How to get BEST 'Home Made Tune?

[wurk_truk]

Here is a question that I have been kicking around in my head.

Getting the BEST possible tune without a dyno available.  So... naturally a TTS and do multiple v-tunes, sure, no problem with that.

But, What if I take my 'dyno tune' $$$, and buy a Twin Tech TSCAN2 Plus Kit, and refine the v-tune with that?

Does the TS2 have functionality that TTS doesn't?  Like TSSM and all of that?

Pros and Cons please.

[glens]

http://www.daytona-sensors.com/download/Twin_Scan2_Instructions.pdf will likely as not answer your question(s).

[strokerjlk]

the twin scan wego III  can tune or better said record all the kpa areas at all throttle positions. instead of just 40% throttle and 80 kpa like the TTS.  you install wide band sensors so now you can read and tune to whatever AFR you desire. collect data in a small data logger (no laptop to ride around with. you can collect data and make corrections to TTS, SERT, SEST, PC, TWIN TECH, (THUNDER MAX with some patience).
you can also use it to sniff a carb set up. If you were to use the DTS then you wouldn't have any need to use your v-tune function again. TTS of course to interface with the bike . the corrections are not generated and applied for you but rather they are displayed on a chart that looks just like the ve tables on a tts or the power commander. then you print the corrections and use that sheet to manually change ve cells.
nice unit with a lot of features. you can read all function in real time. real readings not just what the ECM is calling for.
just what you need John. 

[Tnbrit]

Hi,i'm going round in circles about getting a Tuner for my bike(07FXD),i've no experience with efi or tuners but i'm ok.with computer software programmes
i'd almost decided on a TFI,then a TTS then a .Now after reading Wurks post & checking out the Daytona site,i'm dithering again.
Am I reading this right,could I by their Twin Tuner,with a loaded map & then make simple adjustments,as in a TFI,then for more advanced Tuning add the Twin Tec Link & Software for advanced Tuning?
All replies & help really appreciated.
Thanks,Graham.

[Tnbrit]

Thanks,sorry,i misunderstood your post.

[wavlovr1]

I have used both TTS and TwinScan with WEGO. My TSII is using wide band 02 sensors while my TTS uses the narrow band type. My theory is that the measurements are more exacting with TTS and V-tune. but what do I know?

Vtune is definitely easier to use since it calculates required changes for you and generates the corrected map with a click of the button.

jimbob

[glens]

To use the TwinScan with its sensors, you'll obviously need to remove the stock ones and ensure none of the AFR table is set to trigger closed-loop operation.  Loading such a calibration into the ECM will reset the AFVs, so you should freely be able to datalog with the TwinScan and see where your AFRs are as compared to the ECM's idea of things.

You should be able to use the TwinScan to get all your VEs set to actual good values rather than blending them into something.  But you'd do well to disable the PE in the TTS calibration first and for this purpose, as I'm sure you're aware.

If there are discrepancies between what the Delphi thinks it's doing AFR-wise and what the TwinScan is reading, I believe I'd opt for the Delphi's "train of thought".  Don't forget that if you'd v-tuned with CLBs other than stoich, your AFR values will be offset and you must take this into consideration.

Personally, I think it's a good idea for you to get one to supplement the TTS.  It's not like you won't be able to use it on any other bikes, or even sell it when (if) you're done.  As a matter of fact, why don't you have one drop-shipped to me and I'll test all these theories for you

[strokerjlk]

To use the TwinScan with its sensors, you'll obviously need to remove the stock ones and ensure none of the AFR table is set to trigger closed-loop operation.  Loading such a calibration into the ECM will reset the AFVs, so you should freely be able to datalog with the TwinScan and see where your AFRs are as compared to the ECM's idea of things.

You should be able to use the TwinScan to get all your VEs set to actual good values rather than blending them into something.  But you'd do well to disable the PE in the TTS calibration first and for this purpose, as I'm sure you're aware.

If there are discrepancies between what the Delphi thinks it's doing AFR-wise and what the TwinScan is reading, I believe I'd opt for the Delphi's "train of thought".  Don't forget that if you'd v-tuned with CLBs other than stoich, your AFR values will be offset and you must take this into consideration.

Personally, I think it's a good idea for you to get one to supplement the TTS.  It's not like you won't be able to use it on any other bikes, or even sell it when (if) you're done.  As a matter of fact, why don't you have one drop-shipped to me and I'll test all these theories for you

when using a DTS .if you tune it to a closed loop setting (14.6 on the ECM map) it gives you ve corrections to reach 14.6.open loop. so the clb settings dont come into play until you put the stock sensors back in. and hook them up. (wide bands are not tied to the ecm during tuning)
take the accell and decel settings to 0 and disable the pe.

