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

[FLTRI]

Glens,
All good info, thanks for sharing. Hopefully those who are under some O2 (broadband as well as switching) sensor misconceptions will learn from it, which is readily verifiable. That should help in future dicussions.
Bob

[Steve Cole]

Glens hit the nail on the head this time pretty good. I have one small correction to add. There are THREE types of sensors currently on the market, Wide Band, Broad Band and Switching Sensors. Wide Band sensors are not used by any of the Aftermarket units today but they like to play on the words and call Broad Band sensors Wide band, since they will measure a broader range than a switching sensor under some very controlled conditions. The aftermarket has conveniently left out the part about "controlled conditions"!  So if your replacement sensor run about $100 all you have is a Broad Band sensor and if you want real measurements then you need to control the conditions. A true Wide band sensor cost about $900 per sensor. They work over a large range and do not have the issues Broad Band sensors do. Broad Band and switching sensors are made from the same base technology. The Broad Band sensor was made to check Catalytic Converters in the Automobile industry and are not used for fuel control. If they were any where close to as good as some of the aftermarket companies would want you to believe do you not think the OEM's would use them for fuel control?

Truth is they were made as a cheap way to test the converters for the OBD II requirements and they do that very nicely. The aftermarket has taken them and tried like hell to make them work where the manufacture says they will not.

[Don D]

Can you explain the differences between a person inputting the VEs from a TS2, etc... and a v-tune's VEs?  Please

Assuming you have TTS the adjustments from the TS will manually need to be inputed then commited by uploading to the ECU. In TTS VTune the software changes are made for you and you just commit them.

[glens]

You can't just put in whatever CLBs you want after open-loop tuning if you care about what your only-open-loop areas will be doing afterward.  Why would anybody tell you what you're saying you were told?

When you're v-tuning, whatever your CLBs are is what the ECM uses to say "with the displacement and injector sizes specified, it takes this much VE to achieve 14.6:1 AFR here".  If you stick VE values in which were otherwise derived to achieve an actual 14.6 and are using higher CLBs, more fuel will be required.  This gets picked up by the adaptive fueling and wherever this coincides with an AFV cell, the AFV gets modified to reflect the "necessary" change.  The AFVs effectively act as VE modifiers against what's in the programming.  They get applied at all times, either open- or closed-loop.  The last AFV cell in an "outer" area gets used everywhere else the rest of the way out.  If it gets modified from 100%, it'll effectively be altering all the "outer reaches" VE values as well, pulling the AFR down from what's in the table there.

If you v-tune with the CLBs where you want them to be while in normal service, the extra fuel will be applied directly via the VE tables and the AFVs will remain closer to 100%.  You can then get all the outer reaches of the VE tables set via a TwinScan and they will remain right where you placed them.

So in the end the results wind up not being quite the same; there's a distinction.  If they're achieved with v-tuning, the AFVs will be ~100%.  If they're achieved with "actual" VEs from an exterior source but using the same CLBs as the v-tune would've used the AFVs will be ~103% (or whatever).  AFVs get applied everywhere they can so you need to take this into consideration and tune the outlying areas afterward with as-close-to 100% AFVs as possible.  It's a shame we can't know where the AFV cells are or what they contain.

I've been thinking about something I touched on earlier.  There's nothing in the TwinScan manual about adjusting the readings for different fuel types/formulations, so does it always indicate 14.6/14.7 at stoichiometric burn, regardless the actual AFR that occurs at?  If so, this would be because the controller is calibrated against/as-if-it-were "pure" gasoline, just like the pre-lambda Delphi calibrations.  And presumably the two ECU replacement systems, too.

So with any of them, if you had stoichiometric burn with pure ethanol, it would indicate as "14.6/14.7:1" AFR, even though it actually took 9.0:1?!  Can this be so?  Certainly, if the manufacturers were aware that stoich would occur at ~14.2:1 with E10, and these controllers were calibrated to show purely actual AFR (but they really couldn't be if you think about it; not without knowing what fuel they were working with if not "straight" gasoline!)...  I lost my train of thought.  Okay, look at it this way: at a stoichiometric burn of whatever fuel, there will be no "pumping" going on, either towards the sensor element or away from it.  Without "knowing" which actual AFR this is based on (fuel choice), it could only tell you "it's lambda equals ONE".  This is relatively meaningless anymore when the ECM calibrations use hard numbers like "14.6".  In reality, the ECMs are using lambda behind the scenes but the interface indicates lambda=1 as "14.6".  I guess what I'm getting at is that all these AFR numbers are to be used as if (pure) gasoline is the fuel and likely-as-not these days don't have much bearing on reality.

The reason I went off on the sensors earlier was because (wasn't it?) you, WT, who went off on them in the other direction.

Steve, I see I didn't state the distinction, but I did make it when the only place I use the term "wide-band" was when I quoted it just like that at the start.  Everywhere else I used "broad".  Thanks for pointing that out.

[wolf_59]

Wow! Now I'm totally confused, I thought I had a pretty good handle on this from everything I've read on this site and in the TTS manual, This is the way I understood it VE is the measurement of air flow thru the engine at %TP and RPM and that VE will only need a change if you change airflow requirements such as air filter, cams, different exhaust etc.
And once you have the VE's set then you set AFR values where you want them on a OPEN loop system and the ECM will provide fuel needed to meet the AFR values selected for the VE for each cell and on CLOSED loop system instead of changing AFR values from 14.6 you would adjust the CLB's to acheive the AFR values that you want and the advantages of CLOSED loop over OPEN loop besides the ability to V-Tune to set your VE's is that it is constantly sampling the AFR and making adjustments for minor changes in fuel quality & requirements to meet the CLB's that you set.

   

[FLTRI]

Let me see if I sum this volume of information for those who want plain and simple explanations:
Do not use the CLB to change resultant AFR from your closed loop system after the system has been tuned. By doing this you will also change the resultant open loop portion of the mapping. Set the CLB to what you want tuned to in closed loop.
How's that?
Bob

[Don D]

Read Glens right up again carefully. This isn't a topic that gets stuffed into a 2x2 box and on the shelf. Complex but following the TTS instructions to adjust the MAP by VTUNE and the TS for the higher throttle settings works reasonably well. Not the perfect tune by any means though because timing is not even touched yet and the values are just reasonably close.
Don't for get the items that get toggled off and the AFV. These are important.

[glens]

Thank you.

For the sake of this part of what I intend to say, we're going to establish that every external and internal operational parameter/condition will remain consistent so as to eliminate variables and isolate what I'm talking about.  Engine and air temps, relative humidity, the fuel itself are perfectly consistent throughout.  Everything else is unchanging except for EFI programming values.  The programming, especially with the closed-loop functions, will accommodate all these other things as they swing around but I want to isolate some of those functions as the topic of discussion.  So please understand it that way.

This one here left me feeling a little understated when I looked at it again earlier:

So in the end the results wind up not being quite the same; there's a distinction.  If they're achieved with v-tuning, the AFVs will be ~100%.  If they're achieved with "actual" VEs from an exterior source but using the same CLBs as the v-tune would've used the AFVs will be ~103% (or whatever).  AFVs get applied everywhere they can so you need to take this into consideration and tune the outlying areas afterward with as-close-to 100% AFVs as possible.  It's a shame we can't know where the AFV cells are or what they contain.

What I'd meant to convey there was that if the VEs are obtained via the v-tune software with "custom" CLBs, while later running closed-loop the AFVs (one last reminder of my caveats/conditions) will "cruise" right at 100%. 

With CLBs of ~450mV (or whatever value actually provides for "14.6" [pure gasoline] AFR, probably more like 500mV) a v-tune should produce the same (closed-loop-area) VE numbers as an open-loop TwinScanII tuning session.  At least proportionately the same. This will provide "working" AFVs of 100% as well.  When you then later change just your CLBs the AFVs will effectively change the VEs to match, but this effect is rather farther-reaching than might be expected.  It doesn't seem to get talked about very much other than by me.  It's these elusive AFVs and how/what they do which got me interested in all this stuff in the first place, so maybe having that knowledge y'all will be better able to understand/forgive me my folly.

Admittedly, we're only talking about a few percent, typically, here and there.  If you want a good-enough tune and then just ride the damned thing, this can all be dismissed.  All I'm getting at here is that the two paths to "the destination" don't get you to exactly the same coordinates, and if it matters to you, you should take the route that gets you there.  Maybe "in the county" is close enough; maybe "in the city"; and maybe you're looking for a specific address.  Over the face of the entire globe they're all probably enough the same.

Minutiae is my specialty and sometimes it can sound like I'm talking about things much larger (as in "blown all out of proportion").  I apologize for that.  But then again, we are talking "technicalities" here...

Don't think it would work very well for "street tuning", but it would probably be beneficial if on a dyno to get the VEs where you want them (the first time) and then go open-loop with a Power Commander in-line and play with the timing "live".  Now this won't be perfect since the PC must delay the timing event by at least one revolution from when it was "sent".  But I'd bet it would save time getting the whole job done.

It's not really understandable how different spark timing could alter the VEs if you consider the VEs to be strictly "how much air is flowing" in a purely mechanical sense, so maybe it's best not to think that way.

I surmise a good tune requires VE, then spark, then VE again (and for the really anal, another pair in order).

[Steve Cole]

I guess what most people need to do is understand we are trying to get the VE by backing into it. As you look at things that effect how we are trying to back into it maybe that will make more sense to some of you. VE is the total airflow entering A cylinder under a fix set of conditions. The truth is running an engine is anything but a fixed set of conditions.

With that said we used the resultant fuel delivery to work backwards to arrive at VE and anything you change in the fuel delivery can and does effect the outcome. Now how much it effects it is a different story but let's just go from this point. So now that you understand that fuel effects the outcome we have to take care of that condition so we tell you too by rerunning V-tune after anytime the fuel system is changed. None of this is 100% perfect and as the fuel quality changes this effects the system the same. Our goal is to make the ECM happy in as many conditions as possible so that it does not have to make any corrections. You need to remember that each time a correct needs to be made it is done after the fact by the ECM. With the ECM in closed loop, no matter what you or I do it still has a mind of it's own so we need to make sure it's (ECM) happy with what we have done.

In theory with nothing changing once the VE is arrived at there would be no need to change them but the difference between theory and real world will jump up and bite you in the ass every time! As the cylinder head heats and cools or the reversion in the intake changes or the exhaust changes the VE is effected. All these little things and many I have not stated can and do cause the VE to be different and anytime you are measuring with an external device that doesn't know about all these little things your answers will be off. This is because we are all backing into a VE value, it is not being measured directly! All external devices are assuming what is going on to arrive at VE and the assumptions in many cases are wrong!

On a dyno or on the street doesn't matter, we want the ECM to be happy with what we are telling it to do. If it's not it will change what we've done to what it wants over time in closed loop. Once your in open loop operation the ECM quits LEARNING to try to correct to what it wants but it still applies what it knew to be correct from before. So let's say you run the engine and the external device says the mixture is something other than what you want, so you make a correction to get what you want. Now the bike runs in closed loop for a time and learns that it wants a 20% correction to be happy. Guess what just happened to your open loop mixture? It just got a 20% correction applied so now it is not where you wanted it! Same thing happens if you tune to an external device and the ECM is already applying a 20% correction. Since the external device has no way to know about any of the things the ECM is doing one needs to be careful when trying to understand what it maybe telling you.

[FLTRI]

Say one want 14.5 AFR in closed loop.  That is 768 CLB.

Per Mastertune O2 conversion 798 = 14.25 NOT 14.5.
Bob

[strokerjlk]

The ONLY thing that makes sense is that a v-tune... which is a kinda hybrid deal, uses the CLB in ITS tuning process.  While a REAL dyno does NOT use anything like that and derives it's numbers from purely the sensor.

you guys are making this way to hard. LOL when you set up your map put the area you want to run in closed loop to 14.6 . then set the other areas to what you want them to be say 13.2-12.5 100  kpa. 4500 rpm 80 kpa 13.5. with the twincan you are not tuning with CLB so when your done and you put your stock sensors back in set the CLB to what you want  ....then forget about it.
the AFV is going to adj. (make corrections) no matter what you use (V-TUNE, DTS) that's what happens when we run in closed loop.
as far as the twin scan tune getting  20% corrections added in open loop after you change the CLB in closed loop I have never seen this. maybe 2-5 % if you check it later. then if you check it again later it could be 2-5% the other way.
again this is what happens when we use closed loop. I have been using the DTS for 3 years and I have checked and rechecked diff tunes to see where they were at after time. yes there will be some ve's that need adjusted 2-5 % but no matter what method you use to tune this will be the case....again as long as we use closed loop. this is the reason so many tuners still refuse to tune a 07 up bike to closed loop. so if the small variances bother you ,me anyone then don't tune in closed loop. I use both depending on build and customers expectations.

tend to think a TTS v-tune THEN a TS for final probably works best.   But... then again maybe not.  If the tools are avail;able, why not try the different configurations and SEE what is arrived at?  MAYBE a bike street tuned with TS will be the better running tune?  WHo knows, right?  On any given bike, especially.

John you paid 500.00 for a piece of equipment to be able to tune your bike without making any guesses. use it for that. I have used both and I don't have to guess what works the best. OR 2nd best to a 4 gas analyzer LOL
after you get it and see what it does you wont have any of these doubts anymore.
I have said this before but it bears repeating......I tuned bikes on the street with a twinscan before I got a dyno. I used it for AFR and timing. then took the bike to my local dealer paid 32.50 for 3 pulls with each map I created. I usually made 3 maps for each bike so 9 pulls total. then handed the customer the sheet when he picked up the bike. Funny thing is.... I was getting better numbers and better drivability then the dealer was on there dyno tunes (stage 1 & stage 2 bikes). this came from one of the owners as we examined sheets.
I have had a few of these bikes back on my dyno since road tuning them. I was able to get a little more out of them (with timing) but not much.

[FLTRI]

Wouldn't V-Tune be an external device, too?  But the MATH is integrated?
[/quote]
I think, since the changes are all based and made from internal ECM data, this can be called an internal tuning system?
Bob

[FLTRI]

you guys are making this way to hard. LOL

Over-thinking seems to be the norm for some. LOL!
I also rely on the O2 readings from the "pipe" after tuning in closed loop (TTS) to verify the actual AFR and guess what? They are always within a .1 or .2 AFR at the most. Having the ability to check/recheck my tuning with the dyno AFR sampling is more confidence inspiring than "hoping" the system performs as advertised.
Bob

[strokerjlk]

you guys are making this way to hard. LOL

Over-thinking seems to be the norm for some. LOL!
I also rely on the O2 readings from the "pipe" after tuning in closed loop (TTS) to verify the actual AFR and guess what? They are always within a .1 or .2 AFR at the most. Having the ability to check/recheck my tuning with the dyno AFR sampling is more confidence inspiring than "hoping" the system performs as advertised.
Bob

exactly
and that's the best we can do with what we have to work with....whatever that might be
could get into the great sniffer accuracy debate here if not careful         

[FLTRI]

...could get into the great sniffer accuracy debate here if not careful         

I'm ready! LOL! I've been verifying O2 readings from the bungs against the "sniffer" readings for over 10 years. It started from posts stating one is more accurate than the other. I have found instances where the sniffer produces more reliable readings than bung mounted O2's, usually due to exhaust system choices that the bungs were not in ideal spots/angles which produced erroneous readings from reversion.

Since the sniffer can be relocated in the pipe the reversion sometimes can be eliminated from readings. This luxury is not available if the only method of reading come from permanent bungs in the pipes.

My experience tells me to check one against the other, especially if there are tuning issues (ie: low speed, light throttle running)
Just my $.02,
Bob

[strokerjlk]

My experience tells me to check one against the other, especially if there are tuning issues (ie: low speed, light throttle running)

or center fold pipes.
got a lot of time and money invested in homemade gadgetry.....to get accurate idle readings on baffle-less pipes.
just saying.....the .1-.2 differences  we were talking earlier could now be .2 -.4  when a sniffer is used .still not enough to panic.
same could be said if we are re checking with sensors in the head pipes if the original tune was done with a sniffer. to many variables to see them ALWAYS exact even if both are installed at the same time. been there done that also! LOL.... all's good no debate

[wolf_59]

Let me see if I sum this volume of information for those who want plain and simple explanations:
Do not use the CLB to change resultant AFR from your closed loop system after the system has been tuned. By doing this you will also change the resultant open loop portion of the mapping. Set the CLB to what you want tuned to in closed loop.
How's that?
Bob

That even I can understand
Thanks, Bob

[Steve Cole]

Wouldn't V-Tune be an external device, too?  But the MATH is integrated?

Can one SEE what the AFVs that have been applied?  I still have v100 of Matertune (been a customer awhile, I guess)... can THAT tell me what AFVS have been applied?  Curious...  Maybe use the TS and see what the bike is outputting at any given moment would give one a guesstimate.?

Since we do everything from the decisions the ECM makes we are not an external device. The ECM makes it's mind up from all the inputs, so it knows everything that is going on. We just take it's answer and adjust it to where we want it to go. In this way we make sure the ECM is happy first and foremost. An external device can only see the final output from the ECM with no idea of how it got there, it cannot tell the difference between Decel, Cruise or Power Enrichment modes, it cannot know what the BLM, Integrator or AFV is at, so it's up to the operator to try and see what mode the ECM is operating in during the external device tuning.

A good dyno tuner will have learned there is something different going on in some conditions and disregard what the external device is telling him, but to an untrained/unexperienced person they do not have a clue as to what is happening. I have seen this time and time again when going out in the field and watching what some dyno guys are doing. Let's just say that there are a lot of dyno operators and very few good tuners out there. The training HD dealer tech's have received from HD is very very poor to say the least.

You cannot view or see the AFV in any version of DataMaster let alone know when the data is good versus bad. There is just too much going on within the ECM. That was the reason for V-tune, it can compute all the data better and quicker with many less errors than I can myself and I've only been at this for 30+ years.

[FLTRI]

Bob, do you have some problem with me?  768 IS 14.5....

OOOOOOOOOPs!! Soooory, just another dyslectic maneuver on my part.
Bob

[strokerjlk]

use the TS to see about 'blending'

.
there is no blending with  twin scan. you hit all the cells and make corrections. same way it was done before v-tune came about.
think about it we were tuning closed loop with SERT without V-Tune.
set the decel, accel to 0. disable the pe and collect data.
we had no way to disable pe with sert so we had to start leaner so as the pe didnt go rich to soon and kill power. that was just a way around something we can now control with the TTS. so many things going on we don't have control of.but we learn to deal with or get around it.

[Don D]

Listen to the man!
Good advice.

[Steve Cole]

So... taking Steve's statement out to their logical conclusions... Folks with a TTS MAster Tune have NO need for a dyno operator.  If one can take the time to hit ALL the cells properly, turn them green, get the check mark... what good is a dyno?  I can personally do one thing a LOT of folks can NOT.  I can get to some SERIOUS hills fairly quickly.  With a monitor, and hills, brakes and throttle... should be able to get them ALL green with the 80kpa check box inside.

This is a SERIOUS question.  Steve is passionate about this, and states a good case... it ALL needs to be done internally with the ECM controlling the 'play', what's left?  The 'tricks' that tuning experience can bring, I would assume, ie; reversion?    Also, using a TS for top and bottom kpa... what else?  I've read his statements a few times... and the case is: NO dyno operator needed.  Hmmmmmm... don't know if I go there, personally.  But... what I do for a living is program PLCs... i 'get' more than one would assume from my posts.  Steve's comments make me think of the TTS Mastertune's 'selling gimmick'.  That an OWNER, withOUT a dyno can get 90% as good a tune.   Listening to Steve, makes me think that last 10% is where blending occurs, right?  A 'dead on' TTS tune just HAS to be better than the dyno operators that Steve talks about.  Doubt it's better than Tuners like Jim and Bob, though.....

A good tuner that has learned all the problems will be able to tune outside of closed loop better than V-tune will but not within the closed loop area

I just MIGHT fall into the Don Dorfman camp on this.  Ultimately... a 'hybrid' tune is going to cover the most bases in the best manner.  No 2x2 box here.  Maybe an Urn, though.

What I do know, with CERTAINTY is this:  my bike (with the old top end) would CRUISE right at 30kpa.  Now maybe it REALLY wasn't, but that's what the MAP sensor said, and the ECM goes off of that, and NOT reality.  Steve has said that below this KPA... v-tune doesn't function.  Nor.. does it function above 80kpa.  I have purchased new plug wires and a coil.  I will run the proper heat plugs.  TRY to make the best TTS environment as possible.....


I have never said this, so please quote me correctly. The lower limit of learning in the ECM is 26 kPa and the upper limit is 83 kPa. This is of coarse when using Mastertune as it is not the same in all HD calibrations.

I'm on THIS site for one reason... get a good tune for my bike.  I argue, etc, as MY way to learn things.  From reading Glens and Steve... makes me wonder where MY tune really is at....  Jim states a good case, too, AND it seems that Jim is one of a few who wish to tune a DBW closed loop bike.

MY first attempts to fix my tune will be to use the TTS to its fullest, and then use the TS to 'check and verify (like its the Soviet Union) those settings and then use the TS to see about 'blending'.  Make THAT map the absolute best it could be, I guess.  Come on here and ask more, obviously stupid, questions and see what the true result is.

THEN... try the TS alone.

Compare.  Report.  Learn.

Steve...I started a new thread for you to post in.

Dyno tuning done correctly is great but you first have to know what your doing and then what the ECM is doing. That knowledge is not something that is in any book that I know of and it's not always the same for each motor build. It takes time to learn these things on many different configurations. V-tune will get you about 85% of it knocked out very quickly but you must do the rest of it with the tools provided with Mastertune. You must watch what is happening, learn, adjust and move on.

[glens]

you guys are making this way to hard. LOL ...

