| Author |
Message |
    
Imonabuss
| | Posted on Saturday, June 06, 2009 - 10:44 pm: | 
|
Brapbrap is one major troll. 6 posts on this topic alone? Come on. I wish guys like this would get out of the way and let others chip in. An opinion is of value once.
I just rode an updated '08 and it ran beautifully. There are many here who have tens of thousands of happy miles on '08's that were purchased prior to the fixes. Getting one out the door with all the free updates at a deeply discounted price is a deal in my opinion. I really want a CR which is the only reason I didn't buy an '08R yet. If there were '08 CR's at a discount, I'd buy one right now. As it is I am still debating which to buy. |
Dentguy
| | Posted on Saturday, June 06, 2009 - 10:57 pm: |
|
I believe the 09 injector change was an unnecessary change in response to the fueling problem before they knew it was software driven.
On top of that you preach about the evolution of the 2009 with its new and improved fuel injectors and relocated O2 sensors, of which both were done in haste (because they needed to start building the 09 models) to try and fix a problem caused by an admittedly silly (Jon Flickenger himself told me about this) mis-communication between Buell and Rotax which subsequently was fixed upon the advent of the 03z ECM flash on 2008 models and then improved upon two more times.
So you guys saying that Buell didn't know what they were doing when they made these "improvements" or "unnecessary changes" and were they just throwing stuff out there to build the 09 until they found the real problem? Wow. |
Bikejunky
| | Posted on Saturday, June 06, 2009 - 11:07 pm: |
|
actually when the engine heating became apparent with the first bikes hitting the market they kept throwing more and more fuel in the mix to try and correct the heating. This was because Buell was not communicating on the same standard as rotax was about the fueling. Rotax was saying add fuel, change timing only they weren't both using the same scale/units of measurement. |
Brapbrapbrap
| | Posted on Saturday, June 06, 2009 - 11:08 pm: |
|
Well you go imonabuss, the thread is about to buy now or later 08/09 don't you think a troll would hang out in one of the (insert problem) threads? FYI the Internet does not really have a set limit of post it can handel. PM me I'll explain it to you. Since you have enough free time to count post take a little more time and read some f them. Some like this one are just in defense of party line dribble kind of like Rush Limbaugh for Buell. Ffacts be damned. |
Froggy
| | Posted on Saturday, June 06, 2009 - 11:10 pm: |
|
quote:So you guys saying that Buell didn't know what they were doing when they made these "improvements" or "unnecessary changes" and were they just throwing stuff out there to build the 09 until they found the real problem? Wow.
I think the answer is they attacked the problem from multiple angles. |
Unibear12r
| | Posted on Sunday, June 07, 2009 - 12:54 am: |
|
Nice try on spin doctoring what you want people to hear Dent.
Sense BMC thought every one was on the same page software wise there would be no reason to suspect that the software was wrong would there.
So that leaves changing hardware with known effects to make a change if you are going to be proactive.
BMC shows itself to work very hard on it's issues and seems to care the most about it's customers. Even to the point of fast tracking improvements for the sake of the customer. Good stuff in my book.
I haven't heard any intelligent person say NASA didn't know what they were doing when they crashed a probe into Mars over a mistake of the same type. |
Dentguy
| | Posted on Sunday, June 07, 2009 - 10:35 am: |
|
Nice try on spin doctoring what you want people to hear Dent.
Unibear12r,
That's funny. I wasn't trying to spin or get people to hear anything other than what you wrote. I was trying to understand the comments. That's why I asked the question. You are the one who basically said Buell made an unnecessary change before they found out the real problem. I've got no problem with Buell. I am curious what it is that you think I want people to hear?
Thanks Bikejunky, for explaining your comments without accusing me of spin doctoring.
Enjoy.
(Message edited by dentguy on June 07, 2009) |
Mainstreamer
| | Posted on Sunday, June 07, 2009 - 12:38 pm: |
|
"I believe the 09 injector change was an unnecessary change in response to the fueling problem before they knew it was software driven. The fuel was pooling on the valves because the injector timing was off, not an injector problem.
The movement of the O2 sensor also appears to have been done to save BMC money in the long turn, not for individual performance or reliability issues. "
On what do you base your belief?
I would hope the BMC engineering team would be more adept at correctly diagnosing the cause of the fueling problem and not take the shot gun approach. |
Bikejunky
| | Posted on Sunday, June 07, 2009 - 01:34 pm: |
|
My experience with o2 sensors is that they are designed to deal with high temps but they can be burned up, couple that with unspent fuel (see my post above) hitting them and you could have a shorter lifespan than usual. Moving it away from the head should help keep the heat lower (by how much I have no idea) and may increase the life of the sensor. |
Joebuell
| | Posted on Sunday, June 07, 2009 - 11:03 pm: |
|
So from what I'm hearing, outside of a warranty fix to a complaint if it surfaces, the only difference (mechanically) between an '09 and a PROPERLY UPDATED '08 are bigger injectors / relocated o2 sensors, and possibly heat shields all of which are not necessary because it was the ecm map causing problems in the first place... |
Froggy
| | Posted on Sunday, June 07, 2009 - 11:38 pm: |
|
You forgot the 520w stator  |
Unibear12r
| | Posted on Monday, June 08, 2009 - 05:37 am: |
|
Sorry Dent, hard to hear a guys tone on the internet but your comments seemed pretty sarcastic and twisted compared to what I actually posted. And my second post should have made it even more clear.
"Just throwing stuff out" and "not knowing what they are doing" are uncalled for comments and cannot even be implied with what I posted. BMC checked the primary suspect, their software, and didn't find the problem. Because it wasn't really the software but a communication error with what went IN the software.
It wouldn't have been the first time that a complex machine didn't work exactly like it's designers thought it should.
And as such you are making a HUGE assumption in thinking that there was "a real problem" to even find!
My belief is based no different than yours, off of what I've heard, read and seen. No one has yet shown any power advantage to the 09 injectors at all. Any other advantage, if any, would be so subjective as to be unprovable by anyone but BMC or a well equipped lab with time and money to burn.
Obviously I could easily be wrong on the injectors, which is why I stated it as a belief and not a fact.
It's just as likely that the injectors were changed for smog reasons when you consider that Erik has stated in Fuell that BMC likes to shoot the fuel directly AT the valves for that reason and that's what the twin sprays from the new injectors appear to be doing.
Bikejunky nailed the O2 thing. There is a variable lifespan to O2 sensors. Moving the spot for the O2 sensor gets the weak ones to last longer. For both BMC during warranty and you after warranty. But it's unlikely you can point to any one bike and say that bike's sensors will last longer because of it because it depends on the quality of the sensor. But from BMC's point of view considering all of it's production it can save them a lot of money in warranty work.
(Message edited by unibear12r on June 08, 2009) |
Joebuell
| | Posted on Thursday, June 11, 2009 - 02:50 pm: |
|
where does the CR fit into all of the "issues" that are no longer issues? |
Teach
| | Posted on Thursday, June 11, 2009 - 06:25 pm: |
|
Can't remember the place, but Erik stated that the injector re-location had to do with increasing longevity. |
