Yamaha Boat / Ski ECU Repair

[Bruce]

This is a tip from Cobra1996 on the other forum. He had one of the ECUs from his 2003 SR230 repaired by http://www.cdidoctor.com for $350. That is quite a savings over buying a new one.

If anyone knows him please let him know that we would like to give him a free account a pair of koozies for this wisdom.

@ncnmra found this slightly lower priced option http://www.regulatorrectifier.com/c...x-cruiser-waverunner-ecu-testing-repair-92197

 

[itsdgm]

That would be awesome if there is a way to repair an ECU.

 

[Ronnie]

I hope this information is correct. There is an '06 fx cruiser wave runner (998 cc, 140 hp motor) in my backyard that has been sitting there unused for over a year now. I planned to buy A new ($1,100) ecu for it this off season but could really use the $750 savings over new.

 

[Gym]

I wonder what sort of warranty they give on a repair?

 

[marc7]

I wonder what sort of warranty they give on a repair?

Website indicates 1 year warranty...I've bookmarked the site as I had to replace one of my ECU's earlier this year (used $450) and would like to have a spare available and ready if/when this happens again.

 

[Gym]

Website indicates 1 year warranty...I've bookmarked the site as I had to replace one of my ECU's earlier this year (used $450) and would like to have a spare available and ready if/when this happens again.

So @marc7 I take it you kept your old ECU and will have that rebuilt?

 

[Gym]

@Speedling you may be interested in this. http://www.cdidoctor.com/index.php?main_page=index&cPath=3356_4026_4030_4057_4048_4070 Question 3 refers to tweaking the ECU on a Yamaha R1 motor. They claim they can remove factory timing retard and throttle restrictions. Not sure if the increased RPMs would result in more thrust from the impeller or if it's at max efficiency at 10,200. Might be worth checking with them.

 

[marc7]

So @marc7 I take it you kept your old ECU and will have that rebuilt?

@Gym Yes that's the plan...$350 to rebuild vs buying new (or if you're lucky used) is a good deal.

Cheers!

 

[Speedling]

@Speedling you may be interested in this. http://www.cdidoctor.com/index.php?main_page=index&cPath=3356_4026_4030_4057_4048_4070 Question 3 refers to tweaking the ECU on a Yamaha R1 motor. They claim they can remove factory timing retard and throttle restrictions. Not sure if the increased RPMs would result in more thrust from the impeller or if it's at max efficiency at 10,200. Might be worth checking with them.

Increases rpms would mean more speed only if there was power enough to back it up! I will look into details soon and maybe see what they can do. Only other mod I have really seen is one that adds more fuel into the engine. I haven't seen anyone put on an o2 sensor so no idea on how these things run.

 

[Gym]

Increases rpms would mean more speed only if there was power enough to back it up! I will look into details soon and maybe see what they can do. Only other mod I have really seen is one that adds more fuel into the engine. I haven't seen anyone put on an o2 sensor so no idea on how these things run.

More fuel would require more air. Would the Reiva (sp) stacks solve that?

 

[Speedling]

I have the stacks and no flame arrestor (ribbon for you 1.8 folks) and no air filter.
I want to know what the a/f ratio is and see if and how much the computer adjusts it all.

 

[Bruce]

I wonder about reliability after removing the limiters?

 

[Ronnie]

I wonder about reliability as well. I know some guys that ride Yamaha motorcycles with r1 engines who claim that they have run their bikes for long durations at well over 10k rpm and have not had any problems with doing so.

 

[Speedling]

I wonder about reliability as well. I know some guys that ride Yamaha motorcycles with r1 engines who claim that they have run their bikes for long durations at well over 10k rpm and have not had any problems with doing so.

But we have a different engine altogether really. Different crank, pistons, bearings etc. Actually, if I had an R1 I would look I to the mr1 stuff to get a bores and stroked engine but look for better bearings etc as I built it. We aren't built the same. Even the block has a lot of differences if I recall. The heads, however, appear the same.
I used to have a yzf.

 

[Ronnie]

I was always told/read that the MR1 (either the 998 or 1,052 cc) in our boats are just marinized versions of the R1 engines in the motor-cycles and that Yamaha rev limits the MR1s to improve reliability/service life but hey my source for all this information is the internet so .... I'm also wondering if it is true that the pumps are already optimized so increasing the RPMs will make little or no difference.