... after you change the CLB in closed loop I have never seen this [20% (which was not a suggestion of what might happen with what [at least] I've been talking about -- that 20% was merely a figure thrown "out there" "for example" by Steve)]. maybe 2-5 % if you check it later. then if you check it again later it could be 2-5% the other way.

It's not too hard for me.  Hahaha!  I'm sure I'm not so tedious-seeming in everyday life, but this is the way I approach just about everything.

You no doubt saw where I was throwing figures like 3% around.  Heck, that'll show up on subsequent v-tunes for crying out loud.  That's why I (ultimately) stipulated exclusion of typical operational variances in order to isolate what I was talking about.  (What'll happen to the "upper" open-loop areas after tuning them and then changing the CLBs.)

You maybe also read me say something about this possibly being equivalent to varying, very tiny, degrees of pinpointing something on the surface of the earth.

Ultimately I'd hope folks would come away with the ideas as I'd intended to express them and tried (probably largely unsuccessfully) to iterate them.

Tuning with the SERT had to be problematic enough without the "factory" version of the software prior to the advent of our closed-loop.  TTS has since made available an excellent tool for getting the VE information very largely correct.  It really is folly (at least the way I see it) to not use it as the primary tool.  Steve and Bob have more eloquent delivery than I do but the way I read what they're saying, well, it's exactly what I've been saying.  (Do I say that at the risk of offending them?)  There are several possible ways of saying the same things.  I like to sum it up by the notion of "getting the VE tables so the working AFVs are as close to 100% everywhere as possible".  Or characterizing v-tuning as "centering the AFVs under normal operation".

I'm a big fan of our Delphi system.  I like the way it works.  I like to have the most adaptive "headroom" available in both directions.  I feel I need it when I travel.  Having it well-centered is akin to having a full magazine of fresh ammo in a gun.  Having one in the pipe, too, would be nice, and for private street tuning, following up a comprehensive v-tune with a TwinScanII+ (or whatever it's called at this time) for the areas left unchecked is about as good as it can get for arriving at good initial VE values on the street.

So long as all the trouble is being taken to do this privately, it just makes the best sense to do things in the proper order.  It should be quicker and more accurate.  Why intentionally dick things up 3 or 4 percent in places by reversing the order of your activities?

I've said this many times in many places (probably would be really embarrassed if I ever found out just how much time was spent doing it!):  Get your system so the AFVs are well-centered ("utopianly" 100%) in service.  This way, you'll be best "ready for anything" as you can be while you're out using the bike.

Damn!  I just can't "bale hay" worth a damn!  Bob?  How do you do that?! 

[Steve Cole]

If that does not work out remember Velcro is your best friend.

[glens]

Yeah, you can see that screen in the garage!  Might not be worth much in broad daylight?

[strokerjlk]

It really is folly (at least the way I see it) to not use it as the primary tool.

So long as all the trouble is being taken to do this privately, it just makes the best sense to do things in the proper order.  It should be quicker and more accurate.  Why intentionally dick things up 3 or 4 percent in places by reversing the order of your activities?

with all do respect.....making statements like this is really just your assumptions. if you had actually used both then maybe I could find something valid in your findings. I have done both and find it just the opposite. for you to make these claims ...would be like me making assumptions say about smart tune (SEST PROTUNER) something I have never used. I guess you did say (at least the way I see it) so I will just reply the same (at least the way I see it) I notice you said should before you made the statement about quicker and accurate so again that's you assumption. I will give you quicker since v-tune generates the ve's for you, until you have to extrapolate the cells you couldn't get to. as far as accurate we will just have to agree to disagree here.
I seem to be the minority here on this forum . but outside of this forum there are many more tuners using wide bands to tune then the handful that do. (EDIT: Should have said don't)  If it is all you have to street tune then by all means use it. if you want to tune all the cells then there are other ways.
I too love the Delphi system and think the TTS is the very best we have at this time to tune it. I just choose to go about it different.I never have had a dissatisfied customer YET LOL. I have however had customers come to me to fix there v-tuned bikes.  when I look at there maps..... the ones that can actually get them. I am amazed at how many of them are tuned to the canned map AFR ,timing, accel,decel,CLB. spark temp correction,closed throttle spark, throttle blade control,PE. NO CHANGES  just v-tuned ve's some extrapolation and there ya go. sorry more to it then that. JMO

[glens]

How do you find the opposite?  If you calibrate VEs open-loop with the broadbands first and then stick large CLBs in and go closed-loop, assuming they're all consistent values they'll cause the effective increase in VE values across the board.  Are you saying you've found the opposite to be true?  That the CLBs won't cause this?

I'm not calling this "a tune".  I'm calling it getting your VEs calibrated in such a way that the AFVs are centered in their ranges.  I might use the word "tune", but it's as a verb, not a noun.  It could be the very first step or it could be a follow-up after base spark timing optimization.  Nonetheless, this is precisely what v-tune was set up to do over a lot of VE table landscape.  It makes the most sense to me to use it since that's what the ECM will, as Steve said, "like".  I used the phrase "the ECM's idea of things" in my first "discussionary" post in this thread.  Even if you used median CLBs the ECM's idea of things might be different from the TS's idea of things, as I also said in that post: "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"."

Are your feelings different about that?  If so, how so?

[FLTRI]

...outside of this forum there are many more tuners using wide bands to tune then the handful that do. If it is all you have to street tune then by all means use it. if you want to tune all the cells then there are other ways.
I too love the Delphi system and think the TTS is the very best we have at this time to tune it. I just choose to go about it different.I never have had a dissatisfied customer YET LOL. I have however had customers come to me to fix there v-tuned bikes.  when I look at there maps..... the ones that can actually get them. I am amazed at how many of them are tuned to the canned map AFR ,timing, accel,decel,CLB. spark temp correction,closed throttle spark, throttle blade control,PE. NO CHANGES  just v-tuned ve's some extrapolation and there ya go. sorry more to it then that...

Couldn't agree with this more,
Bob

[lonewolf]

Are your feelings different about that?  If so, how so?

Well I went back and checked with broadbands after vtuning (on dyno). I still like to conventionally do my ve 's.

[attachment removed after 60 days by system]

[strokerjlk]

Are your feelings different about that?  If so, how so?

Well I went back and checked with broadbands after vtuning (on dyno). I still like to conventionally do my ve 's.

thanks Russel. sometimes A pic is worth a thousand words.

John
nice set up! after you get your TS. all you will need to do is connect the  high speed usb cable (that comes with the kit) to your monitor (mirror mounted  nice!) from the data logger. no laptop strapped on will be needed. 

[TXChop]

Chop, if I get this mounting system all worked out, and it does, in fact, work.... this 'mirror' mount will be able to go from Bike-to-bike.  At night... I think this will be GREAT for the V-Tune cells.

Haven't heard a word from Shawn at Dr V-Twin yet..... 

Man that looks great!!! Gotta get me a setup like that...

I ended up getting mine from ebay. Made another few data runs. Tuning a PCIII rigt now with it. Try to be super anal and hitting as many cells as possible. The bike is running better. The PCIII is much simpler though. TRying to get my AFR's exactly where i want them. Going to run a few runs on a local dyno to see how my afr adjustments went. Got a few guys askin me to tune theirs. They saw all the wiring hangin off the side and were curious.

[FLTRI]

...Knowing the ACTUAL AFRs, during break-in, is most important...

I cannot impress this point enough
Bob

[FLTRI]

Since stem mounted mirrors vibrate a bit at idle. Is this exaggerated or lessened with a monitor bolted to it?
Just curious,
Bob

[strokerjlk]

I have however had customers come to me to fix there v-tuned bikes.  when I look at there maps..... the ones that can actually get them. I am amazed at how many of them are tuned to the canned map AFR ,timing, accel,decel,CLB. spark temp correction,closed throttle spark, throttle blade control,PE. NO CHANGES  just v-tuned ve's some extrapolation and there ya go. sorry more to it then that...

Couldn't agree with this more,
Bob

You have me on this whole set-up.  Shawn shipped yesterday BTW.  But the folks and tunes you describe above isn't a FUNCTION of TTS, but rather the folks themselves, right?  Really not much to do with TTS, but the fact the folks didn't even TRY to understand.

Hey Russel, what's up?

not sure what you mean John. let me explain a little. I have had homemade tunes come in that were just plain wrong  weak , no throttle response, surging at idle and popping here and there on acceleration. then the decel pop ...o my. cant really fault them as they gave it there best shot.
on the other hand I help "as you know" guys from all over the country heck the world as far as that goes. guys are always PMing me and calling me from everywhere with problems with there dyno tunes. I am not complaining as I enjoy this very much (helping people) that is why I do this really, because so many people get SH*T on when they get a dyno tune. so back on topic  we e-mail back and forth maps ...even videos of the problem areas of there dyno tunes.
I have had the opportunity to see maps from most of the BIG  name tuners out there and even the small time guys that dont frequent the forums.LOL.what I see is really amazing.
so back to the V-tune on the dyno. I have seen tunes (maps) from the big guns that claim to tune complete....bottom line the ve's were v-tuned and nothing else touched. completely base map everywhere. I guess this goes back to your thread "how much for a proper tune" I think when you pay the price some guys charge you should get a complete tune. I am serious when I say some of these bikes you had to literally wind up to 3000 rpms to get them moving. I have the videos to prove it. sad really sad.

[strokerjlk]

John I don't have to think on it LOL. I don't believe the AFR line has to or needs to be straight......but you already knew that!
I can tell you though when they look like that (lonewolfs graph) throttle response is lousy. we are talking about the merits of v-tune or TS I though not TTS. I have no problem with TTS best tuner on the market for HD at this time. but V- TUNE until it is capable of tuning the whole map, not 40 % throttle and 80 kpa max,or is able to operate on wide bands so it doesn't heat up so fast. I spend 1/2 my time cooling the bike with it, (I know we are talking street tune) not dyno ...or are we hell I forget. ah hell forget it you are just  LOL.
How bout this .....offer two models one with all the toys,and one without v-tune,  data master, dyno whatever, etc... just the tuner for tuners

[Steve Cole]

I have no problem with TTS best tuner on the market for HD at this time. but V- TUNE until it is capable of tuning the whole map, not 40 % throttle and 80 kpa max,or is able to operate on wide bands so it doesn't heat up so fast.

I have no idea what you are doing to only be able to tune to 40% tps as that makes no sense at all. Let's look at what is going on here. MAP  running from 26 - 83 and V-tune will correct it when properly operated, so what range of the tune does that area cover? At sea level max MAP is ~100 kPa and min MAP is ~30 kPa for the engine operating range. Values below 30 kPa are typically decel only. Once the Throttle is open far enough to reach 83 kPa there is only a small amount left untuned 83 to 100 kPa. If you take the corrected values from 83 kPa and extend them to the end of the RPM row your going to find that they will be with .5 AFR of desired and always slight to the rich side which is just how we want it for safety. Now as far as it getting hot that just tells me you do not have near enough cooling fans moving air across the motor. Simple fix.... go buy a better fan!

Until Dyno operators are willing to step up to REAL Wide Band Sensors or purchase a system that correctly reads the Broad Band sensors with correction for temperature and pressure your not going to get much closer than +/- .5 AFR and with some of the current aftermarket meters we've tested that is +/- 1 AFR. We are more than willing to setup a system that allows a dyno operator to tune with true Wide Band Sensors but it's going to cost in the $20,000 range and every time we have discussed this there has been no one that is willing to sign up for it.

[rbabos]

But... this is a 'conversation' about the merits of TTS and other tuning methods, and NOT what some tuners do and don't do.  There are equally as bad of tuners using TS2, etc.  So... one should SLAM the Twin Scan because 'some' tuners do a crap job?  Nope... Just like saying that about v-tune?  Nope.    Another thing that COULD be one way or another?  Is Russel's v-tune AFR maps.  We, as humans, want everything to be pretty, so we THINK a straight line is best.  On a machine that operates in a dynamic environment... maybe the fuel DOES need to look like this to overcome obstacles at various RPMs?   I mean... REALLY think on that and not just fire something back.  The arguments are GOOD in this thread so far....  makes one THINK and not just accept whatever the 'gospel' is for the moment.  What bothers ME are those humps at 3k.  I 'might' go with the wavy, but that hump?  That cannot be right... it sits on a cell location.  (funny how you see ME argue FOR ts one minute and against TS the next?  THAT is to keep the information coming.)

I wonder of I can go find some AFR graphs from back in Z06 days....  Hmmmmm...

Jim... Your examples are WHAT is driving me..... BTW.

Mirror shakes at idle.  More weight... seems exaggerated a bit, but clears out like 1500.  Like I said, mirror mount was free, while a tank mount would cost me the price of the new door.  For v-tune, I see NO problem with the mirror thing.  On a twin scan?  We shall see.  I wonder if I can shrink enough to get the portions I WANT to see in real time up on that screen.  I surely could get AFRs, but could I get MAP AND the TACH?  Don't know yet.

I don't, as a rule, ride under 1500.  And... from my own experience with TTS, those are the cells that ALWAYS get hit first.  I bought new brake pds today.   It was EASY to hit some of the cells, since I could SEE them.  But... it would take brake taps and drags to get em green.  THAT is where the WVa Dyno is going to come into play.  Either US 250 or US 33......

Truk: Don't know if you've been following my exploits with trying to tune an oddball as Steve puts it. I can tell you it's been a education than most end users won't ever see. As for the braking and high loads, I think it bloats the ve numbers to higher than what they should be. It will be richer than needed once you drive normally in these ranges. Did it myself for no other reason to hit the higher cells, for a better reference for smoothing the map. So far what's worked best for me is drive it normally, like you would every day. Since ,with my low MAP numbers I was hard pressed to hit 60 kpa with hills and brakes. Too damn abusive and too much high speed, since it accels like an animal, even cracking it in sixth at 50 mph. I ended up doing it over and avoiding as much decel as possible, drove it normally to and above cruise rpms as well and some major passing action. I hit the cells I wanted, saved it and called it quits for vtune. Since I only had a few hits above 40 kpa smoothing was not done since there isn't enough data to do a decent smoothing job. The way I look at it is if you don't use them, it's just filler in the map. I've noticed the vtune numbers change depending on how it's driven, so tune it the way you would normally ride it and not like you are trying for low quarter mile times. Just my observations working with an oddball than won't follow the rules. Your's might, since I've taken over your bad luck from last year
Ron

[strokerjlk]

I have no problem with TTS best tuner on the market for HD at this time. but V- TUNE until it is capable of tuning the whole map, not 40 % throttle and 80 kpa max,or is able to operate on wide bands so it doesn't heat up so fast.

I have no idea what you are doing to only be able to tune to 40% tps as that makes no sense at all. Let's look at what is going on here. MAP  running from 26 - 83 and V-tune will correct it when properly operated, so what range of the tune does that area cover? At sea level max MAP is ~100 kPa and min MAP is ~30 kPa for the engine operating range. Values below 30 kPa are typically decel only. Once the Throttle is open far enough to reach 83 kPa there is only a small amount left untuned 83 to 100 kPa. If you take the corrected values from 83 kPa and extend them to the end of the RPM row your going to find that they will be with .5 AFR of desired and always slight to the rich side which is just how we want it for safety. Now as far as it getting hot that just tells me you do not have near enough cooling fans moving air across the motor. Simple fix.... go buy a better fan!

Until Dyno operators are willing to step up to REAL Wide Band Sensors or purchase a system that correctly reads the Broad Band sensors with correction for temperature and pressure your not going to get much closer than +/- .5 AFR and with some of the current aftermarket meters we've tested that is +/- 1 AFR. We are more than willing to setup a system that allows a dyno operator to tune with true Wide Band Sensors but it's going to cost in the $20,000 range and every time we have discussed this there has been no one that is willing to sign up for it.

where to start... I dont run the brake to step up through the rpms and only adjust one throttle position at a time.
I set the brake to hold specific RPM say 2250 and then go through all the throttle positions in that RPM range. no matter what gear I could only get readings to 40 % throttle or I should say get it to record data it would put the x out to the higher throttle positions but not collect data.
I did get readings up to 80 kpa. it took way longer then I thought it should to collect enough data to get a good reading.
as far a fans I have two very good fans that are enough to cool the bike whenever I tune other then v- tune. the dyno I have is the same one Doc used when he worked at Zepka H-D, same fans and so I assume they were adequate enough for him also. I have added a couple more fans that are dedicated to the exhaust also. I can assure you volume is not the problem.
with v-tune I could only work one RPM at a time and then cool. with twin scan I can work 2-3 rpm range cells before stopping to cool.just depends on what ones I work. higher rpm ranges naturally generate more heat.
I dont buy into the "cheap" wide band not being as accurate as the stock narrow band sensors theory. they have been used for years and as long as you keep the calibrated and replace them when they are weak they work fine. I am lucky enough to have access to cal gas where I work . we work in confined spaces (reactors) and have to cal our monitors every 24 hrs. so they do get calibrated .I do agree that the stock narrow band sensors are as accurate as the the "cheap" wide bands but you have to work within there range. that range just plain makes for a hot running motor. on the street it wouldn't be as big a problem. but if I add anymore fans to the dyno I am going to have to own stock in the power company.

I told you and Bob both at the v-twin Expo I would give the v- tune a honest shot because it would be great to tune the 2010 touring bikes with it on the dyno,and not have to jack with those 12 mm sensors or use a sniffer on them. but honestly I have better results with the twin scan.
my v-tuned bike the guinea pig for me, lost 10/10 and had horrible throttle response. I know some have had some luck with it but I didnt. maybe when I have some more time I will give it another shot. because it sure would be nice to use it on the 10's

[johncr]

Hope I don't get booted for bringing up another tuner, but since the thread is titled Best home made tune I think this qualifies.
What is the difference between v-tune and the SEPST (Super Tuners) Smart Tune?
Does the v-tune have more capabilities somehow?
The process sounds the same, program the ECM with a smartune enabled map. It automatically sets all the cells to 14.6. Set the VCI to record mode and go ride. Turn recording on and off with the button on the VCI. The new software/VCI firmware allows up to an hour of recording before the buffer is full.
Load the recordings into the software and the program evaluates the recordings and makes the recommendations to the VE tables.
I realize there are other items like accelerator enrichment it does not change for the recording phase, but I’m not sure if it’s necessary or not. (just learning also)
Anybody work enough with the smartune to know if it is a valuable tool or not?

[Steve Cole]

strokerjlk

Well I'm not sure what you have going on because Bob tunes with Vtune and doesn't have a heating issue, we do not here and Doc's shop isn't having issues. So something is going on at your end. Now I have the smallest cooling system of all three of us and I can run typically from idle to 3500 hitting all the cells without having to stop. Above that I can go to all cell for 2 complete RPM points at a time before cooling any. As far as 40% like I said once you reach 83 kPa your done and yes that does happen at lower RPM but typically at engine speeds above 3000 RPM your going to get to 60 - 80% tps range.

Now as far as how long it takes it's about 5 -6 seconds per data point to collect enough data for a proper correction, that's not very long in my book and I doubt that a twin scan is going much faster than that. With the dyno setup and cooling being handled that's about 20- 25 minutes for both cylinders! The hot running motor just doesn't make any sense to me either. If we tune the VE's at lets say 14.4:1 which is well within the range of the sensors then adjust the AFR after the VE's are set to 14:1 your going to see about 13.8:1 and if you want it to be richer it's no more than changing the AFR setting so you can and do get what you want.

How are you calibrating the Twin Scan when it has no provision for correcting based on temperature or pressure? The corrections can be found on the Bosch data sheet that needs to be applied for a correct reading and must be taken at the same time as the reading. While the stock sensors do not need this correction, the Broad Band sensor does. This is why the stock ones can be more accurate within there limited range.

Let me ask you a question, what do you think the VE is going to be at 2250 RPM, 40% tps and 100 kPa? What about 2250 RPM, 60% tps and 100 kPa? Again 2250 RPM, 80% tps and 100 kPa?

Everyone has there own way of doing things and how you like to do it is up to you, I just think you might be missing something and that is why your having an issue.

johncr

Hd came out with smart tune about a year after we released V-tune. While it is a start it does not have the capabilities of V-tune. Is it better than nothing, sure.

[wavlovr1]

just my 2 cents, because I am not a tuner and do not have a dyno... I have used both Twinscan with Wego and TTS. I like them both but doing test runs on the streets, I can tell you that twinscan with wego takes much more time and work to collect data than TTS. I am amazed how well the TTS works for me. I only make about 3 to 4 runs for about twenty minutes each and I get most of the usable cells filled with data. The motor doesn't overheat and it is a 2009 at 10.5:1 compression with the 255 cams.

Now I can't prove my bike is perfectly tuned, but I for one am more than happy with it. I haven't come up against a 110 that can even come close to hanging with me and it's just a 103. The bike runs cool, fast, and still gets better mpg than when stock. It is a Street Glide and will pull the front tire off the pavement in second gear, so I am reasonably sure it's tuned pretty good. I am thinking that setting the CLBs a little richer would cure the overheat problem. As far as time needed to collect data, I am just guessing but I would think the heat may be an issue.

Like I said, don't know that much about it but TTS sure works good for me.

jimbob

[Steve Cole]

The HD copy of Vtune is missing the ability to allow for changes to start with. Once you check the smart tune box it changes whatever you set on the screen to what it wants. It does not show you the changes nor does it tell you about them. Now when you go to collect data you have no idea of what is going on. Just think about Vtune with no display, no input for you to see about anything, so you have no idea of what data was collected or how much data was collected. Now once you load the data into the tuner it will show you changes but you still have no idea how they got there or if any of it is suspect data.

There is a lot more that it's not doing well under the covers so to speak but I see no reason to get into all of that now.

[wavlovr1]

Jimbob, did you run the twin scan AFTER you dialed in with TTS, and what were the results?

