Triumph Tiger 800 - Tuning - Summary 87.58 BHP with the Leo Vince + Arrow Tune
If you want to contact me about anything on this site please email me - firstname.lastname@example.org
I am seeking to make a few changes to improve initial throttle response and exhaust tone, top end bhp does not interest me
because I ride my Tiger on the road.
1. I have fitted a Leo Vince Evo2 stainless silencer and I am delighted so far. Very easy to fit, looks great on my Tiger XCx,
sounds great with the DB killer in place. The quality of construction and finish is superb, better than my previous Remus silencers.
2. I have had the Triumph Arrow Tune installed on my 800 XCx. I had my Tiger checked on a Dyno 27 Oct 15, I wanted to see how
well the Arrow Tune + ECU had adapted to the Leo Vince. My earlier planned Dyno run was aborted because the rear ABS Sensor
was faulty and I could not switch off TTC. While this was being fixed I had the Arrow Tune installed on my Tiger 800. I would have
preferred some before and after runs to compare with the standard tune but the faulty Sensor spoilt my plans.
|LINKS BELOW TO
Why go with the Arrow Tune? There is some good reading on the Tiger 800 websites plus an awful lot of incorrect or ill informed assumptions together with many unsubstantiated
claims. My previous Tiger 955i and 1050 benefited from a Triumph Off Road tune “TOR” and this was without doubt my No 1 Tuning upgrade. Triumph have to produce an 800 Tiger that will
pass strict emission tests. This requires Triumph to run the engine lean at certain revs (Around 4,000) This weak fuel/air mixture is the reason why so many Bike tests show a dip in the torque
curve at these revs because every new engine is designed to run inefficiently to ensure the lowest possible emissions. To overcome this power dip new Bike owners are tempted rush out to
buy a Power Commander or Tune ECU and visit a Dyno shop. Triumph work within the emissions parameters to create a standard Tune that will run equally well, or equally badly, on a freezing,
wet day at sea level e.g. Where I live or up a mountain at 9,500 feet on a scorching hot July day e.g. When I attend the Stella Alpina event. The TOR tune was not intended for road use, owners
could ask to have it loaded onto the ECU and the result was the bike ran as efficiently as possible, with near perfect fuelling, including the low to mid range. The result was more power and a
smoother power curve with no dips. All was well.
With the Tiger 800 there is no TOR Tune however Triumph do offer a tune for the Arrow Exhaust. There are some good threads on the Tiger 800 sites which show that the Arrow Tune increases
fuelling by around 5% across the range. IMO Triumph are seeking to remove the leanness from the standard Tune and optimise the fuel/air ratio to improve the running of the engine. Triumph
cannot cheat with the standard Tune (Unlike VW!) however they can offer an “Optimised” Tune for aftermarket exhausts.
Some contributors suggest that the Arrow tune is specific to the Arrow Exhaust. Well yes and no, all aftermarket exhausts are basically a perforated pipe surrounded by exhaust padding running
through an outer case smaller and lighter than stock. Look down the inside of any aftermarket exhaust and the view is similar - a tube with holes in it. They are all fitted with a restrictor or “Db
Killer” to meet Type Approval. Triumph spend many, many thousands of £ Sterling to produce an Arrow Tune that will run efficiently with the Arrow silencer at all altitudes, all temperatures and
all humidity’s so why not use it with my Leo Vince silencer.
Some contributors suggest the Arrow Tune gives poor fuel economy, again I tend to disagree. It is long accepted that the only modification to an engine that increases both performance and
economy is an exhaust that permits gases to flow more freely. Any Tune that makes the engine run more efficiently with a free flowing exhaust is not necessarily going to give poor economy.
When I had my Tiger 1050 I travelled into London 75 miles each way on motorways. I had the TOR installed and my fuel economy increased. The heavy traffic I encountered every day ensured
my riding style did not change. I was so tempted to make more use of the throttle but I could not. My best ever tank range was 220 miles on Bulgarian unleaded running out next to a long
awaited petrol station, proof indeed that the TOR and Remus exhaust did not ruin economy. If I am tempted to ride my modified 800 XCx harder the economy will drop which is because of my
right hand, not because of the Arrow Tune.
In summary I would prefer to put my trust in an Arrow Tune that Triumph R&D have painstakingly developed rather than buy a Power Commander or Tune Boy and attempt to set it up myself in a
few sessions on a Dyno. Anyway these are my thoughts and readers are welcome to disagree.