 

[Gym]

I was always told/read that the MR1 (either the 998 or 1,052 cc) in our boats are just marinized versions of the R1 engines in the motor-cycles and that Yamaha rev limits the MR1s to improve reliability/service life but hey my source for all this information is the internet so .... I'm also wondering if it is true that the pumps are already optimized so increasing the RPMs will make little or no difference.

I also believed that @Ronnie and that the mr-1 was limited to 10200 due to the limit of the pump efficiency.

 

[Speedling]

I know from reading on Greenhill that they believe over there that the pump itself is designed for a max rpm of 7000. This is why mr1 engines are gear reduced and also why when Yamaha designed a fresh motor for marine they didn't redesign a bike engine, but instead built something that could do a top end of about 7000 rpm. All jet pumps have a designed working rpm and then you change pitch. I have only heard of a couple old pump manufacturer that change gears and spin the same impeller faster or slower. Everyone else changes pitch and maintains a similar rpm. I don't know all the science behind this but I am sure there is a lot of trial and error in it that I will leave up to the manufacturers.
If I am wrong, then why would Yamaha go and gear reduce the mr1 instead of run it at 10000 rpm?

The mr1 is indeed a marine version of the r1 but what is that really supposed to mean? I believe they bored, stroked, used different bearings, and if I recall they tweaked the block as well, meaning, you can't bolt an mr1 engine into a r1 motorcycle. I believe it was the engine mounts mainly. But people love using the mr1 engines in small hot rods and such as it is super reliable and lightweight and the mounts we have are great for that as well.

 

[CrankyGypsy]

I think I remember reading the real hurdle in our boats is not the horsepower, but the [small] size of the pumps. the HOs aren't really all that much faster than the standards.

it's like sportbikes/cars: at a certain point, you need a large amount of additional power (or aerodynamics) to overcome wind resistance in an attempt to gain a few MPH.

 

[Speedling]

I think I remember reading the real hurdle in our boats is not the horsepower, but the [small] size of the pumps. the HOs aren't really all that much faster than the standards.

it's like sportbikes/cars: at a certain point, you need a large amount of additional power (or aerodynamics) to overcome wind resistance in an attempt to gain a few MPH.

From the data that I have collected, the 21-24 footers with 155mm pumps really start to lose efficiency over 200 hp. Anything over 250hp is really just a waste.
There are options to make them 160mm pumps.
http://www.greenhulk.net/forums/showthread.php?t=187481
Some quick notes concerning:
1. Not needed unless you are supercharging that 1.8
2. Will increase your efficiency etc as the more veins will help straighten the flow and will still flow more due to the size of the pump.
3. Remember how Yamaha went to a 160mm pump? It was right after these guys made this announcement. And only on the SVHO models if I recall correctly.
4. If you want more than 250 hp, say.... like 300, then in our boats my general graphs would suggest that you need more like a 170mm pump (remember, at 7000 rpm) which is about 6.7 inches. For reference, 155 is 6.1. Doesn't seem like a huge difference, but I'm reading the data, and trying to make equations work out of it, so that's the difference, and that is really the minimum pump size for efficiency.

If you REALLY want to talk efficient and hp/speed numbers, well, then you need to have a single pump (as dual pumps create more friction in bearings, side walls, etc.) and then the size will depend on how much horsepower. In all reality, you don't want a supercharger because it has parasitic loss. I'm wondering who will take the supercharger off the 1.8 sho motor and put on a turbo? They do it on the ski's from time to time!

http://rd-performance.com/turboKits/yamaha/fzr-sho-svho.asp

But at that point the efficiency thing is kinda gone....

 

[Ronnie]

This is a tip from Cobra1996 on the other forum. He had one of the ECUs from his 2003 SR230 repaired by http://www.cdidoctor.com for $350. That is quite a savings over buying a new one.

If anyone knows him please let him know that we would like to give him a free account a pair of koozies for this wisdom.

I just spent $320 to have my waverunner's unit diagnosed and hopefully repaired. They are having a sale right now. If they can't repair it I'm only out $58 and shipping costs to deep northern CA, so well under $100. Its a lot better than the alternative, over $1,000 for a new one.