Page 2 of 3 FirstFirst 1 2 3 LastLast
Results 16 to 30 of 36

Thread: 1998 R1100RT I pulled the cat code plug!

  1. #16
    Registered User roger 04 rt's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2011
    Location
    Massachusetts
    Posts
    1,290
    Quote Originally Posted by scott.lambert View Post
    ...

    So, Roger, I noticed on the online catalog the 1100 isn't mentioned... are you going to offer the gizmo for th R1100, or is it hopeless ?
    On the nightrider.com site, there are just some placeholders for now. We are actively working on the R1100, R1150, R1200 and F800. Each of those bike has either been run with an LC-1 or narrowband device, or both. The K1200s with MA 2.4 are coming up soon. We've finally made some solid headway on OEM connectors which are mandatory for plug and play.

    Specifically, the R1100 got an extensive test, read about it here: http://www.bmwmoa.org/forum/showthre...l=1#post880407.

    Stay tuned.

  2. #17
    Day Dreaming ... happy wanderer's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2010
    Location
    Vancouver, B.C. Canada
    Posts
    1,965
    Quote Originally Posted by Roger 04 RT View Post
    Specifically, the R1100 got an extensive test, read about it here: http://www.bmwmoa.org/forum/showthre...l=1#post880407.

    Stay tuned.
    Yeah, and I would happily test it some more. Several years for example!

    Seriously though, after I returned from the long distance beta ride and removed the device I did another fairly long ride. Only a couple thousand miles this time with essentially a stock bike again. Only mods were the Booster Plug still installed and the GS intake tubes which have been on the bike for two years now. The bike resumed surging, lost the low RPM improvements and was generally a whole lot less fun to ride.

    The biggest surprise of all was that the mileage was worse. Now _that_ surprised me. You would think a bike that runs a wee bit richer would use more fuel but that was not the case. As Roger surmised when I sent him the mileage data this is likely due to less use of high gears at lower RPM which his O2 sensor device delivers in spades.
    MJM - BeeCeeBeemers Motorcycle Club Vancouver B.C.
    '81 R80G/S, '82 R100RS, '00 R1100RT

  3. #18
    Jammess jammess's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2005
    Location
    Florence, OR.
    Posts
    639
    Hi Happy Wonderer,
    I have been riding my '04 1150RT with the LC-1 and EFR of 13.5 and strangely I too have noticed a slight increase in fuel economy. Am just using the LC-1 no booster plug or other mod. Surging? Not a bit, and a much improved low end. I really like Roger's new device as it seems to accomplish the same thing only with the stock narrow band sensor which I think is a big plus. I wouldn't miss the logging capability at all as I am more into just riding.
    Jammess

  4. #19
    Day Dreaming ... happy wanderer's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2010
    Location
    Vancouver, B.C. Canada
    Posts
    1,965
    I am still sitting on the fence on whether to go with the LC1 or not. I called the local distributor here in Vancouver today and their price is CDN$459! It is $199 from the manufacturers retail to the public. So when you hear Canadians whining about cross border pricing craziness there is a great example that makes zero sense.

    I believe I still have lingering issues with imbalance causing surging that the LC1 might help diagnose. That said I agree with you that Roger04RT's setup is pretty ideal. Plug it inline with OEM setup and away you go with immediate and obvious benefits. And yeah, the mileage increase really had me scratching my head. But in a good way!
    MJM - BeeCeeBeemers Motorcycle Club Vancouver B.C.
    '81 R80G/S, '82 R100RS, '00 R1100RT

  5. #20
    Jammess jammess's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2005
    Location
    Florence, OR.
    Posts
    639
    $459, YIKES, and I do believe CDN is at about par with US. Forgot to mention that I also, besides installing an LC-1, sent my fuel injectors to RC Engineering for cleaning and balance check. This proved to be like frosting on the cake in that I could feel the difference with a smoother motor. Maybe you should take a wee trip south of the boarder and save some loonies.
    Jammess

  6. #21
    Day Dreaming ... happy wanderer's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2010
    Location
    Vancouver, B.C. Canada
    Posts
    1,965
    Oh yeah the money's on par. About .02 difference today but reality isn't.
    I had my injectors serviced when I bought the bike late 2010 but I am not convinced they are clean and more important that the flow rate is equal. I plan to take them off and have them done again but with test reporting this time.
    MJM - BeeCeeBeemers Motorcycle Club Vancouver B.C.
    '81 R80G/S, '82 R100RS, '00 R1100RT

  7. #22
    Registered User
    Join Date
    Jun 2012
    Posts
    213

    R1100rt

    So. As performance mods go even the wideband retrofit is pretty reasonable.
    Considering it is easy to go back to stock with no ramifications.

    Has anyone considered or researched re-chipping the Motronic 2.2?

    asked the software engineer...

  8. #23
    Registered User
    Join Date
    Jun 2013
    Posts
    5
    "Has anyone considered or researched re-chipping the Motronic 2.2?"


    http://www.rhinewestperformance.com/motorcycles.html


    I had one of their chips in an '04 K1200GT and it worked very well. Not cheap though.

