surging he knew it was US spec and had said his chip was a fix. Never bought one, but others have and reported good luck with it. I'd ask him specifically about the 1100RT US spec. If you're close, he did offer to extend his 30day money back policy to a longer period allowing for international shipping. Try it, what have you got to loose? Heck, email him about your article and offer to do a similar one, or sidebar, about his product? BrianM: "hunting between cruising and idling"...don't buy it. Can I say 100% for sure? Nope. Don't know that much detail about the Bosch MC control strategy. In every other app I've seen idle is determined by the TPS voltage being below some threshold. Also why does the problem go away with the O2 disconnected? If it was a problem with the ECU hunting between the idle and running, why would the O2's removal fix this? I guess for me it comes down to this. I've read the nanny stuff, their theory, their audio interviews, Ken's info, and whatnot. I've also hashed this over with the guys I work with. All our BS over beer always has one *but*...without some extreme testing and instrumentation, or deep knowledge of the Bosch's internals there is always that "what if the box is doing something seriously goofy". Which usually is followed by 'It's Bosch, they are good, they have their act together a bit more than that.' No scenario we could come up with justified the nanny. I've tried modelling a bit extra fuel into a closed loop FI system. Didn't do anything. Again, without real good details (O2 response time, exhaust gas delay) specific to the bike...That being said. One thought did cross my mind, you could, possibly, external to the ECU, determine RPM using the period between either the injectors open or close (depending on which is the stable edge). Then you could monitor pulse width...and set a *min* pulse width for a given RPM. So instead of taking the fuel and adding to it, you're just preventing it from swinging too lean? The nanny lit always says "adding"...Ken? Can you clarify? Or get me a demo nanny to bench test? Hmm...when I get back to work I'll try that in a model and see what pops out. I personally get a better warm fuzzy from Bernard's chips. To decode and modify the ECU's maps takes a certain level of knowledge of the ECU's strategy. That knowledge IMHO is more useful than the chip itself. If BBPower sold the nanny *and* chips, that would be more credible. Someone with deep internal knowledge of the ECU says X. Maybe I'm giving Bernard too much credit and the nanny not enough. FWIW, And I don't own, or need/want to own, either product at this point in time. Both products, IMHO, have some risk with regards to failures of expensive bits. Simple question...how many have had success in the non-control mode with the nanny? Maybe it's my limited sample, but it seemed most said control-mode really helped (tbrown being one). In which case, not using an EGA to setup control mode *is the same* as not using an EGA to setup the CO pot. I see no reason you could not use a DVM and the stock O2 sensor to setup the pot...spot on setting? Probably not, but close? Sure. Set the pot just after the O2 switches from rich to lean. That would be pretty much the same as Ray's solution. Unless those A/F gauges have started using wideband O2s. But this is leading into my long usual "it's a switching O2" rant. RTV sounds like a good fix for the scotchlocs, still the nanny guys should just provide a male and female injector plug. Still they are not removable, bad IMHO. Wayne Dowers
Ray Downes…I would like to know more information on how the RSR equipment works. Maybe a new thread? Steve…IMHO, there is too many variables to consider to say for sure what causes lean-fuel surging, so everything being said is theory. However, much of the theory came about after extensive bench testing to determine the cause and effect. But there are some basic facts we know. First and foremost, lean-fuel surging regularly occurs on US versions between 3000-4000 RPMs and is more prevalent on US versions that use a different motronic (M2.2), along with a catalytic converter, O2-sensor and a special CAT Code Plug (CCP). We also know the mapping used to interface with the US version is very sensitive to all components properly functioning and set. That said, we also know from testing the RT’s Bosch 02 sensor that it is not consistent from bike to bike. Testing on Bosch 02 sensor varied between sensors from 3.1 to 3.5 CO. As you know, 02 sensors can also get lazy over time or soil, failing to provide proper input. I personally believe most of the problem is in the interface between the input signals from the 02 sensor to the motronic. IMHO, this is why so many 83i users are unable to use the “stealth mode” and switch to the “control mode.” However, if all components are properly functioning and a lean-fuel surge still occurs, an 83i in the stealth mode will work on most newer RTs. Again, IMHO, this is the cause. The effect on the other hand is a lean-fuel surge between 3000-4000 RPMs. Testing show the motronic signal output to the fuel injector at the low point of the surge is equal to the output signal at idle or in neutral. Testing also shows the motronic signal output to the fuel injector at the high point of the surge is normal output for a steady state. This creates an erratic fuel curve. The 83i works by intercepting this signal on the output side and flattens the curve for a smoother running bike. Properly adjusted, no additional fuel is added. Keep in mind in the control mode, the bike will use the leanest map available and the 83i is adjust up from that point. One of the reasons why so many 83i users are using the product in the control mode is it can easily be setup in their garage and adjusted without expensive tuning equipment. Engle Motors BMW in Kansas City regularly installs the 83i in the stealth mode with great success. Ken Krumm
"Originally posted by Ken Krumm: …I would like to know more information on how
the RSR equipment works. Maybe a new thread?" Ken, I don't have much on the
design aspect of this gauge, it does seem to have a power-up test, so I'm
assuming there's some "active logic" in the gauge, other than just a ADC. I
had essentially no luck with all the various surge fixes (since '95 in my case
- '94 RS), and I thought that this gauge might visually show what was
happening in the "combustion system". To start, there are a number of sources
for this type of gauge, the one I picked came from RBRacing (
http://www.rbracing-rsr.com/rsrgauge.htm ) - their pricing is currently
$225, which is probably high but the unit seems well made. I also bought their
O2 sensor, though it should wire right into the current Bosch unit without
issues (they provide a schematic). I had considered mounting the gauge for
observation underway, but as I have an RS there's not a lot of room. This
setup implies that that you already are set up for the O2 pot, and that the
stock O2 sensor is unplugged. As others have said, it appears that the O2 pot
only has effect at idle - my bike run slightly "fat" (rich) at off-idle RPM's.