No, I used them on two different bikes. The twinscan and wego I got a couple of years ago to tune my 2002 Deuce. The motor is a 11:1 95 inch with all HQ parts and headwork. The 0033 cams make a ton of power from 4000-6500 where I shift. The power starts coming in about 3500. I have had the thing dyno tuned with different exhaust systems many times and WOT is really amazing. The problem always was the low end manners (2000-4000). Dyno guys could make it sing above 3500, but it was very pissy below that which is where most of the riding is done. Nobody could seem to tame the beast down low with that much cam overlap. I ran HQ's protuner for a while but ran into issues because it only took data from a rear O2 sensor to regulate and would occasionally run the front cylinder too rich.

I ran probably close to a hundred data runs over the years, looking at the data and trying different combinations of timing and AFR (excessive/compulsive?). I started to hit on a pattern of numbers that tamed the low end bad attitude. Now it idles smooth, has good smooth power from idle up, and still gets decent mpg. The weird part is that it runs extremely cool now. In heavy traffic at high outside temps, it pretty much stays cool as well. I made the changes with the old SERT using the TS/Wego data.

My 2009 Street Glide came delivered with the Stage II 103 kit (10.5:1 and 255 cams). It ran smoking hot. I got the TTS to see if I could get temps down without killing mpg. Again I did a lot of tests using different starting points. I finally ended up using Steve's Fullsac 110 dyno map as a starting point. (I got the 2" cores and TTS from Fulsac). I sort of worked backwards from that 110 map using a 103 map as a reference point. This whole process was much quicker than the TS/Wego process on the Deuce. The results were better than I had imagined. The dropoff of power at 4000 everyone talks about is almost not noticible on the 103. The drop seems very gradual to me and others who have ridden it. I usually shift between 5000-5500 when running it WOT.

Overall, I am finally pleased with the way both bikes perform. If you knew me, you would probably say that is impossible, LOL. Both TS and TTS are great tools. To me, TTS just seems like it is much easier to use. The largest investment in the TTS was reading all the instructions and trying to grasp the implications. Fortunately for me, all my questions get answered by the real tuners here online.

jimbob

[johncr]

The HD copy of Vtune is missing the ability to allow for changes to start with. Once you check the smart tune box it changes whatever you set on the screen to what it wants. It does not show you the changes nor does it tell you about them. Now when you go to collect data you have no idea of what is going on. Just think about Vtune with no display, no input for you to see about anything, so you have no idea of what data was collected or how much data was collected. Now once you load the data into the tuner it will show you changes but you still have no idea how they got there or if any of it is suspect data.

There is a lot more that it's not doing well under the covers so to speak but I see no reason to get into all of that now.

Steve,
I am not by any means challenging the fact that V-tune has more features but just want to point something out.
When you click Smart tune to flash the ECM it does make changes but the fact that you don’t know what it changed is not necessarily true. Once the flash is complete (in smart tune mode) you can retrieve that map from the ECM my loading the map from the VCI. It will show the current map (in smart tune) mode and you can see what changes it did or didn’t make to the map.
As I mentioned in the previous reply, I don’t think it changes the acceleration enrichment or CLB table, how important is it that these get set before the data collection?

[Steve Cole]

The HD copy of Vtune is missing the ability to allow for changes to start with. Once you check the smart tune box it changes whatever you set on the screen to what it wants. It does not show you the changes nor does it tell you about them. Now when you go to collect data you have no idea of what is going on. Just think about Vtune with no display, no input for you to see about anything, so you have no idea of what data was collected or how much data was collected. Now once you load the data into the tuner it will show you changes but you still have no idea how they got there or if any of it is suspect data.

There is a lot more that it's not doing well under the covers so to speak but I see no reason to get into all of that now.

Steve,
I am not by any means challenging the fact that V-tune has more features but just want to point something out.
When you click Smart tune to flash the ECM it does make changes but the fact that you don’t know what it changed is not necessarily true. Once the flash is complete (in smart tune mode) you can retrieve that map from the ECM my loading the map from the VCI. It will show the current map (in smart tune) mode and you can see what changes it did or didn’t make to the map.
As I mentioned in the previous reply, I don’t think it changes the acceleration enrichment or CLB table, how important is it that these get set before the data collection?

Unless this is something only in the latest version only, that was not true with any of the earlier versions. Since I have not checked the  latest release it could have changed. In the past there are several tables changed and since they are not event shown in the tuner how can you see them now? As for the CLB table it has always forced them to 450 in the past versions regardless of what you put in, but I will have to check the latest release to see if they changed it.

[johncr]

The HD copy of Vtune is missing the ability to allow for changes to start with. Once you check the smart tune box it changes whatever you set on the screen to what it wants. It does not show you the changes nor does it tell you about them. Now when you go to collect data you have no idea of what is going on. Just think about Vtune with no display, no input for you to see about anything, so you have no idea of what data was collected or how much data was collected. Now once you load the data into the tuner it will show you changes but you still have no idea how they got there or if any of it is suspect data.

There is a lot more that it's not doing well under the covers so to speak but I see no reason to get into all of that now.

Steve,
I am not by any means challenging the fact that V-tune has more features but just want to point something out.
When you click Smart tune to flash the ECM it does make changes but the fact that you don’t know what it changed is not necessarily true. Once the flash is complete (in smart tune mode) you can retrieve that map from the ECM my loading the map from the VCI. It will show the current map (in smart tune) mode and you can see what changes it did or didn’t make to the map.
As I mentioned in the previous reply, I don’t think it changes the acceleration enrichment or CLB table, how important is it that these get set before the data collection?

Unless this is something only in the latest version only, that was not true with any of the earlier versions. Since I have not checked the  latest release it could have changed. In the past there are several tables changed and since they are not event shown in the tuner how can you see them now? As for the CLB table it has always forced them to 450 in the past versions regardless of what you put in, but I will have to check the latest release to see if they changed it.

Steve,
You are correct, if there are tables that do not show in the actual tuning software you would not be able to see them by pulling the smart tune map from the VCI. I’m guessing that is one of the areas the SEPST falls short of the V-tune, having limited control over all the options.
Since that is what I have at this point, do you recommend CLB at 450 and Acceleration Enrichment set to Zero for collecting data?

Thanks for your help.

[strokerjlk]

strokerjlk

Well I'm not sure what you have going on because Bob tunes with Vtune and doesn't have a heating issue, we do not here and Doc's shop isn't having issues. So something is going on at your end. Now I have the smallest cooling system of all three of us and I can run typically from idle to 3500 hitting all the cells without having to stop. Above that I can go to all cell for 2 complete RPM points at a time before cooling any. As far as 40% like I said once you reach 83 kPa your done and yes that does happen at lower RPM but typically at engine speeds above 3000 RPM your going to get to 60 - 80% tps range.

Now as far as how long it takes it's about 5 -6 seconds per data point to collect enough data for a proper correction, that's not very long in my book and I doubt that a twin scan is going much faster than that. With the dyno setup and cooling being handled that's about 20- 25 minutes for both cylinders! The hot running motor just doesn't make any sense to me either. If we tune the VE's at lets say 14.4:1 which is well within the range of the sensors then adjust the AFR after the VE's are set to 14:1 your going to see about 13.8:1 and if you want it to be richer it's no more than changing the AFR setting so you can and do get what you want.

How are you calibrating the Twin Scan when it has no provision for correcting based on temperature or pressure? The corrections can be found on the Bosch data sheet that needs to be applied for a correct reading and must be taken at the same time as the reading. While the stock sensors do not need this correction, the Broad Band sensor does. This is why the stock ones can be more accurate within there limited range.

Let me ask you a question, what do you think the VE is going to be at 2250 RPM, 40% tps and 100 kPa? What about 2250 RPM, 60% tps and 100 kPa? Again 2250 RPM, 80% tps and 100 kPa?

Everyone has there own way of doing things and how you like to do it is up to you, I just think you might be missing something and that is why your having an issue.

johncr

Hd came out with smart tune about a year after we released V-tune. While it is a start it does not have the capabilities of V-tune. Is it better than nothing, sure.

this is the gas we use. as far as the set up to calibrate sensors we have one of the most sophisticated labs in the country. sorry no pics of that .I want to keep my job. you understand  proprietary I am sure. we test many types of sensors for various gases chemicals etc. this lab is set up with  mass spectrometry so it isn't just the run of mill. the engineer that is charge of the lab calibrates them for me although I know the procedure and the equipment he uses. I can say that they are under a 1 Torr (1000 micron) vacuum so it is not a free air calibration. this lab is his baby! so no messing around with his equipment I have my baby on the other end of the plant and he doesn't mess with my stuff either.
one thing I can tell you is the free air cal of the twin scan is pretty good until they are degraded to the point that they cant be calibrated with it.
you are correct the twin scan takes 5 sec to record a cell. I know the V-tune is supposed to take the same time 5-6 sec but it doesn't for me so yes I could be doing something wrong. I am not perfect or the smartest man alive. I do have a elec /mech Eng degree so I like to think I am not a complete idiot. (depends on who you ask).LOL
your question ....I realize 100kpa at 2250 is 100 kpa.no mater the throttle position

[Steve Cole]

The calibration gas is all well and good but the issue is from the temperature and pressure corrections that are not being used in the unit! I would assume your only running the calibration test at room temperature and pressure. It is required according to the manufacture of the sensor (Bosch). Last time I looked the exhaust is anything but room temperature and pressure and both the temperature and pressure change with engine speed and RPM. There are some equipment manufactures that do make the test equipment with them used correctly but last I looked they wanted $3000 for it. At that kind of cost you might as well go get the real deal and use real Wide Band sensors. This way you have no need to mount the extra probes in the exhaust of each bike you want to test.

Since you understand that 100 kPa is the same thing regardless of throttle position then you should also understand the VE will not change in those conditions. So if you have 100 Kpa at 15% tps all the cells above 15 % tps at a fixed RPM will get the same values. Since we can get up to 83 kPa if you use the corrected value from that cell and extend it to the end of the RPM row you have now filled in all the points for that RPM. The final result has always been the same and that is you will find that you are about .5 AFR richer than what you have set at 100 kPa.

If you would like to run a test I think you will find that you can move the AFR +/- .5 AFR and see little to No change in power output. So by erroring to the rich side we keep the bike cooler for those who do not have a dyno. Those with a dyno and proper measuring equipment can make those final adjustments to get the last little bit out of the motor.

[strokerjlk]

 

The calibration gas is all well and good but the issue is from the temperature and pressure corrections that are not being used in the unit! I would assume your only running the calibration test at room temperature and pressure. It is required according to the manufacture of the sensor (Bosch).

they are calibrated at what ever temp Bosch recommends or what we have found to work. we test sensors not only from Bosch but most every other manufacturer.
and they are under vacuum 1 TORR 1000 microns not free air. although we use some other methods besides what the manufacture recommends on other sensors. I don't believe Bosch is one of them.  you see we designed and wrote the  recommendations for testing many of these sensors on the market.
we have proprietary testing methods that only we use. rest assured they are calibrated.and the equipment was a lot more then 3000.00. we use sensors that cost more then that.

[Steve Cole]

I understand only too well what good equipment cost, we've got plenty of it here. My point is that Bosch (the maker of the sensor) says you must read the sensor, the temperature and the pressure all at the same time to arrive at an accurate output reading. That means that you must be able to read the temperature and pressure from within the exhaust system as the sensor is read. Leaving out any part of that gives you an inaccurate reading and too the best of my knowledge the twin scan nor any of the other aftermarket units currently do that, please correct me if I am wrong!

So the sensor can be calibrated as much as you want in lab conditions but if you do not use it as the manufacture defines it to be used your not going to get the results listed in there specification sheet. If you do not use the corrections for temperature and pressure the reading can be off +/- 1.0 AFR! So you tell me does it matter if your off by +/- 1.0 AFR?

In our testing +/- .5 AFR showed little change provided you were in the range of 13.8 - 12.8 AFR but +/-1.0 AFR is going to be a problem. Were we really get scared is if the sensor happens to be off in the  14.6 - 14.2 area as that can really cause issues when your trying to lean the motor down for cruise range mileage. Now go back to the stock switching sensor and it's dead bang on in the 14.6 - 14.2 range which is where we use it to tune with. I know we cannot accurately read outside that range but I also know that the math in the ECM works very well once calibrated. So by setting it up where the stock sensor is good, then allowing the ECM to handle the richer areas, it works very nicely for us.

[strokerjlk]

per Bosch

Sensors should be placed so they are not overheated (gas temp not above 750 °C, nor cooled beyond the ability of the heater to maintain their working temperature (~10 Watts).
All pump cell wide band sensors are pressure sensitive. They should not be placed where the working gas pressure is much above or below atmospheric pressure, otherwise different calibration curves must be used for best accuracy.

Twin scan has a heater installed to keep the LSU 4.2  within there operating range. as does  dynojet.  it only takes a 10 watt heater to maintain 600-750 C inside the exhaust.
and as long as you don't try to use them MUCH above or below ATMOSPHERIC pressure then they maintain there accuracy. They could become +/- 1.0 if you tried to use them in a 400 C exhaust without a heater or were to somehow expose them to increased or decreased atmospheric pressure. to say that one is better or worse depends entirely on if they are used within there capabilities.

[Steve Cole]

per Bosch

Sensors should be placed so they are not overheated (gas temp not above 750 °C, nor cooled beyond the ability of the heater to maintain their working temperature (~10 Watts).
All pump cell wide band sensors are pressure sensitive. They should not be placed where the working gas pressure is much above or below atmospheric pressure, otherwise different calibration curves must be used for best accuracy.

Twin scan has a heater installed to keep the LSU 4.2  within there operating range. as does  dynojet.  it only takes a 10 watt heater to maintain 600-750 C inside the exhaust.
and as long as you don't try to use them MUCH above or below ATMOSPHERIC pressure then they maintain there accuracy. They could become +/- 1.0 if you tried to use them in a 400 C exhaust without a heater or were to somehow expose them to increased or decreased atmospheric pressure. to say that one is better or worse depends entirely on if they are used within there capabilities.

Granted the heater will heat the sensor up but it will do nothing to cool it! Since there is no temperature sensor with the sensor you have no idea of the temperature it is at when a reading is taken. Bosch does however make a sensor that does have a temperature sensor in it but it cost more and is not readily available. Last I looked temperature of the exhaust varies on placement in the exhaust stream along with running conditions of the motor, so you really have no idea what it is unless it gets measured. This is just why Bosch tells you it HAS to be measure for ACCURATE readings! A properly running HD motor will run in a range of 260° C to 760° C in normal riding. Where you place the sensor can make big difference in temperature!

So what is ATMOSPHERIC pressure to you? Sea Level, 2500 ft, 5000 ft......... plus once inside the exhaust the pressure is ALWAYS above atmospheric IT'S JUST WE HAVE NO IDEA WHERE and it varies from build to build and exhaust system to exhaust system. Change the mufflers and you change the pressure in the exhaust, again the reason why Bosch says you must measure it!

Look hiding from the facts isn't going to change them any, and when using the sensors properly (which none of the aftermarket units do) it would be a different story.

[strokerjlk]

Look hiding from the facts isn't going to change them any

who's hiding from the facts

wide bands have been used for years with great results. hard to imagine anything got tuned correct before the narrow bands were placed in the closed loop bikes.
starting to get redundant here. So I will let it go. great tuner the TTS how about marketing one without v-tune, data master for say 1/3 less for guys that just want a good tune from a dyno tuner and not tinker around with a laptop strapped on?

[Steve Cole]

Yes, TRUE WIDE BANDS have been used for years and they work great! It's just the cheaper Broad Bands that are being used by the aftermarket and claiming them to be Wide Bands that have all the issues point out above. Under the conditions the Broad Band sensors are being used they are no more accurate than switching sensors and less accurate during the switching sensors narrow area of operation.

If you want to hang your hat on the Broad bands being used the way they are today then you must also admit that they have the issues spelled out by the manufacture of the sensor if you use them improperly as is being done today.

This is not about ours is better than the others but to say there's is better than ours due to the sensor is just wrong. As for getting the cost down I do not see that happening anytime soon, with HD making changes each year the R&D eats away all the time. I think it like asking a tuner to cut his cost by 1/3, I do not see that happening anytime soon either!

[strokerjlk]

This is not about ours is better than the others but to say there's is better than ours due to the sensor is just wrong. As for getting the cost down I do not see that happening anytime soon, with HD making changes each year the R&D eats away all the time. I think it like asking a tuner to cut his cost by 1/3, I do not see that happening anytime soon either!

fair enough....
one more try. how about something just like ole SERT for 1/3 less with the timing temp and PE adj? I am serious here if the bike doesn't have sensors anyway the customer is just wasting money on all the bells and whistles.
one more thing before I let this one die. Are the TTS canned maps for the CVO bikes in the TTS files tuned with v-tune. Interesting enough when they are a match to the bike being tuned they don't need very much correcting as far as VE's when tuned with twin scan. higher KPA areas only.

[Steve Cole]

Most of the later calibrations for O2 sensor bikes were done with V-tune and then check with a real Wide Band system but not all. I have not gone back and gotten each combination in house to do them all over again. As I get a combination back in house we will release any changes as we go along. That is why it is important to only use the latest calibrations we supply and not hold on to the old ones, they get updated for a reason. As far as any different models of tuner that's not going to change unless a new model year requires it.

When are you going to drop your tuning charges by 1/3rd? It cost so much to be in business and we all have to pay the bills.

[strokerjlk]

Most of the later calibrations for O2 sensor bikes were done with V-tune and then check with a real Wide Band system but not all. I have not gone back and gotten each combination in house to do them all over again. As I get a combination back in house we will release any changes as we go along. That is why it is important to only use the latest calibrations we supply and not hold on to the old ones, they get updated for a reason. As far as any different models of tuner that's not going to change unless a new model year requires it.

When are you going to drop your tuning charges by 1/3rd? It cost so much to be in business and we all have to pay the bills.

I wasn't trying to piss you off about the stripped down model. honest question. as most guys just want a good tune and could care less about v-tune datamaster etc. I understand your comment about my tuning price and staying in business. my price is already 1/3 less then most. LOL.

[Steve Cole]

Most of the later calibrations for O2 sensor bikes were done with V-tune and then check with a real Wide Band system but not all. I have not gone back and gotten each combination in house to do them all over again. As I get a combination back in house we will release any changes as we go along. That is why it is important to only use the latest calibrations we supply and not hold on to the old ones, they get updated for a reason. As far as any different models of tuner that's not going to change unless a new model year requires it.

When are you going to drop your tuning charges by 1/3rd? It cost so much to be in business and we all have to pay the bills.

I wasn't trying to piss you off about the stripped down model. honest question. as most guys just want a good tune and could care less about v-tune datamaster etc. I understand your comment about my tuning price and staying in business. my price is already 1/3 less then most. LOL.

Not pissed off but asking us to drop our prices when we know what it cost us to develop, maintain it and pay the bills is no different then saying you should drop your prices by 1/3 too. Doesn't matter that you've already spent the money to learn how to tune and have purchased equipment to do it with you just need to drop your price. Sorry but it just doesn't work that way.

[strokerjlk]

Most of the later calibrations for O2 sensor bikes were done with V-tune and then check with a real Wide Band system but not all. I have not gone back and gotten each combination in house to do them all over again. As I get a combination back in house we will release any changes as we go along. That is why it is important to only use the latest calibrations we supply and not hold on to the old ones, they get updated for a reason. As far as any different models of tuner that's not going to change unless a new model year requires it.

When are you going to drop your tuning charges by 1/3rd? It cost so much to be in business and we all have to pay the bills.

I wasn't trying to piss you off about the stripped down model. honest question. as most guys just want a good tune and could care less about v-tune datamaster etc. I understand your comment about my tuning price and staying in business. my price is already 1/3 less then most. LOL.

Not pissed off but asking us to drop our prices when we know what it cost us to develop, maintain it and pay the bills is no different then saying you should drop your prices by 1/3 too. Doesn't matter that you've already spent the money to learn how to tune and have purchased equipment to do it with you just need to drop your price. Sorry but it just doesn't work that way.

OK worded diff...market a stripped down version to compete with the fuelers etc. no frills no bells and whistles. I am not saying drop the price of the current tuner. If a guy has a 05 or earlier bike and doesn't need v-tune  or the TBW features etc why make him pay for it all? basically just like the SERT before closed loop.
I wasn't merely asking you to drop the price.
I hear all the time I just bought so and so because it was cheaper and so and so said I didnt need all that stuff if I was going to dyno tune anyway. not saying it is right just a observation. I talk till I am blue in the face to potential customers about the merits of TTS over other tuners. but some just don't listen and purchase something else because they feel they didnt need the extra options .  O-well I tried!

[strokerjlk]

Got the Twin Scan + kit today.   I have to fix an exhaust leak first, though.  Tore the cam chest apart looking for what the heck is making noise.  After hearing Jim's bike last week.....  felt I needed to see what's up with my own bike.

I guess your not sending that new Fat cat Boss to me for some mock up then?   

