Gsxr Throttle Bodies

[danny56712 1]

you've missed my point. I know what you're saying, it works to a point, but I disagree with proper mapping not making gains to peak figures. I've seen 10bhp on a 172 just going from a std siemens ECU to omex properly mapped. And a siemens sirius is far and away better than a dizzy.

 

Peak figures aren't everything either, if everything is up the top of the revs it wont be fast.

 

 

Now just to go back on point for a minute its an mi16 engine using three row management not an 8v... now i really appreciate this brilliant advice given above and have decided carbs will be the route i will be taking, now as far as ignition is concerned i worry am i running into more hassle than it is worth???

[Baz 421]

Now just to go back on point for a minute its an mi16 engine using three row management not an 8v...

 

I'd hazard a guess that that's already known and people are referring to the fact that the popular way to run the ignition on a carb-equipped 16v Xu is to revert back to the 8v ignition and distributor (Spits)

Edited December 29, 2009 by Baz

[danny56712 1]

I'd hazard a guess that that's already known and people are referring to the fact that the popular way to run the ignition on a carb-equipped 16v Xu is to revert back to the 8v ignition and distributor (Spits)

 

 

why revert back to this i already have my engine going well now on 3 row mi16 management which i wired myself but is fine, now im going carbing and wondering is it worth changing the ignition

[Baz 421]

Exactly, why go backwards...

 

As said, yes if you want to fit carbs then you have a minefield of options, as this topic, like many others previously, is discussing.

[danny56712 1]

Exactly, why go backwards...

 

As said, yes if you want to fit carbs then you have a minefield of options, as this topic, like many others previously, is discussing.

 

 

Sorry if my knowledge is not as good as yours, i looked at heaps and heaps of old posts just couldn find clear answers, just dont see need for smart comments on these forums, if people want to help do comment but no need for smart silly comments, they dont help in my opinion

[Baz 421]

Sorry if my knowledge is not as good as yours, i looked at heaps and heaps of old posts just couldn find clear answers, just dont see need for smart comments on these forums, if people want to help do comment but no need for smart silly comments, they dont help in my opinion

 

Who's making smart comments?

 

I'm trying to help you without you raping this thread, as you're seemingly asking about something different now to what the thread is about! No offence meant at all!

Edited December 29, 2009 by Baz

[Sandy 191]

out of interest, what have you found to be the minimum throttle size the XU responds well to? The vast majority of 2 litre engines i've touched need ~45mm, and i've seriosly struggled to find any bike bodies that come close to that. Think it may have been the GSXR1000 that was 42mm??

 

Smaller than 45mm on XU 16v doesn't suit the overall port design very well. You might get better throttle resolution on a low spec engine, but otherwise not ideal. Some of the later GSXR1000 bodies are 46mm and there's another bike that has similar 48mm, but I can't remember what it is. The spacing is the biggest problem, it means diverging tracts, which need a good length to resolve well or the linkages nightmare of re-spacing, the work involved does indeed take you into extra time and money, DIY or otherwise.

 

ECU wise, I agree with the comments about ECU processing speed and it can be seen in the precision of the map that can be achieved. A well set up Emerald will run any of its peers close though, the margins are too small for most to worry about. Software comes into it in a big way for me. I use OMEX/GEMS on a regular basis and still struggle with the software, it doesn't live up to the standard of the ECUs for me. I tend to favour DTA-S series because I can manipulate the maps to get what I want much easier and quicker. The OMEX/GEMS systems I find less demanding of map precision to run smoothly, but the more precise map I tend to get on DTA-S, seems to benefit economy greatly. I also like to run twin injectors where possible and DTA-S does that on even the most basic model brilliantly. Mapping standards vary hugely and much of the time, owners will be unaware of how good it really is, which seems to be what alot of mappers rely on! The experiences I've had so far with MS have been frustrating and time consuming. I think at the moment it's "cost effective" image is being traded on by some people, when the reality is, by the time it's running properly and well set up, they'll probably have come within a whisker of the cost of a branded system, and cognitive dissonance takes care of the difference. Figure in the fact that it'll be worth next to stuff all secondhand and the branded systems make more sense.