[TXChop]

Nice thread!!! Wurk...I just talked to Jim last night about the very same thing. I need to get a few builds in the ballpark so my customers can at least ride them before tuning. This seemed like the answer for me as well. Keep us updated on your progress...Where you getting one from?

[wavlovr1]

Dr. V-Twin

Amazon is like $7 more, though.

I just think this AND a TTS can be a very nice set up.  I've talked to Jim and Bob about this and think its a doable thing for me.  And... friggin 'hobby'.... haha!

That is my problem. With TS, TTS, a SERT, and two bikes; I don't have time for riding anymore, just data runs LOL..

jb

[FLTRI]

You may be interested in buying a complete netbook with a 7" monitor? They're almost as cheap as the monitor alone now. For example: http://www.eglobalwireless.com/p-4333-new-7-mini-netbook-laptop-notebook-wifi-windows-2gb-hd.aspx?gclid=CIq2tMqN7KECFR5OgwodglvsIg
Bob

[strokerjlk]

So, if I get all the VEs for 14.6 open using the TS2, does THAT match what I want to use for 14.6 closed?  And THEN the CLBs would take it even further like 14.4 closed?  A VE is a VE, right?  Its the TTS that applies the various offsets using the CLBs?  OR... do I set the AFRs to 14.4 and then when going back into closed loop set it at 14.6 with the requisite CLBs?

I'm going to do this for sure, I guess.  So NOW, want to get into WHAT, I may be getting into.

As far as narrow band being a better O2 sensor?  That's BS.  One HAS to remember that vendors and others ALWAYS have axes to grind and objects to sell.  When a VENDOR gets on here, and no matter how helpful, the bottom line is.... VENDOR (not you, Wav...).  While it COULD be that a person sees a value himself... I look with a jaundiced eye on most claims that defy what ALL others do.  So... NOT picking, but just that I have a sign on my forehead that says TAKE ADVANTAGE and I am frigging tired of it.  It's time for ME to take the TTS to the next logical level.

While a wide band, like on a TMax may have longevity issues.... and maybe a 'stay on the bike' O2 may be better served by a narrow band... there is NO dyno tuner that uses a narrow band to tune with, unless... it is a v-tune dyno tune.  Almost ALL use wide band or 4 gasses.  I wholeheartedly agree the TTS is way a$$ easier to use.   But... there IS a point to having the best tune as possible.  Yesterday....  (as you all may know, I am a noise chasing fool), at 2250 to 2750, had a vibration AND noise change AFTER the bike was hot.  Spark temp correction table fixed THAT (table pulled  timing).  But... did a VTune on a couple specific cells that was done by a TUNER.  Not much, but STILL like an 8-10% difference between v-tune and the last TUNE I had done on those cells.  10% here... 10% there... and all of a sudden the tune is NOT for my bike.  Do I trust a well known tuner? V-Tune?  See?  Whom and what do I trust?  These were NOT cells that get blended, but cells inside of closed loop cruise...  10% to me IS a big deal where I ride... not so much that the WHOLE tune may be 10% fatter or leaner, but that the tune can have BOTH swings inside when a comparison is made..... and NOW there could be a 15-20% swing?
So... instead of getting another dyno tune, I wish to learn more of what is going on, and can spend THAT $$$ on this TS2.

The TS2 is to backstop the numbers so I feel more comfortable with whats going on.   And, assuredly, falling down into a rabbit hole a LOT of others have already done so...

(plus... to those that KNOW... I need something like this to keep occupying my time).

Sorry Glens... BUT... you can come to Ohio (the land of NO tuners) and have a look!!!  Or hey, ride over to Strokers and look at his Dyno.  You are right about between the two of us!

I'm going to work on getting a 7" monitor mounted to my gas door.  I could SEE those green V-Tune cells AND the TS data!!!

set the AFR table to what you want it to be open /closed (14.6) / both/ whatever.
tune the ve's to those AFR settings. once it is tuned to those AFR setting  via ve's ....you can change the AFR table to whatever you want. 14.6 for closed loop..or 14.4 at cruise 13.2 WOT 12.5 WOT .
If you tuned a cell at 14.2 (open loop) and now you decide you want it in closed loop then just change it to 14.6.

[strokerjlk]

you can read what the ECM is calling for (one side of the scale) and actual (other side of the scale) two pointers side by side.
you dont have to guess what the inj. pulse width is it is telling you and your watching it respond.
not sure what your talking about ...but if the ECM is calling for 13.2 and reading 15.8 or 11.2 .then you just go and see what the correction is for the ve table. it will tell you what the ecm was calling for what it was actual and how many ve numbers to  raise or lower it.

[Hogflash]

You may be interested in buying a complete netbook with a 7" monitor? They're almost as cheap as the monitor alone now. For example: http://www.eglobalwireless.com/p-4333-new-7-mini-netbook-laptop-notebook-wifi-windows-2gb-hd.aspx?gclid=CIq2tMqN7KECFR5OgwodglvsIg
Bob

Note that these 'inexpensive' 7 inch laptops usually run windows CE and Datamaster will not work on them.  Let me know if you run across one for this price with Windows XP though!

