Honda Motorcycles - FireBlades.org banner

1 - 20 of 39 Posts

·
Registered
Joined
·
32 Posts
Discussion Starter #1
Has anyone else other than KIDRR run into problems running the 12.7:1 A/F Ratio?  Just curious since i'm taking my bike to get it remapped next week using that ratio. I am going to take ratter's advice and run this ratio above 40%. I'll run it leaner below that (maybe at my current 13.2)
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
8,271 Posts
I ran mine at 12.5 to 12.8 and never had any problems anywhere throughout the range . . .
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
32 Posts
Discussion Starter #3
Abtech, did you use the 12.5 thru 12.8 all throughout (except for idle) or just after a certain throttle position (I.E - 30%, 40%, etc).
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
5,183 Posts
you have to remember that abtechs is a race bike, and normally fuel economy does not play a factor in setting a map in that sort of situation.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
3,983 Posts
While my bike was never dyno'd itself...

THe map I ran was aiming for 12.6 or .7 EVERYWHERE except for idle. It ran perfect! Though refueling came with laughter from people I rode with. But a RC51 is bad about that anyway...
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
8,271 Posts
scooper929 : Abtech, did you use the 12.5 thru 12.8 all throughout (except for idle) or just after a certain throttle position (I.E - 30%, 40%, etc).
Idle? we don't need no stinking idle . . .

I had the map set at this A/F ratio from idle to rev limiter.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,666 Posts
Ok...I'll go ahead and ask...

I was under the impression that there was an ideal A/F ratio for gasoline engines (somewhere around 14.7:1) at which point the combustion was as efficient as possible (max power extracted).

Would someone explain to me why different engines would require a different A/F ratio, or where I'm going wrong? I'm fairly technical, so hit me with the good stuff.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
14,390 Posts
dB : Ok...I'll go ahead and ask...

I was under the impression that there was an ideal A/F ratio for gasoline engines (somewhere around 14.7:1) at which point the combustion was as efficient as possible (max power extracted).

Would someone explain to me why different engines would require a different A/F ratio, or where I'm going wrong? I'm fairly technical, so hit me with the good stuff.  
Ahhh...there's the kicker, most efficient does not mean most power in engine terms.

'Stoichiometric ratio' means you have equal parts of all of the chemicals needed to complete the reaction. Thus you have just enough fuel to combine with the air to burn.

It has nothing to do with making power!
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
8,271 Posts
ahhh, there's the word!

It's actually 13.7 to 1 (not 14.7) and a short walk through the pits at any NHRA National will have the folks on the floor if you mention it . . .
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
14,390 Posts
abtech : It's actually 13.7 to 1 (not 14.7) and a short walk through the pits at any NHRA National will have the folks on the floor if you mention it . . .
If you don't fall over from breathing the unburned fuel dumping out of the exhaust pipes first.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
8,271 Posts
My bad, although the following excerpt from an SAE white paper from the 1999 journals is usually the norm for engine tuning:

Air/Fuel Ratio  - The ratio of pounds of Air to pounds of Fuel needed for combustion in an engine. Air/Fuel ratio is based on pounds of AIR to pounds of FUEL but carbs are metered (jetted) by volume so changes in fuel can change A/F ratios. A/F Ratios range from about 2:1 for NitroMethane to about 16:1 for gasoline, with 14.7:1 considered the stoichiometric or chemically correct ratio under perfect conditions with normal (non-oxygenated) gasoline.  Gasoline A/F ratios for best power tend to be in the 13.25:1 - 13.75:1 range.

As you can see there seems to be a few variables in the above excerpt, which when combined with the various dissimilarities between automotive engines (relatively low compression ratios, relatively low RPM range, much smaller intake tract (throttle body volume vs displacement)) and contemporary sport bike engines, may account for the higher performance gained from lower ratios on the Blade . . .
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,666 Posts
I did a little reading in K. Cameron's 'Sportbike Performance Handbook' about the subject. He mentions the stoichiometric ratio of 14.7:1 but then goes on to say that optimum power will come in the 12-13.5:1 range. He goes through a bit of layman's chemistry but doesn't really explain why the richer mixture produces more power, except a quick blurb about the mixture having a larger volume. So presumably, there's not enough oxygen to burn all the hydrocarbons in a peak performing engine.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
8,271 Posts
'So presumably, there's not enough oxygen to burn all the hydrocarbons in a peak performing engine.'

Thus all of the restrictions on high performance hardware . . .
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
469 Posts
abtech : ahhh, there's the word!

It's actually 13.7 to 1 (not 14.7) and a short walk through the pits at any NHRA National will have the folks on the floor if you mention it . . .
On the floor from laughter or to avoid the shrapnel?
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
14,390 Posts
Hmm...I've been thinking about this and have a couple of thoughts as to what MAY be happening.

The first is the cooling effect of the increased fuel. More fuel in the mixture will cool the ports and cylinder head as it flows in.

The second is the effect of the extra fuel on scavenging. There are situations where I could envision an extra bit of fuel in the headers will change the backpressure on the engine.

I have no idea if these effects are real and could help. Just brainstorming...

Trying to return from deep left field now.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
8,271 Posts
sweetonion : Quote (abtech @ June 12 2003, 3:31pm)ahhh, there's the word!

It's actually 13.7 to 1 (not 14.7) and a short walk through the pits at any NHRA National will have the folks on the floor if you mention it . . .
On the floor from laughter or to avoid the shrapnel?
both boss . . .
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
32 Posts
Discussion Starter #20
Just had my 929 Remapped again. I gained 2HP from going from the 13.2:1 A/F ratio to 12.7:1. I did not use 12.7 all throughout. I used 12.7 for 40% and more trhrottle and over 6K RPMs. Since my 929 is not a race bike, I wanted some fuel economy for cruising. Anyway, thought i'd let everybody know. 12.7:1 is definately good.
 
1 - 20 of 39 Posts
Top