 

On the subject of the manifolds, the cost of casting is prohibitive in this sort of market. It also means that you limit yourself to one design. Since we've made GSXR manifolds, we've done about 8 different designs to suit different engines and installations (the set up cost of casting would have limited us to one) and as the price of the TBs have increased with the resulting demand, we've been able to adapt our designs for different Bodies, which wouldn't have been possible with a casting. It's always going to be a low volume market, I don't think Colin's made more than a dozen manifolds of any one of the designs for example. By the time you've designed and written the programs for CNC flanges, sourced, bent (properly!) and cut to shape the runners, TIG welded it inside and out, maybe injector pockets too, faced it off, CNC machined the TB end to get the necessary precision, hand ported the whole thing, and made the brackets, it's become a quite labour intensive item. Then, to make it work well, you need to modify the fuel rails, make the fuel line adapters, make better throttle quadrants to fit, weld them on and finish them, CNC the trumpet tubes and flanges, join them and finish them, seal and assemble the whole thing; even more work!

[sideways danny 0]

agree with some of the software comments, but then i had the advantage of working for omex, so got to know the software well enough. MAP3000 is out dated but it's free..... GEMS software, GWV4 is a much better system but requires a license dongle. The precision of the map, i'm surprised you dont think is good. My own mk1 clio is close to 190bhp now and still returning 35mpg. Maybe that's just down to system familiarity again.

 

Andy Cutler who I worked with at Omex is now the mapper at K-tec (renault specialists) and i wont use anyone else.

 

I'm far from being tied to Omex ECUs BTW. There's a whole list of worthy standalone out there, emerald being quite far down the list for me, and MBE isn't great either. DTA is decent, but the tech support is not freely available to back up a good product. For me, KMS is looking a good option at the moment, as is the SC typhoon

[Sandy 191]

What I'm getting at with OMEX/GEMS, is the difficulty of making swift adjustments on the fly and only making graph tweaks by key-tapping; I had a couple dongle GEMS jobs this year and it was much the same as MAP3000, but with a heap more options cluttering it up as far as I could tell, the amount of fuel it took to map one of them (GroupN VVT Subaru) was frightening, and I couldn't get a feel for it. The time it takes me to make the adjustments and refine it is a major issue, because in the process of doing it, the heat's building up and the parameters are changing. If you're starting with a good base map, it's much easier, but if I'm given a from scratch job to do, I price it 1.5x what I would for DTA, because it'll take me twice as long usually. The ECU themselves are precise and like I said, it smooths over imperfections very well, especially transient, the problem is getting the basic main maps good all over to start with.

 

I can't rate KMS at the same level personally. 3D maps have been a big step forward for it, but only being able to see one map or manipulate one line at a time etc, is even worse than what I'm talking about above. It's the same old thing, mapping by numbers it's ok, but trying to get a feel for the sweet spot is near impossible. I was very happy with the last KMS job I did, but as soon as I'm back on DTA the joy seems to come back into it!

 

I did a Clio Williams with a K-TEC TB+OMEX kit on it the other day as it happens.

Edited December 29, 2009 by Sandy

[Galifrey 1]

you've missed my point. I know what you're saying, it works to a point, but I disagree with proper mapping not making gains to peak figures. I've seen 10bhp on a 172 just going from a std siemens ECU to omex properly mapped. And a siemens sirius is far and away better than a dizzy.

 

Peak figures aren't everything either, if everything is up the top of the revs it wont be fast.

 

I know this, but comparing what you had with a standard ECU and a new ECU mapped completely differently is comparing apples with oranges. A mappable ignition means less compromise, as you have a much higher resolution I am sure you could have achieved the same with the Siemens had the mapper had software to map that properly The manufacturer has different objectives. For a peak BHP figure, you are talking about a static situation with a WoT and fixed igntion timing point, that can be achieved with a dizzy.

 

Where the dizzy struggles is is in other areas, part throttle, different load settings, not peak power, and if you read my post properly, I clearly stated that the mappable gains you driveability essentially what you have worded differently in your last line, so we do actually agree. In the event of you adjusting a dizzy to be driveable, it is likely you wont have the best for peak BHP/Torque or vice versa. I gained 11bhp on my ZX12R just by advancing the ignition with an advancer plate and we had to remap the fueling.

 

And yes, as Baz points out, I was referring to the fact that some people run carb'd Mi16s with a Dizzy, I never stated it was the best, just good/simple enough for a lot of people taking a DIY route.

 

I think for the purposes of tidying up this thread, we should just summarise here what we agree on.

 

1. Manifolds are a critical part of the instalation, and there are good reasons why they are expensive.

 

2. A good ecu mapped by a reputable mapper will make a huge difference.

 

3. Carbs can give a reasonable alternative, however, for best gains they need properly jetting and a mapped ignition.

 

4. Danny works for Omex, so hit him up if you want a discount

 

Now lets keep it friendly, as this will be one of the threads other people will read when they do a search, and there is some great information here for those that want to understand what is involved.

 

[DrSarty 90 1 Cars]

What's wrong with B&Q rubber hose joiners and jubilee clips then?