--Gary

[Hogflash]

My netbook has XP.  It was offered by Verizon last year and is a Dell.

Let me know when the XP system costs $100!  Last I checked these are about $300 - unless you can get them as part of a bundle deal!  --Gary

[Don D]

We use both TTS (Vtune) and Twin Scan but they end up at a tuner for the numbers guys

[glens]

Be aware that if you specify 14.2 in your AFR table and modify the VE tables so that 14.2 is what the TS says, too, when you put it back into closed-loop later with CLBs not at ~450 mV (like, say, 700), the ECM will say its "14.6" is too lean and will add fuel.  This will shift any affected AFR values in the same way.  Ultimately none of this really matters if you tune for "best running" and not necessarily some specific AFR numbers (which likely-as-not aren't "real" numbers anyway if your fuel isn't "straight" gasoline).

This CLB juggling needs to be taken into consideration.  Like (I believe) I said (differently) earlier, the Delphi may be saying "send fuel for 14.0:1 [rather, lambda=0.9524 (which might be an actual 13.4!)]" and the TS may say it's 13.6 [rather, lambda=0.9252], and this may be correct!  Do you understand what I'm saying?  If not, I'll try to elaborate further later.

[hollywood63]

This should be a sticky

[yositime]

As far as narrow band being a better O2 sensor?  That's BS. 
... there is NO dyno tuner that uses a narrow band to tune with

It is not so much the aftermarket tuning kit vendors but the O2 sensor manufacture's data sheets and scientific study results. Wideband sensor manufactures guarantee that their sensors are accurate only under certain very narrow conditions and within hours of being free air calibrated.  Not BS, facts of life.  A dyno tuner controls the environment as well as calibrated before every run...  as well as change our O2 sensors often.  Not something real practical for street use.

You can argue about the specs and marketing literature all you want, the proof is on the street.  Currently using narrowband O2 to set cruise condition fueling and making a best guess at WOT fueling works just as well as using a wideband O2 sensor to set fueling under all conditions. Wideband sensors are not that inaccurate, but just not accurate enough in a HD air cooled engine over time. Looks good on paper, but life is full of compromise....  just saying if you have the time and money, doesn't hurt nuttin to experiment.  Perhaps someday there will be a practical way to directly measure fuel AFR or burning efficiency instead of indirectly with O2 sensors.  I dunno... 

[Foxster]

I used to tune by the plugs when that was all you had. I got kinda OK at it, I would say I could get an engine to feel better than when I started and it wouldn't guzzle fuel. Then when narrowband O2 setups became affordable I used a few different ones of those. They really helped to tune the cruise areas but the fluctuating readings and inaccuracy outside a small band of AFR meant they were of limited use and I still relied heavily on how the plugs looked and seat of the pants feel.

Then I got my first wideband O2 meters and these simply took the guesswork out. Now I could measure what the AFR really was across all throttle settings and pick different AFRs for different conditions. This overlapped a time when fuels were really getting cleaned up, with lead being removed and detergents added. This meant plug reading got harder and less reliable.   

Now I'd only recommend reading plugs to get a vague idea of gross over or under-fuelling; with EFIs this generally indicates a fault condition rather than a tuning issue. Narrowband meters for tuning purposes I see as pointless and only for those who can't afford a wideband meter. If you use a wideband meter properly then you can get accurate readings and a long life out of a sensor. Misuse a sensor or leave it plumbed in permanently for months at a time and its not going to be accurate. Treat it well and just for tuning sessions and it will remain far away the best method available to home-tune an engine. 

[TXChop]

Wurk, did you get your TSII yet? I was playing with mine a bit last night. Going to play some more tomorrow if it dont rain.

[strokerjlk]

Glens.  So say 14.5 AFR is 768 on the CLBs.   What you think needs to happen (so it all jives...) is if I set my CLBs to 768, then I would need to tune to 14.5 and NOT 14.6, so the VEs match between methods?

tune it to whatever AFR you want 13.2 13.5 14.6 . set your ve's to achieve this.
now you can go in and change the afr table to whatever you want.
If you know you are going to run a section in closed loop then tune it to 14.6. the closed loop bias isnt working with the stock sensors out and the wide bands in. so you just tuned it to 14.6. (open loop)
after you put the stock sensors back in and your still in closed loop 14.6 in that area, adjust CLB to what you want.
No guess work involved.

[Don D]

TTS promotes V-tuning on a dyno, but you cannot tell me that GUESSING at 80-100% is better than knowing.  How would THAT work?  That's like saying screw the ILS and GUESS where the runway actually is

That is why we use both V-Tune and TS on the street
Be careful your laptop is issolated from vibration.