Results measured on the road. I have the Torque App on my Galaxy Note 4 phone. Torque uses my phone's GPS & Clock and when set up correctly it will measure 0-60, 0-100,
40-60, 60-80, 80-100,60-120 standing1/8 mile, standing 1/4 mile. Torque will also calculate BHP, I input the weight of my Tiger as 300Kg which includes me and a full tank of Petrol.
When fitting an new performance part we all "Want" it to be better. The increased rasp from a new exhaust convinces the rider that the performance has improved, but has it actually improved?.
I live in the Fens and I am surrounded by long, straight, flat (bumpy) roads that follow rivers and drains, perfect for me to try the Torque app. The 0-60 times were near identical within 1/10 of a
second. From a standing start the average 0-100 times were 15 seconds as standard, 14 seconds standard silencer + Arrow Tune and 13 seconds with the Leo Vince Evo2 silencer + Arrow
Tune. BHP measured highest at 99.5 with the Leo Vince + Arrow Tune. I can corroborate these figures because these is a slight kink in the road which I had to straightline to reach 100 with my
Tiger as standard, with the Leo Vince + Arrow Tune I reached 100 before the kink.
I also tried a series of top gear rolls on from 2,500 revs in 6th. 40-60 improved, so did 60-80 saving a second between them and a further second 80-100. An app that costs a couple of pounds
does give some odd readings ( On one run 0-60 in 1.1 seconds !) so I tried 4 runs each way when it was still and quiet early in the morning, I ignored odd results. I am convinced that the Leo
Vince + Arrow Tune is giving better performance. I am not really bothered how my results compare with other Tiger 800s. My Tiger was running a taller 17t front sprocket, Puig screen, 30l
Top-box, I was wearing fabric gear and I sat upright. I am content to be able to measure my modifications back to back on real roads. (Off course Officer all these figures are actually in KPH
because I would never exceed 100 kph on a public road).
Sample Screenshot (taken from a run on a private road Officer) The average for 40-60 is 2.0s 60-80 is 3.0s and 80-100 4.0s remember I am using a 17t front sprocket
|My Tiger 800 XCx on the Dyno. Heats the room nicely.
Happy days, my 800 produces 87.58 BHP and near perfect fuelling with the Leo Vince + Arrow Tune + Airbox mod. There is a Dyno chart on Leo Vince site showing the Evo2 with a Power
Commander 5 producing 86.20 BHP so my Dyno figures are spot on and I have saved the cost of a PC5. I spent a couple of hours on the Dyno with cooling down periods. My Tiger had covered
2,000 miles, we were at Sea level on a cold day and my shortened DB killer was fitted. In the lower fuelling graph anything above the Red line is too lean, below the Green line is too rich. Ideal
fuelling is between the lines.
GREEN GRAPH - above shows the Standard Tiger Exhaust + Arrow Tune. We made a few test runs and then recorded a full run. The fuelling was very lean, especially when holding a steady
speed below 5,000 revs. Crack the throttle open and the fuelling improved while accelerating.
BLUE GRAPH - above shows the Leo Vince Exhaust + Arrow Tune. The fuelling was so much better below 7,000 revs. My Tiger was still lean when holding a steady cruising speed but less
lean than stock.. Look at the additional power between 3,000 - 4,000 revs. On the road this is 40 - 50 - 60 mph in top and I can feel the improved acceleration. There is a small power increase
above 7,500 revs all the way to the rev limiter, which is good but I don't spend much time up there when adventure touring.
RED GRAPH - above shows the Leo Vince + Arrow Tune + Plastic Air intake removed. This gave a further power increase at low revs and the best fuelling. My Tiger was still running lean at
steady revs but the fuelling was better than Green or Blue. However the increase in induction noise was noticeable standing next to the bike.
Should I modify the Airbox Intake? My research has not shown up any airbox mods for the 2015 version of the Tiger 800. The Tiger airbox has a single, rear facing inlet pipe 47mm
I.D. This draws air from a small space left of the battery. In contrast a 1950s BSA Gold Star has a 50mm bellmouth running in the open delivering air to a 35bhp single. Hmmmm! You would
think that my Tiger would benefit from less restrictive air intake but I do not want to make any big changes. In the 3rd run on the Dyno I removed the plastic Air Intake which gave me the best bhp
at all revs and the more importantly the best fuelling. It also introduced a heap of induction noise. See my Tuning-Airbox page for a surprising result.
|2 hours on the Dyno used up a least 1,000 miles worth of rear tyre and turned my collector blue.
My Tiger 800 makes more power than my standard Tiger 955i (the 955i has more torque)