[BVHOG]

I've read this whole thing and really have to wonder where the truth lies here, if everything Steve says is accurate, than companies like DTT, Zippers, and Dynojet are just wasting there time using the type of sensors they do. I bet their opinion would differ on the ability of these sensors to do the job. I hear that the narrow bands are so much more accurate within their range, maybe be true but I have never had a problem using the Bosch DTT sensors, if they were as inaccurate as they are being depicted here the bikes I have tuned with them would have rough running or surging, or bad mileage, that has never been the case though.  We keep hearing how bad these sensors are only from the manufacturer of a product that does not use them yet feels it is adequate to simply "guess" at the final numbers at WOT, high MAP, you can word it differently any way you want but it is no more than hypothesis, an educated guess at best. From personal experience this simply will not cut it in any way shape or form, you might as well guess at the entire map it you are going to rely on this method. I agree the TTS is far and away the best ecm reprogramming tuner on the market, I also feel the V-tune portion of it is incomplete at best with it's inability to read and sample all of the running areas of the bike.
On another note, I may be the only one around these forums that has used the DTT stuff more than Stroker, I started using it back when it was available only as a single channel unit a few years ago and have continued the use of it's data logging capabilities through the process of becoming a dyno owner. I have tested the DTT stuff against the stock sensors and the afr numbers were basically identical when compared against the stock 2 wire units. You guys that own these systems(DTT twinscan)can easily hook up to the newer bikes and read the 02 data against target afr. you may be surprised at what you see. Everyone has their favorite method to what we are all trying to achieve, a well tuned bike with good street manners and decent mileage. I have more than become tired of hearing how it supposedly cannot be achieved with the "cheap" heated 02 sensors, this is simply not true. I would rather see these products be marketed with a bias more toward what they can offer than marketed by what others supposedly cant.

[lonewolf]

 :up:Well said Bob.

[Steve Cole]

I've read this whole thing and really have to wonder where the truth lies here, if everything Steve says is accurate, than companies like DTT, Zippers, and Dynojet are just wasting there time using the type of sensors they do. I bet their opinion would differ on the ability of these sensors to do the job. I hear that the narrow bands are so much more accurate within their range, maybe be true but I have never had a problem using the Bosch DTT sensors, if they were as inaccurate as they are being depicted here the bikes I have tuned with them would have rough running or surging, or bad mileage, that has never been the case though.  We keep hearing how bad these sensors are only from the manufacturer of a product that does not use them yet feels it is adequate to simply "guess" at the final numbers at WOT, high MAP, you can word it differently any way you want but it is no more than hypothesis, an educated guess at best. From personal experience this simply will not cut it in any way shape or form, you might as well guess at the entire map it you are going to rely on this method. I agree the TTS is far and away the best ecm reprogramming tuner on the market, I also feel the V-tune portion of it is incomplete at best with it's inability to read and sample all of the running areas of the bike.
On another note, I may be the only one around these forums that has used the DTT stuff more than Stroker, I started using it back when it was available only as a single channel unit a few years ago and have continued the use of it's data logging capabilities through the process of becoming a dyno owner. I have tested the DTT stuff against the stock sensors and the afr numbers were basically identical when compared against the stock 2 wire units. You guys that own these systems(DTT twinscan)can easily hook up to the newer bikes and read the 02 data against target afr. you may be surprised at what you see. Everyone has their favorite method to what we are all trying to achieve, a well tuned bike with good street manners and decent mileage. I have more than become tired of hearing how it supposedly cannot be achieved with the "cheap" heated 02 sensors, this is simply not true. I would rather see these products be marketed with a bias more toward what they can offer than marketed by what others supposedly cant.

So you are saying that the manufacture of the sensor is wrong? I am only saying what Bosch has put into there specifications. You do not have to do what they say but do not expect to get the results they say either! While all of these devices do work, saying one is more accurate than the other is pure BS.

Yes, the sensor can do it but the improper use of the sensor and not following what the manufacture tells you to do is where the problem comes from.

[BVHOG]

Never said the manufacturer of the sensor is wrong, what I'm saying is the application these sensors are being used in is working, I think that's pretty obvious. Also never said one was more accurate than the other but that is exactly what you would have the readers of your posts believe, that's the only BS I have seen.

[Steve Cole]

The stock switching sensors are more accurate within there operating range of 14.2 - 15.0 outside of that range they are no better or no worse than the Broad Band sensors as they are being used today by the aftermarket. If one steps up and uses the Broad Band sensor as specified by Bosch then they will be more accurate outside the switching sensor range and match there performance with in the range.

This should make very clear what I am and am not saying.

So when someone says that 13.5, 13.2, 14.6 AFR is the spot to be you need to use equipment capable of accurately measure it first! None of the aftermarket systems that currently use the Broad band sensors do this today. They will get you no closer than the stock sensors can and do.

[wavlovr1]

can I hook the Twinscan/wego up on my 2009 bagger using the stock sensors on that bike?... I'm just curious to see what it would show...

jb

[BVHOG]

The stock switching sensors are more accurate within there operating range of 14.2 - 15.0 outside of that range they are no better or no worse than the Broad Band sensors as they are being used today by the aftermarket. If one steps up and uses the Broad Band sensor as specified by Bosch then they will be more accurate outside the switching sensor range and match there performance with in the range.

This should make very clear what I am and am not saying.

So when someone says that 13.5, 13.2, 14.6 AFR is the spot to be you need to use equipment capable of accurately measure it first! None of the aftermarket systems that currently use the Broad band sensors do this today. They will get you no closer than the stock sensors can and do.

Agreed, like I said before, we are all just using a different means to the same end, I'm guessing that you have tried a work around for the open loop areas that you can't cover now. Theoretically it should be possible. Have you indeed looked into this?

[Don D]

You may be surprised to find the TS software allows you to toggle between sensor types.

[Steve Cole]

The stock switching sensors are more accurate within there operating range of 14.2 - 15.0 outside of that range they are no better or no worse than the Broad Band sensors as they are being used today by the aftermarket. If one steps up and uses the Broad Band sensor as specified by Bosch then they will be more accurate outside the switching sensor range and match there performance with in the range.

This should make very clear what I am and am not saying.

So when someone says that 13.5, 13.2, 14.6 AFR is the spot to be you need to use equipment capable of accurately measure it first! None of the aftermarket systems that currently use the Broad band sensors do this today. They will get you no closer than the stock sensors can and do.

Agreed, like I said before, we are all just using a different means to the same end, I'm guessing that you have tried a work around for the open loop areas that you can't cover now. Theoretically it should be possible. Have you indeed looked into this?

We can do the entire area if we like but in testing we were to afraid of people hurting the air cooled engine when running at the lower limit of 14.2 AFR. If you look at where 83 kPa gets you and forget that the table is in throttle % it only makes sense to do it like we have. Trying to use the sensors at 100 kPa would require us to say the sensors were good enough to properly measure richer than we knew they could do accurately as we feel 13.5 is as lean as you should go under this condition.

Let's forget for the moment the TPS %, if the motor is being tested at sea level 100 kPa is all your going to get, doesn't matter what the throttle % is. 100 kPa is all the atmospheric pressure there is and opening or closing the throttle makes no difference as long as the pressure remains the same. So the cell at any given RPM that you hit 100 kPa is as good as it gets. So now what do we fill the other cells in with if 100 kPa occurs at 15% tps? You still have 20 % to 100% to go at that RPM. The answer is they all get the same value as it's the same 100 kPa. So since we can measure at 83kPa we just use that value and have found that it gets you to within .5 AFR which is as good as most aftermarket measuring equipment goes. We do have real Wide Bands here and tested all this several times. What you end up with is a slightly richer mixture than you think you have and we are good with that as it will not damage the motor. Now it may cost you a Hp or two but it will keep it running cooler.

Now let's think about what happens when your out riding and your bike was tuned at sea level but now your up at 5500 ft. Since atmospheric pressure is now only 85 kPa what happened to the tune? The cell that you used to hit 100 Kpa is gone as you cannot hit it any longer the best you get is 85 now. So the tuning has changed. This is why HD has gone to Map based VE tables for 2010 Touring bikes as it gets a better tune across all riding conditions. I think we will see this method be used more and more as time goes on. This by the way is how everyone else has done it for years, HD was the only odd company using tps% for VE's.

[FBRR]

Wurk-turk gave a good analysis of the difference between narrow band and broadband sensors.

A narrowband sensor sees ONE THING oxygen or the lack of oxygen. IN OTHER words STOICH. They are only advertised or more correctly designed to sense STOICH a/f ratio. Manufacturers state that they, "narrowband" sensors can be used to control A/F from STOICH to plus or minus .5 A/F ratio.
Several salient points here! As fuel changes ( both fuel and percent ethanol!!) STIOCH changes. While the Stoich switch point is calibrated by the manufacturer, change in voltage vs. A/F ratio is not absolute!!

Even the application manual states "other" factors ( aging, temperature, and fuel type) have more impact on slight changes in voltage vs. A/F ratio!
So while narrow band sensor can be used to CONTROL A/F from plus or minus .5 A/F ratio, that does not mean their "output" is accurate in that range for voltage vs. A/F.

Fuel control in this instance does not mean "commanded" A/F, BUT it does MEAN Controled A/F within that range. CONTROL is dependant on FUEL CONTROL! FUEL CONTROL is the way  the switch point voltage is used in conjuction with software control of the fuel integrator! The intergrator is the result of reading the switch point voltage and both adding and subtracting fuel from the pulse width to DRIVE fuel control about a mean A/F ratio.
If you have access to real A/F measurement benches, you will see the pretubations ( switches of the O2 sensor) are a RESULTANT of the integerator changes in pulse width. The really interesting part of that is for each PERTUBATION of the fuel control, is in fact A CHANGE in A/F ratio!! So while you can "bias" the closed loop fuel control an AVERAGE of plus or minus .5 A/F, the real A/F with closed loop control active is a function of the integrator! Under "normal" closed loop operation those pertubations can be as much as .2 a/f ratio swings with each change in O2 sensor state from rich to lean!

The bottom line here for those arguing that "narrow band" are "as accurate" as broadband sensors, is the narrow band can be used with correct APPLICATION of fuel control keep A/F ratios with plus or minus .5 a/f OF STOICH! The specification of narrow band sensors DOES NOT say they are accurate for VOLTAGE vs. A/F! They are not! As stoich changes the "measured" A/F even at the MEAN voltage of the narrow band sensor is not constant. Braodband sensors when correctly calibrated DO MEASURE Lamda A/F ratio vs. a GIVEN VOLTAGE!!

If you push "fuel control" too far on the rich side with a CLB,(as I have previously posted) the A/F pertubations as a result of the fuel control integrator "hanging" either on the high or low side of control, will be out of control for some amount of time. The longer the integrator takes to return to "switch point control" is the amount of time the A/F is not being controlled as expected. One big thing on fuel control! is the base fuel control has affects on other SYSTEMS and algorithms. Both A.E. ( acceleration enrichment) and D.E. ( decel enleanment). System learning ( and by definition VE calibration) is also dependant on the Integrator being in a NORMAL operating range! Learning does not happen when the Integrator is outside of a calibrated window! So if the integrator is "hanging" one side or the other of th erich lean switch point, VE's are not learning.

The other elephant in the room with regard to broadband vs. narrowband VE development is the Broadband ais accurate vs.voltage ( when calibrated correctly) at 2 lamda ( much richer than narrow band range)

Expected A/F ratios for power enrichment are much richer than stoich. To run  those power enrichment speed and load points at near stoich (for closed loop control with a narrow band sensor) and then actually commanding a very much richer A/F for best power will result in a change in VE! So the best way to calibrate P.E , V.E's is to lock the integrator at nominal value, and command an A/F near the expected P.E. A/F. Then using a good A/F measurement device, set the VE's so actual and commanded are the same!

[FBRR]

nevermind

[Don D]

This document shows how to use the switching sensors, just showing how not a recomendation just a FYI it can be done and is supported by Daytona Sensors

[attachment removed after 60 days by system]

[FLTRI]

Then using a good A/F measurement device, set the VE's so actual and commanded are the same!

IMO. this is the most important point you made.

IME, when a system has had the VEs calibrated properly in open loop to target AFRs the whole system works as expected. If the VE's are not right on for the exact bike and its idiosyncrasies, any changes made to the target AFRs will not produce expected results.
When the closed loop system is working its ass off trying to keep targeted AFR from poorly calibrated VEs, the results will not be a nice smooth running snappy bike, but a rough running with throttle hesitations.
Just my experiences,
Bob

[Hogflash]

Wurk-turk gave a good analysis of the difference between narrow band and broadband sensors.

A narrowband sensor sees ONE THING oxygen or the lack of oxygen. IN OTHER words STOICH. They are only advertised or more correctly designed to sense STOICH a/f ratio. Manufacturers state that they, "narrowband" sensors can be used to control A/F from STOICH to plus or minus .5 A/F ratio.
Several salient points here! As fuel changes ( both fuel and percent ethanol!!) STIOCH changes. While the Stoich switch point is calibrated by the manufacturer, change in voltage vs. A/F ratio is not absolute!!

.....
.....
The bottom line here for those arguing that "narrow band" are "as accurate" as broadband sensors, is the narrow band can be used with correct APPLICATION of fuel control keep A/F ratios with plus or minus .5 a/f OF STOICH! The specification of narrow band sensors DOES NOT say they are accurate for VOLTAGE vs. A/F! They are not! As stoich changes the "measured" A/F even at the MEAN voltage of the narrow band sensor is not constant. Braodband sensors when correctly calibrated DO MEASURE Lamda A/F ratio vs. a GIVEN VOLTAGE!!

This is misleading information.  As mentioned earlier, both the narrow band and "broad band" sensors use the same basic technology to measure O2 concentration in the exhaust gas.  They are BOTH lambda sensors - the "AFR" measured by either of these sensors is just a mathematically calculated value based on the sensor output voltage and the fuel blend being burned. 

The narrowband sensor is a very rugged and accurate device for measuring lambda over a narrow range (which is why manufacturers rely on them) - and, this fact can be used to accurately calibrate the VE tables over 85 percent of their range.

Once the VE tables are accurately calibrated, the ECM's AFR or Lambda table can be set to the desired value and the ECM will deliver the correct amount of fuel.  Period.  Now, in the event that the fuel blend changes, the Delphi ECM uses correction data gathered during closed loop operation and applies this to the open loop areas of the fuel map which thus corrects these portions of the calibration for use with the new fuel blend.  This same methodology has been used in cars for the last 20 years and is well proven.

The "broadband" sensors are capable of accurately measuring and controlling lambda IF the exhaust temperature and pressure are measured and compensated for, but few systems do this.  The fact that aftermarket fuel control systems generally work decently with broadband sensors would indicate that accurate (i.e. better than +/- 0.5 AFR) control of AFR is not really necessary, or only produces small differences in performance.

--Gary

[FBRR]

Rufus, There was nothing misleading in what I said! The narrow band sensor is not and has never been intended to anything accept be very accurate about stoich A/F ratio. When you say they are accurate over a very narrow range! That is misleading, as the "narrow range" is precisely STOICH! The manufacturers never intend a narrow band sensors output volage ( other than at Stoich) to be correlated to any given A/F ratio!
Yes! they can BE used to control accurately within a plus minus .5 A/F( I edited this post as I had ".05 a/f, which was a fatfinger@@ERROR). But that control is dependant on Fuel control. I have use narrow band sensors for production applications for many years and they work Great at closed loop control of A/F ratios near stoich! ( And in case anyone is wondering, no one controls production calibrations at 14.2 A/.F ratio, That is simply too rich to pass an current emissions standard!)

I have friends that are engineers at several major O2 suppliers, of BOTH types. Narrow band sensors are used for closedloop control with good results, the caveat is, pushed too far in either direction, you are out of control even in CLOSE LOOP with a narrow band sensor. The range of actual control and measured A/F from their output a broadband has advantages. I have use them in advanced emissions studies to see if we would adopt them for production. So if we are arguing range of A/F control, a Broadband sensor is more accurate the further from stoich you are trying to control!

Your reinteration of Steve's point about "The "broadband" sensors are capable of accurately measuring and controlling lambda IF the exhaust temperature and pressure are measured and compensated for, but few systems do this. " is also misleading!

[Don D]

The switching sensor output is just used to correct the VE numbers, just one of the many factors in an algorithm. For map development the whole map is put in closed loop, 14.6 when using TTS VTune
Get the VEs correct (well at least the ones that are accessable) then, in theory, the AFR can be user programmable to their desired values. So the sensors accuracy at say 13.2/1 is not really relevant, right? The Delphi, closed loop mode, doesn't work outside of an AFR value set at 14.6 so CLB aside that is the only number it needs to hone in on then if the user selects any other AFR they want after the VEs are corrected it's their choice and the sensors outputs are no longer in the formula.

[Steve Cole]

Manufacturers state that they, "narrowband" sensors can be used to control A/F from STOICH to plus or minus .5 A/F ratio.

Yes! they can BE used to control accurately within a plus minus .05 A/F.

FBRR

Make your mind up as it cannot be both! What you are posting is misleading and you seem to be switching what your saying from post to post! You seem to not understand all of what you think you do. The switching sensor and the Broad Band sensor are built from the very same base technology. The Switching sensor will accurately measure +/- .5 AFR that is a pure and simple fact! I have called out the range as 15.0:1 - 14.2:1 which is just under that amount, as that is what our testing showed it would do. That is the STOICH ratio for most gasoline based fuels. You do not have to compensate for exhaust pressure or temperature with a switching sensor, another simple fact!

If your going to compare to a Broad Band Sensor within that range (15.0 - 14.2) you have to measure temperature and pressure as well as the sensor voltage to be as accurate as the Switching sensor. Now outside of that range in order to be accurate the Broad Band sensor needs to still perform the same measurements. Please show me just one of the current aftermarket units on the market today for a HD that does that! Until you can what I posted is not misleading at all, it's another fact!

While there is a few lab quality instruments that do the job right they are not out for most to buy let alone where most of the people that use this forum would event begin to know about. I have clearly stated this before as well.

[FBRR]

Steve,
If as you say you have actually calibrated! You should know there is a difference in the terms "used for fuel control" and using actual sensor voltage as a basis of actual A/F. Both the statement you quoted say the narrow band can be used to control A/F ratio. ( my fat finger of .05 is wrong, narrow band are good for plus or minus .5 A/F.) But that statement is IN CONJUNCTION WITH FUEL CONTROL! Narrow band sensor output is only "absolute at stoich".

My statement is "with FUEL CONTROL". As I'm sure you know "fuel control "is a very specific software function! Fuel control IS NOT WHAT A/F is commanded. Fuel control ( from a calibration standpoint ) is THE SOFTWARE alogorithm function that takes a signal (feedback from the O2 sensor) and through MANY different calibrated values! Use the siganl to keep the O2 sensor switching and "in control". The actual O2 sensor voltage cannot be used for an actual A/F ratio value! Fuel control is how the software algorithms use sensor input of rich or LEAN and makes additive and reductions in pulse width about the switch point!

As I am unsure of actual Harley calibration values here are only some of the calibrations that can drive FUEL CONTROL!

If others are interested here are a few of the software functions included in "FUEL CONTROL." Proportional step size ( which can be changed base on RPM,MAP, and even delta change in voltage of the O2 sensor)
Intgral step size ( same variables as proportional. And integral is different THAN INTEGRATOR! The integral is the small amount of fuel change base on how long the INTEGRTOR has been Rich or LEAN! The Integrator is the resultant of all fueling calculations for delivered pulse width.) There are transport delay times based on several other factors. You can even have different CLB or rich and lean switch points based on whether the system is switching from RICH to LEAN or LEAN to RICH. And some fuel control makes changes based on O2 sensor "direction", that is headed towards the swirch point either rich ot lean! What many folks fail to realize is the O2 sensor signal can also be used in several different ways AT THE SAME TIME. There is RAW unfiltered O2 sensor siganl, as well as filters applied against the raw signal. How you filter the O2 sensor depending on actual sensor voltage, can be use to deterime STATE of CHANGE and expected State of change ( that is Rich or Lean !). That is FUEL CONTROL! There are many other calibration valuse associated with "Fuel Control", that are simply not available on aftermarket devices! Yet changing one or two of those inputs ( such as CLB) can and does impact all those "other" area and calibrations that are used for FUEL CONTROL!!

And if you are still interested, there are several aspects of software design and algorithm development to consider. There are mechanical functions is air and fuel flow. Such as throttle changes and airflow lag time from throttle blade to VALVE. Those lags time are physical in nature. How long does it take for an change in INJECTOR ON time before actual "fuel delivered " to the cyclinder and is measured by the feedback of th eO2 sensor. Those are mechanical functions and are accounted for in software algo rithm design.
The other function included in calibrations are to account for electrical "lags times" in the ECM. When you command a change, while they are fast, can be slow from a  sense delivered change vs. when the software calculates and delivers that change. So both electrical and machanical lags in response times are included in software calibrations!!

As I am not here to sell anything, I only post so folks will have some understanding of how things work...
And some changes in one value can and do affect other calibration values. And only a FEW calibration values are available in any after market tuner! There is also a BIG difference in "what works?" and optimized engine control system!

VE's and fuel control are the HEART of making actual A/F match COMMANDED A/F. But closed loop fuel control is obviously NOT active in open loop ( P.E operation!).
And we haven't even touched on Injector "DYNAMIC" range! This is a big issue on "built" engines. Changing production injectors for larger engine builts, involves more than just "INJECTOR" constant" to be correct!
If anyone is interested I can address injector issue in another post!

[Steve Cole]

Look your running in circles now and still not answering the base questions. You made comments that I was misleading people then you turn back around and state the same thing I have. The stock switching sensor is good for +/- .5 AFR. Since you like to use the term STOICH so much how about you explain that for all gasoline that is sold through the USA today! Are you here to say that STOICH is the same thing for all of them? The answer is HELL NO it's not the same and this is just why the sensor needs to have a range to work in and still be accurate. That is the range we use the sensor in, no more, no less. Trying to use it outside that range is foolish.

So now that we have proven to use the sensor in a range that it is deadly accurate in why can we not calculate the corrected VE values and place those in the ECM? Guess what WE CAN AND DO. Are we the only ones that can, Hell no and as I stated before GM, Ford, Chrysler and others have been doing it for years! If you are really a calibrator then you should have known that too!

Now let's move on to the Broad Band sensor. Have you got an answer yet to my previous question? You again stated i was misleading people but you offer up no proof, could it be you have none? How the fuel control works within the ECM is not what most want to know but there are a few that would. Most simply want to know that it works and there bike runs as it should. Since you have not worked with an HD system and have admitted to such how can you really say how it works!