 

[hcmini1989 16]

What's wrong with B&Q rubber hose joiners and jubilee clips then?

 

i wish band q made them that big .for gsxr bodies.although if your going for r1 carbs on a budget you can get some rad hose to fit the manifold and r1 carbs not ideal but will get you running just keep them short as said before on the forum the longer they are they seem to pulse like mad

 

and have a look at trigger wheels website megajolt lt jr is peanuts from them

[Galifrey 1]

What's wrong with B&Q rubber hose joiners and jubilee clips then?

 

 

[DrSarty 90 1 Cars]

Retract your Facepalm NOW!

 

I was joking.

[Galifrey 1]

Retract your Facepalm NOW!

 

I was joking.

 

Rich, so was I

[sideways danny 0]

What I'm getting at with OMEX/GEMS, is the difficulty of making swift adjustments on the fly and only making graph tweaks by key-tapping; I had a couple dongle GEMS jobs this year and it was much the same as MAP3000, but with a heap more options cluttering it up as far as I could tell, the amount of fuel it took to map one of them (GroupN VVT Subaru) was frightening, and I couldn't get a feel for it. The time it takes me to make the adjustments and refine it is a major issue, because in the process of doing it, the heat's building up and the parameters are changing. If you're starting with a good base map, it's much easier, but if I'm given a from scratch job to do, I price it 1.5x what I would for DTA, because it'll take me twice as long usually. The ECU themselves are precise and like I said, it smooths over imperfections very well, especially transient, the problem is getting the basic main maps good all over to start with.

 

I can't rate KMS at the same level personally. 3D maps have been a big step forward for it, but only being able to see one map or manipulate one line at a time etc, is even worse than what I'm talking about above. It's the same old thing, mapping by numbers it's ok, but trying to get a feel for the sweet spot is near impossible. I was very happy with the last KMS job I did, but as soon as I'm back on DTA the joy seems to come back into it!

 

I did a Clio Williams with a K-TEC TB+OMEX kit on it the other day as it happens.

 

 

That's why my advice is nearly always to choose a tuner first then take their advice on an ECU. You'll get the best out of what you know and are comfortable with.

 

Erm key-tapping though? do you have a pot-box? best thing you can ever invest in if you use omex regularly. There's methods you use when you know the system well for building maps from scratch, but yes once you have good maps for a car its very much easier

 

 

Galifrey - I USED to work for omex.

[Galifrey 1]

Galifrey - I USED to work for omex.

 

Bugger

[Sandy 191]

 

That's why my advice is nearly always to choose a tuner first then take their advice on an ECU. You'll get the best out of what you know and are comfortable with.

 

Erm key-tapping though? do you have a pot-box? best thing you can ever invest in if you use omex regularly. There's methods you use when you know the system well for building maps from scratch, but yes once you have good maps for a car its very much easier

 

 

Galifrey - I USED to work for omex.

 

Yes, I totally agree, about the advice.

 

I have DTA and MBE knob boxes, but not OMEX, I really should get one and it would probably be worth getting some training from them too, I'm sure I'd probably nail alot of the issues!

[Cameron 16]

Damn this thread.. now I'm looking at CBR / GSXR bodies on the 'bay.

[danny56712 1]

Damn this thread.. now I'm looking at CBR / GSXR bodies on the 'bay.

 

 

Right lads bodies are defo too complicated for me to start with so im looking at carbs now, whats best for mi16 as in size and type

[Baz 421]

Weber/Dellorto 40/45s.

[Cameron 16]

Yeah for ease of fitting and set-up I'd definitely agree. Bike carbs may be marginally cheaper to buy but unless you can fabricate your own manifold and tune / swap jets yourself then you have to pay someone else to do it all for you. Webber carbs are pretty cheap and DCOE manifolds are widely available. There's also hundreds of people around the country who can tune them.

Edited January 2, 2010 by Cameron

[Matt Holley 11]

Right lads bodies are defo too complicated for me to start with so im looking at carbs now, whats best for mi16 as in size and type

 

I will have a complete twin dellorto set up for sale in a week or so, pm me if interested.

[danny56712 1]

I will have a complete twin dellorto set up for sale in a week or so, pm me if interested.

 

 

Well firstly in relation to people to tune twin carbs there are very few here as im in ireland lads and tuning scene aint huge here. Always tghought once i copied someone elses design with bike carbs and jet size and had decent manifold sorted they be much easier option no?

[Cameron 16]

Yeah you can fit the jets but they will still need fine tuning just like Webers will, and you're much more likely to find somebody who can tune Webers than bike carbs.