| Author | Message | ||
     Froggy |
Jrftizny, you probably have a dead battery. | ||
| Albert666 |
just fitted an ebr ecm and the bike definitely runs smoother, i have to say i miss the engine braking though | ||
| Kinder |
Hey Whippetlovr I too am from 'up north' and waht I said hold true here. I lived where you are for a while to as its close to original home.  Now I'm in Calgary... Alot of tech comes from nascar. Its kinda neat since most don't consider driving in a oval needs much tech. After driving one in Vegas I respected them alot more.  Jrfitzny; just put the old one back on and see if the problem persists. quick way to eliminate or isolate if its the issue. From what I hear Erik Buell Racing will work with you if its the problems. | ||
| Aseecobra |
The ECM is designed and made in the USA. | ||
| 07xb12ss |
Albert666: I miss my engine braking a lot! | ||
| Pmjolly |
It took getting used to, but I like the change to less engine braking. I just run a little higher in the RPM's and it's all good. | ||
| Firemanjim |
Hey,Whippet--tell your friend with the Power Commander he got robbed--as easy as those are to tune on a dyno his bike should be spot on if that shop knew Anything. Too bad he is so far away,I'd do it for free! | ||
| Cataract2 |
You can request the Erik Buell Racing ECM with engine braking. I did with mine. | ||
| Milezero5 |
Another positive testament to the ebr ecm. Installed it the other day, bike runs buttery smooth with my fmf exhaust. No more lean spots or surging and it runs awesome. Didnt realize how crappy the bike ran till the proper tune was put in. +1 for Eric and the team. | ||
| Whippetlovr |
Thanks everyone. My ECM shipped 2 days ago, I'm anxious to get it on the bike and see the difference for myself. Too bad I didn't know about the engine braking part before I ordered... oh well, I'll adjust. Firemanjim- I'm suprised his bike still doesn't run perfectly, we drove 4 hours to a race shop in Toronto that tunes my cousin's pro race bikes, it runs WAY better after their tune but it still runs super rich and stalls. It sucks that there's nobody in less than 4 hours from us to help us with our bikes. | ||
| Tibman260 |
Just a couple more notes.... "That the stock ECM is Japanese, and the replacement isn't, so THAT will be a problem. That the stock engine was designed for use with the stock ECM only, that Bombardier would never support the use of the E B R ECM, its not a valid 'upgrade' to help the bike run better, it's just being sold to make a quick buck, etc." Whoever fed you that should no longer be allowed to give you advice about your Buell since they obviously do not know anything about the bike. The hardware portion of the ECM was designed and developed by a company out of Indiana that I will leave anonymous because I know they still work with Erik and it is not my place to divulge that info. I can't speak for right now, but would be surprised if it has changed, while Buell was still open the ECM was manufactured by Synerject in Delavan WI. They are the ones that made the circuit boards, housing, assembled it together and shipped it to Buell. They are literally right down I-43 from Buell. As far as the software side of things go, Buell 100% developed the ECM programming on their own. Bombardier assisted Buell in providing the engine parameters and helping to develop the spark mapping but the remaining 98% was done by Buell. Oh, and one more thing. The engineers that developed the stock ECM programming? Ya, they are the ones that developed the race ECM programming and still help Erik Buell Racing tweak it today. Finally, as it was said earlier by someone else, the race ECM is nothing more than a stock ECM part that was bought from the same hardware manufacture (Synerject) and reflashed with the race firmware and software. If you had the flashing software and different firmware/software versions you could change back and forth from stock to race with either part, it makes no difference. So please, tell whoever told you that to go educate himself before telling blatant lies. He is either biased and purposefully lieing to you or genuinely dumb. (Message edited by tibman260 on March 26, 2011) | ||
| Anonymous |
"That the stock ECM is Japanese, and the replacement isn't, so THAT will be a problem. That the stock engine was designed for use with the stock ECM only, that Bombardier would never support the use of the E B R ECM, its not a valid 'upgrade' to help the bike run better, it's just being sold to make a quick buck, etc." Yeah, we'd love to know who the lying a**hat is that said this. Please post who it is for the sake of knowing the truth. Thanks, Tibman, for setting the story straight. | ||
| Court |
Truth ....... On some days ...... Shines so brightly. Nice to see some of this ridiculous information put where it belongs ....... In the trash. Berylium | ||
| Buell_rida |
Installed Erik Buell Racing ECM the other day, along w/ a Barker's pipe and K&N filter. It's like a completely different bike. I can't believe how much smoother the bike runs. Took the quiet core out of the pipe this morning. The neighbors will hate me, but it sounds great! Buy the ECM, totally worth it! | ||
| Blake |
Put the quiet back in it. Obnoxiously loud noise in public streets is inconsiderate and uncool. | ||
| Jdugger |
> Berylium Indeed. Did anyone ever clear up with steve anderson what parts he was referring to when he mentioned it regarding Eslicks bike? | ||
| Bobbuell1961 |
Put the quiet back in it. Obnoxiously loud noise in public streets is inconsiderate and uncool.+1 | ||
| Bwbhighspl |