What it boils down to is that people have been using the Broad Band sensors and making bike engines run good enough, so what's that tell us? It tells us that event with an inaccurate sensor system the engines still runs well. Since the Bosch documents show that it could be off as much as +/- 1.0 AFR that would lead one to believe as long as your within that range it must be good enough. I sure would not want to be off when at WOT to the lean side but error to the side of caution and be a little rich for safety on an air cooled motor. Now where does most of the riding occur and mileage come from? CLOSED LOOP control range is where it happens and that again is where the stock switching sensor is accurate!

So if you want accurate readings step up and spend the money to get lab quality equipment that properly reads the necessary inputs to give you an accurate value with Broad Band Sensors. The aftermarket boxes for 300 - 500 bucks are not going to give it to you and the aftermarket ECM's that use these sensors without using the proper inputs are not any more accurate!

How about we talk about the fuel for awhile since were talking about STOICH. Do you really event know the range that it runs in across the USA? Forget what the pump says, what it really runs as from station to station just in the USA. Then how about the rest of the world? How much change do you think that your going to see when running with different fuel once the bike engine has been tuned?

[FBRR]

This is my last post on the subject. Steve I mention Stoich because that is WHAT A narrow band sensor is used to control. And I say STOICH BECAUSE it varies so much with fuel type and brand. And yes, I've had the corp. fuel studies delivered to my desk for many years.

The point you IGNORE and haven't answered is given a FUEL that IS STOICH at 14.7, manufacturer's fuel control will vary in exteremly small increments from that value! For best emissions. Many of the aftermarket TUNERS are trying to tune a 14.7 (stoich fuel!) at 14.2 actual A/F ratio.Or quite simply the tuners are pushing the fuel control with "normal" stoich fuel far richer than any manufacturer! I can assure you there are no Tier I emsission vehicles trying to CONTROL at 14.2 ( for a fuel that is Stoich at 14.7!) The fuel control tables are calibrated about a much more "CENTERED" O2 sensor value! The aftermarket nominal A/F ratios are trying to push those narrow band sensor to control at the extremes of the sensor range! You can "get off your bike all you want!" but when a production calibration is done with a fuel that is 14.7 stoich and you get fuel that is stoich at 14.2 A/F you are still well within range of accuracy of the measuring device. The O2 sensor.
When you use fuel control designed around (14.7 stoich) and are controlling to actual 14.2 A/F ratio with that 14.7 stoich fuel, when YOU then get a variation in fuel "STOICH" (of again a 14.2 stoich fuel )you are trying to control well outside of the accuracy range of the sensor!!

So don't give me the "manufacturers" are doing it! THEY are NOT pushing nor is the production FUEL CONTROL designed to work at the Extreme accuracy range of the O2 sensor! They are controlling very close to mean STOICH A/F ratio. They are not pushing to the rich limit of the sensor.

[FLTRI]

All the above said, and boy a lot said. A couple points:
* Fact is the TTS Mastertune is the best we have and it is better by quite a lot.

* Also Broadband sensors, when used for tuning in a self-contained environment produces reliable, repeatable readings.

* Since long term reliability is relatively short with Broadband sensors when mounted to the exhaust right outside the exhaust port, after an auto-tune system has tuned the bike the sensors should be removed and the system returned to open loop and run off the tuned mapping.

So in my opinion everyone/system can win. Just have to understand the O2 sensors limitations and reliability issues and get a great tune and enjoy the ride.

I mean we're really worrying about a RCH or two, right?

Bob

[Steve Cole]

A narrowband sensor sees ONE THING oxygen or the lack of oxygen.

This is all ANY oxygen sensors see's, Narrow Band, Broad Band or Wide Band so what is the point?

While the Stoich switch point is calibrated by the manufacturer, change in voltage vs. A/F ratio is not absolute!!

NOT in our case as the user of the software is allowed to change it, this is what the CLB adjustment is

So while narrow band sensor can be used to CONTROL A/F from plus or minus .5 A/F ratio, that does not mean their "output" is accurate in that range for voltage vs. A/F.

Again it does mean it is accurate within the limited range that we have specified, not in all ranges

Fuel control in this instance does not mean "commanded" A/F, BUT it does MEAN Controled A/F within that range. CONTROL is dependant on FUEL CONTROL! FUEL CONTROL is the way  the switch point voltage is used in conjuction with software control of the fuel integrator! The intergrator is the result of reading the switch point voltage and both adding and subtracting fuel from the pulse width to DRIVE fuel control about a mean A/F ratio.

No argument from me on how it works but this is a little more in depth than I have tried to go here on the forum.

The bottom line here for those arguing that "narrow band" are "as accurate" as broadband sensors, is the narrow band can be used with correct APPLICATION of fuel control keep A/F ratios with plus or minus .5 a/f OF STOICH!

Here you go again, instead of calling out the range which I have done you leave it wide open and try to cover it with STOICH. Please list the range of STOICH for todays common gasoline fuels sold across the USA.I will bet you it falls right in to what I have stated!

The specification of narrow band sensors DOES NOT say they are accurate for VOLTAGE vs. A/F!
They are not!

Please present some documentation to show this. Bosch goes to great length to provide the data that we have that gives us ouput voltage Vs Lamdba. While it is non-linear it still measures Lambda Vs voltage!

Braodband sensors when correctly calibrated DO MEASURE Lamda A/F ratio vs. a GIVEN VOLTAGE!!

Just what I have been saying all along! The only issue here is what I highlighted in RED and as soon as the aftermarket begins to do this I am more than willing to admit it, but that is not the case with any of the ones on the market today.

The other elephant in the room with regard to broadband vs. narrowband VE development is the Broadband ais accurate vs.voltage ( when calibrated correctly) at 2 lamda ( much richer than narrow band range)

Yes, it sure is when used properly

Expected A/F ratios for power enrichment are much richer than stoich. To run  those power enrichment speed and load points at near stoich (for closed loop control with a narrow band sensor) and then actually commanding a very much richer A/F for best power will result in a change in VE!

Really, since VE represents the amount of air entering the cylinder versus its true displacement how is this going to change based on fuel mixture? Will there be some minute change, sure there is, but not enough to talk about here and by the way it changes each and every firing cycle too, so I guess we really need to have the VE value changed for each firing cycle.

So the best way to calibrate P.E , V.E's is to lock the integrator at nominal value, and command an A/F near the expected P.E. A/F. Then using a good A/F measurement device, set the VE's so actual and commanded are the same!

No argument from me on this one, but remember they must first have the proper equipment and tools to do it

So again you have still not answered any of my questions. You step in here and say that I am misleading people and then I stand up for what I know to be true and instead of answering the questions you start talking in circles. Now your dropping out with still no answers.

We are not talking about tuning emissions here we are talking about tuning to given AFR and the accuracy of doing just that. If I was to get into how it all works and why we would do things for catalyst efficiency, catalyst break through, cold start emissions and all the fine points an OEM  level calibration must go through today I would have lost everyone long ago! Are the OEM's tuning to something other than 14.7............ you bet ya and they have been doing it since 1994! Are they tuning to a fixed point through out the entire operating range of the engine while in closed loop control............... NO! There is a range that the stock O2 sensor can and does work in very accurately, stay within that range and all is well, go outside it and all bets are off.

[FBRR]

I said I would not post again, BUT then again I don't like anyone that thinks they can "shout down" and opposing viewpoint!

Steve said!
“So again you have still not answered any of my questions. You step in here and say that I am misleading people and then I stand up for what I know to be true and instead of answering the questions you start talking in circles.”

I did step in here and say RUFUS comment was misleading! Oh! Or is Rufus just Steve using a different orifice?
“The other elephant in the room with regard to broadband vs. narrowband VE development is the Broadband ais accurate vs.voltage ( when calibrated correctly) at 2 lamda ( much richer than narrow band range)

Yes, it sure is when used properly”
YUP! that's my point!
===================================================
And you seem offended when I use the term Stoich, when you know full well that is the proper term for what a narrow band is measuring, and not A/F!

Stating what “A/F” the sensor measures is MISLEADING to anyone that works with both types of sensors! As narrowband are not A/F devices, but STOICH switch point sensors!

NO CIRCLE THERE if you understand physics and fuel!

Maybe you can get RUFUS to respond too!!!

[Steve Cole]

I said I would not post again, BUT then again I don't like anyone that thinks they can "shout down" and opposing viewpoint!

Steve said!
“So again you have still not answered any of my questions. You step in here and say that I am misleading people and then I stand up for what I know to be true and instead of answering the questions you start talking in circles.”

I did step in here and say RUFUS comment was misleading! Oh! Or is Rufus just Steve using a different orifice?
“The other elephant in the room with regard to broadband vs. narrowband VE development is the Broadband ais accurate vs.voltage ( when calibrated correctly) at 2 lamda ( much richer than narrow band range)

Yes, it sure is when used properly”
YUP! that's my point!
===================================================
And you seem offended when I use the term Stoich, when you know full well that is the proper term for what a narrow band is measuring, and not A/F!

Stating what “A/F” the sensor measures is MISLEADING to anyone that works with both types of sensors! As narrowband are not A/F devices, but STOICH switch point sensors!

NO CIRCLE THERE if you understand physics and fuel!

Maybe you can get RUFUS to respond too!!!

No I'm me and I post with my real name right up front unlike you who hides behind a fake screen name and cannot or will not answer questions. I'm not shouting you down I'm just posting the information and asking you to do the same but you refuse. I am more than happy to post the Bosch document numbers to support what I've said and I have done so in the past many times. All you need to do is spend a little time searching on the subject. I have posted the same basic information that Rufus did so yes your statement applies to my comments.

You have a problem with answering questions and backing them up so that leads me to believe you are not who you claim to be. Then when I present the facts to you, you start in name calling and questioning my knowledge and abilities. The reason that I have asked several times for you to post what STOICH is was a very basic thing and you either know the answer and know it backs up what I've said or you really do not know what it is. In either case looks like that all your trying to do is  and provide no real information.

Users are not here to tune for emissions, nor are the end users trying to write the fuel control code that is already all done for them. What they are doing is calibrating the VE's for there modified components. They and I in this case could care less about a tier 1 emissions calibration. From what I see here from you I believe I have probably done more of that that you have, if you've done any at all!

* All O2 sensors measure oxygen doesn't matter which type

* Narrow band stock sensors do it over a narrow range and that range is output as a voltage.

* Broad Band sensors do it over a broader range and that range is output as a voltage

* Wide Band sensors measure it over the widest range of the three and output a voltage.

* Bosch publishes the O2 sensor voltage output versus Lambda for all three sensors

* OEM manufactures use narrow bands to do fuel control and donot use Broad bands for fuel control

* Current gasoline fuels sold across the USA today have a STOICH value between 14.28 - 14.68 and the narrow band sensors work great with them!

* I have stated to use the stock sensors within a range 14.2 - 15.0 outside of that your on your own!

* Tuners have tested what I've posted as well as HD and Delphi and it works just fine in that limited range.

* FBRR has no experience with a HD fuel system at all, from his own statements

This pretty much sums up what has been said other than the list of questions you have refused to answer!

[Steve Cole]

The ECM is getting data from more than one cell of the VE table at a time so V-tune puts back the corrections in more than one cell. Typically it will be going into 4 cells but not always. With this in mind you can see how the cell could be effected event if you did not get any data in one of them.

[Hogflash]

I said I would not post again, BUT then again I don't like anyone that thinks they can "shout down" and opposing viewpoint!

Steve said!
“So again you have still not answered any of my questions. You step in here and say that I am misleading people and then I stand up for what I know to be true and instead of answering the questions you start talking in circles.”

I did step in here and say RUFUS comment was misleading! Oh! Or is Rufus just Steve using a different orifice?

No, Rufus is not related to Steve.  No point in replying to someone who is not paying attention.  I have useful things to do!

--Gary

[strokerjlk]

Thanks Steve.  Makes sense to me AND thats a bitty piece of understanding that I know have.

My Mastertune has been permanently attached to the bike for 18 months.  Just unplg the data port.  I semi permanently installed the Twin Scan tonight.  Just have to swap out injectors.

Didn't try it as of yet.

Hey you guys, when unplugging the O2s to swap in the WBs, do any of you do anything with the leads?  Install O2 eliminators?  If so... how can I make an eliminator?

TIA

no you don't have to do anything with the connectors.
why injectors?
your making me CRAZY!      
YOU MIGHT AS WELL GO ALL THE WAY......complete the challenge that was put forth to me some time back.  Do A V-TUNE and save the map. do a DTS and save the map. take the two and go get a tune with a 4 gas analyzer. then analyze all three.
I will just challenge you to two....forget combining the two ...do a v-tune map...do a DTS map and see what you have SOP and take it to your new buds with the dyno and see what they do?

[wurk_truk]

HAHAHAH   

O2s  not injectors

[lonewolf]

I said I would not post again, BUT then again I don't like anyone that thinks they can "shout down" and opposing viewpoint!

Steve said!
“So again you have still not answered any of my questions. You step in here and say that I am misleading people and then I stand up for what I know to be true and instead of answering the questions you start talking in circles.”

I did step in here and say RUFUS comment was misleading! Oh! Or is Rufus just Steve using a different orifice?

No, Rufus is not related to Steve.  No point in replying to someone who is not paying attention.  I have useful things to do!

--Gary

Ahh, but you know him well.

[ViennaHog]

Looking at WT's VE tune sheet I see the same issues I have been chasing with my bike too. Look at the VE levels at 3/5/7 % TP and you notice numbers in some areas well beyond 90 and even up to 125. This is BS and will cause driveability issues. There was a lot of talk as reversion caused by certain cam, exhaust and a/c being the problem. My combo is s TW6, currently SE Touring mufflers and a SE a/c. Nothing even remotely outside the flight envelope. I took a 4 channel sniffer and set the VE's in these areas gradually lower until I hit a minimum HC value and called it good. Looks like the VE Tune method shows its limitations in the low TP areas

[FLTRI]

....Looks like the VE Tune method shows its limitations in the low TP areas

You will experience this exact condition/issue with any "auto-tune" system that wholeheartedly relies on O2 sensors to mandate fuel to the engine.
Tuners figgered this out after their first experience with an auto-tune system and low rpms with high overlap cam profiles.
These areas/issues, caused by reversion, etc., must be manually tuned.
Guess those looking to eliminate the tuner/$$ should keep with modifications that do not cause reversion issues. Like stockish cams and restrictive exhaust systems.
Bob

[ViennaHog]

Bob,
can't agree more with you. Sad thing is that mild combos like mine shows these limitations and the unsuspecting user will get into trouble with the self tune gadget and doesn't even know it. By now I think the VTune tool is great to get things in the ball park. The extreme end of the VE table is better left to the pros who know how to deal with the idiosyncrasies of the HD engine mods.

Regards VH

[Sonny S.]

I have nothing to add to this thread.....other than WOW !!  You guy's that really know this stuff have provided a ton of valuable information to the rest of us......even though I don't understand all of it 

great thread......thanks !! 

[Kricke]

wurk_truk

I'm in the end of my one tuning sessions and was wonder if you getting a VE top in the 0%tps section due to exhaust reversion and/or other things??? mine has a quite high top around 2250rpm (on
both front/rear)
If so,,, I was wondering if you smoooth the colum or just leavit as v-tune made it??
(or if you or any one els have some input in this matter???)

[wurk_truk]

Here is one data run.      http://www.box.net/shared/bbemnqq3lt

Open this in Datamaster, then go to 'view'... hit v-tune histogram.  On the histogram... hit start, and allow it to play out.

Haven't worked on 'smoothing and blending' getting the data in and do timing.  Idle.... hard to work with and WHY I also have Twin Scan.   AT some ponit... I will compare that area of tune...

I have DBW (no zero % column used, I don't have an IAC for idle, I have the plate motor).)... but looks like VEs are increased around 2000 rpm at 2,5,7% throttle with V-tuning Dyno dude map.

On the map I am presently playing with???  There seems to be simply a 'transition' vs the base map.  Low RPM in 2-7 columns are lower.  2000 rpm is spot on the base map.  2000+ starts to build upwards slowly.

Dead???  That was a cool question...  Here's why... On the OTHER base map, I was seeing a bulge.  On THIS base map, seeing a simple transition.  Do NOT know which is 'correct' but the transition looks like one would think.

[Kricke]

i have twin scanII and Wego IIID to so i have made several IRL 60,80 and 100tps runs.. (not many cops on the highways here,,, he he) just to see the differens from the dyno runs with motec o2 sensors and now it is micro changes just to smooth things out (a bit anal on the "it has to be as good as it can possible get" thing)

so the top in decel is now the last thing i will tinker with or leave! if it is the best choice??..

wow i see the extra monitor is a good investment... but you do not having the 0 and 2% in CL so we cant see if you have a top in 0% tps..

[Steve Cole]

You will never get to 0% tps in a DBW bike so it's of no concern. IF the TPS was to go to 0% you would have stalled the motor.

[glens]

If you stalled the motor, would it be in closed-loop or open-loop?  Hahaha!

[wurk_truk]

8 hours v-tuning.  That includes some data runs to get rid of timing being pulled by ION sensor.

I have SOME experience with this, so far.....   So... just so somebody reading this, this is NOT a SEST Smart Tune that gives you hardly any control.  THIS takes some time and effort to get the v-tune runs run correctly.

Cannot go and putt around for ten minutes.  To hit the cells takes running in 6th and dogging it out going uphill.  To hit cells, it takes 3rd gear and SCREAMING and holding THAT so that the cells fill in.   Think of how a dyno operator runs the bike... pretty much have to mimic THAT to get the cells to fill in on the Histogram.  This is NOT, go out and go through the gears twice and make a tune.....  EVERYONE needs to look at the histogram of EACH run to get a feel on how they are riding and filling cells.  Right now?  I can hit the cells on my 'track' without no where near the effort of the first run out.  I AM lucky to have hilly terrain.  I cannot believe how much I must have left on the table when I did a Stage 1 and when I did cams.

EASY to tell bike runs WAY better.  This from a base map that was NOT a dyno tune first.  (oh... MY Dyno Tune )

Now..... time to fiddle with TS2.

[wurk_truk]

I bow down to the King... StrokerJLK.

AFter playing with TS for like 10 minutes, it damwned on me how this all works.

Glens, and myself were talking crap when we said that we would have to refigure AFRs using the 'offset' CLBs.

Nope... not the case.

1) with NB O2s unplugged, the ECM is in OPEN loop at 14.6.  Cannot have closed loop without the O2s. TS will tune to the commanded 14.6

2)  thought this thru all wrong, too.  The ECM still commands 14.6 regardless of the CLB setting.  What the CLB setting does is trick the ECM into thinking the O2 is still reporting Stoich, and the ECM corrects to Stoich in closed loop.  The CLB changes what the sensor REPORTS as stoich, is all the CLB does.  In V-Tune, we need that 'trick' at hand to come up with the correct math.  Thats why the NEW v-tune if we change CLB.  The 'ticked out' O2 is in 'play' during V-Tune with all the math in tow.

Thats' why one can input outside data and NOT have to worry about it all.  There is no math 'trick' involved if tuned against commanded output.  Can change the CLB at will.  The ECM is actually tuned against actual command.

Command is how the Twin Scan works.  It sees what the command is, and sees what the final in the pipe AFR is, and states how much % to change each and every cell to match the commanded against the WBo2s.

[Kricke]

You will never get to 0% tps in a DBW bike so it's of no concern. IF the TPS was to go to 0% you would have stalled the motor.

Ahh,, OK. I have a softail so I didnt know that..

[eddfive]

Like any software package the Twin Scan has to be setup properly for data collection and data presentation.  The key is data accuracy.  I believe you have a DBW bike.

1-The Table format needs to be Super Tuner Twin Cam Advanced for you bike.  You have some more columns of data that can be shown.
2-The Percent VE table is only good to +/- 0.5% as the percent is rounded to nearest whole number.  If you believe like I do that the Bosch LSU 4.2 is more accurate than that, then Daytona Sensors has spreadsheets that will give you the VE correction to the 0.1 of an AFR
3-If your bike is a 2008 or 2009 then the Twin Scan Parameters need to be set up for that.  If you bike is a 2010 then the Twin Scan needs to be setup for that which is different.  If you bike is older than 2008 or is cable throttle then the Twin Scan setup is different.  This is to setup the Twin Scan before data collection.
4- When collecting data you need to remember to clear the Scan Tool Data buffer.  If you are also carrying a laptop then you clear the Twin Scan Data buffer and the Program data buffer.  Laptop is not necessary.
5-Data logging interval is important for getting enough samples so the data is good and flyers in the data can be eliminated.

The Daytona Sensors TS2 will work for any of the software Direct Link, SERT,Super Pro Tuner and TTS up and through model year 2009. The TS2 will work with Direct Link and Super Pro Tuner for 2010.  TTS changed things with Lambda and some of the tables so the Twin Scan will collect all the data but it will not line up 100% in the spreadsheets.  The Lambda calculation can be done easily enough but there is still a rowXcolumn alignment issue. This is just an FYI.

[Steve Cole]

At the end of the V-Tune, I blended all the columns for 90+100 to match the 80kpa.  Also blended all the rows from 5000 down to match the 4500 row.   I ran multiple TS data runs.  Combined these.  I find that what Steve says to be correct, and that these areas become a bit rich after blending.  Look at 5000 and 5500 rows and the 90+100 columns.

So now looking at your data, it shows V-tune and TS line up pretty damn well. Most of your corrections are less than 5% and it's going to change that much day to day. This is why we tell you to get the Vtune down to the 5% or less corrections and then call it a day. These things will never be perfect but once you've got it down to the 5 % area that's as good as the sensors can repeat and some not event that good! At the high load areas we are much more comfortable with it being on the rich side than the lean side of things.

