So, is the AF-XIED the solution for our bikes? And, do you need a GS911 to know where you have set the transition?
Originally Posted by roger 04 rt
Andy, Dual Innovate LC-1/2s with some work from you and some support from me is one option. But the easier, simpler plug 'n play option is AF-XIED bought from Beemerboneyard. No GS-911 is needed. The setting procedure is simple: start with setting 7 (about 4-5% enrichment), ride for a while (few hundred miles). Also try settings 8 and 6 for a similar period. I run at the equivalent of 8 on my 1150 but most seem to prefer 7.
Originally Posted by afmeyer
Its cold here in NC. I rode the bike the other day at 35-40 degF. and the difference is huge. I'll have to get one of these devices before the Spring. It seems that the LC1/2 is a complicated installation compared to the AF-XIED. Do you agree? Is there any advantage performance wise of one versus the other?
The LC-1/2 install is very involved. The benefits are AFR datalogging and very precise AFR programming. By comparison the AF-XIED is plug n play, no programming required. It is less precise but that's not important since you get the same good result whether you add 4.5% or 5% more fuel. For most it is the way to go.
I've used various types of programming and monitoring electronics and complete aftermarket ECUs on various bits of track machiney for a long time. The LC1/2 is one many gadgets that over the years have evolved to make these electronics more usable to those with the skills/need/inclination to employ them. I drive modded, turbocharged street machinery that employs a combo of monitoring and signal jiggering electronics (plus bigger injectors) so the stock ECU, developed at great expense by the maker, can be retained to control the turbo motor. Such stuff works well BUT do not underestimate the work- if you've never been around and done such stuff its not the place to start solo.
What Roger has done is use data from such to make a far simpler device that employs one of the same principles to provide many of the same benefits of stuff that is more expensive and complicated. Its possible because he did the homework for the rest of us. Despite my experience with the more complex stuff, when trying to improve driveability of a motorcycle, I want something easy and cost effective. The AF-XiED is exactly that- fixes the lean fuel issues built in by BMW in a no fuss, cost effective way. I know because I've already installed it on 2 different BMWs and am about to do it on 2 more. Those bikes range from older Motronics controlled machines to new BMS controlled ones. Results are a bit different on each of the 2 I've done but you sure don't need a dyno to tell the difference in driveability. In fact, my SO was very enthusiastic about the obvious improvement to her R1100S and she's no gearhead.
You don't need a GS-911 (or anything beyond hand tools and the ability to locate the connector for the oxygen sensor) to install the AF-XiED but if you have a GS-911, you can data log your own bike, export that data to a spreadsheet, and see what all the sensors on your bike actually do. Knowing how to interpret such data can be very handy for troubleshooting some types of problems as has been pointed out by Don and others.
I think the AF-XIED is the way for me to go. The bike has run poorly for 45K miles except when it's cold. When it is cold, it seems almost as smooth as an I6 328I. First I have to fix the ABS pump module and then on to the FI. Which FI or ECU system is present on my R1200RT?
Last edited by afmeyer; 01-04-2014 at 03:34 AM.
Well, I wish I had found this conversation before buying the accelerator module I installed on my bike about a month ago. I agree with afmeyer, the AF-XIED is probably my best bet. My question at this point is, what would be better, leave the accelerator module in place until I'm ready to swap over of just remove the AM now since my bikes electronics have probably adapted by now anyway? Only thing I'm mildly concerned about is, since the adaptive functions are leaning things, if I remove the error signal on the IAT, would that leave the bike running "way" lean for a while afterwards? I'm probably just overthinking this but would appreciate an opinion.
Thanks & Ride Safe,
FWIW... I had the accelerator module on my '05 GS. I installed it with about 30K miles in the odometer. After installation I gained approx 500-600 RPM at the low end meaning I could ride the bike down to about 2100-2200 RPM. Without the module anything below 2700 RPM was not usable. That extra 500-600 RPM was all I ever noticed (and all I wanted). No other change in performance, gas mileage, etc. was noted.
Originally Posted by srhodes13
I sold the bike almost 50,000 miles later. I could still ride the bike down to about 2200 RPM, something I couldn't do the first 30,000 miles I owned the bike. Any adaptation that occurred was not noticed. What I did not do was remove the device to see if that moved my low RPM limit back to 2700 RPM or if it stayed at the 2200 level. Maybe I can get the current owner to perform that test.
That is only one data point. If you do remove your Accelerator module I'd be very curious to hear what differences you notice.
Just a reminder about basics.
It's fun to use tuning devices to improve the running of vehicles but it is unrealistic and unreasonable to expect any such device to correct defects in that vehicle other than what they are intended to do.
So the starting point should be a vehicle that is known to meet specs and be in good state of tune with no ignition, fuel or air supply issues.
Any vehicle suspected not to meet that should be repaired first. Things to do to check a machine at a minimum would be a good visual inspection, a checks for any codes and a test ride by a qualified person familiar with what is correct for that vehicle.
