Anyone using the Bazazz system?

[Arachnosold1er]

Just wondering if anyone here has any experience with the Bazazz Z Fi system. Any ups/downs?

[hillbillypolack]

Power Commander, Bazzaz, DP ECU.  Spin the wheel, spend your time and money.  All guesswork to try to get them running as the should have in the first place. 

My 2 pesos.

[ungeheuer]

...Power Commander, Bazzaz, DP ECU.....

I know nothing at all about Bazzaz, sorry.  But Power Commander and DP ECU?  Not the same thing at all, one is a fixed firmware primary device and the other is an entirely user programable add-on.

[Duc796canada]

I have the same question I talked to a buddy that works at a bike shop, he said that the Bazzaz has better low end adjustability than the PCV. That being said, I have heard on here that below 4k RPM the stock ECU is a closed loop and can't be adjusted. Bazzaz has a lot of attachments including emulators for the O2 sensors, maybe that is how they do it?? I'm leaning toward Bazzaz, might be my winter purchase. Someone can jump in here that has experience with Bazzaz.

[ungeheuer]

... I talked to a buddy that works at the a bike shop, he said that the Bazzaz has better low end adjustability than the PCV.

Really?  I wonder how so?

That being said, I have heard on here that below 4 RPM the stock ECU is closed loop and can't be adjusted.

That'd be correct (I forget now the exact rpm cut-in, but the point is correct).

Bazzaz has a lot of attachments including emulators for the O2 sensors, maybe that is how they do it?? I'm leaning toward Bazzaz, might be my winter purchase. Someone can jump in here that has experience with Bazzaz.

PCV also runs O2 "optimizers" which plug-in line of your stock lambda probes.  Its their workaround for being otherwise unable to adjust the fuelling in the stock closed loop.  Much the same as FatDuc for pre-Siemens Monsters.

[hillbillypolack]

I stand corrected.

A friend with a Streetfighter has a Bazzaz, hasn't yet installed it but did say it had the ability to improve the sub-4k rev range.  Which perked my ears up.

I'd be curious to know more.

[ungeheuer]

I'd be curious to know more.

Me too.  Keep us posted  .

[Duc796canada]

We are all here to learn...someone keep us informed without bias 

[RLSinOP]

I've got a 2011 Monster 796 and initially installed the Z-FI system and was running with their slip-on map for my bike.  I've got Arrow Slipon's installed with the baffles out.  The fuel the slipon map was adding was pretty significant.  Up to 30% at certain TPS/RPM intersections.  While most of my decel pop's mostly went away, it was certainly running too rich.  Bazzaz has a great software program and great phone-based technical support.  Between the two I leaned out my map manually, basically just reducing the fuel additions to around half of what the slipon map was adding.  This was about 3 weeks ago.

This last weekend I installed the Z-AFM system.  It plugs right into the Z-FI and the O2 sensor went right into the exhaust where the stock sensor was.  I put the system into "collection" mode and went for a 20 minute ride.  One of the Bazzaz technicians suggested "if you're just going to ride on the street or track rather than put it on a Dyno, try letting the bike accelerate from a fixed throttle position, like 10%.  Then fix the throttle position at 20% and let the bike accelerate.  Etc., etc., etc.  The theory is to try to get as many TPS/RPM combinations as possible."

When I got back and plugged it in to my computer, the results were really enlightening.  Basically, the system suggested that certain TPS/RPM areas needed to come down from the slipon map more that other areas.  I applied the changes, cleared the AFM, put it back into collection mode and went out for another similar ride.  Upon return, the suggested changes were very minor, meaning that the first collection process really nailed where the air/fuel settings need to be.

I'll mention that at the start of this process, you need to pick an overall Air/Fuel ratio for the system to "work towards."  The AFM defaulted to 13.0, which is where I left it.  Once you get used to the system and what it's trying to do, you're able to do a lot of tweaking.  For instance, the AFM system allows you to actually see what the actual A/F ratios are based on the map you've got loaded.

I don't race, and I'm not a mechanic.  But I was able after a little bit of self-discovery, trial and error, and a couple of calls into Bazzaz tech support to get my bike running really, really well.

I'll also add, that the adjustments below 4k RPM's certainly adjusted that area.  No question about it.

PM me if you have specific questions.  I never did flash my ECU and while I've heard great things about the PCV, I've never used it.  I am very happy and satisfied with my Bazzaz Z-FI and Z-AFM system, and would suggest if your going to do the FI, you should absolutely do the AFM.

RLS

[ungeheuer]

This last weekend I installed the Z-AFM system.  It plugs right into the Z-FI and the O2 sensor went right into the exhaust where the stock sensor was.

I'm confused.  You removed the stock narrowband O2 sensor(s) from the exhaust system and disconnected these same sensors from the stock loom?  Then in their place you install the Z-AFM wideband sensors which in conjunction with the Bazzaz device data-log your AFRs. And armed with this collected data you manually adjust mapping accordingly?  Do the Bazzaz O2 sensors plug into the bikes stock lambda looms?

I'll also add, that the adjustments below 4k RPM's certainly adjusted that area.  No question about it.

And you have a stock ECU??

I'm trying to comprehend how this could be.  Its my belief that with an unflashed ECU - which retains the stock closed loop - the ECU will override any fuelling adjustments you apply in that range (lets say its below 4k for the sake of the discussion).  The next thing I'm struggling to comprehend is why you get no check engine light and no "lambda slow response" errors with the stock narrow bands disconnected?

Anybody able to unfuddle me on this?

[asherrick]

I'm wondering the same thing, Ung. However, their website says they can tune from 0 rpms...

http://www.bazzaz.net/index.php?page=shop.product_details&flypage=vmj_genx_img1.tpl&product_id=497&category_id=1&manufacturer_id=1&option=com_virtuemart

[RLSinOP]

Here's the deal...

During the Z-FI install, the factory O2 sensors are both disconnected but not removed from the pipes (I guess you could remove them if you had plugs to install into the pipes where the sensors screw in).  Bazzaz supplies two O2 eliminators that plug in to where the factory sensors plugged in.  So, the factory sensors were left in the pipes, but were disconnected and had Bazzaz O2 eliminators put in their place.

Now...

When I installed the Z-AFM system, it came with one (yes 1, not 2) new O2 sensor.  I removed one of the disconnected factory O2 sensors from the pipe (Bazzaz suggested the sensor for the rear cylinder), and screwed in the new Bazzaz sensor, which connects to the Z-FI system collecting air/fuel data.

As for my ECU, yes, it's stock.  As for why no "check engine light", it's because the Bazzaz O2 eliminators are there to let the ECU know "everything is fine".  As for how it controls air/fuel below 4K, the Bazzaz FI unit comes with a wiring harness that directly connects to each cylinders injection port.  So the Bazzaz unit can control air/fuel at any TPS/RMP level.

[Arachnosold1er]

^^ Thanks for the explanation. It sounds like Bazazz has a very good system. Do you feel that this is a better system than PCV? What are the options for tuning? Is it completely customizable?

[ungeheuer]

Here's the deal...

During the Z-FI install, the factory O2 sensors are both disconnected but not removed from the pipes (I guess you could remove them if you had plugs to install into the pipes where the sensors screw in).  Bazzaz supplies two O2 eliminators that plug in to where the factory sensors plugged in.  So, the factory sensors were left in the pipes, but were disconnected and had Bazzaz O2 eliminators put in their place.

I see.  So these Bazzaz O2 "eliminators" must output a constant voltage causing the stock ECU to believe everything is always in order......

As for my ECU, yes, it's stock.  As for why no "check engine light", it's because the Bazzaz O2 eliminators are there to let the ECU know "everything is fine".  As for how it controls air/fuel below 4K, the Bazzaz FI unit comes with a wiring harness that directly connects to each cylinders injection port.  So the Bazzaz unit can control air/fuel at any TPS/RMP level.

OK....  I'm beginning to get this.....  

Lets compare PCV method to Bazzaz:

PCV's problem is that they use "optimizers" which merely modify the output of the stock O2 sensor's feedback to the ECU.  Though they are effective in "tricking" the ECU into fuelling a little more, the closed loop range is still kept within the rigid (if now fattened up 13.6:1 threshold vs 14.7:1 stock AFR) fuelling parameters laid out in the ECU's mapping for the rpm range within closed loop.  And the problem?  Well if within your PCV you dial in added fuel in the closed loop rpm range..... the stock lambdas ("optimized" though they are) report this overfuelling and shout "RICH!" back to the ECU.... which will then lean things out again to bring fuelling back within its targeted range.  In short: PCV adds fuel, O2s report the added fuel, ECU leans it back out. A self defeating circle.  

Bazzaz's O2 "eliminators" seemingly allow a greater degree of deviousness however  .  
In the closed loop these eliminators are reporting to the ECU "nothing to see here".  Not too lean, not too rich. Everything's Goldilocks  .  
And so.....when you dial in added fuel within the Bazzaz in the closed loop rpm range..... thats what you get!  Coz even if you add 50% more fuel (obviously I'm exaggerating) the "eliminators" will continue to tell their pretty lies to the ECU, causing the ECU to be blissfully unaware that such evilness is occurring.  Bloody brilliant  .

I was skeptical in the beginning, but if I've understood this correctly Bazzaz its a superior solution to PCV, IMHO.  

When I installed the Z-AFM system, it came with one (yes 1, not 2) new O2 sensor.  I removed one of the disconnected factory O2 sensors from the pipe (Bazzaz suggested the sensor for the rear cylinder), and screwed in the new Bazzaz sensor, which connects to the Z-FI system collecting air/fuel data.

This is the only shortcoming. You're data logging AFRs only from the rear cylinder.  In my experience - and that of others here - significantly different fuelling is sought by the rear cylinder than is ideal for the front cylinder.  In PCV you can create independent maps for each cylinder, whether created in an "advanced" Dynotune-run or as I do, with dual Autotune.

[Arachnosold1er]

So would it be possible to make a map based on the needs of the rear cylinder, then change the placement of the sensor to the front and take another reading, compare the two and make a map that is suitable for both cyl? And why would the rear cyl need a very different map? Both cyl should have the same bore, stroke, and cam design. The two cylinders should be mapped the same in my mind. Please correct me if I am wrong.