On a dyno assuming a closed loop bike wide bands are put in the bung holes and the cells taken out of closed loop. VEs corrected from top to bottom. Or the V-Tune used for the lower cells then the Dynojet with wide bands for the high map cells.

[glens]

I haven't gotten to the end of all the new posts yet, other than a quick glance, so may have more to say or un-say following this.

This is about the "wide-band" vs. "stock" sensors.  Neither one is inherently more accurate than the other since they use exactly the same-type core sensing element.  The stock sensor merely says "this is what I've got to say about this narrow range around stoichiometric burn".  The actual AFR used to produce that is irrelevant to the sensor.  "Straight" gasoline will require a fairly-narrow window around 14.7:1 AFR and pure ethanol will need around 9.0:1 AFR for these sensors to "operate" properly.  This word "operate" means "to produce usable output".

The broadband sensors use this same core element with its same limitations.  What it does is incorporate an "ion pump" on the back (reference) side of the element.  This "pump" will migrate oxygen either to or from the reference side so that across the element itself the difference produces stoich across the element.  These sensors must use a closed-loop controller specifically for this purpose of driving the ion "pump" to achieve the "perfect" condition across the element, and the controller then produces a variable-voltage output for external use based upon how much and which direction it needed to "pump" oxygen to get things the way the sensing element likes them.

But now there's a very important element of this whole process which needs to get taken into consideration if actual, accurate, repeatable measurements are to be made.  And this element is the pressure levels on each side of the sensing element.  If there's greater pressure on the sample side and ions need to get pumped toward it, more will need to be pumped than if the pressures on each side were the same.  If there's less pressure on the sample side than on the reference side, less "pumping" will be required.  If the sensor controller doesn't know what the absolute pressures are on both the sample and reference sides, it cannot accurately inform you of the actual whatever-it-is you're looking for.

The broadband sensors have the capability of being every bit as accurate as the stock sensors but none of the systems "we" use, with our limited budgets, take the pressures into consideration.  So they therefore cannot be as repeatably accurate for our purposes as the stock sensors are in normal use.

Another factor that needs to be used is the temperatures, and these don't get used either in our "consumer-grade" equipment.  It's easy enough to ensure a workable minimum temperature with a heating element, but there's not much we can do to cool things down if it gets too warm.  This one's a wash between the two of them for all practical purposes (unless the stock sensors are unheated and the mixture's too rich).

It's also extremely important to observe specs on wire routing, since this is the typical way to get the reference "air" to the backside of the sensing element.  This means no folding-over, kinking, pinching, etc.  There are minimum radius values, &c.

The two types have inherently the same accuracy, but the broadbands have additional factors involved, including the closed-loop controller itself.  All these additional factors "conspire" to decrease the accuracy of the broadband units in typical usage, in comparison to the stock units.

Please take all this into consideration when getting ready to proclaim the superiority of the broadband units.

Why do the dynos use them instead?  Simply because they need to be able to use the sensors over a wider range than the simpler versions can accommodate.  If the target areas were just within range of the stock-type sensors, those sensors would be the most accurate to use since you could eliminate (most) all the other variables introduced but ignored by the broadbands.

[glens]

Okay.  In regards to the differences between what the AFR values are in the table and what they are "out the pipe",  I realize it's not a great amount (likely within a half a point), but there will be differences between them whenever the CLBs are not ~450mV.

If you set it up for 14.6:1 measured "AFR" in open-loop and use higher CLBs later, all those AFR values will drift downward from what's in the table.

What'll happen when you go back to closed-loop is the system will add fuel to meed the CLBs and this will alter the adaptive fuel values.  Now open-loop operation will be affected in that area just the same.  Since we don't know where in any calibration the AFV cells are, we can't guarantee containment of this phenomenon to just the normally-closed-loop areas.

One other thing which maybe does or maybe doesn't need to be considered is the fact that you're probably not going to find much fuel which actually has a stoichiometric burn of 14.6:1 AFR like what's shown in the calibration tables.  So all the values will only be a fixed percentage of what's in the tables anyway.  I'm pretty sure this also affects things like the TwinScan, but it might be prudent to determine this on a case-by-case basis.  If the TwinScan actually indicates true AFR regardless the stoichiometric properties of the current fuel and you're running E10 where it'll be ~14.2:1 and set the bike for 14.6, you'll be leaner than you thought.

If I were going to use a TS, I'd v-tune at CLB=450 over a good range and then stick in the TS gear and see what it reads.  If it's E10 and the TS says ~14.2 then make a mental note on the percentage difference (not necessarily 0.4 AFR across the board) and work with it factored in for all the final results.  If the TS says 14.6 forget about all that and just use the numbers, even though they aren't "actual".

When you're done (for now) with the TS, send it to me and let me try it