[BVHOG]

I will have to say you did one hell of a job populating cells on the street, how the brakes holding up

[wolf_59]

Thanks, wurk_truk
This has been a great post and thanks for sharing your findings and simplified explanations with us. Now I can't wait to get my ecm and interface back from TTS so I can start tuning

[Steve Cole]

As we've always said V-tune will get you 85%+ of the way there when done correctly and as you have found out it can be done on the street if you pay attention to the details. There is no need to wear brakes out or anything else when doing it, you just have to think outside the box some. Using different gears and load for different areas, hills no hills helps but so does putting a passenger on when gathering data. The AFR is going to change/move a small amount everyday and every tank of fuel so do not get caught up in trying to correct it below about a 5% range as it's not going to happen with any part of it, nor will it hurt performance.  I've been at this for 30 plus years and this works.

Bottom line is it works as we say it does and when following the directions you will get a very nice tune. Will it be the end all be all dyno tune......... NO but close enough to be very safe.

[strokerjlk]

WOW ...glass 1/2 full or 1/2 M/T
I cant believe that AFR'S off 1.5 to  2.0 is called good enough!
when I see 10's 12's 15's 18's I call that off. and keep tuning.
I see canned maps closer then this! we are talking about a v-tuned map here right?
afr command of 13.1 and a actual of 11.1 is not close enough nor is a afr  command of 13.5 and actual of 11.8.
thanks for posting your results John. I would do some more tuning 

[Steve Cole]

Where did you dream up those numbers If you look at what his results were from the areas he V-tune it's within 5%! The motor will change that much day to day!

Then we have to know how close the Broadband sensor is that's being used because the TSII does not follow the Bosch specifications, but according to you that does not matter. Guess he needs to go get those calibrated as well! Talk about a glass 1/2 empty or 1/2 full you can never be sure of what your getting!

Now if you bothered to read his post he stated he quit tuning at 4500 so anything above that was untuned ( his choice, as Vtune works to 6000), so you of coarse pick a number from above that! To see what's really been tune we would need his Vtune data and overlay that with the TSII data as well but you knew that too. When it's all said and done no matter what anyone has said over the past year and half your not going to believe it works!

[strokerjlk]

Where did you dream up those numbers If you look at what his results were from the areas he V-tune it's within 5%! The motor will change that much day to day!

Then we have to know how close the Broadband sensor is that's being used because the ,TSII does not follow the Bosch specifications but according to you that does not matter. Guess he needs to go get those calibrated as well! Talk about a glass 1/2 empty or 1/2 full you can never be sure of what your getting!

Now if you bothered to read his post he stated he quit tuning at 4500 so anything above that was untuned ( his choice, as Vtune works to 6000), so you of coarse pick a number from above that! To see what's really been tune we would need his Vtune data and overlay that with the TSII data as well but you knew that too. When it's all said and done no matter what anyone has said over the past year and half your not going to believe it works!

so then your saying extrapolating the ve's isn't accurate? I can look at the whole map and see it is off but you knew that also.
In the last year and a half I have seen more screwed up v-tune maps it makes my head spin. the handful that have success with v-tune follow up with wide band to get it right (by the way thats what is happing here also). so why not just use them in the first place. face it the public using v-tune are not happy otherwise these forums wouldn't be full of them seeking help. NO I don't believe it works for ultimate tuning SAFE yes, but is it as good as Twin Scan no way. wonder where the idea of v-tune came from anyway?
as far as the bosch broadbands they were ok in your previous post when you were claiming looking at your data, it shows V-tune and TS line up pretty damn well. but as soon as someone says the AFR is off then your back to TSII does not follow the Bosch specifications 

[Don D]

Tuners charge $3-500 for this same service.  IMHO, that price is a BARGAIN

Congrats on getting your feet in the water. Good Job.

I have both tools. On mine it will be the TS for VEs and then datamaster to glance at timing activity, based on what I have learned from this thread.
Actually this tuning excersize with a 130hp bike on the street can be a little more of a cop dodge challenge A buddy locked his front brake going up hill at the same time trying to hit cells, not good
I will get it close and then to a dyno to finish. Will just save the tuner a little time and he can spend more time power hunting.

[wurk_truk]

Thanks Don.  I needed a little pick me up.  You and TXChop made MY day!!!!!

[Steve Cole]

Where did you dream up those numbers If you look at what his results were from the areas he V-tune it's within 5%! The motor will change that much day to day!

Then we have to know how close the Broadband sensor is that's being used because the ,TSII does not follow the Bosch specifications but according to you that does not matter. Guess he needs to go get those calibrated as well! Talk about a glass 1/2 empty or 1/2 full you can never be sure of what your getting!

Now if you bothered to read his post he stated he quit tuning at 4500 so anything above that was untuned ( his choice, as Vtune works to 6000), so you of coarse pick a number from above that! To see what's really been tune we would need his Vtune data and overlay that with the TSII data as well but you knew that too. When it's all said and done no matter what anyone has said over the past year and half your not going to believe it works!

so then your saying extrapolating the ve's isn't accurate? I can look at the whole map and see it is off but you knew that also.
In the last year and a half I have seen more screwed up v-tune maps it makes my head spin. the handful that have success with v-tune follow up with wide band to get it right (by the way thats what is happing here also). so why not just use them in the first place. face it the public using v-tune are not happy otherwise these forums wouldn't be full of them seeking help. NO I don't believe it works for ultimate tuning SAFE yes, but is it as good as Twin Scan no way. wonder where the idea of v-tune came from anyway?
as far as the bosch broadbands they were ok in your previous post when you were claiming looking at your data, it shows V-tune and TS line up pretty damn well. but as soon as someone says the AFR is off then your back to TSII does not follow the Bosch specifications 

You know what your beginning to sound like a broke record. If you cannot have a bike brought to you for TS II tuning you say it doesn't work, and also please stop trying to put words in my mouth. What I said is that it line up pretty damn good, I did not think it needed to be said in the areas where the two could be compared! I assumed most here were smart enough to know that already, my bad for including you in that group.

The idea for V-tune came from our automotive line were it has been around since 1989-90 long before TS or the others were event in business, so drop that line of BS! So who copied who here? Guess what, others were doing it before us too! I have always stated that the Bosch Broadbands were OK when used properly, when they are used improperly who knows. Now if you read the Bosch specification it says that you need to correct for the pressure in the exhaust and the temperature in the exhaust. As the pressure rises and the temperature climbs the corrections get larger. So where would that tend to make the sensor readings further off? Maybe just maybe at higher loads and higher exhaust flows!

Looking at the data posted in the areas that were Vtuned (as the customer chose not to do them all) they line up, no where have I or any TTS employee ever stated that you can copy values from RPM point to RPM point and expect it to be right! What we have stated repeatedly is that once you get the 80 kPa point corrected at an RPM point you can copy/extend that value to the end of that RPM row. When doing this you going to be a little richer than desired but it will be safe and within a couple of Hp of max power output! If anyone has any doubt just sit down and read the Tuning Guide as it's all explained there on pages 53 - 62! This test has again showed just exactly what I've said is true.

So if your going to say that being within a few percent is too far off for you I guess you should quit tuning as they move that much day to day and tank of fuel to tank of fuel.

[strokerjlk]

You know what your beginning to sound like a broke record. If you cannot have a bike brought to you for TS II tuning you say it doesn't work, and also please stop trying to put words in my mouth. What I said is that it line up pretty damn good,

who's sounding like a broken record around here? you are always running off about the wide bands broad bands being cheap and they don't work as well as the narrow bands. so if they line up pretty damn good then how bad can they be. it isn't a matter of if...a bike cant be brought to me then it isn't tuned right ,it is the fact that 85%... so called...  (your words) is NOT good enough! you are the broken record constantly putting down wide bands when they work fine and any one that has used them knows that as well.
The topic of this thread is how to get the best home made tune. I think most here are smart enough to see that 100% vs 85% is better...my bad I knew better then to include you in that group because you are marketing a product and would never admit that something is better.
all this crap you spew about how cheap wide bands don't work is BS to further push your product. when someone challenges you then you get abusive and defensive. I don't buy your BS and neither does the majority of tuners .in fact it is a joke among tuners (v-tune and smart tune.)

So if your going to say that being within a few percent is too far off for you I guess you should quit tuning as they move that much day to day and tank of fuel to tank of fuel.

a few percent would be OK but 1.0 -2.0 is not acceptable. it's a guess plain and simple.
no reason to quit tuning because when owners get frustrated with v- tune they have to be tuned correct.
I am done with you on this one because.......we are both beginning to sound like a broken record. you do your thing and I will do mine

[Steve Cole]

Yes, if owner wants/needs 100% then a dyno tune can get you closer but it's still not going to get 100%, we've been saying that from day 1. Guess like always you have not been listening! If the dyno operator uses a Broad Band sensor system that does not follow the Bosch specifications (like a TS) your not going to get much better than 90%. As for wide Bands if you could find a dyno tuner that owns a set then they could get about 98% for the day the bike was tuned on. Two days later or a week later it could be down 5-7% for a Broad Band setup and about 2 - 3% for Vtune or a Wide Band system. Nothing any tuner can do about it as those changes are due to outside causes.

As people can see some socalled tuners are not very happy that they are losing business and are not willing to change. They think things should just stay the same and keep people in the dark.

[glens]

AFter playing with TS for like 10 minutes, it damwned on me how this all works.

Glens, and myself were talking crap when we said that we would have to refigure AFRs using the 'offset' CLBs.

Nope... not the case.

That remains to be seen, my friend.

1) with NB O2s unplugged, the ECM is in OPEN loop at 14.6.  Cannot have closed loop without the O2s. TS will tune to the commanded 14.6

With AFVs cleared beforehand, right?

2)  thought this thru all wrong, too.  The ECM still commands 14.6 regardless of the CLB setting.  What the CLB setting does is trick the ECM into thinking the O2 is still reporting Stoich, and the ECM corrects to Stoich in closed loop.  The CLB changes what the sensor REPORTS as stoich, is all the CLB does.  In V-Tune, we need that 'trick' at hand to come up with the correct math.  Thats why the NEW v-tune if we change CLB.  The 'ticked out' O2 is in 'play' during V-Tune with all the math in tow.

Well, sort of.  What the CLB does isn't trickery of any sort.  All it does is tell the ECM what sensor output voltage to use as the "hinge" point during its consideration of what's going on at the moment when closed-loop.  The system will dither the fuel just every so slightly rich (crossing the CLB voltage) and lean (crossing the CLB voltage again).  Ideally this will occur on successive cycles.  This is why the faster-acting your O2 sensors are the better they'll work (they get slower with age and some are better than others when new).  This is why they're called "switching sensors".  It's because they're very fast-acting and can quickly toggle (follow the AFR across stoich).  At a consistent and even pressure/temperature/burn (not cyclic) I think you'd see their output voltage stay at one continual level.

How do you know that when you're free-air-calibrating your TwinScan/WEGO unit that you're not adjusting one single CLB within the WEGO's closed-loop sensor controller?  Tap into the sensing element's signal with an oscilloscope and tell me what you see, both during use on an engine and while free-air-calibrating it?  I'm thinking a nice symmetrical voltage waveform in the first case and a steady-state (or at least much more-so) voltage in the second case.  I guess it depends on how/if the controller dithers the ion pump or not.

Thats' why one can input outside data and NOT have to worry about it all.  There is no math 'trick' involved if tuned against commanded output.  Can change the CLB at will.  The ECM is actually tuned against actual command.

Okay.  So you TwinScanned to (whatever the actual stoich AFR of your fuel actually is, but still) "14.6", the ECM will have good data for a true "14.6" (equivalent), if it has 450mV CLBs!.  If you change them to a "richer" voltage, the AFVs will at least all move to accommodate the change.  Wherever such an AFV becomes what it takes to make the "new" "14.6" its influence will be "felt" wherever it has "jurisdiction" and whether the commanded AFR is "14.6" or something different there for the moment.  And the "right" and "bottom" AFVs will be used the rest of the way out (just like the CLBs do, the ETC throttle-blade control does, etc.).

Just think.  If the VE tables matched the fueling tables (in respect to axes, like the 10 [and should be 09] touring calibrations) you'd be able, if you had indication of what/any AFV activity was at all times, to figure what the "AFR" would be anywhere closed-loop with your chosen CLBs, then set the "AFR" values appropriately in the calibration and tune the VEs to that with your TwinScan.  Then, put the values back to "14.6" in the calibration with those CLBs and all your ever-open-loop areas will remain at what you set them with the TwinScan.

If you get everything spot-on with your TwinScan and then go closed-loop with >450 CLBs, all your ever-open-loop areas will go richer, in proportion to how much higher your went with the CLBs.  Because your AFVs will take you there.

If you did it the way I outlined in the "Just think" paragraph above, your AFVs will start and stay at 100% (nominally, as always).

[glens]

I'm not picking at you.  I'm trying to help you understand what it is you're trying to do.  That's all.

If you load a calibration or otherwise clear your AFVs and tune with the TwinScan with its sensors installed as replacements to the stock units, you'll be open-loop at the time.  No AFVs will be changed from their 100% base value because no CLBs will be considered because the system has no O2 sensors, so how can it do any closed-loop work?

If you are running 450mV CLBs when you do go back to closed-loop, the AFVs will nominally stay right at 100% because your VEs are all accurate.  Of course this all assumes that the Delphi and the TwinScan, each with their sensors in operation, develop the same notion of things.  I just wanted to throw that out there because it's possible they'll differ some.  But let's keep this simple and assume they jibe with each other.  Sorry for that.  I had to say that for "liability" reasons.

When you instead go closed-loop with greater CLBs, the Delphi will figure the fuel it needs and send it.  The closed-loop operation will toggle "rich"/"lean" about that greater CLB and determine it needs more fuel than it was figuring for its "14.6".  It'll provide this fuel via an AFV wherever appropriate.  Then, as I stated earlier, this "final factor" gets applied at all times either directly for any AFV, or as part of a combination of more than one, depending on where "current" operation is in relation to it/them.  And it doesn't matter if the current operation is calling for "14.6" or "12.8".  Whatever AFV (or combination of them) is pertinent to the operating area will be applied anyway.  This is how the system compensates for things like different fuel blends and keeps things relatively "right" across-the-board, even when it can't confirm them, like in the 100% throttle or 100% MAP columns.  (If you consistently need 3% more of this current "blend" of fuel during closed-loop operation, it certainly must apply in any open-loop operation, too, because it's a deviation from the tuning [VE] parameters everywhere.)  Man, this paragraph's getting big, but I want to make sure you understand what I'm saying.

What happens to your, say, "88" VE value when a "final factor" used is "100%" (the same as used to develop the VE)?  Nothing.  It'll be both actually and effectively "88".

What happens to your "88" VE when it was developed with a "final factor" of "100%" but a final factor of "104%" is used against it (because a CLB takes the "14.6" to "14.0")?  It'll actually be the original "88" but it'll effectively be "91.5" because of the resultant AFV ("final factor") becoming "104%" (as outlined above for this example).

Do you see what I'm saying?  Your "commanded" AFR of, say, 13.8, will still be "commanded" as that, but without closed-loop confirmation, the last best information from closed-loop operation will be applied.  In the case of the "effective" 91.5 VE, what was 13.8 @88 will become 13.3!

Are these differences "huge"?  No, they're not.  But they will be brought about, and if you're trying to be as complete as possible you need to be aware of them (I guess that's debatable) and either learn to work around them (as in my example in my previous post) or just never go closed-loop after you've polished your VEs with the TwinScan.

Don't take any of this as being antagonistic in any way.  It's not intended as such.  Not in the least.  I'd like to have a TwinScan myself.  And a load-control dyno.  And the time to use them.

[strokerjlk]

Yes, if owner wants/needs 100% then a dyno tune can get you closer but it's still not going to get 100%, we've been saying that from day 1. Guess like always you have not been listening! If the dyno operator uses a Broad Band sensor system that does not follow the Bosch specifications (like a TS) your not going to get much better than 90%. As for wide Bands if you could find a dyno tuner that owns a set then they could get about 98% for the day the bike was tuned on. Two days later or a week later it could be down 5-7% for a Broad Band setup and about 2 - 3% for Vtune or a Wide Band system. Nothing any tuner can do about it as those changes are due to outside causes.

As people can see some so called tuners are not very happy that they are losing business and are not willing to change. They think things should just stay the same and keep people in the dark.

Oh I have been listing alright. just because I don't agree with you, you start your abuse and throwing around innuendos.
tunes can and will deteriorate over time. agreed!
your statement aimed at me being a so called tuner is a prime example of your methods to somehow discredit someones opinion if it doesn't line up with yours.
I am not loosing business because of v-tune. if fact it has brought me business. as I stated earlier.
actually in my area Joe biker off the street has never heard of TTS. I actually have to talk them out of going PC or SEST, and tune with TTS.
you got me all wrong again.....I don't tune to make a living. I tune because I have a passion for it. I do this because I got tired of seeing guys get ripped off on there tunes. I work a full time day job for the #2 fortune 500 co. (last I checked). If I were to do this for a living I would have to hustle two tunes a day to make the same money....three if I counted my benefits etc. then I would not be able to give the compleat tunes that I do now and it would be easy to fall into the very same boat that SO CALLED tuners are in now.

[jluvs2ride]

8 hours v-tuning.  That includes some data runs to get rid of timing being pulled by ION sensor.

I have SOME experience with this, so far.....   So... just so somebody reading this, this is NOT a SEST Smart Tune that gives you hardly any control.  THIS takes some time and effort to get the v-tune runs run correctly.

I've been doing some Smart Tuning, and gained noticible improvements. I've been trying to run under various loads, at various RPMS and throttle positions. It does take time and effort. I'm not looking to get into a debate here about the merits of either device, but what is it in the ECM that the SESTP doesn't give me access to?

VTune and Smart Tune allow corrections to the VE tables based on data gathered during runs. What additional control are you getting w/the TTS that I don't have w/the SESTP? Again, I'm not looking for an argument here, rather just trying to gain some knowledge.

[Steve Cole]

Yes, if owner wants/needs 100% then a dyno tune can get you closer but it's still not going to get 100%, we've been saying that from day 1. Guess like always you have not been listening! If the dyno operator uses a Broad Band sensor system that does not follow the Bosch specifications (like a TS) your not going to get much better than 90%. As for wide Bands if you could find a dyno tuner that owns a set then they could get about 98% for the day the bike was tuned on. Two days later or a week later it could be down 5-7% for a Broad Band setup and about 2 - 3% for Vtune or a Wide Band system. Nothing any tuner can do about it as those changes are due to outside causes.

As people can see some so called tuners are not very happy that they are losing business and are not willing to change. They think things should just stay the same and keep people in the dark.

Oh I have been listing alright. just because I don't agree with you, you start your abuse and throwing around innuendos.
tunes can and will deteriorate over time. agreed!
your statement aimed at me being a so called tuner is a prime example of your methods to somehow discredit someones opinion if it doesn't line up with yours.
I am not loosing business because of v-tune. if fact it has brought me business. as I stated earlier.
actually in my area Joe biker off the street has never heard of TTS. I actually have to talk them out of going PC or SEST, and tune with TTS.
you got me all wrong again.....I don't tune to make a living. I tune because I have a passion for it. I do this because I got tired of seeing guys get ripped off on there tunes. I work a full time day job for the #2 fortune 500 co. (last I checked). If I were to do this for a living I would have to hustle two tunes a day to make the same money....three if I counted my benefits etc. then I would not be able to give the compleat tunes that I do now and it would be easy to fall into the very same boat that SO CALLED tuners are in now.

You are just the so called tuner I am talking about. I think you need to go back and read what you've stated before you event talk about throwing innuendos. You do not know how the system works and are not willing to learn it. Your stuck on the idea that the engine needs to run at a fix AFR value to work properly when that is not the case. Then you cannot seem to understand that the TS is using the Bosch sensor improperly and you want to say it's the bible to go by! The TS and any other meter using the Broad Band O2 sensors placed in the exhaust pipe with out sampling exhaust pressure and exhaust temperature are reading WRONG. The error they give gets worse with increased temperature and increased pressure. So since your so smart working for a fortune 500 company why not due some basic research first before you further put your foot in your mouth. Start by getting the Bosch specification sheet for the Broad Band sensor and reading then understand what they tell you and why they tell you how it has to be used for accurate readings!

I have no issues with someone who goes and does the research and has a different opinion but those who are too lazy to go do the work are a problem and you sir fall into the later category!

[Sonny S.]

So let me get this straight.
An AFR meter using a Bosch " broad band " O2 sensor such as Innovate LM-1 / LM-2 or DTT WEGO III  are not that accurate ?   

Can any readings be somewhat translated in to usuable AFR data ?

As for the 5% variance. Are you saying that the actual running AFR can vary 5% at any given time?  So tuning to 14.2:1 one day can actually be running in the mid 13's to high 14's depending on weather and fuel ? Let's just say in open loop.
I have personally seen changes due to both but didn't pay attention to what percentage.

[Steve Cole]

I am not saying anything, the Bosch specification sheet is saying it all! All I am doing is letting people know about it.

ALL motors will move around due to outside causes, this is just why a closed loop system was developed to trim them back. Yes, emissions is what forced it to happen but it is a good thing. So if your going to test you must test with something that is more accurate than what you are testing. If you do not use equipment that is better than what your testing you gain no useful information about the system operation.

With that in mind I've run test after test here with various fuel mixtures on a properly tuned HD motor and would anyone like to guess the WOT power output change from running 13.5:1 down to 12.7:1 AFR using a real WIDE BAND system?

[Don D]

The TS and any other meter using the Broad Band O2 sensors placed in the exhaust pipe with out sampling exhaust pressure and exhaust temperature are reading WRONG. The error they give gets worse with increased temperature and increased pressure.