  9. #24
    Day Dreaming ... happy wanderer's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2010
    Location
    Vancouver, B.C. Canada
    Posts
    1,965
    Quote Originally Posted by scott.lambert View Post
    So. As performance mods go even the wideband retrofit is pretty reasonable.
    Considering it is easy to go back to stock with no ramifications.

    Has anyone considered or researched re-chipping the Motronic 2.2?

    asked the software engineer...
    Oh yeah it's been done. People have been tweeking the 1100 engine for a very long time. Try searching "surging" here and be prepared to read for days.

    These guys http://www.rhinewestperformance.com/r1100rt.html have chipped lots of bikes including the RT.

    Considering the EEProm chip costs $349 I did not think a few questions prior to purchase was unreasonable. I got no answers so I opted out. Specifically I wanted to know how it affected the surging issue.

    Or if you want to go racing how about a turbo RT? http://www.rbracing-rsr.com/bmwR1100.html
    MJM - BeeCeeBeemers Motorcycle Club Vancouver B.C.
    '81 R80G/S, '82 R100RS, '00 R1100RT

  10. #25
    Registered User
    Join Date
    Jun 2012
    Posts
    213
    Oh, yeah I have already salivated sufficiently over the $10000 RSR package for the RT, thank you.
    I still go back from time to time.

    Yes I found little supporting evidence offered by rhinewest - found a dyno plot for a GS.
    Which showed a shift of +4-5 HP across the board.

    On the 1100 absolute performance gains are secondary to more polite behavior, we could probably all agree on that.
    I agree an FAQ doc would probably help them sell more chips.

    Heh heh - searched google for Motronic diagrams and guess what I got?
    Roger's diagrams, on MOA.

  11. #26
    Registered User roger 04 rt's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2011
    Location
    Massachusetts
    Posts
    1,290
    On the subject of rechipping I'm a skeptic.

    If the rechipped bike continues to run Closed Loop with a stock O2 sensor, most of the fueling would remain at lambda=1.00. High rpms and wide throttle angles could change but most of the riding areas wouldn't.

    Rechipping could be used to advance or alter spark timing, unlikely to solve driveability problems like surging.

    The other problem I have with rechipping is there are no concrete statements about what they change, just that there is more power, but how?

    In the Wideband O2 Project, Wally G spotted that small throttle angles in first, second and third gear and rpms above 2500 resulted in lean Open Loop conditions. He also felt light surging in this area even with richened mixture, suggesting that this area is quite lean with stock fueling. Since this is an Open Loop area, you could rechip and richen it. No rechipper claims to change this area.

  12. #27
    Registered User
    Join Date
    Jun 2012
    Posts
    213
    Frankly I like your approach better. Leave the Motronic a black box and alter it's input signals.

    I run my valve lash a little tighter than normal. I noticed that I get a perceptible increase in power above the magic 4500 RPM mark.
    And at or near WFO.
    But. It burbles and backfires a bit when the throttle is shut. And the low speed indecision is slightly worse.
    I surmise that tighter lash = valves open longer = more air = even leaner than usual AFR.
    Pulling the CAT plug seems to improve things a lot.
    Does it shorten O2 sensor or catalyst lifespan?

    Now, the chip installation instructions say that for a "restrictive" exhaust system, such as the stock one (hah - restrictive only because it has a catalytic converter), to leave the standard cat code plug in. For a non-restrictive full-flow exhaust system we are to pull the code plug.

    Hmmm.

  13. #28
    Registered User
    Join Date
    Jun 2012
    Posts
    213
    Quote Originally Posted by scott.lambert View Post
    Does it shorten O2 sensor or catalyst lifespan?
    Sorry, you covered those already.

    When you mention CO measurement you're talking about measuring the amount per volume of exhaust gas of carbon monoxide?
    And if too high this indicates incomplete combustion, cat overwhelmed possibly, possibly accumulating carbon?

  14. #29
    Jammess jammess's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2005
    Location
    Florence, OR.
    Posts
    639
    I agree with Roger 100%. I don't think re-chipping will result in less tendency to surge at all.
    Jammess

  15. #30
    Registered User roger 04 rt's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2011
    Location
    Massachusetts
    Posts
    1,290
    Quote Originally Posted by scott.lambert View Post
    Sorry, you covered those already.

    When you mention CO measurement you're talking about measuring the amount per volume of exhaust gas of carbon monoxide?
    And if too high this indicates incomplete combustion, cat overwhelmed possibly, possibly accumulating carbon?
    Yes CO volume. With a richer mixture, like most carburatored engines, the is insufficient oxygen for some of the fuel to fully combust. The leads to increasing amounts of CO where CO2 would be expected. Here is a table comparing co to AFR. http://www.mgexp.com/article/co-afr.html

    BMW set up the no-cat 1100s to idle at 1.5%co a which is an AFR of 14:1, 5% richer than bikes with cats. That tells me that the BMW engineers preferred to run the boxers 5-6 % richer than 147, just like many of us are doing now.

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •