Would anyone be interested in a mod that would remove the VTEC system?

Crazy question here, but i'm trying to figure out something to do for a senior design project and this seems like something. The VTEC system on 6th gens is activated using oil pressure to lock the lifters going from 2 valves per cylinder to 4 valves per cylinder. As far as i know, no one has tried to come up with a way to lock those other 8 valves so the motor is always running on all 16 valves, thus totally eliminating that transition many of us don't like. This would also allow for easier valve checks in the future. Besides the mechanical aspect of it, the other hurdle i foresee is tuning for that pre-vtec stage, which should be able to be worked out in the future. Would anyone be interested in this or am i way out in left field here and just talking out my ass?

Nope I love my V-Tec and wouldn't trade it for anything :cheerleader:

As far as eliminating the transition? Those who don't like it are always seem to be non-V-Tec owners.

[image: View Post]tpierce(MP), on 02 May 2010 - 07:03 PM, said:

Crazy question here, but i'm trying to figure out something to do for a senior design project and this seems like something. The VTEC system on 6th gens is activated using oil pressure to lock the lifters going from 2 valves per cylinder to 4 valves per cylinder. As far as i know, no one has tried to come up with a way to lock those other 8 valves so the motor is always running on all 16 valves, thus totally eliminating that transition many of us don't like. This would also allow for easier valve checks in the future. Besides the mechanical aspect of it, the other hurdle i foresee is tuning for that pre-vtec stage, which should be able to be worked out in the future. Would anyone be interested in this or am i way out in left field here and just talking out my ass?


I don't ride a 6th gen, but I'd be interested to see how it goes, and if successful, this would definitely remove the barrier that has prevented me from ever wanting to own a 6th gen. Go for it!!

[image: View Post]dweese, on 02 May 2010 - 07:07 PM, said:

Nope I love my V-Tec and wouldn't trade it for anything :cheerleader:

As far as eliminating the transition? Those who don't like it are always seem to be non-V-Tec owners.


:ohmy: Guilty.

[image: View Post]dweese, on 02 May 2010 - 07:07 PM, said:

Nope I love my V-Tec and wouldn't trade it for anything :cheerleader:

As far as eliminating the transition? Those who don't like it are always seem to be non-V-Tec owners.


That does seem to be how it is. I owned 2 '04s, both had a transition that could be easily felt (although the second VFR was better than the first), and i have also ridden one VFR (TimC's) that had a practically invisible transition. It seems to be something that isn't very consistent through out the bikes.

[image: View Post]tpierce(MP), on 02 May 2010 - 07:03 PM, said:

Crazy question here, but i'm trying to figure out something to do for a senior design project and this seems like something. The VTEC system on 6th gens is activated using oil pressure to lock the lifters going from 2 valves per cylinder to 4 valves per cylinder. As far as i know, no one has tried to come up with a way to lock those other 8 valves so the motor is always running on all 16 valves, thus totally eliminating that transition many of us don't like. This would also allow for easier valve checks in the future. Besides the mechanical aspect of it, the other hurdle i foresee is tuning for that pre-vtec stage, which should be able to be worked out in the future. Would anyone be interested in this or am i way out in left field here and just talking out my ass?


It has been attempted before; I can't remember if it was someone here or another forum. They found that the bike ran like crap below the transition. The 2v operation helps combustion at low rpm and there are reasons for the way the engine was designed. But I can't deny my curiosity to confirm what happens... :happy:

[image: View Post]dweese, on 02 May 2010 - 07:07 PM, said:

Nope I love my V-Tec and wouldn't trade it for anything :cheerleader:


:+1: :cheerleader:

I've said before that, if anything, I think it'd be cool to have a bigger transition. ...Like have the VTEC trigger both a NOS shot and exhaust bypass solenoid. That would be AWESOME. :squid:

[image: View Post]tpierce(MP), on 02 May 2010 - 07:16 PM, said:

It seems to be something that isn't very consistent through out the bikes.


Heck, it's not even consistent on the same bike, on the same ride! My baby sure has her moods... :wub:

Posted Image Posted Image Posted Image

I would suspect that if you do engage Vtech all the time you will lose alot of the Low end grunt the VFR in known for..
It would then be like most 600rr's where they are pretty much gutless on the Lowend..

For the record I have no issues with the Vtech transition on the street or the track and really pay it no attention.

Let us know how it works out for you..


By the way couldnt you just insert the stopper/plugs used for valve checks and leave them in, Thus activating all 8 valves all the time..

[image: View Post]marid2apterbilt, on 02 May 2010 - 08:26 PM, said:

Posted Image Posted Image Posted Image

I would suspect that if you do engage Vtech all the time you will lose alot of the Low end grunt the VFR in known for..
It would then be like most 600rr's where they are pretty much gutless on the Lowend..

For the record I have no issues with the Vtech transition on the street or the track and really pay it no attention.

Let us know how it works out for you..


By the way couldnt you just insert the stopper/plugs used for valve checks and leave them in, Thus activating all 8 valves all the time..


Gutless down below isn't too much of a concern since it would be more similar to that of the '99-'01 VFR800s. The lower end power could be improved with tuning of the fueling and spark.

If there is really no need, then there is no reason to do it. I was just curious.

Wouldn't that be just a straight 5th gen engine?!? Wanna re-invent the 5th gen engine?? Why not just find a used one?? :idea3: Or maybe I'm just understanding this all wrong--sorry if I am... :blink:
c

Cool idea for a project - I'm sure there are lots of folks that would support this idea.

I'm all for figuring stuff out, just because!!

I wouldn't offer my bike as a test mule though - I love my VTEC, and I also love the buttery smooth transition I have from 2 valve to 4 valve. Loving the VTEC !!!

YES! YES! YES!

V-tec is really not that cool......i'd love a 5th gen engine in a VTEC chassis.

Here's something I'd like to do but am too lazy / busy / etc to get into; replace the stock ECM with a Microsquirt. Right now I think I would run it in tandem with the factory computer and have the Honda ECM control ignition and VTEC, then run the MSquirt for fuel injection and fan controller duties.

Do that for your project, document the hell out of it, and I'll think you are cool. Worrying about eliminating VTEC isn't going to work very well and really doesn't seem worth the trouble.

NO! :beatdeadhorse:

Do some before and after dyno runs and post them here.

If you can get rid of that torque hole just before VTEC transition, I'm sure you may find more support.

[image: Posted Image]

I never heard anyone say they wanted their vfr to be less powerful. Good luck with that. May I also suggest installing square tires, and removeing first gear.

Someone (somewhere...) did it, by overriding the signal to the solenoid that controls the Vtec. The problem is, you then need to remap the fuel delivery, as it's set up for only two valves not four.
As for the Vtec producing more torque from better cylinder filling/turbulence running on two valves, that's simply not borne out by the dyno charts. I suspect that like the switch to camchains, and some of the other changes made, it's all to do with satisfying Euro noise and exhaust emissions. That's also why there's that big dip - it's probably around the revs where the testing's done.

A guy over here in Barcelona had some bike-tech expert do it on his. He only reported in once or twice on our forum... said the motor made some unusual noises under the 6800 RPM (VTEC Transistion point) but the bike was sooo much better to ride at those lower revs... he couldn't explain what was done as he didn't do it.. I should try and track down his thread, was some time ago...

I can't see how it would be less powerful at low RPMs... the 5th gen isn't... on the contrary.

[image: View Post]dweese, on 02 May 2010 - 07:07 PM, said:

Nope I love my V-Tec and wouldn't trade it for anything :cheerleader:

As far as eliminating the transition? Those who don't like it are always seem to be non-V-Tec owners.


And many of us never will be. You can keep the Gen6 (and the Gen7 too for that matter). I've pretty much given up hope of Honda building another decent VFR.

[image: View Post]carlitos92, on 02 May 2010 - 08:24 PM, said:

[image: View Post]tpierce(MP), on 02 May 2010 - 07:03 PM, said:

Crazy question here, but i'm trying to figure out something to do for a senior design project and this seems like something. The VTEC system on 6th gens is activated using oil pressure to lock the lifters going from 2 valves per cylinder to 4 valves per cylinder. As far as i know, no one has tried to come up with a way to lock those other 8 valves so the motor is always running on all 16 valves, thus totally eliminating that transition many of us don't like. This would also allow for easier valve checks in the future. Besides the mechanical aspect of it, the other hurdle i foresee is tuning for that pre-vtec stage, which should be able to be worked out in the future. Would anyone be interested in this or am i way out in left field here and just talking out my ass?


It has been attempted before; I can't remember if it was someone here or another forum. They found that the bike ran like crap below the transition. The 2v operation helps combustion at low rpm and there are reasons for the way the engine was designed. But I can't deny my curiosity to confirm what happens... :happy:

[image: View Post]dweese, on 02 May 2010 - 07:07 PM, said:

Nope I love my V-Tec and wouldn't trade it for anything :cheerleader:


:+1: :cheerleader:

I've said before that, if anything, I think it'd be cool to have a bigger transition. ...Like have the VTEC trigger both a NOS shot and exhaust bypass solenoid. That would be AWESOME. :squid:

[image: View Post]tpierce(MP), on 02 May 2010 - 07:16 PM, said:

It seems to be something that isn't very consistent through out the bikes.


Heck, it's not even consistent on the same bike, on the same ride! My baby sure has her moods... :wub: '




I must admit, I like the VTEC too.

Flash

A 6th gen WITHOUT VTEC??? COUNT ME IN!!! :cheerleader: :bliss:

.. but untill that day, I love my smooth gear driven V4 :wub:

I rode in a buddy's CRX with a B16 swap in it. The B16 is a vtec motor and he didn't have the computer for it yet and set up the vtec on a toggle switch. The car ran like crap in the lower rpms if you turned it on early or left it on. It sounded like crap too. My father has been a honda certified technician for over 20 years and he said it is not good for the engine. I never asked why, but just repeating what he told me. I personally wouldn't want this done. I like the transition, its like waking up a beast to me. But good luck if you do it. Would be an interesting project.

I say go for it. There's nothing wrong with learning more about your VFR and even though there are a lot of nay sayers here I bet if you can pull it off and show conclusive dyno runs showing the same or better in the power department you will definitely find yourself making a big impact here (just look at Toro1).

With that said I love my 6th Gen and have no problem with the transition point. I will keep riding it happily for many years to come.
At the same time I would love it if the VFR wasn't designed as a "one size fits all" approach for emissions/noise standards. Break the mold! :fing02:

[image: View Post]Cogs69, on 03 May 2010 - 09:58 AM, said:

I rode in a buddy's CRX with a B16 swap in it. The B16 is a vtec motor and he didn't have the computer for it yet and set up the vtec on a toggle switch. The car ran like crap in the lower rpms if you turned it on early or left it on. It sounded like crap too. My father has been a honda certified technician for over 20 years and he said it is not good for the engine. I never asked why, but just repeating what he told me. I personally wouldn't want this done. I like the transition, its like waking up a beast to me. But good luck if you do it. Would be an interesting project.

The VTEC in the cars vs the VTEC in the VFR are not the same thing. The B16 runs the 4 valves all the time. At VTEC there is a change in the cam performance. VFR VTEC transitions from 2 valves to 4 valves per cylinder so comparing the B16 to the VFR engine is not a valid example. If they were the same then your dad would be correct.

I also have a CRX with a B16A swap so I know something about what you are talking about. When it hits VTEC there is nothing noticeable about the transition point at all. :wink:

[image: View Post]vanion2, on 03 May 2010 - 10:01 AM, said:

I say go for it. There's nothing wrong with learning more about your VFR and even though there are a lot of nay sayers here I bet if you can pull it off and show conclusive dyno runs showing the same or better in the power department you will definitely find yourself making a big impact here (just look at Toro1).

With that said I love my 6th Gen and have no problem with the transition point. I will keep riding it until it happily for many years to come.
At the same time I would love it if the VFR wasn't designed as a "one size fits all" approach for emissions/noise standards. Break the mold! :fing02:


:+1:

[image: View Post]vanion2, on 03 May 2010 - 10:13 AM, said:

The VTEC in the cars vs the VTEC in the VFR are not the same thing. The B16 runs the 4 valves all the time. At VTEC there is a change in the cam performance. VFR VTEC transitions from 2 valves to 4 valves per cylinder so comparing the B16 to the VFR engine is not a valid example. If they were the same then your dad would be correct.

I also have a CRX with a B16A swap so I know something about what you are talking about. When it hits VTEC there is nothing noticeable about the transition point at all. :wink:


Thank you for the insight. I am learning as I go. I just knew the B16 was a nice drop. I was venturing away with a DOHC ZC instead.

[image: View Post]Cogs69, on 03 May 2010 - 10:23 AM, said:

[image: View Post]vanion2, on 03 May 2010 - 10:13 AM, said:

The VTEC in the cars vs the VTEC in the VFR are not the same thing. The B16 runs the 4 valves all the time. At VTEC there is a change in the cam performance. VFR VTEC transitions from 2 valves to 4 valves per cylinder so comparing the B16 to the VFR engine is not a valid example. If they were the same then your dad would be correct.

I also have a CRX with a B16A swap so I know something about what you are talking about. When it hits VTEC there is nothing noticeable about the transition point at all. :wink:


Thank you for the insight. I am learning as I go. I just knew the B16 was a nice drop. I was venturing away with a DOHC ZC instead.

Also a good swap. Check this forum out for all your CRX needs. CRX Community :fing02:

I know that the whole "To VTEC or not to VTEC" discussion has been a dead horse :beatdeadhorse: since shortly after Honda sold the design on the VFR to the public, but the whole experience from Honda will eventually have to be judged in the history of motorcycles if it was something that was really worth Honda's effort and the buying public's money. Heck, some ideas were really spectacular at first glance, like the NR's oval pistons, but did not really translate to anything more significant than a 90's techno show excercise from Honda.
We do have to consider what the reason was for Honda not to proceed with any other VTEC bikes after the VFR. Did they categorize the VFR's VTEC system as something that belongs in the Honda history archives like their "Inboard brake" design of the 80's. I really hope not as I think that the system could have been extended into the future and improved from what it is. The basic concept still sounds good, but they might have to re-think the mechanical/electrical recipe for the design a bit to get there.
JMOs

Beck
95 VFR

[image: View Post]Beck, on 03 May 2010 - 03:11 PM, said:

I know that the whole "To VTEC or not to VTEC" discussion has been a dead horse :beatdeadhorse: since shortly after Honda sold the design on the VFR to the public, but the whole experience from Honda will eventually have to be judged in the history of motorcycles if it was something that was really worth Honda's effort and the buying public's money. Heck, some ideas were really spectacular at first glance, like the NR's oval pistons, but did not really translate to anything more significant than a 90's techno show excercise from Honda.
We do have to consider what the reason was for Honda not to proceed with any other VTEC bikes after the VFR. Did they categorize the VFR's VTEC system as something that belongs in the Honda history archives like their "Inboard brake" design of the 80's. I really hope not as I think that the system could have been extended into the future and improved from what it is. The basic concept still sounds good, but they might have to re-think the mechanical/electrical recipe for the design a bit to get there.
JMOs

Beck
95 VFR


I'm afraid the VTEC technology was merely an attempt to extend the life of an engine configuration that wasn't going to be able to meet ever-stringent EPA requirements without backing down on the performance noticeably -and thus hurting sales of the loyal buyers. VTEC is a compromise technology that allowed aggressive valve openings at the higher RPM's while still being "clean" at the lower engine speeds to get by the clean air requirements. It's sort of like robbing Peter to pay Paul. Paul get's a few extra ponies but Peter gets the shaft (oh, no... that's the 1200cc bike!) Going to 1200cc is the logical answer to the issues that VTEC was aimed at. Just make it a bigger motor with more displacement and then the faithful will not notice it has been detuned for pollution. Throw an auto trans in there to boot and call it "even higher tech" than VTEC.

If one likes this kind of pull up by your own boots technology that costs a lot of money at the assembly line as well as in the long haul with greater maintenance costs and shorter intervals (how many times do I need to replace the CCT's of the lifespan of a Gen6?), then that's great. Some people like that stuff. More power to them.

But for me, I'm not impressed. I've pretty much given up hope Honda will ever build another VFR that is for me. Good thing there are a lot of old Gen5's laying around for next to nothing. Diversity is a great thing right? We all get what we want.

[image: View Post]vanion2, on 03 May 2010 - 10:01 AM, said:

show conclusive dyno runs showing the same or better in the power department


My gut tells me that is going to be difficult to do.

[image: View Post]Lee 2002, on 03 May 2010 - 05:19 PM, said:

[image: View Post]vanion2, on 03 May 2010 - 10:01 AM, said:

show conclusive dyno runs showing the same or better in the power department


My gut tells me that is going to be difficult to do.



As far as I know, nobody has ever done the full-time NON-vtec mod and posted before and after dyno charts.

I'd LOVE to see the results. :salesman:

[image: View Post]Serenity_VFR, on 03 May 2010 - 04:56 PM, said:

[image: View Post]Beck, on 03 May 2010 - 03:11 PM, said:

I know that the whole "To VTEC or not to VTEC" discussion has been a dead horse :beatdeadhorse: since shortly after Honda sold the design on the VFR to the public, but the whole experience from Honda will eventually have to be judged in the history of motorcycles if it was something that was really worth Honda's effort and the buying public's money. Heck, some ideas were really spectacular at first glance, like the NR's oval pistons, but did not really translate to anything more significant than a 90's techno show excercise from Honda.
We do have to consider what the reason was for Honda not to proceed with any other VTEC bikes after the VFR. Did they categorize the VFR's VTEC system as something that belongs in the Honda history archives like their "Inboard brake" design of the 80's. I really hope not as I think that the system could have been extended into the future and improved from what it is. The basic concept still sounds good, but they might have to re-think the mechanical/electrical recipe for the design a bit to get there.
JMOs

Beck
95 VFR


I'm afraid the VTEC technology was merely an attempt to extend the life of an engine configuration that wasn't going to be able to meet ever-stringent EPA requirements without backing down on the performance noticeably -and thus hurting sales of the loyal buyers. VTEC is a compromise technology that allowed aggressive valve openings at the higher RPM's while still being "clean" at the lower engine speeds to get by the clean air requirements. It's sort of like robbing Peter to pay Paul. Paul get's a few extra ponies but Peter gets the shaft (oh, no... that's the 1200cc bike!) Going to 1200cc is the logical answer to the issues that VTEC was aimed at. Just make it a bigger motor with more displacement and then the faithful will not notice it has been detuned for pollution. Throw an auto trans in there to boot and call it "even higher tech" than VTEC.

If one likes this kind of pull up by your own boots technology that costs a lot of money at the assembly line as well as in the long haul with greater maintenance costs and shorter intervals (how many times do I need to replace the CCT's of the lifespan of a Gen6?), then that's great. Some people like that stuff. More power to them.

But for me, I'm not impressed. I've pretty much given up hope Honda will ever build another VFR that is for me. Good thing there are a lot of old Gen5's laying around for next to nothing. Diversity is a great thing right? We all get what we want.


You guys DO know that the 02+ VFR isn't the only Honda bike with VTEC, right? :laughing6-hehe:

[image: View Post]marid2apterbilt, on 02 May 2010 - 08:26 PM, said:

Posted Image Posted Image Posted Image

I would suspect that if you do engage Vtech all the time you will lose alot of the Low end grunt the VFR in known for..
It would then be like most 600rr's where they are pretty much gutless on the Lowend..

For the record I have no issues with the Vtech transition on the street or the track and really pay it no attention.

Let us know how it works out for you..


By the way couldnt you just insert the stopper/plugs used for valve checks and leave them in, Thus activating all 8 valves all the time..


+1 I like pulling upto the back tire of a 600cc bike while he running 8500-10000
rpm and just flick the wrist and go by him.

I would suspect that if you do engage Vtech all the time you will lose alot of the Low end grunt the VFR in known for..

But the 5th gen don't have VTEC and produces slightly more torque in the midrange :blink:

[image: View Post]enzed_viffer, on 03 May 2010 - 05:14 AM, said:

Someone (somewhere...) did it, by overriding the signal to the solenoid that controls the Vtec. The problem is, you then need to remap the fuel delivery, as it's set up for only two valves not four.


I did it on my '04 last year sometime. I wired the VTEC solenoid to a switch on the handlebar. I didn't run it long enough to fully realize any long term difference, but for the short time I ran it it really didn't seem to make any difference in power, but the abrupt transition was completely eliminated. It ran fine. Switching it on/off while riding in most cases makes almost no difference at all, except for a change in sound. If all you want to do is eliminate VTEC, hotwire the solenoid and get it tuned.

The best thing I ever did for my bike is swap out the 2004 ECM with a 2006-7 ECM and harness. Drivability is greatly improved, power is much more linear, and VTEC transition is smoother and more consistent.

[image: View Post]CBR600F4i, on 04 May 2010 - 08:26 AM, said:

[image: View Post]enzed_viffer, on 03 May 2010 - 05:14 AM, said:

Someone (somewhere...) did it, by overriding the signal to the solenoid that controls the Vtec. The problem is, you then need to remap the fuel delivery, as it's set up for only two valves not four.


I did it on my '04 last year sometime. I wired the VTEC solenoid to a switch on the handlebar. I didn't run it long enough to fully realize any long term difference, but for the short time I ran it it really didn't seem to make any difference in power, but the abrupt transition was completely eliminated. It ran fine. Switching it on/off while riding in most cases makes almost no difference at all, except for a change in sound. If all you want to do is eliminate VTEC, hotwire the solenoid and get it tuned.

The best thing I ever did for my bike is swap out the 2004 ECM with a 2006-7 ECM and harness. Drivability is greatly improved, power is much more linear, and VTEC transition is smoother and more consistent.


How plug & play is the Harness and 06-07 ECM. And what kind of cost was involved?

[image: View Post]Switchblade, on 04 May 2010 - 07:02 AM, said:

+1 I like pulling upto the back tire of a 600cc bike while he running 8500-10000
rpm and just flick the wrist and go by him.

:huh: If you are pulling up on a 600cc sport bike running those rpms and passing it then the rider is a noob or didn't realize you were there. Sorry...it's not that I am calling you a liar but a 600cc sport bike will walk off on a VFR once it hits the higher rpms. The VFR beats the 600cc only in the lower rpms. I've had both at one time and others can verify. That is with riders being equal.

[image: View Post]vfr_steve, on 04 May 2010 - 08:20 AM, said:

I would suspect that if you do engage Vtech all the time you will lose alot of the Low end grunt the VFR in known for..

But the 5th gen don't have VTEC and produces slightly more torque in the midrange :blink:

Because the 5th Gen motor was tuned without VTEC. I bet if you could close 2 valves per cylinder right now below 7k rpm your bike would run like crap. It just wasn't designed for it.

The 6th Gens were so if you start running with 4 valves open all the time there will definitely be issues. For starters...the oil temperature needs to be above a certain threshold before VTEC will kick in as things are right now. Remapping fuel tables and a lot of tuning will be needed to smooth out the performance issues. Sure...you can electronically kick in VTEC all the time as CBR600F4i said but I wouldn't go that route without making sure I wasn't leaning out the fuel maps any where.

But then...as I said before...I love my VFR the way she is. Until Toro1 get the super charger done I think I will stick with what has been working for me for the last 3 years. I still say if the OP wants to do it then go for it. :fing02:

[image: View Post]Graves, on 04 May 2010 - 08:32 AM, said:

[image: View Post]CBR600F4i, on 04 May 2010 - 08:26 AM, said:

[image: View Post]enzed_viffer, on 03 May 2010 - 05:14 AM, said:

Someone (somewhere...) did it, by overriding the signal to the solenoid that controls the Vtec. The problem is, you then need to remap the fuel delivery, as it's set up for only two valves not four.


I did it on my '04 last year sometime. I wired the VTEC solenoid to a switch on the handlebar. I didn't run it long enough to fully realize any long term difference, but for the short time I ran it it really didn't seem to make any difference in power, but the abrupt transition was completely eliminated. It ran fine. Switching it on/off while riding in most cases makes almost no difference at all, except for a change in sound. If all you want to do is eliminate VTEC, hotwire the solenoid and get it tuned.

The best thing I ever did for my bike is swap out the 2004 ECM with a 2006-7 ECM and harness. Drivability is greatly improved, power is much more linear, and VTEC transition is smoother and more consistent.


How plug & play is the Harness and 06-07 ECM. And what kind of cost was involved?



For it to be a complete plug & play swap you will need the ECU, main harness, front harness, light switch, a relay or two, tail light, and front turn signals. It could be quite expensive to buy all that stuff new. The 02-05 light switch can be used with the 06+ harness by switching a few wires around in the connector (you'll need wiring diagrams for both years). The turn signal sockets are different. I didn't want to buy new lights, so I cut the turn signal bulb sockets off my old harness, tinned the pigtails and plugged them into the 06 harness. Some of the relays on the front harness can be swapped over, but I think one is different and there's one additional one on the newer harness. I didn't mess with any of them because my 06 harness came with all the relays attached. The newer ECU is much smaller and doesn't fit the bracket. I used a couple zip ties to mount it. Changing the harness is a major PITA. You need to remove all the plastics, fuel tank, rear fender and exhaust, and it's still not easy. It took me 4 or 5 hours to do the whole job, but well worth it IMO. It would have been easier to cut and splice the new ECU connectors onto the old harness, but I wanted to do it without splicing any wires. Please note, I already had an '06 engine in my bike, including the updated '06 injectors. I still have the O2 sensors disconnected.

I bought the complete harness with the ECU and all relays for $70 on Ebay. The bike runs so much better I no longer need the Power Commander, so I sold it for $225 and I'm $155 ahead. Oh, I also sold the '04 ECU for $100.

Some pics from my swap.
[image: Posted Image]
[image: Posted Image]
[image: Posted Image]

judging on how the system works disabling or enabling v-tec all of the time would be just a matter of bypassing or blocking the solenoid valve(which would lead to a whole new set of problems starting with the check engine light). The better trick would be conditioning the signals given to the computer to trick it into changing the engage point from 6800rpm to what ever you dialed in, or better yet push button control. I think you could do it with an RMC since all of the inputs the computer uses to control v-tec are analog. Good luck, and no, my bike is not guinea pig.

[image: View Post]StuntManDan, on 04 May 2010 - 10:35 AM, said:

judging on how the system works disabling or enabling v-tec all of the time would be just a matter of bypassing or blocking the solenoid valve(which would lead to a whole new set of problems starting with the check engine light). The better trick would be conditioning the signals given to the computer to trick it into changing the engage point from 6800rpm to what ever you dialed in, or better yet push button control. I think you could do it with an RMC since all of the inputs the computer uses to control v-tec are analog. Good luck, and no, my bike is not guinea pig.


The check engine light is not a problem, it can be bypassed the same way as when disconnecting the O2 sensors. A resistor between the ECU VTEC output and ground is all that's needed. The resistance value is not extremely critical (nor is it with the O2 sensors). The ECU just checks for an open circuit, a resistor will provide a current path for the check. I used a 1k ohm resistor.

You can't change the VTEC engagement point by changing any of the input signals to the ECU because those same signals are used for other calculations, most importantly fuel and spark. There are only two ways to do it. Hack the ECU code or control the spool valve with something other than the ECU. Hacking is the most elegant option, but also the least likely to happen. External control is incredibly easy, but requires wiring modifications and additional hardware (control module or simple switch). Either way requires tuning, but only to the same degree that an aftermarket exhaust requires tuning, and lots of people run aftermarket exhausts without tuning.

I would do more with mine, but after changing to the '06+ ECU I don't feel the need anymore.

So, the downside to stumbling across a 6thGen (arguably a more attractive, aggressive looking bike) with a blown motor and swapping in a 5thGen (all valves, all the time and GDC's too) is what??

[image: View Post]5thGenJim, on 05 May 2010 - 11:27 AM, said:

So, the downside to stumbling across a 6thGen (arguably a more attractive, aggressive looking bike) with a blown motor and swapping in a 5thGen (all valves, all the time and GDC's too) is what??


Time and money. It has been done, but it isn't a drop in and go.

i dont have a problem with mine.its not like the rear wheel locks up or somthing when it engages.

VTEC... Vacillating Torque Engine Compartment... worked on heavy cars
but it's been a failure on light bikes... it's a shame Honda destroyed
the sweetest power band in the world by engineering a dip... I think
it should be recalled in the name of smooth linear power...



Mercy... that hole is so deep you can rent a Burro and go down it... at
the bottom you'll find a Starbucks and a gift shop...
[image: Posted Image]

[image: View Post]5thGenJim, on 05 May 2010 - 11:27 AM, said:

So, the downside to stumbling across a 6thGen (arguably a more attractive, aggressive looking bike) with a blown motor and swapping in a 5thGen (all valves, all the time and GDC's too) is what??

It might be easier to just try to install a 6th gen front fairing to a 5th gen chassis instead. Maybe some minor modification to the 5th gen rear fairing can make it match better to the 6th gen front too.