I suspect I could "tune" this as well by slightly rotating the TPS and
watching the gauge - I currently "tune" it for "throttle quality", not by
voltage. Here's a still of the gauge in use: If you can stand a 5MB download,
grab the apple MOV movie at
http://www.demonchaserracing.com/rkd/ Ray Downes
Quote: "Originally posted by Ken Krumm: Ray...where to you wire this device into your system? " All I'm using off the bike is ground and 12VDC (off the accessory outlet). Per the picture, there's the "John Deere" plug, and another connector between the O2 sensor and the gauge - that's it. I am not "Y"ing the O2 sensor to feed the Motronic AND the gauge (though I suspect this could be done). The bike is now set up "euro" style with the pot and no map plug - the gauge is simply there to check the AFR pre-CAT. Ray Downes
Ken, "US versions that use a different motronic (M2.2)" Umm...really? I thought they used the same box, just some had O2s and CCP (one of many) other had CO pots. "The 83i works by intercepting this signal on the output side and flattens the curve for a smoother running bike. " Flattening what curve? What's on the X and what's on the Y axis of this curve? "Properly adjusted, no additional fuel is added." ... Then what does the nanny do? I thought it added fuel? Switching O2s are quite consistent when used as switching O2s. Try and amplify the stair step portion of their curve and sure, you're going to get crap. That's been a long standing point of mine. I don't see how you can look at the square nature of the switcher and disagree... The fact that the RSR gauge can be connected into the switching O2 sensor IMHO makes it junk. But hey, that's my opinion. I'm curious where you've done the bench testing. Have you done it? Or reporting others work? "One of the reasons why so many 83i users are using the product in the control mode is it can easily be setup in their garage and adjusted without expensive tuning equipment." What expensive tuning equipment do you need for the CO pot? If you want to setup the pot on the EGA you should also want to setup the nanny with an EGA. If you want to setup the nanny by ear, setup the CO pot the same way? What am I missing? Steve Knapp
Quote: Originally posted by Steve Knapp: The fact that the RSR gauge can be connected into the switching O2 sensor IMHO makes it junk. But hey, that's my opinion. Apologies Steve, I have not been able to find your original reference that O2 sensors are switching devices. I have read in several sources that the O2 sensor outputs a voltage (once warmed up) between 0 and 1 volt depending on the O2 content and they do this in a analog way (i.e. NOT switching). See http://www.kemparts.com/TechTalk/tt07.asp for one of the many similar write-ups I've seen. http://www.unofficialbmw.com/all/engine/all_o2sensor.html, http://www.autotune.com/techtips/o2.html Based on the above, I've been thinking that the current crop of AFR gauges are just overpriced digital voltmeters. Ray Downes
Gee Steve...must you so early in the morning!!! I wrote above, "One of the reasons why so many 83i users are using the product in the control mode is it can easily be setup in their garage and adjusted without expensive tuning equipment. " You wrote, "What expensive tuning equipment do you need for the CO pot? If you want to setup the pot on the EGA you should also want to setup the nanny with an EGA. If you want to setup the nanny by ear, setup the CO pot the same way? What am I missing?" I don't believe I was making any reference to a CO pot. Where did you come up with this comment? This statement was in reference to your question why 83i users are using the control mode over the stealth mode. I believe it was sufficiently answered. I wrote, "The 83i works by intercepting this signal on the output side and flattens the curve for a smoother running bike." Your reply, "Flattening what curve? What's on the X and what's on the Y axis of this curve? Steve...you are aware the manufacturers in their efforts to meet fuel emission standards have leaned the fuel in lower and mid range, but did very little to the top range. This creates the irregular fuel curve. Believe it our not, it's not a kid on a skateboard behind your bike pulling on occasions creating that lean fuel surging sensation some owners are reporting. No, I have not done the bench testing myself and I'm not taking Techlusion's word for it. Two very competent folks confirmed this; one's even a BMW dealer that has the testing equipment. The irregular fuel curve is created in the mapping to meet fuel emissions standards...imagine that! I wrote, "Properly adjusted, no additional fuel is added." Your reply, "Then what does the nanny do? I thought it added fuel?' We covered this time and time again Steve, so I know you know the answer. When you reset the motronic with an 83i installed, the ECU will default to the leanest map. So lean, the bike will barely idle. By adding fuel in the center pot, you bring the bike back to a normal idle using the approximately the same fuel as the standard American map. So, it should go without saying, but I will say it again, "properly adjusted, no additional fuel is added" is in comparison with the standard American version map at low range. At mid-range, the erratic fuel curve providing the surging sensation is flattened. I know you put a lot of faith in old Bernard and his BB Power Chip. As I've always said, if it works, use it. However, if Bernard's chip is the Holy Grail you're professing, why doesn't BMW purchase the chip from him or employ him. I'm curious where you've done the bench testing. Have you done it? Or reporting others work? Ken Krumm