Sure, adaptives can cover some normal variances and wear and tear but once you get outside that you're also outside what a tuning device is likely to correct.
Some older Motronics R bikes are infamous for a range of issues but newer BMS-K bikes span the range from stuff that has a few issues (eg R1200s) to stuff that runs very nicely in good factory tune (eg some of the F twins) which does not mean it can't be improved).
An R1200RT uses the BMS-K ECU (engine management computer), a ZFE (monitors electrical systems) and the ABS which is non whizzie 2007 and later. In good tune the bikes could still use some help at lower revs and the power curve has some less than sterling spots in it. But they will run smoothly and strongly enough in good shape especially when compared to 1100 or 1150 motors, a combo of better mechanics and electronics.
Last edited by racer7; 01-05-2014 at 02:52 AM.
Marchyman - I hear ya. I probably won't remove the accelerator module for a while simply because I don't feel like peeling off all the tupperware I'd have to in order to get to it. I really don't have that many miles on it yet and the bike runs fine. I probably picked a bad time to do the mod as it's pretty cool (weather wise) around here and the bike was running as good as it ever has. I wasn't that unhappy with how the bike had been running, even in the heat of summer. I've read the complaints about rough idle and surging in the lower rpm bands. I never felt like my bike was that bad at idle. I could have been better but I didn't find it that bad. Then again, I had come off a Harley so I probably didn't have a valid reference point for the BMW. The things I've heard about surging? The only significant surging I had on my bike was early in the warm up cycle from a cold start. It would stumble after an upshift but that usually only lasted for the first mile or so. Once warmed up, there wasn't what I would call any significant uncommanded (on my part!) change in engine speed or power. The main thing I've felt on my bike that goes hand and hand with complaints from others about lean running as been the rpm ranges that engine was happy with. In the lower gears (1-3) I could get down to around 2500 with no problem. In the higher three gears, it definitely wasn't happy that low in the rpm range. One guy said, "just keep it above 3000 and it'll be happy." That's pretty much how my bike was. I also found I had to keep the rpms up and do a lot of (at least more than I really felt I should have to) clutch slipping to get started from a dead stop. I stalled the bike a number of times before starting to get a handle on that. I just thought it was me. Turns out the engine tuning had something to do with it too because after installing the module, I haven't stalled the bike once, and I can easily and smoothly come off a dead stop with the engine 500 to 700 rpm slower than before. On top of that, the idle smoothed up noticeably. The surging issues during warm up were gone and the engine is quite happy at rpms at least 500 rpm lower than it would have been before. From that standpoint, the module has done exactly what they said it would do. This "adaptive" programming they're talking about has me wondering. I'll just hang in there for the time being and see how it turns out.
Racer7 - your points are well taken. I have no reason to think my bike had any issues based on how it was running before the modification. For now, I'll just continue reading and leave things the way they are. If the ECU adapts back to what it was before the mod, then so be it. I really like how it's performing at this point and would like to maintain that so I guess I'll just have to play it by ear as time goes on.
Thanks for the replies guys!
Lots of great info on this subject that's dear to me. I have a '12 R1200RT and have been after performance gains. I've changed the air filter to one less constrictive, installed Remus headpipe and muffler and installed the booster plug. Performance is better but very occasionally I get the infamous popping on decel and the idle is a bit rough, surges back and forth about 50 rpm.
I am going to install the af XIED this summer. Do you all think it will cure my popping and surging issues? Thanks for any and all advice.
On the Road
Yes, enriching the mixture with an AF-XiED will help your issues and will make all of these bikes run better stock or modified. If someone leaves the air temp fooler (Booster Plug, Accelerator Module, etc) on or removes it, it won't matter as far as the AF-XiED is concerned. Roger has shown quite a bit of proof and solid data that the effects of an air temp fooler are adapted out rather quickly by the BMSK. You can read that info on the last 2 or 3 pages of this thread: http://www.bmwmoa.org/forum/showthre...Sensors/page17
Originally Posted by franz
Thanks mike. I fully understand how ALL new street bikes run lean due to manufacturer's requirement to meet the EPA mandates. Coming from HD, it was always an easy fix with numerous vendors selling very good products that help machines run cooler with increased performance and fuel economy.
Originally Posted by MIKEFIGIELSKI
I was a bit disappointed when searching for the same enhancement on the BMW. Looks like you good folks have done all the homework and I thank you for for that. Once again I'll be looking forward to reporting back to you all on my seat of the pants performance once I install my own af XIED.
In addition to seat of the pants I used the GS-911 to collect engine rpm data from which I calculated torque, HP and acceleration. Better than standard everywhere, by especially between 2k and 4k.
Originally Posted by franz
Originally Posted by roger 04 rt
In your opinion, was my choice to install a free flowing air filter and Remus cat free head-pipe and muffler a wise decision that that will help my bike run better? I've not heard from others who have decided to go this route. From what I can gather, most folks leave the stock exhaust intact and are just altering the AFR but I always thought the more complete performance package includes improving the flow of fresh air and exhaust gas thru the engine. Correct?