09 California Model = Poor performance

[8secBusa]

Just bought an 09 Busa, set it up same way as my 08. The preformance is about the same on the top end, but the bottom end is extremely soft.

Does anyone know if the ECU or anything else was modified on these models? Based on how it acts, I feels like either the timing or fuel curves may be the issue.

 

[aussiekeeper]

My '09 runs like a scalded dog, must be your particular machine.

 

[Dozerdriver]

The Cali models do have extra emissions added to the bike. Does yours have the extra canister under the rear section tail. I think you can just lift the tank and see if the extra hoses are connected to something, to tell if it is a Cali model. My wifes 09 seems much weaker then my 08 but it is all stock.

 

[Djxtrodinaire]

Cali busas needs Botox for extra umph!

 

[8secBusa]

Yes it is a cali model, rear canister and all. And yes its weaker, especially on the bootm end. I race my bikes , so the performance i speak of is not seat of the pants, its track and dyno. I will dyno next week but can say it feels as weak on the bottom end as if I took my 08 and tried to launch it in B mode. The top end is comparable. Raced at MIR yesterday, set up the same as my 08 the bottom end is much weaker, top end very similar. My thoughts, the ECU is ultra lean on the bottom or the timing is way retarded.

Already yanked the canister when I relocated my rectifier.

 

[Dozerdriver]

There is a member on here who I sold a non Cali ECU... I will have to contact him and see if the performance was better. He might chime in...

 

[Dozerdriver]

Can you just put your 08 ECU in the 09 and see if that does the trick?

 

[mestona]

Cheaper to do an ECU edit

 

[8secBusa]

Power commander list a different part number for 09 PC5's. I assume there is a difference. I have purchased the ECU editor, just haven't gotten fall enough along to see the differences in models, if any.

 

[m_ridgeway]

what were the track differences?

 

[8secBusa]

0-60 is where the big difference was. The bike felt sluggish, avg 60's on 08 were 1.55, best on sat was 1.72. Same gearing, same pipe, same tune. Launch the same manner, low rpm, quick throttle, but the bike fell on its face. Had to raise the launch rpm way up to even get it moving.
08 same setup 9.3-9.4" on avg, sat avg 9.8's.. On the top it was the same 148-149MPH..

 

[Johnnycheese]

the ecu's are the same the canister is nothing more than a charcoal box
just remember no two bikes are the same
gen 1 were 147-163 hp stock gen 2 like wise have the same spread

 

[BIG GUY]

Would it be legal to take the canister off and run it like that in California?

 

[m_ridgeway]

could even just be diff clutch characteristics, or even track conditions leading to the difference in short times. your comparing this season to last season and two diff bikes right?

do you still have the 08? ever get numbers on the 1441?

 

[8secBusa]

I am fairly well versed in the conditions (weather, track, etc), I am sure the bike is different on the bottom end. I will post results, dyno overlay, 08/09 similar setups. My guess is 15-20 HP diff or 10-15 Tq on the bottom end. I expect the peak HP to be similar as they both pulled comparable MPH.

The 1441 lives and runs well. Plan to have it back out this weekend.. To date best et 8.82 at 160 mph, still need seat time as my 60fts are the weakest link. The dyno numbers depends on who's facility. Don't want to start another war of who's dyno is how conservative, but will say my trusted dyno was very consistent with the track results. More on that dyno equaled quicker ET and better MPH. We are re-tuning this setup Sat with ECU editor to hopefully improve a few things.

 

[CCbusa05]

My '09 runs like a scalded dog, must be your particular machine.

Ditto!

 

[m_ridgeway]

I am fairly well versed in the conditions (weather, track, etc), I am sure the bike is different on the bottom end. I will post results, dyno overlay, 08/09 similar setups. My guess is 15-20 HP diff or 10-15 Tq on the bottom end. I expect the peak HP to be similar as they both pulled comparable MPH.

The 1441 lives and runs well. Plan to have it back out this weekend.. To date best et 8.82 at 160 mph, still need seat time as my 60fts are the weakest link. The dyno numbers depends on who's facility. Don't want to start another war of who's dyno is how conservative, but will say my trusted dyno was very consistent with the track results. More on that dyno equaled quicker ET and better MPH. We are re-tuning this setup Sat with ECU editor to hopefully improve a few things.

that would be cool id like to see the graph even if no number were up, just to display two comparable bikes that run diff times