Beck
95 VFR

[image: View Post]BusyLittleShop, on 05 May 2010 - 12:48 PM, said:

VTEC... Vacillating Torque Engine Compartment... worked on heavy cars
but it's been a failure on light bikes... it's a shame Honda destroyed
the sweetest power band in the world by engineering a dip... I think
it should be recalled in the name of smooth linear power...



Mercy... that hole is so deep you can rent a Burro and go down it... at
the bottom you'll find a Starbucks and a gift shop...
[image: Posted Image]


Never mind the VTEC dip, but Dang!!!!, seeing that graph reminds me how Honda was always being the wimp when it comes to power output on their bikes. Even newbe highschool 600 riders can just laugh at that less than 90HP max from that dyno pull! The 750s must be averaging something like 85hp or even less at the rear wheel??.... Really, what the hell is holding up these supposedly fantastically engineered V4 motors from making more power (can't we even have just 100 RWHP?) Compression ratios? induction/exhaust volumes? Mild cams?? Whaaaatt????!! :blink: :angry: I suspect it's all of the above........


Beck
95 VFR

[image: View Post]Beck, on 05 May 2010 - 01:20 PM, said:

Really, what the hell is holding up these supposedly fantastically engineered V4 motors from making more power (can't we even have just 100 RWHP?) Compression ratios? induction/exhaust volumes? Mild cams?? Whaaaatt????!! :blink: :angry: I suspect it's all of the above........


Yep, all of the above. I've been playing with cam specs lately on a virtual engine simulator I have (more so for further tuning of the ZX10R, as cams are readily available), and if the VFR could turn some more Rs (~1500 or so), a set of cams closer to what the race RC45s ran would really wake this engine up (at the expense of low-mid torque). Added compression and more lift only help, and we haven't even touched the heads yet. It all comes back to what the intended focus of the bike was, which was not full-blown supersport but rather everyday sportbike. Bikes keep making more power every year due to increased revs and bigger cams (while trading off bottom end punch).

As far as VTEC is concerned, if Honda implemented a true variable cam timing system on the VFR, there would be no downside compared to a 5th-gen (other than increased complexity). As it stands, though, the cam timing is left unchanged, and instead a step is introduced in the powerband that, judging solely from dyno printouts, can be argued is ultimately unnecessary (at least from a power perspective). From all the dyno charts I've seen, the 6th-gens seem to have nearly identical power & torque numbers to 5th-gens, with any differences (minus the VTEC dip) being pretty much inconsequential (6th-gens do seem to make a few ponies more way up top, though). Increased intake charge velocity by means of breathing through a single inlet valve should bump up power down low, but if that's the case, I haven't seen it documented on an actual dyno graph. After riding a few 6th-gens, I've found the powerband to be quite smooth, with the step-over point amounting to a non-issue, but then again I'm also used to riding some hairy 2-strokes...


If this mod can be done, and is shown to produce a smooth power curve with no detriment to low-speed power production, then I see no reason why any 6th-gen owner would not want to perform that mod themselves (assuming it is cheap & easy to perform, that is).

[image: View Post]toro1, on 05 May 2010 - 02:23 PM, said:

and if the VFR could turn some more Rs (~1500 or so), a set of cams closer to what the race RC45s ran would really wake this engine up (at the expense of low-mid torque).


A properly tuned HRC kitted RC45 will have it all... bottom end plod... mid range punch... top end rush....
140 RWHP at the expense of your licence...


[image: Posted Image]

[image: View Post]Beck, on 05 May 2010 - 01:20 PM, said:

Mercy... that hole is so deep you can rent a Burro and go down it... at
the bottom you'll find a Starbucks and a gift shop...


:laughing6-hehe: :laughing6-hehe: :laughing6-hehe:

[image: View Post]Beck, on 05 May 2010 - 01:20 PM, said:

Really, what the hell is holding up these supposedly fantastically engineered V4 motors from making more power (can't we even have just 100 RWHP?) Compression ratios? induction/exhaust volumes? Mild cams?? Whaaaatt????!! :blink: :angry: I suspect it's all of the above........


Beck
95 VFR


Nothing is holding those fantastically engineered V4s...

Stock pipe and a home made K&N filter...
[image: Posted Image]