Yamaha R1 Forum: YZF-R1 Forums banner
1 - 20 of 160 Posts

·
Registered
Joined
·
995 Posts
ok...guys...surfing on the net i found something interesting...
http://www.totalfuel.net/
give a look...
here you can find why fastcard is "better" than pc3...
the answer is simple...pc3 intercepts tha data coming out from ecu and lies to it in the way ecu can sum or subtract fuel...this is not the best way to go when coming to r1 2007 for the advanced fuel management it has...so it's only for this reason that fastcard could work better...cause it uses a very simple load tecnology and of course it needs no tuning (there is no way to tune that cards,they are very simple,no software needed)...and it's the only effective in that advanced management ...
 

·
me r1 to eats P***y
Joined
·
3,513 Posts
the problem is that those of us that think the dyno jet is a better product get told we are brainwashed and just against a new product, thats not true.

I have not tried this new generation but i tried the 2nd generation, actualy i tried 2 of the 2nd generation units on my 06 and no matter what I did it did not run good and the bike was very rich as verified by a dyno with an a/f anylizer. Especially on part throttle application as verified by my wide band commander.

The problem I have with it is it can not take away fuel and all of us that have custom maps with our pc's have negative numbers which means the unit is taking away fuel.

The PC doesnt lie to the ecu anymore than the fast card does, It does not bypass sensors either. The original generation PC's did but that was years ago.

Some people have used the fast card and are happy with it. Im happy for them but there is deff a hard core group of guys that are REALLY pushing it . Saying that I havent read where anyone has not been happy with the new fast card. For me there just havent been enough people outside the select group to be totally convinced.
 

·
Ghostrider Squadron
Joined
·
9,251 Posts
i gotta call little BS to dyno charts. no way it makes any more difference. if pc3 and Tfi are at same A/F ratios, bike should make same power. its not rocket science. i would like to see test on same day, same bike, both tuned with best possible A/F ratios. in both the A/R is 12.79 for pc and 12.80 for TFI.. but TFI is 5 more HP... sorry that dont jive. i know both charts have same date on them, but i just cant see it. i have access to dyno anytime with tune link software. i would be happy to do test on it. air and fuel... is air and fuel.. if air fuel ratio is same, it should have same results at peak.. now i can see maybe one be easier to tune or whatever.. but with peak power.. same A/F.. its not like is doing magic to injectors. again just my .02. i havent tried one and not bashing it, but sounds like marketing ploy to me.
 

·
Angry Misogynist
Joined
·
13,391 Posts
i gotta call little BS to dyno charts. no way it makes any more difference. if pc3 and Tfi are at same A/F ratios, bike should make same power. its not rocket science. i would like to see test on same day, same bike, both tuned with best possible A/F ratios. in both the A/R is 12.79 for pc and 12.80 for TFI.. but TFI is 5 more HP... sorry that dont jive. i know both charts have same date on them, but i just cant see it. i have access to dyno anytime with tune link software. i would be happy to do test on it. air and fuel... is air and fuel.. if air fuel ratio is same, it should have same results at peak.. now i can see maybe one be easier to tune or whatever.. but with peak power.. same A/F.. its not like is doing magic to injectors. again just my .02. i havent tried one and not bashing it, but sounds like marketing ploy to me.

Right on, dude. None of the guys pushing this TFI thing seem to understand this very basic, fundamental aspect of how engines operate.
 

·
Ghostrider Squadron
Joined
·
9,251 Posts
yea u read one of post guy says that 12.79 is leaner than 12.80.. then says people dont understand rich or lean on motorcycles.. sounds like he doesnt understand A/F either. 12.79 is richer than 12.80.. but not enuff to make 5 hp difference. not sure what he is thinking.
 

·
Twisty Roads for me!
Joined
·
896 Posts
It was my bike that I did the test on... Same day for all the testing... I said on that post that 12.79 is richer than 12.80... Also an o2 senser can't read co which is also a factor in making power. The bike did make 5 more hp.... I'm just a R1 owner and just wanted to share my findings, as did Gapbound.... I'm not selling anything.


Stan


yea u read one of post guy says that 12.79 is leaner than 12.80.. then says people dont understand rich or lean on motorcycles.. sounds like he doesnt understand A/F either. 12.79 is richer than 12.80.. but not enuff to make 5 hp difference. not sure what he is thinking.
 

·
Candy Freakin Red
Joined
·
1,429 Posts
I dont know what the dyno says yet but I am happy with my TFI.
 

·
Ghostrider Squadron
Joined
·
9,251 Posts
not trying to bash any product or insult anyone. if ur happy with it, thats cool. im sorry if i misread it and apologize for that. 12.79 to 12.80 is not enuff difference to make 5 more hp in all my testing and dyno runs. obvioously it works on ur bike. only arguement i have is that a/F is exactly that and .01 difference in A/F should not make change in neighborhood of 5 hp. what were conditions at each time of dyno run? also what was correction factor used? all of this could show differnce in power. we all should know that dyno is not absolute. 5 different runs on dyno should show 5 different readings. my first runs on my bike with 42 miles on it started off at 142hp on first pull. next pull it went to 145, then 147, then 148.97. nothing changed.. just 4 back to back runs on dyno with swing of 6 hp. but all that matters if u are happy with it. both are made for tuning. one may have different approach to that. BTW very nice hp for ur bike Stan.
 

·
Twisty Roads for me!
Joined
·
896 Posts
Thank you..... I'm very happy with my 07 R1... I just installed Marchesini rims on it.... All I could say is WoW....


My mod are


Ohlins ttx-36, Ohlins 25mm front cart, Fastcard Gen III, Dynojet Ing module, Quick shifter, Akro Evo II, Speedohealer, Zumo 550 GPS, Pluig DD, Seat Cal, Gel seat, 520 kit, Steel brake lines, Hid lights high and low beams, Corser III, Greg flush mount lights, LED tail light, Driven Gel grips, GTYR air filter, Passport 8500 Rader dector, HPC steering damper.


Stan



not trying to bash any product or insult anyone. if ur happy with it, thats cool. im sorry if i misread it and apologize for that. 12.79 to 12.80 is not enuff difference to make 5 more hp in all my testing and dyno runs. obvioously it works on ur bike. only arguement i have is that a/F is exactly that and .01 difference in A/F should not make change in neighborhood of 5 hp. what were conditions at each time of dyno run? also what was correction factor used? all of this could show differnce in power. we all should know that dyno is not absolute. 5 different runs on dyno should show 5 different readings. my first runs on my bike with 42 miles on it started off at 142hp on first pull. next pull it went to 145, then 147, then 148.97. nothing changed.. just 4 back to back runs on dyno with swing of 6 hp. but all that matters if u are happy with it. both are made for tuning. one may have different approach to that. BTW very nice hp for ur bike Stan.
 

·
Candy Freakin Red
Joined
·
1,429 Posts
Stan: Those rims make much of a performance difference? Ever try ceramic bearings?
 
1 - 20 of 160 Posts
This is an older thread, you may not receive a response, and could be reviving an old thread. Please consider creating a new thread.
Top