Help Selecting TTS Base Map

[VDeuce]

I have been running with the NI176-002 base map for a few weeks and have some questions whether it is really the right starting place. After quite a few VTune runs, my rear VEs still have about 8 cells that are maxed and the engine size is already at 124, even though it is a 107.

I have talked with Steve Cole on this and might give him my current map to take a look at. The thing to note on the NI176-002 map is that there are already a number of cells maxed at 127.5 on both front and rear. This map was seemingly the closest I could find, given that this is for a bagger, 2:1 exhaust, larger TB, compression and the right injectors.

Build...

'07 Street Glide
107, flat tops, 10.3:1
Wood TW-8-6 cams
GMR Stage III heads
HP 51mm TB, SE 4.89 gm/sec
D&D Fat Cat, performance quiet baffle

Now I'm wondering if I should consider another map. Perhaps the NL176-002, which was for a 113". This map has no maxed out cells and the build is similar other than the displacement and the cam specs, but I can't find any base map that comes real close to the TW-8-6 anyway.

There are only 3 base maps for 2007 models with a 2:1. I'm concerned that if I go with a regular touring style exhaust as a base, it may be too far off from the exhaust I actually have.

Thoughts?

The front and rear VE tables are attached. Note the seemingly large differences between front and rear...





[attachment removed after 60 days by system]

[Herko]

Maybe it's just me but I'm pretty much a PZ176 fit all fan for the 07 Tourings. I size things up in the TC's and go from there.
2/2, or 2/1, exhaust.
FWIW, the last 3 bikes I tuned with 4.89 SE's I had to use 4.60 ish in the Inj Size to get the VE headroom I was comfy with.

Looking at your VE tables I would definitely make a change.

[Herko]

Having said that about PZ176, there's others that will work good too.
I've heard good about PS176 for example.
A key element is getting things sized right in the TC's soon as possible.

Set up the TC's and go straight to the high VE area of the map (the 15-30 TPS 2500-4000 RPM +/-)  and do a quick couple of VTunes in that area and have a look.

[VDeuce]

Thanks Herko for the suggestions! I'll look at the map you suggested. Any recommendations on CLB values for 670 feet above sea level and good quality 93 octane?. Are you staying predominately with all CLB cells of one value, or do you customize them a bit?

Are you recommending more of a change in injector size as opposed to engine displacement? Just to make sure, the injector size decrease would be the equivalent of an engine displacement increase, correct?

[Herko]

CLB's. Set something in the mid to high 700's across the board.
Don't get too wrapped around the axle about the AFR offset with these CLB numbers.
More important is where you leave the switching number (14.6) set or not set in the AFR Table after VTune.

Get as much bright green data as you can when VTuning.
Insufficient data (not green or red) can be misleading.
Simple joy riding may not get the job done.
IMO a set of rear brake pads is a small cost to pay to augment a more thorough VTune.

Keep eyes on the road at all times.

I do customize CLB's on some bikes.
Yours, I would just go with one number...at least for now.

Yes, in the Tuning Constants, Injector Size decrease and/or Cubic Inch increase means more fuel.

[WVULTRA]

VDeuce:

As Herko mentioned, PZ176 is a great map to start with.  For my own curiosity, I tried the PS176 map with the TCs corrected for 96" and set the CLBs to 778 straight across the board.

Here's the Generated corrections from my 2nd. VTune session:



And the accompanying Histogram from the VTune Recording:



So far, I'm getting good results with the PS176; but as Herko has also stated, load up a particular map and do a couple of quick VTune Recordings concentrating on the higher load areas.  Should let you know pretty quick if your on the right track.

HTHs!

[VDeuce]

Been working with the PC176-002 map today and so far with 2 VTune sessions, the VEs are much more what I would expect; they are not as far apart and non cells are maxed! I might be on the right track with this one. More runs today and I'll report back...

[Scramjet]

VDeuce,

I have a very similar build (look at my signature or the dyno section) and have had good success with PC176 with help from Steve Cole and Herko.

BTW, I ended up using the actual injector size and 126 CI in the tuning constants.  I still had peak VE's of 116 front and 121 rear from V-Tune.  There is nothing wrong with increasing the Cubic Inches to get the proper VE's.

PM me if you want to compare notes.

B

[VDeuce]

VDeuce,

I have a very similar build (look at my signature or the dyno section) and have had good success with PC176 with help from Steve Cole and Herko.

BTW, I ended up using the actual injector size and 126 CI in the tuning constants.  I still had peak VE's of 116 front and 121 rear from V-Tune.  There is nothing wrong with increasing the Cubic Inches to get the proper VE's.

PM me if you want to compare notes.

B

Thanks, I might just take you up on that!

Did a few more runs and things are looking way better than with the NI176 map. I could never get that map right - no matter where I set the engine size, I always had around 8 cells maxed in the rear and the front was way different.

Now with the PC176 base, the VEs are much closer and no maxed out cells with the engine set to 117 so far.

[Scramjet]

I thought NI176 was the best base map too and started there.  The bike would not run well enough to to get my first V-Tune done.  It coughed and sputtered so much I thought I has screwed up the build.  With PC176 it all went smoothly.

B