Quote:
Originally Posted by choneofakind
250, no. It's carbureted. The engine response is a function of various physical parts in the carbs. There is no computerized control system there.
This is just how an engine is controlled by a fuel injection system... There's tables for every parameter and equations relating all the tables. The ECU just follows the numbers based on the rider inputs and conditions. There's tables for ramp-in, rider input (throttle), volumetric efficiency, load, incoming air temp, engine temp, engine speed, air density, crank position, etc etc.
|
There are quite a few FI 250's including my 2013
What was Euro/ Asia starting using 250 FI years? 2011?
I am not sure but I know as far back as 2011 for sure
I was curious because I play a lot with maps values on mine.
I can adjust values separation from as little as 250rpm but usually use 500 rpm separation between values/changes
These maps are of course the fuel maps but rely on the throttle sensor for input.
I can tune for excellent crisp throttle response which I do but for me the trick is always adding a bit more fuel to achieve strong mid range without losing that crisp response which of course leaner always provides
What is also interesting to me is studying all the maps from various after marker guys like Two Bro, Power Commander, Area p etc.
They all seem to prefer overall leaner than stock settings in many spots of throttle % openings the one exception being FuelMoto whose map is quite rich but runs very strong pull wise & is not blubbery in the throttle response at all. Kind of has me scratching my head
My problem is no dyno so it is a slow process where I usually load 2 altered maps & one zero map.
That way when I test I can reset my brain/feel for the bike by reverting to stock between trying various maps.
Fun to do & interesting to note the results