On engine braking.... Keith Code recommends against it, and I agree. His point was that brake pads are a lot cheaper to replace than pistons. He also points out that brakes are designed to slow you down, whereas the engine is not. If the default EB R tune hampers engine breaking, I would draw the conclusion that they also recommend against it by default. I admit, it is fun, but my research has told me it's not the best thing to do to your bike. | ||
| Mls1 |
I bought my Erik Buell Racing ECM specifically w/o engine braking and love it. It gets rid of the jerkiness when rolling in and out of the throttle. Besides that the 8 piston ZTL hauls it down from speed plenty fast for me and I feel I can control the decel better with the brake than throttle. my 2c. Cheers, ml | ||
| Ohsoslow |
can someone give me a rational explanation as to why "engine braking" can hurt the engine? id really love to hear it. | ||
| 1125rcya |
Here are some other things best not for the 1125 Unleaded fuel, Burn outs, Stoppies, High revs while in neutral/with clutch pulled in, Oil and filter after +3k.,Ride with your eyes closed, Watch the birds, Speed past police, Ride with a plug in tire *argument* lol | ||
| Jaimec |
Keith Code is referring to "Downshift/Engine Braking" which beats the HELL out of the transmission. Simply rolling off the throttle to slow won't hurt the engine at all. If it did, my two BMWs with over 140K wouldn't be as oil-tight and solid running as they were/are. I can still remember the end of a long, spirited back road run when my friend on a Honda VFR told me my brake light was out. I checked and it worked fine. He said he never once saw it come on when we were hauling down the road. I told him that was because I never once TOUCHED the brakes! Just rolled (not CHOPPED) the throttle on and off. For more information, read Nick Ienatsch (sp?) article "The Pace." | ||
| Reepicheep |
Ohsoslow... I think some of it is urban legend based on no longer relevant facts. I'm restoring a 1971 Kawasaki Bison (two stroke) now, which has the crankcase oil mixed with the gas. On a normal two stroke, if I were to engine brake down a loooong downhill, I would be starving the engine of oil. If it was hot already, and it was a long hill, I could see something seizing. Kawasaki addressed this on my 71 by adding oil injection, which I pulled because it needs some plumbing work, but that I may put back on if I get everything else debugged. That addressed the problem by continuing to pump oil into the motor even with the throttle off. Blake and I had a conversation here on a thread a while back where we were trying to figure out loads, and he convinced me that downshifting is really no worse than accelerating in terms of drivetrain (including transmission) loading... the idea being that in first (and probably second) gear, every Buell made makes enough power to break traction with the rear wheel on acceleration. Meaning that the limit in loading is the traction of the rear tire. Downshifting loads will have that same maximum, the max friction of the rear wheel. The one difference I could see is that maximum RPM on acceleration is limited by the ECM by spark cutout, but the ECM can't limit max RPM on a downshift. So a downshift might spin the motor faster than acceleration ever could, and there is an RPM beyond which is 100% fatal to a motor. That scenario would have to be a pretty deliberate user mistake though, it would probably be pretty hard to get the bike to do it. (Anybody else smelling a mythbusters segment here!  ) | ||
| Jdugger |
The real argument against engine braking is that under braking in general the rear tire has little traction to spare. Unless you want the bike to track out of line, why waste what little rear traction you do have on trying to slow the bike when the front brake is so much more effective at this task, anyway? | ||
| Milezero5 |
Just use "freight train mode", all 1125s have it. Simply roll on throttle to WOT. By sheer force it will move anything out of the way, I.E. buildings, trees, and semi's. Thus no stopping required. It took a few rides to get used to no engine brake, but I dont miss is now. | ||
| Nm5150 |
Between less engine breaking and a much smoother and better pull at lower RPMs I believe my corner entries and exits are a lot smoother with the Erik Buell Racing ECM.IMHO | ||
| Jaimec |
Jdugger: Under acceleration or steady cruising, most of the bike's weight IS on the rear wheel. Unless you are braking aggressively (which isn't possible with engine braking) you'll have more than enough traction on the rear to slow the bike. STOPPING is another matter entirely and in this case you definitely want to use the brakes. Weight transfer will aggressively move to the front of the bike loading the front wheel. | ||
| Jdugger |
Jamie, It would be impossible for me to disagree more. You are coasting, not slowing the bike at any real rate of speed. I assure you, I have the rear wheel light in many situations I have no intention of stopping the bike. The rear wheel is a rather ineffective way to slow a bike. Jam on the brake and it skids. Roll off the throttle, and you aren't shedding speed very quickly at all. If you are on the brakes with any king of significant pressure, the rear wheel is light. These bikes have such a short wheelbase they are a bit prone to stoppie. Read NM's comments a couple of posts above... he's got a handle on it. (Message edited by jdugger on March 29, 2011) | ||
| Hootowl |
The weight bias on an XB is greater than 50/50 to the front, so the majority of the weight is not on the rear tire unless you are accelerating enough to lighten the front end. Don't know what the bias is on the 1125 series. | ||
| Jaimec |
We are not talking about JAMMING on the brake, we are talking about rolling off the throttle. Under those circumstances there is MORE than enough weight on the rear wheel to SLOW the bike. If you roll off your throttle and the rear wheel locks, you've got some serious mechanical issues that need to be addressed. |