Holy cow, this means then that if a tuner uses these same sensors in his wand sampling device or in the exhaust port then that data is erroneous. That would put all Dynojet operators in that catagory AFAIK right??? Do they sample temperature and pressure? Does the Dynojet tuning software have compensation tables to cause a correction?

[Steve Cole]

Think about what happens when you remove the sensor from the exhaust pipe.

[Sonny S.]

>>>I am not saying anything, the Bosch specification sheet is saying it all! All I am doing is letting people know about it.<<<

Steve, I asked if that's what " you " were saying because I don't have the Bosch specification sheet. I was also curious if you were saying the O2 sensor varied by 5% or actual running AFR.
Thanks for clearing that up.

Now I'm wondering what to do with AFR data I get from my WEGO III 
I guess If you saw WFO go from 13.5 to 12.7....then it could also go to 14.2 ?

[hrdtail78]

"With that in mind I've run test after test here with various fuel mixtures on a properly tuned HD motor and would anyone like to guess the WOT power output change from running 13.5:1 down to 12.7:1 AFR using a real WIDE BAND system?"

My guess would be not much of a change.

Think about what happens when you remove the sensor from the exhaust pipe.

Got to wonder the same thing Don and Sonny are asking.  I use Bosch p/n 16065 for the dyno.  Different p/n for the LM1, but looks to be the same.  I have used one to verify what the other is reading.

[BVHOG]

I am not saying anything, the Bosch specification sheet is saying it all! All I am doing is letting people know about it.

ALL motors will move around due to outside causes, this is just why a closed loop system was developed to trim them back. Yes, emissions is what forced it to happen but it is a good thing. So if your going to test you must test with something that is more accurate than what you are testing. If you do not use equipment that is better than what your testing you gain no useful information about the system operation.

With that in mind I've run test after test here with various fuel mixtures on a properly tuned HD motor and would anyone like to guess the WOT power output change from running 13.5:1 down to 12.7:1 AFR using a real WIDE BAND system?

Less than 2% I would guess.  But your the data guy so show us.  I find it ridiculous that you keep ripping on these wide bands as being used improperly, if the wide bands were so far off as you would have the general population believe we would be melting pistons or washing down cylinders. This whole narrow band wide band argument is BS, I bet the guys with the 4gas setups are having a good laugh over this one. I think the issue here is the best overall tune and getting 85% of the way there and guessing on the last 15% is not even remotely acceptable by any of us so-called wannabe  tuners. You have the best  ecm access product but you can't seem to admit it's shortcomings, the VE's will NOT always run out to the end of the table and be on the rich side, period. And just one more question, do you think we would have ever even seen the 02 sensors on the Harley Delphi system if not for the epa, the ecms had the ports for many years and they didn't add them till they had to. Many pre 07 bikes tuned (with cheapass multiwire narrow bands) are performing excellent every day while getting decent mileage and no bad running habits. As for all the testing you have done you also know how cam overlap, compression, exhaust reversion all can factor in to make a sample at low speed that is not accurate by even the best sensors, that is where us, dare I say tuners, come in to figure things out from experience and get these bikes to run the best they can.

[Steve Cole]

The amount the reading from the unit can and does change is based on three things. The reading, the exhaust pressure and the exhaust temperature. This is what needs to be feed into the unit so that it can apply the corrections to give a correct reading out. The amount of the correction itself will vary based on these inputs. The corrections gets larger as the pressure and temperature increase, so speaking as a general rule of thumb only, the closer the pressure is to baro and the closer the temperature is to 450 C the smaller the correction that needs to be applied.

Understand what I've said shows the bigger problem and that is I have no way to know for sure what the correction needs to be on any one given day. All we can do is say it can vary within the correction limits called out for and that can be a lot! A +5% correction to 10:1 is 10.5:1 yet a 5% correction to 14.6:1 is 15.33:1!

Without using the Bosch corrections it is anyone's best guess what the mixture reading really is and there in lies the problem with the Broad Band systems currently in use today. Placing the sensor in the exhaust pipe exposes it to both the increased heat and pressure along with high vibrations which is what I believe causes them to fail at the rate they do. Now I'm not talking about a complete failure to where it does not work but one that I feel is much worse! That's a sensor that still works but reads much further off than the specification calls for. This is just one of the reasons DynoJet came out with a calibration gas kit for there sensors! If they are off too much get new sensors and the test gas let's you see this but still does nothing for the corrections that are not being used.


I see one taker on the power output question I've asked. The answer is less than 2 ft/lbs and less than 2 hp! That again is something that you will see on a dyno from run to run as the bike dyno cannot measure any closer than that. So it just goes to show that the HD motor is not all that sensitive to AFR changes for power production, emissions is another thing! So as long as you get it close it will perform well, so all you so called tuners can drop the BS about it needs to be spot on as you do not have the tools to get it there and you never have. All you have been doing is GUESSING as you call it! The work from a good tuner will be spent in knowing when to ignore the sensors as the mechanical problems put the system in a condition that no sensor is going to work in some cases, but to say your getting a better tune due to the Broad band system is pure crap!

A good tuner has learned and has knowledge of these things and works around them, it called an EDUCATED GUESS!

[strokerjlk]

I have no issues with someone who goes and does the research and has a different opinion but those who are too lazy to go do the work are a problem and you sir fall into the later category!

I have done plenty of research and I have the Bosch sheets. I have also used the v-tune . and it was a joke. marketing ploy plain and simple.
see there you go again whenever any one disagrees with you you revert to trying to discredit them.
still the funny thing is that when you said the twin scan and v-tune lined up pretty damn good. ...so I wonder is the narrow band just as cheap as the wide bands  or the wide bands just as good as the narrow bands.
it dont matter anyway because all we have to do is get close

[BVHOG]

So what kind of pressure are we talking about here? in plain numbers.  Would be interesting to see what kind of pressure is in an HD exhaust while running and would be very easy to check.  I'm sure it varies with pipe design and baffle. Most of the units that use the wideband also feature a free air cal adjustment to check sensors before tuning, while I don't subscribe to the auto tune systems that leave the widebands in place the few hours we use them on the dyno they will last for many, many tunes, if there is any doubt it is easily checked by plugging in a new one, or two if need be or simply swapping wire leads front to rear to see if readings remain consistent. Once again Steve, you have a great product, your method of advertising by tearing down others work is not very becoming of someone with your abilities. I was always taught it was better to toot your own horn than to badmouth your competition which is exactly what you do on these forums on a repeated basis.
Now you rip on us, the very people who promote your product and use it on a regular basis.

[glens]

I don't see it as badmouthing the competition.  Rather, trying to give a heads-up that the products aren't quite what they're being marketed to be.

The broadband sensors have an internal ion pump to migrate oxygen to/from the backside of the sensing element.  If the pressures both sides of the element aren't taken into consideration the amount of pumping can't be accurately factored.  It's as plain and simple as that.

On top of that, the "free air" calibration is almost at one end of the spectrum.  That'd be okay so long as the response of the whole probe system is completely linear.  Is it?

And I'm not so much "sticking up for" Steve, either.  I feel he ignores me way too much

[glens]

To be fair about it, one must consider that the "switching sensors" are exactly the same as the broadband but without the closed-loop ion-pumping controller.  So pressure differential is still a factor with them, too.  The narrower range helps lessen this factor but there's still a closed-loop control system at work in the broadbands which can effectively amplify errors.  Temperature factors are a wash between them, too, in the same ways and to the same extent.  I believe Steve's suggested that when both sensor types are being used in the areas they overlap there's not that much difference between them.  But it's the "outer" areas where the broadbands are more relied-upon and this is where things get a bit more critical.

What it boils down to is the message they deliver ain't necessarily as "gospel-like" as is commonly believed.

[jluvs2ride]

8 hours v-tuning.  That includes some data runs to get rid of timing being pulled by ION sensor.

I have SOME experience with this, so far.....   So... just so somebody reading this, this is NOT a SEST Smart Tune that gives you hardly any control.  THIS takes some time and effort to get the v-tune runs run correctly.

I've been doing some Smart Tuning, and gained noticible improvements. I've been trying to run under various loads, at various RPMS and throttle positions. It does take time and effort. I'm not looking to get into a debate here about the merits of either device, but what is it in the ECM that the SESTP doesn't give me access to?

VTune and Smart Tune allow corrections to the VE tables based on data gathered during runs. What additional control are you getting w/the TTS that I don't have w/the SESTP? Again, I'm not looking for an argument here, rather just trying to gain some knowledge.

Is this just way too dificult a question for you guys??

[Steve Cole]

So what kind of pressure are we talking about here? in plain numbers.  Would be interesting to see what kind of pressure is in an HD exhaust while running and would be very easy to check.  I'm sure it varies with pipe design and baffle. Most of the units that use the wideband also feature a free air cal adjustment to check sensors before tuning, while I don't subscribe to the auto tune systems that leave the widebands in place the few hours we use them on the dyno they will last for many, many tunes, if there is any doubt it is easily checked by plugging in a new one, or two if need be or simply swapping wire leads front to rear to see if readings remain consistent. Once again Steve, you have a great product, your method of advertising by tearing down others work is not very becoming of someone with your abilities. I was always taught it was better to toot your own horn than to badmouth your competition which is exactly what you do on these forums on a repeated basis.
Now you rip on us, the very people who promote your product and use it on a regular basis.

You need to use the proper names when talking about things for a starter. My position is not changing nor am I ripping on anyone. If I was you would certainly know it!

Broad Band sensors are what ALL of the current aftermarket systems use NOT Wide Bands. If you had true Wide Bands we would not be having this conversation. What I am doing is trying to open the eyes of people like yourself who have believed all the hype about Broad Band sensors when they are being used improperly. Find a device that uses them properly and again we will not have this conversation!

As for the exhaust pressure it's going to depend on the compression ratio, camshaft and exhaust so there is no one size fits all answer. Just another good reason why you need to use equipment rated to do the job and do it properly. Now as for putting them into the exhaust on the dyno then removing them, yes that makes them last longer but exposes them to greater heat, pressure and vibration, so you've hurt your readings by doing so! I just had a customer today call with an issue that the dyno tuner could not find. Turned out to be the new exhaust system moved the sensor location and made the bungs in the pipes to deep. This had the entire sensor out of the exhaust stream and up into the bung. Guess what the reading were wrong.  Since the sensor could not read properly Vtune was not going to work properly. Now who's fault is that? HD's system, Vtune or the pipe manufactures. This isn't the good old days of carburetors that could hold at best a 2.0 AFR range from day to day. You have to use equipment properly in order for it to mean anything.

I am being told by very few of you that our product does not work as advertised and yes I disagree and will stand up for what I know to be true. The majority of the real tuners are very happy with it and find it works as advertise. A few of You seem to have a problem with that and that fine but when you do disagree, bring some cold hard data to back it up. When you try and come with data from something that does not have the ability to measure accurately then I will let you know that too. I am not picking on anyone product yet you would like to twist it that way, my problem is with the improper use of the Broad Band sensors and trying to tell me that when they are used improperly they are better than the switching type sensor, Sorry but that's not going to happen. I've been to too many dyno shops and gotten them to run some tesst and have been able to show them the issue and it's opened there eyes to say the least.

[glens]

Another thought I have on the subject in general is that if v-tune can't be made to work for any given case then that situation isn't really going to work very well closed-loop anyway.  If the system can't get enough of a hold on things to give you decent data how would you expect it to be able to do right with the setup under "normal" use?

Steve, is there no way for you to ferret out and provide the information on at least where in any calibration the AFVs are and to make it even better, what values they contain?  Huh?  Please?  This would enable folks to get a problem area set and isolated much better/easier.

[BVHOG]

First off, I never said your product does not work, but what you are saying is that products like the T-max, PCIV with auto tune, Daytona twin tech, and the LM1 units that use these sensors are all wrong, last year I spent a week at S&S cycles training course, they have an emissions lab that we(including yourself) can only dream of having yet guess what units they use in their dyno rooms and test bikes? Yep, these cheap ass sensors  with the LM1 and analog input to the dyno software that you keep claiming can't work. They also use these on their VFI systems.  To be fair,they do use the the true widebands for some racing applications and replace very frequently because of fuel contamination.
FWIW I have tested the DTT Wego unit with a sniffer and did a direct comparison to the readings of the factory system and they were nearly Identical, this was on a bone stock 07 Ultra, the DTT unit read it at 14.7 at idle and the factory sensors showed 14.9  Hardly the huge swing you describe, also keep in mind these sensors are being used with a vacum pump in many cases so the vibration, heat, pressure etc does not have the same effect.
I think I will call Chris Schroeder at DTT Monday and see what he thinks about this little controversy, my bet is that since his company sells the cheap widebands (that really aren't widebands) he will tell me his are better. In the end all you have to do is follow the $ sign. 
Still here to learn but this constant "ours is better" stuff is getting old. The ability of your method with the narrows is still incomplete, any way shape or form you twist it to.

[wolf_59]

8 hours v-tuning.  That includes some data runs to get rid of timing being pulled by ION sensor.

I have SOME experience with this, so far.....   So... just so somebody reading this, this is NOT a SEST Smart Tune that gives you hardly any control.  THIS takes some time and effort to get the v-tune runs run correctly.

I've been doing some Smart Tuning, and gained noticible improvements. I've been trying to run under various loads, at various RPMS and throttle positions. It does take time and effort. I'm not looking to get into a debate here about the merits of either device, but what is it in the ECM that the SESTP doesn't give me access to?

VTune and Smart Tune allow corrections to the VE tables based on data gathered during runs. What additional control are you getting w/the TTS that I don't have w/the SESTP? Again, I'm not looking for an argument here, rather just trying to gain some knowledge.

quote author=WVULTRA link=topic=27125.msg276028#msg276028 date=1276276650]

MasterTune

Allows the following adjustments:

Air Fuel Ratio Adjustment
VE Front Cylinder
VE Rear cylinder
PE AFR
Warmup Enrichment
Cranking Fuel
Closed Loop Bias Front Cylinder
Closed Loop Bias Rear Cylinder
Accel Enrichment
Decel Enleanment
Spark Advance Front Cylinder
Spark Advance Rear Cylinder
PE Spark
Spark Temperature Correction
Closed Throttle Spark
Adaptive Knock Retard
Idle RPM
IAC Warmup Steps
IAC Crank to Run
IAC Crank Steps
Max Knock Retard
Injector Size
Engine Displacement
RPM Limiter
Knock Control
EITMS Control
PE Mode Control
Primary Ratio Correction
Speedometer Correction
ACR Control
Active Intake/Exhaust Control (HDI Bikes)
Fan Control (Vrods)
Throttle Blade Control (DBW Bikes)
Backup Copy of Original ECM Program
Full Graphing of all tables
Auto Tune with NO extra parts (CL Bikes)

Also included with the product is a full on-line manual that explains how to use the product as well as how to tune. Very simple to use GUI that makes changes as simple or as fancy as you want. If you want to use a feature use it, if you do not, just skip over it. The system can be as smart or as simple as you want. This allows you to use more as you learn/understand more! Tuning aids include O2 Voltage Calculator, VSS Calculator and VIN Information Form. Full manual with screen shots and examples can be printed for a hard copy. User can assign any part number they want to appear in the calibration as well as leaves no trace within the ECM when the original program is restored to the ECM or when programmed with a Base file. You can reprogram as much as you want, so when you change parts you just hookup and make the necessary tuning changes.

DataMaster

Full Real Time Data Recording to capture what the engine is doing and V-tune data. Comes with DTC Capture and Reset, AFV Reset, Speed/Distance Calculator, Quarter Mile Calculator and Dyno Graphing from captured data. Graphing of any 4 items and the ability to change graphed items real time. Zoom in and out on graphed items for better resolution. Included with the product is a full on-line manual that explains how to use the product as well as how to use the collected data for tuning. Full manual with screen shots and examples can be printed for a hard copy.

V-Tune

V-tune takes the data collected from the engine and generates a new tune based on what was tested. The user has to do nothing other than push the buttons on the screen to generate a corrected tune. This is as close to a real Auto-tune as it gets. No need for other products to be purchased and combining data the best you can, it does it all for you the proper way! Included with the product is a full on-line manual that explains how to use the product. Full manual with screen shots and examples can be printed for a hard copy.

Mastertune Calibration File Listing

Documentation of all the supplied calibration files. Currently list over 120 different base calibrations for V-Rod, Sportster and Big Twin engine combinations.

TTS Software Updater

A software package that keeps you up to date with all the latest releases of the above products with the simple push of a button. Updates are placed on the server so you can update anytime day or night.

All of these features for a MSRP of $425.00 for single bike or $625.00 for a Dual Bike Unit. You can use the system to check any HD Delphi bike

Sorry no help on the SEST

[ViennaHog]

Air Fuel Ratio Adjustment Y
VE Front Cylinder y
VE Rear cylinder y
PE AFR n
Warmup Enrichment y
Cranking Fuel y
Closed Loop Bias Front Cylinder y
Closed Loop Bias Rear Cylinder y
Accel Enrichment y
Decel Enleanment y
Spark Advance Front Cylinder y
Spark Advance Rear Cylinder y
PE Spark n
Spark Temperature Correction n
Closed Throttle Spark n
Adaptive Knock Retard n
Idle RPM y
IAC Warmup Steps y
IAC Crank to Run n
IAC Crank Steps n
Max Knock Retard n
Injector Size y
Engine Displacement y
RPM Limiter y
Knock Control y
EITMS Control y
PE Mode Control n
Primary Ratio Correction n
Speedometer Correction n
ACR Control y
Active Intake/Exhaust Control (HDI Bikes) y
Fan Control (Vrods) n
Throttle Blade Control (DBW Bikes) y
Backup Copy of Original ECM Program n
Full Graphing of all tables y
Auto Tune with NO extra parts (CL Bikes) y


AFAIK

[strokerjlk]

First off, I never said your product does not work, but what you are saying is that products like the T-max, PCIV with auto tune, Daytona twin tech, and the LM1 units that use these sensors are all wrong, last year I spent a week at S&S cycles training course, they have an emissions lab that we(including yourself) can only dream of having yet guess what units they use in their dyno rooms and test bikes? Yep, these cheap ass sensors  with the LM1 and analog input to the dyno software that you keep claiming can't work. They also use these on their VFI systems.  To be fair,they do use the the true widebands for some racing applications and replace very frequently because of fuel contamination.
FWIW I have tested the DTT Wego unit with a sniffer and did a direct comparison to the readings of the factory system and they were nearly Identical, this was on a bone stock 07 Ultra, the DTT unit read it at 14.7 at idle and the factory sensors showed 14.9  Hardly the huge swing you describe, also keep in mind these sensors are being used with a vacum pump in many cases so the vibration, heat, pressure etc does not have the same effect.
I think I will call Chris Schroeder at DTT Monday and see what he thinks about this little controversy, my bet is that since his company sells the cheap widebands (that really aren't widebands) he will tell me his are better. In the end all you have to do is follow the $ sign. 
Still here to learn but this constant "ours is better" stuff is getting old. The ability of your method with the narrows is still incomplete, any way shape or form you twist it to.

careful there Bob or.......you certanily will know it

didnt you get one of those shirts yet....REAL TUNERS USE NARROW BANDS 

[hrdtail78]

1. PE Mode Control
2. PE AFR 
3. Closed Throttle Spark

[yositime]

I'm not sure there is a I'm better than you discussion going on here, I don't get that...  but maybe the discussion is more along the lines of how can you can prove it. 

Based on the definition that a 100% tune hits all your desired AFR numbers spot on for all conditions, one discussion seams to me to be more about, given the technology available, how you know that you are hitting these desired numbers 100% spot on, even by using high dollar equipment. And if you are compromising on your measurement technique to hit another price point, how can you prove to be spot on?  Are we just kidding ourselves?

The other discussion may be more about which AFR targets are really right or maybe that it really doesn't make any difference AFR wise as long as you are close (until you get into the highly built motors). The difference is in fine tuning the timing perhaps?  I dunno

Perhaps we need more street face offs as the two face offs I've seen published tuned slightly modified bikes with TTS and then a competent pro dyno tuned using his bag of tricks. Both tunes ran the same (on the street), and was within 1HP and 1lBft WOT power. The pro was then able to get a slightly smoother tune and a couple HP by tweaking timing, which may be another black art subject.

I mean there were quite a few years there when everyone thought the earth was flat and proved it using subjective and flawed measurements.... 

[BVHOG]

I'm not sure there is a I'm better than you discussion going on here, I don't get that...  but maybe the discussion is more along the lines of how can you can prove it. 

Based on the definition that a 100% tune hits all your desired AFR numbers spot on for all conditions, one discussion seams to me to be more about, given the technology available, how you know that you are hitting these desired numbers 100% spot on, even by using high dollar equipment. And if you are compromising on your measurement technique to hit another price point, how can you prove to be spot on?  Are we just kidding ourselves?

The other discussion may be more about which AFR targets are really right or maybe that it really doesn't make any difference AFR wise as long as you are close (until you get into the highly built motors). The difference is in fine tuning the timing perhaps?  I dunno

Perhaps we need more street face offs as the two face offs I've seen published tuned slightly modified bikes with TTS and then a competent pro dyno tuned using his bag of tricks. Both tunes ran the same (on the street), and was within 1HP and 1lBft WOT power. The pro was then able to get a slightly smoother tune and a couple HP by tweaking timing, which may be another black art subject.

I mean there were quite a few years there when everyone thought the earth was flat and proved it using subjective and flawed measurements....

Good post and all valid concerns, I believe a 4 gas analysis by someone who knows what they are looking at is still the best measure of combustion efficiency.  From speaking with these guys they claim the 02 readings are the least of their concern. 
As far as the subjective part keep in mind who has the mo$t to gain from their opinions.

[Don D]

What I am doing is trying to open the eyes of people like yourself who have believed all the hype about Broad Band sensors when they are being used improperly

What about the folks that don't believe the hype but don't feel it is relevant either way?