Steve….Forgot to answer your question regarding motronic control units. You wrote, "US versions that use a different motronic (M2.2)" Umm...really? I thought they used the same box, just some had O2s and CCP (one of many) other had CO pots." Although this BBS regularly mention BMW has only one motronic with many different maps, there are actually two motronic control units. The most common is the M2.2 which is a closed loop system that incorporates a catalytic converter and 02 sensor and is standard on all US models and is optional (IMHO) for anybody stupid enough to want one. The second version is the M2.1 motronic control unit for open loop systems not equipped with a catalytic converter and uses the oxygen potentiometer instead of the 02 sensor. I don't know how different the maps are between the two. I'm guessing the M2.2 is the same as the M2.1 with an additional map for a closed loop system. Ken Krumm
Quote: Originally posted by Ray Downes: [B] Apologies Steve, I have not been able to find your original reference that O2 sensors are switching devices. I have read in several sources that the O2 sensor outputs a voltage (once warmed up) between 0 and 1 volt depending on the O2 content and they do this in a analog way (i.e. NOT switching). See http://www.kemparts.com/TechTalk/tt07.asp for one of the many similar write-ups I've seen. Right...read that. "In order to read the O2 sensor, most computers send out a certain voltage to the output terminal of the sensor. This is typically around 450 millivolts. Since we know that the sensor sends low voltage (under 300mv) when a lean condition is present and a high voltage (over 600mv) when a rich condition is present, the computer can count the number of times the sensor crosses the 450mv mark. Cross-counts are the number of times an O2 sensor crosses 450mv. A scanner can "look" at this for you." "The O2 sensor is constantly in a state of transition between high and low voltage." Rich vs. Lean... if >450 Rich, if <450 lean. Now go to Bosch's web site and look at the A/F to voltage curve for the LSF4 (a switcher, just like most applications) sensor. The ECU controls mixture by keeping the sensor toggling between rich/lean. The "step" of that curve isn't stable. AKA, you could map it out A/F vs. voltage, but then slight temp changes and the like would change the curve. Hence it's properly used like a digital rich/lean input. Control can be difficult with this given the delay between injection and the O2 sensor. To much...to much to much....to little to little to little....by design the ECU is constantly adding a bit more or a bit less fuel each X period (time or engine cycles) waiting for the O2 to switch. When the delays are long you can end up injecting very rich or lean before switching from adding to subtracting, or vice versa. Imagine being in a very large room and trying to get a picture level with the help of a friend. He/she starts waking to the other end of the room and you start adjusting the picture. When they get to the other side of the room the picture is off to the left...so they start walking back to tell you this...you've been pushing it further to the left the whole time. They say "off to the left" and start walking back...you start pushing to the right. They get to the other end of the room and see it's too far to the right. Steve Knapp
Quote: "Based on the above, I've been thinking that the current crop of AFR gauges are just overpriced digital voltmeters ... " Yup. Sorry. If they used a linear A/F sensor (see the Bosch LSU4 for an example) it would make tons more sense and seem more worth the money. The sensors are more expensive and the circuit to drive them is also more complex. It would give you more accurate feedback info of how rich/lean you are (making the control loop smarter, and allows you to specify your target A/F ratio. In the picture example it's like the person telling you the picture was 1" lower on the left than the right. Ken, typically I enjoy our discussions, but your attitude in your last few posts seemed a bit strong. "Kid on a skateboard"? Come on, I'm the same guy you've been talking to all along. You can ditch the BS. First off I have no fuel nanny to test. Since I have no interest in buying one, why should I spend the $$$ just to test it and report back here? Then again why do I reply to your posts? I enjoy the conversation and learning. If you know of a way I can borrow one let me know and I'll see if I can find an ECU with low side drivers to test it with. Your comments about setting the nanny up without expensive equipment. I thought was in regards to the CO pot solution "needing" an EGA (the expensive equipment) to setup. Where the nanny does not. I've heard this mentioned, not from you? IMHO this is untrue. Either open loop setup can be adjusted with feedback (EGA, O2 voltage?) or without. Your "when properly adjusted, no additional fuel is added" wasn't qualified with "at low RPM". I thought you were further pushing the non-intrusive nature of the nanny. I'm curious how you did your bench testing. BMW dealer used what test equipment. I'm actually, sincerely, interested. I'd love to find out what I'm missing here. But I'm in the grey area between the high level description and the detail needed to really understand. In this spot is the worst place to be as it's full of guesses and theories. I assume the nanny to do X based on what you've said. That doesn't make sense. Is the nanny crap, or do I need more detail? More detail. Call me cynical sure...but understand that it's justified there is a lot of automotive stuff flowing around being endorsed by experts. I've not heard of a V2.1 Motronic. I was under the impression that non-US bikes used the same ECU, but with the CO pot installed. More info here. I'm not claiming BBPower to be the holy grail. I've not purchased one of his chips, I've only heard about them. My point is simply that to reverse engineer the maps you need a good idea what the engine strategy is doing (perhaps only a embedded software person can appreciate this?). That knowledge, IMHO, and in my view of the surging problem, would be very helpful. And we still have the disconnect of target A/F. In closed loop operation there is only one target A/F ratio. Ya can't pick. it's the switch point of the O2. Oh, and my bench testing. Well, on my bench I've got an ECU that runs one of these. I've also used Matlab with Stateflow to model the fuel nanny, as I understand it, into a simple closed loop EFI system. As I mentioned I want to try one other "what if it does this" when I'm back in the office. I work on passenger car apps as well. I've bounced a bunch of this off our systems/guru types for feedback. So about 50 years of design, implementation, and tuning EFI systems for production cars there as well. Did I rip my RT apart and put it's ECU on a bench...no. Bike runs fine and I don't have that sort of free time do perform such tasks for free. Why doesn't BMW employ BBPower? German arrogance? After all we know they don't have a systemic problem with their bikes.
Steve....sorry for the attitude in previous posts. I really enjoy these posts and your technical knowledge. The information you provide to this BBS is tremendous, especially in the area of 02 sensors. When it comes to bench testing the 83i, you may want to call Mark Dobeck at Techlusion and ask him if he would be willing to provide you with one for testing. He may be willing to provide some test information, however some may be proprietary. As you know, the 83i is a very simple device. It's nothing more than three adjustable pots connected to the left side fuel injector with the ability to extend the duration of the fuel injectors at idle, mid-range and high-range. Although very simple, each pot can be adjusted with a DVM in millivolts. Do you plan on bench testing the BB Power Chip? I would be interested to know how well this chip integrates with the American motronic M2.2. Maybe Bernard will provide you with one. The only current testing I know with the BB Power Chip is on a Dyno. Ken Krumm
I've said, I've got no real stake in this. My bike (an 1150RT) runs great with
the olive-green CCP. Bench testing a BBPower chip would be a *major*
undertaking. Would need a V2.2 ECU and a test jig that simulated all the ECU
inputs. Plus then they would all need to be tracked in relation to each other
to make real sense. A major PITA requiring way too much of my time and money.
I'm curious the results of the Dyno test tho. That being said. Bench testing
the nanny would be easier...I'd think. Feed a function generator into a bread
boarded low side injector driver. Connect a scope to the generator and nanny
output...the difference between the requested, function generator, pulse, and
the delivered, nanny modified, pulse should be night and day. If the box is
simply adding fuel, or setting a minimum pulse width for a given RPM, this
would be easy to discover. My real question is is it doing something more. And
that, you are correct, would be difficult info to get from the nanny-folk.
Just got off vacation and back to work FWIW...I'll think about this some
more...let me know if there are any nanny bench tests you'd be interested in
too. Steve Knapp