AFR Settings (and dash in-fill gloat)....

[SapperWing]

I'm finally getting my bike back together after some considerable mod work / ECU update.

I've done a lot of reading on this forum about the AFR settings (though they seem to be kinda old), and not quite sure what the smart people decided.

I'm looking to do two tuning maps via PCV and AutoTune with a map switch installed. One tune will be max fuel economy as my normal fuel map (as I don't ride that hard most of the time). The other fuel tune would be for max power. With the switch off, AutoTune will be off - and the default map in PCV will be fuel economy. With the switch on, the AutoTune will be on - dynamically adjusting for max power (if I understand how the switch actually works).

What is a reasonable AFR for max fuel economy 13.8? 14?

Is the power fuel map still around 13.2?

I also got my dash infill done -

Anthony's ECU flash
Akra can
Arrow headers
UNI air filters
..... Tabasco's underside armor plating...... .

 

[hulkss]

Max fuel efficiency and max power are not mutually exclusive and can be done in one tune.

Ride the bike around and do some data logging to determine the zone (throttle position and RPM) in which you cruise and put on the most miles. Set the AFR target in that region to about 14.5.
At the extremes of rpm and throttle combined the AFR should be about 12.5 to protect the engine from excessive exhaust gas temperatures.
Everything else is between these limits.

There is a good AFR table generator here: AFR table generator

 

[Bose]

My negativity here - but why would you want the need/ hassle of trying to complicate something that works very well already in either mode from the factory??
110 bhp/ 110 nm torque with correct air/ fuel mix is more than adequate for the 1200 lump I feel.
Pipes/headers / free flow air filters / mapping are a waste of £/€/$ for an extra 5-10 bhp, you may be just riding the wrong steed if you haven’t got enough on tap from the factory the way it was made , we always seem to want more more an more .

 

[hulkss]

My negativity here - but why would you want the need/ hassle of trying to complicate something that works very well already in either mode from the factory??

Absolutely do not mess with the engine (hardware or software) if you are happy with the bike.

To determine if you would like more engine performance, just try to use wide open throttle and allow the bike to rev to near 7000 rpm when safety permits. If you do this and feel "that was kinda lame, I need more" then engine mods are for you.

Drivability is another issue. If the engine is not smooth, responsive and fun to drive, tuning may help.

I do tuning as part of my motorcycle hobby, no other real reason.

 

[SapperWing]

I don't think it's the wrong bike, I've owned many bikes in my 30 years of riding. At this point in my life, I would like a bike that is great on \ and off-road for many long miles - and can carry some gear and my backside with some comfort. Ended up between the GS and the ST - and I went with the Japanese reliability and TCO.

Now, regarding this specific bike, it's well known, and widely discussed (From Ryan F9, down through the wild webs) that there is a considerable unlocked potential in this bike. Do I enjoy tinkering and making this on\off-road, tour in comfort, mechanical masterpiece the best I can? Yea, it brings me considerable satisfaction.

Do I need to? No, point taken, not at all. But if "need" was a real factor, I wouldn't have this bike - nor any of its predecessors over the last 30 years.

Edit: And thanks for the the input \ help!

 

[hulkss]

There are a lot more options for tuning if you get a Power Vision 3. See my thread on the subject here: https://yamahasupertenere.com/index.php?threads/power-vision-3-lets-take-a-look-inside-our-ecu.31665/

 

[thughes317]

I don't think it's the wrong bike, I've owned many bikes in my 30 years of riding. At this point in my life, I would like a bike that is great on \ and off-road for many long miles - and can carry some gear and my backside with some comfort. Ended up between the GS and the ST - and I went with the Japanese reliability and TCO.

Now, regarding this specific bike, it's well known, and widely discussed (From Ryan F9, down through the wild webs) that there is a considerable unlocked potential in this bike. Do I enjoy tinkering and making this on\off-road, tour in comfort, mechanical masterpiece the best I can? Yea, it brings me considerable satisfaction.

Do I need to? No, point taken, not at all. But if "need" was a real factor, I wouldn't have this bike - nor any of its predecessors over the last 30 years.

Edit: And thanks for the the input \ help!

Just a thought: That "Japanese reliability and TCO" will likely be impacted to an extent proportional to the amount of "considerable unlocked potential" you decide to unleash. (think "KTM")


apologies in advance to DD