I suggest that the merrits or cons of either sensor doesn't matter.
This thread is a run away train that is headed down a "slippery slope" fallacy.

Technologist hat off
Logic seeking end user / consumer hat on
Remember the topic?
How to get BEST 'Home Made Tune?
NOT: Which is the best tuning product and O2 sensor?

Here is what I have gathered from this great discussion, my mind dump:

Most of the customers don't want to know the inner workings of the product they want the baby not the growing pains described

Vtune does not provide a turn key solution but will correct 85% of the VE range to reasonable accuracy

I don't give a rip about hardware capabilities or design just what will "get er done" and done well on the road but not to take the place of the dyno tuner for mass power output testing and adjustment, just to get the VEs accurately corrected and supply the tools in a user friendly fashion to obtain decent driveability under most conditions, mileage acceptable, and a safe timing adjustment

No matter how hard we try to cram this data on a shelf labeled case study it does not follow any sort of "case study" criteria therefore is nothing more than casual discussion between some very technical and some less technical folks some biased. The goal is to seperate the wheat from the chaf and develop a methodology to tune bikes at home or at least as best possible given the constraints we face.

There can be multiple products that can achieve the goal, or none, besides, just one

RE:Broad Band sensors when they are being used improperly
Logic accepted, solid data backs up the claim, so what? Stop the obsession. Your vast knowlege is needed helping others not choose a product but getting the most from yours. It is a great product, not perfect, but your participation in these discussions is greatly appreciated and we give important feedback for suggested product enhancements. Take heed!
These same sensors fill a nitch and are used for data aquisition very successfully and who cares if they are disposable so are Qtips. Just factor that into overhead. As far as relying on Broad Band sensors for closed loop use, long range, YMMV, carry a spare or tune it and then move it to closed loop.
As far as relying on Broad Bands for a "Home Tune", the topic, you betcha I would. They ought to be able to last the 50 miles or so I need to get the job done then ride on until I visit a tuner for a final which is optional not mandatory. I would be using the TTS for data mode monitoring of ION sensing activity but that is not O2 sensor dependant. My tuner will have the same Broad Bands used for sampling and if I choose the right tuner they will be fresh and provide accurate feedback.

For me TTS and TS a hybrid of them

[Steve Cole]

The issues here are simple to me and maybe not so simple to others. First we need to separate the way to tune being hardware from tuner knowledge. Tuner knowledge is not hardware. If the hardware being used for testing is not more accurate than what it is testing the information is not of any use. Standard for the testing industry is that the test equipment needs to be 3 to 5 times more accurate than what is being tested. The argument of Broad Bands versus Switching type sensor has been gone over enough that I hope people can see that when used properly one will do a wider range of measurement but it will be no more accurate than the other in the range they both measure. When used improperly who knows what the results may or may not be but you sure cannot rely on them.

Now as far as the performance of the HD motor, while not talking emissions is concerned, what's it take to make them run good and be at peak power output. Testing has shown that the power output does not vary within the accuracy of the dyno when the mixture is 1 AFR apart. So how close is good enough? What will vary with mixture is fuel economy, cylinder heat and emissions. Fuel economy will improve with a leaner mixture which falls right in the range of the switching sensors. Timing which has to be done by the user of the tuning tool will effect fuel economy, cylinder heat, emissions and power output.

I've seen published tuned slightly modified bikes with TTS and then a competent pro dyno tuned using his bag of tricks. Both tunes ran the same (on the street), and was within 1HP and 1lBft WOT power. The pro was then able to get a slightly smoother tune and a couple HP by tweaking timing, which may be another black art subject.

This has happened time and time again as Vtune does the job it is supposed to do and is more than good enough for this. Now can it be made better from the KNOWLEDGE of a good tuner......... You bet Ya! We've said that from the start. This is just why we have always said 85%, as the knowledge from a good tuner can look to see what is happening from the parts installed and know that certain changes must be made that the electronics has no way to know about. As the motor builds get bigger and wilder there is no substitute for KNOWLEDGE.

As for the Broad Band sensors we use them here as well. I guess the big difference is we know the short coming of them and when we need to be accurate we switch to true Wide bands or 4 gas measurements.

[glens]

Remember the topic?
How to get BEST 'Home Made Tune?
NOT: Which is the best tuning product and O2 sensor?

Well the best tuning product is going to be desired for achieving the best "home made" tune, so the two aspects (means and goal) rather invite each other into any discussion of either.

Most of the customers don't want to know the inner workings of the product they want the baby not the growing pains described

Vtune does not provide a turn key solution but will correct 85% of the VE range to reasonable accuracy

You're only going to really get that 85% if you're a customer who's willing to research enough of the inner workings to be able to know just what it is you're wanting to do so you can actually do it correctly.  At least in a timely and/or repeatable manner.  Also, if you opt for other tools to assist the TTS mechanism in your goal, if you're not careful you'll still end up with mostly just the 85% when you're done.  Another reason for needing to know a few things beyond a casual "paint by numbers" using just (either of the two) good tuning guides available.

No matter how hard we try to cram this data on a shelf labeled case study it does not follow any sort of "case study" criteria therefore is nothing more than casual discussion between some very technical and some less technical folks some biased. The goal is to seperate the wheat from the chaf and develop a methodology to tune bikes at home or at least as best possible given the constraints we face.

There can be multiple products that can achieve the goal, or none, besides, just one

Very good and well-expressed thoughts/observations, there.  I don't have anything to add; just wanted to say that about what you'd said.

RE:Broad Band sensors when they are being used improperly
Logic accepted, solid data backs up the claim, so what? Stop the obsession. Your vast knowlege is needed helping others not choose a product but getting the most from yours. It is a great product, not perfect, but your participation in these discussions is greatly appreciated and we give important feedback for suggested product enhancements. Take heed!

Yes, I agree.  This is partly where I feel I get too ignored

[rbabos]

Another thought I have on the subject in general is that if v-tune can't be made to work for any given case then that situation isn't really going to work very well closed-loop anyway.  If the system can't get enough of a hold on things to give you decent data how would you expect it to be able to do right with the setup under "normal" use?

Steve, is there no way for you to ferret out and provide the information on at least where in any calibration the AFVs are and to make it even better, what values they contain?  Huh?  Please?  This would enable folks to get a problem area set and isolated much better/easier.

Now we're talking. That would be a damn good idea for guys like me that only have that little black box and no other way to identify what's wrong and where.
Ron

[BVHOG]

Check out the dtt tech page here http://www.daytona-sensors.com/tech_wego.html  A ton of good info on the lsu widebands and a bunch of links to other useful info. You gotta be really bored to read all the stuff on that page, lol

[Don D]

The dyno pull
OK that is whacking the throttle at 2k or thereabouts and then looking at the WOT AFR. What correlation will that have to the way the bike runs just going through the gears? Not a heck of a lot that is in different map areas.

Glens
Always enjoy your posts keep up the good work.
I believe the TTS is the best tuning product, simple as that. The TS is nothing more than a data aquisition tool with a small calculation function and really it is not fair to compare them. The TTS is still needed or a similar product such as the SEST to access the tables in the Delphi, all old news to a guy with your knowledge level. I have just been suggestng it is a lot easier and more accurate to correct the VEs with the wide bands and the TS then upload with the TTS. Then move on to timing assuming there are no glaring problems there first.
I am a former owner of a DTT Wego IId and that is headed to the dumpster and I don't think the Tmax or the PCV are real turnkey robust solutions either, a few good features and then many cons or just feature losses compared to keeping the Delphi and getting it programmed correctly.
Just MHO.

Carry on Wurk Truk.
Have the tuner put the map out of closed loop a few ticks and see how close the Vtune is to the AFR measured with broad bands in the pipe instead of the switching sensors. Part throttle stuff with the brake on. Will be interesting to see the result.

Bob have you done that?

[strokerjlk]

Actually wondering what the 'dyno tune' map will make power-wise -vs- the V-tune map.  I will do some SOP back-to-back also.

my dyno v-tuned map lost 10/10 vs the twin scan dyno tuned map. your results may vary.
it will be interesting to see your results.
make sure it is a totally v-tuned map no hybrid as you say. and a totally twin scan map.
are they both going to be open loop?

[strokerjlk]

I can do that.  I was more wondering if homemade lost BIG to the original dyno tune I have.

Gimma a month... I will have all four maps ready to go.  Be an interesting job for me to do, and fun for ME.

something else to look at ...the farther away from desired AFR you tune to the more the ve's will be off ,when you change your AFR tables.
been shot down on this before. but it is a fact. you tune to 14.6 and then change to 13.2 in the afr table the ve's will be off SOME, if you go back and run them again. so with twin scan try to tune to desired afr as much as possible,so you don't have to re run them again. now if you tune (calibrate) cruise to say 14.2 and then later take it to 14.0 (afr table) there wont be much of a variance in what the ve's need corrected . but you make a big jump  they will be off SOME.

[Don D]

THIS tune gets 43ish and I wonder if the added mileage means loss of power?
The timing and the actual afr would affect mileage not power output as measured the way they do at WOT. Same story again two diierent operating modes. Google "BSFC"

[rbabos]

I can do that.  I was more wondering if homemade lost BIG to the original dyno tune I have.

Gimma a month... I will have all four maps ready to go.  Be an interesting job for me to do, and fun for ME.

something else to look at ...the farther away from desired AFR you tune to the more the ve's will be off ,when you change your AFR tables.
been shot down on this before. but it is a fact. you tune to 14.6 and then change to 13.2 in the afr table the ve's will be off SOME, if you go back and run them again. so with twin scan try to tune to desired afr as much as possible,so you don't have to re run them again. now if you tune (calibrate) cruise to say 14.2 and then later take it to 14.0 (afr table) there wont be much of a variance in what the ve's need corrected . but you make a big jump  they will be off SOME.

I find this interesting since my low end will not vtune correctly. My only hope for half assed smooth is to increase the afrs to 13.4 ish in the low end. Is this telling me that my ve's are too low in the low end, and I'm compensating.  Here's something interesting. Origially I was doing the 5-10% up and down with the ve's and the idle went seriously south, so I always put it back. Then it dawned on me, leave the idle ve's as is and work above it. Experts said my rear is showing reversion, but no luck with ve changes there. Moved to the front ve's and wtf, got a noticable improvement with a ballpark 5% from 1125-1750. Added 1 to all these the next edit and it's a touch better again. Decided to install removable saddle bags ,just to get a break from all this, but the new map sensor is in now and will continue fresh with it's install next week.
Truk: It seems you've played with the ts long enough and you need to send it to me. I compliment you on what you are doing and sharing. It's still sad that all this extra equipment is needed to identify where the problem areas are to help out a tuning system.
Ron

[glens]

Check out the dtt tech page here http://www.daytona-sensors.com/tech_wego.html  A ton of good info on the lsu widebands and a bunch of links to other useful info.

Yes, that is a pretty good Web page.  I glanced through about the first half of it and a couple of things jumped right out at me:

"What AFR values are optimum when tuning an engine?
... Combustion of a stoichiometric mixture (exactly enough air to burn all the fuel) results in 14.7 AFR indication."

and

"What are the limitations of the wide-band sensor?
... gasoline containing ethanol will result is slight air/fuel reading errors."

This is what I was talking about earlier (maybe in this thread, maybe in one recently pertaining to adjusting CLBs to match different fuel [which isn't necessary]).  If you're running pure ethanol, stoich is 9:1 AFR, which will "result in 14.7 AFR indication".  The unit is hardcoded against straight gasoline and the resultant numbers are only relative to what's really going on.  The actual "lambda" values are the same between them, though, so it's okay.  Just consider that you're running "straight gasoline" no matter what it really is, when you're using "AFR" numbers these days.

Also, there's a prominent link to the sometimes-hard-to-locate Bosch technical data.

You know, if you actually read what's on that Web page, you'll see just about everything Steve's mentioned.  It's rather downplayed in the page, but it's still provided.  Kudos to DTT.

Thanks for the kind/encouraging words, "Deweysheads".

[BVHOG]

They really do lay it all out there with nothing to hide, no false claims etc. From what I gather using the 5 wire sensors on the dyno will not be a problem as far as vibration or  back pressure but I could see some problems with temperature when located too close to the exhaust valve in the pipe. But the stock sensors would suffer the same fate.  Anyone know how high the exhaust gas temps read under various running conditons on a twincam, assuming the fuel mixture is relatively close?

[Don D]

Ever notice how the stock pipes have the sensor in a piece of pipe away from right in the exhaust stream. Most aftermarket pipes just weld them on. The bungs that is. Any issues with that?

[wurk_truk]

I just went out to look at the bungs.  TS sends the weldable nuts.  Thats all they are, too, a nut with a flange that fits thru the pipe.   My Bosscats are like the pipes from MOCO... they have the 'pipe'.  Looks to me that the 'pipe is used to gain O2 placement within not only the pipe, but the bike, too.  If they simply used the nuts as bungs, the O2s would point in directions that would not be equal to the stock orientation.

From visual inspection, it appears that the tips of the O2s are in the stream but the full heads are not.  Can see carbon rings where that portion of head is in the bung.

Wonder how much of an O2 sensor needs to be directly in the exhaust stream?

Would like to build a sniffer and get the tube close to the front O2 position and put bike in closed loop.  Check what the outputted AFR is.  SHOULD match the command plus the CLB..... 

[Don D]

Why not develop your own timing strategy? Study the topic and look specifically at the requirements of a high performance relatively high compression motor. Lot of this stuff is not cut and paste. Theory from other automotive applications will cross over.

[FLTRI]

The thing I, and others, wonder... is what base map works the best in a given application.

Just for chits and giggles, take the 3 cals and put them up on the screen with the file comments. You will see where the timing is different according to the builds.

One way to tune is to pick the closest cam timing map, tune the VEs, then start
copy/pasting different timing maps to see how each runs with corrected VEs.

Then, after the most favorable timing map is picked, revisit the VE tuning to make minor corrections from the ignition map change effects.
Just my $.02
Bob

[Steve Cole]

OK.  Got that.  But I started fresh with a new base map and all vs You know whos tune.  That tune got 40 MPG tops (usually 38ish)  THIS tune gets 43ish and I wonder if the added mileage means loss of power?  Might be a thing to put THAT map open loop and TS it and see what happens...

I get the point. So... if tuned all at 14.6 and I change to 14.2... run TS again and find the new settings.

I think that you are beginning to get it. Understand that the fuel varies enough these days to really make a change in what's going on. While it's not for everyone we only start and end the testing on the same exact fuel due to these issues. While we can and do buy test gasoline when were ready for street tuning it's down to the local station with a 55 gallon drum. Fill it up and use only that fuel from the drum while testing. It's a pain but when you see the swings we have it really opens your eye's. We have seen mixtures move as much as 1 AFR on pump fuels. While this is an extreme change to some it's not to others.

The AFR meters that have hard coded results are going to show the change in fuel only if you know what your looking for. So if the meter is coded for a fuel with a Stoich value of 14.68 and you run a fuel with a stoich value of 14.2 what's the meter going to show?


Mileage for the most part is the first 25% of the throttle and not many do much if any testing down in this area on the dyno. So dyno results are not going to show anything much about mileage. So what this means is you can get a dyno of 100/100 from one dyno tuned combination and get 30 mpg while a different dyno tune on the same combination get 102/102 and 43 mpg so dyno number really have little to do with mileage.

[glens]

The AFR meters that have hard coded results are going to show the change in fuel only if you know what your looking for. So if the meter is coded for a fuel with a Stoich value of 14.68 and you run a fuel with a stoich value of 14.2 what's the meter going to show?

Ahem; cough.  It'll show "14.7" on the meter when you're running "14.2" with the fuel.  But this won't matter in the least because lambda=1 in both the meter and in the running engine in this case.  If you want to go to lambda=0.9 from there, it'll actually be mixing at "12.8" and the meter will show "13.2", which is perfectly okay, even if you thought your gas was 14.7 stoich AFR and you were targeting "13.2" with it, and it's actually 14.2 gas.  You'll have the exact equivalent.  All this in a perfect world for purposes of this discussion, naturally.

If the system is closed-loop and you change fuel composition with a fill-up, between the two fuels being considered here it amounts to a 3.5% difference in fueling needs under any circumstance.  If one's AFVs aren't tapped out anywhere (but how can we know?) this change will in all likelihood be accommodated without any fanfare whatsoever.  If the system is open-loop with the same fuel change, I'd say "tune it with 14.2 gas so any errors will be to rich instead of lean when the change goes the other way".

Maybe another pertinent point to this whole discussion is that the TTS V-tune scheme is maybe best considered to be primarily a way to get the whole fueling system/control to be as happy with itself as it can be.  This is especially important, that the system be in a happy place, when closed-loop control is being utilized.  I feel the main benefit of having happy EFI control is that its adaptive mechanisms will have the most range to work in either direction if/when something comes up.

If the ultimate goal is to run strictly open-loop anyway (I'd have to wonder loudly "WHY?!) then perhaps, aside from being necessary to actually burn the ECM with new data with something, a third-party fuel-tune-developing scheme/system is perfectly fine to use.

In my mind, however, I see possible ramifications of trying to get the two schemes on the same page.  Make that "same sentence".  If the two are telling you slightly different things and only one of them makes the EFI system happy, the other stuff is going to have to be factored accordingly.

wurk_truk:  you can safely play around with these calibrations without committing any changes to files on disk.  Load up one calibration in one window, then fire up another one with the other calibration it.  Oh, wait, I think I tried copying whole tables between two active windows and it didn't work.  Maybe it can't be quite that easy.  Maybe you need to load the first calibration and select to copy whatever tables, then open the other calibration in that same window and paste them into it.

The initial calibration will become the "baseline" (I think that's the one; there are three levels, the original, one that's been saved as the baseline, and the one you're interacting with.  After you've gotten the first promoted into the middle position and the new tables into the "working copy", you can select to show the tables with the difference between any two levels.  This is quite handy.  I like to enable colors on the tables as handy eye-catchers.

When you're done, you can do all or nothing with your efforts.

[Hogflash]

I have copy/pasted between two open Mastertunes.  Just highlight one whole table and then copy... highlite the receiving table and hit paste.

The ctl-C / ctl-V copy and paste functions use the windows clipboard to pass data, so you can copy tables between different programs (or two instances of Mastertune). 

What Glens was referring to is the multiple table copy-and-paste, which is a different function.  This only works within a single instance of Mastertune - the reason being it also does 2D interpolation of the data to allow upgrading from early MT6 files to newer MT7 files which have different X- and Y-axis breakpoints.

--Gary

[Steve Cole]

Understand that the AFV's some of you are asking about do not come out of the HD ECM code, so it's not there to be read. We could rewrite the code to do it but real see no need for it. What we removed from the first version was done as it was causing more trouble than good. So then people ran around saying we cut back the product when what we did was to stop the confusion as it didn't do what some were lead to believe by others outside of TTS.

Also people need to understand that not all the calibrations work in the same way, there are familys and they work different! So there is no one size fits all. If you were to understand what I do it would be easy to explain but I do not see that happening anytime soon.

Just to do a quick overview of something that is going to screw with those asking is that how many AFV's do you think that there is in the ECM? 10,20, 30......... and how are they used. Truth is they are used part of the time and not all of the time, so how are YOU going to know when and which ones and when they mean anything? A typical HD built calibration only has 12 AFV's and they do not cover the entire operating range of the closed loop system, so now what? All closed loop .MT7 file are NOT the same as the HD calibrations, I've change how things work to allow Vtune to work over the range we specify which very nicely covers the entire closed loop operating range. Just as there are many more things that needed to be changed to make all this work the way it should.

Understanding the O2 sensor system is a big part of understanding what's going to do what to a calibration and those that come on here and say this or that have little to no understand of the interworkings of it all. Look I am all for making it easier but somethings are best left the way they are to stop confusion, but to think that your going to out do the ECM when it comes to closed loop control areas of the engine operation it's not going to happen. The ECM wins regaurdless of what you or I think. With that said, maybe now some will understanding that outside devices do not read correctly nor the same as the ECM and you just might begin to understand why it's important to me.

With the fuel the way it is today and where it maybe tomorrow the closed loop system is going to play an important roll in keeping things running correctly day in and day out. That may or maynot be the same AFR as reported on an outside device!

Wurk_truk

You should use the automatic copy feature to move tables from one calibration to the other as it make sure thing fit in properly. The feature is called "Copy Multiple Tables". You can reaad about it in the "help" section of Mastertune.

[rbabos]

Well, just swapped out the map sensor and it was a waste of time. Same low end readings, maybe even 1kpa lower than the old unit. Just to confirm it's the correct one, the old sensor # is 28004403/70254
New sensor is 16212460/82742883 The invoice part number is 32316-99. Bike runs the same so I guess it's the correct Delco part, but thought I'd ask here to be sure.
Ron

[strokerjlk]

snapped a pic of WURK TRUK preparing to collect some data.
go hit the hills buddy......

[slik rik]

  #
# How to get BEST 'Home Made Tune?

yeah right, if I want to spend 2 grand and still have to go dyno it

Granted this conversation is highly informative of the failings of all these devices. And of course the amount of tech knowledge on afr but for the "home" guy its to much bs. The reason I found this post was I was looking at the twinscan/wego thing, but after reading I'm more confused.

So heres my .02  I'm going to get a factory pro tune at big boyz, going to get rid of my power commander and go with what they want to tune with. After reading all the post it seems that the 4 gas setup is best. And cost prohibitive for a home user.

I understand some of you guys have  a distance to get to the tuner and some may want to play with toys....no issue there, but as you guys have shown in this thread its more complicated, work, and expertise than what most of these advertisers state

Great thread tho' learned alot.......

You guys rock and no disrespect but not "Home tune" not even close

[hotroadking]

Wurk, do what I did, find 4 guys that have similar bike ages that the Wego works with, we split the cost, so it cut it down significantly.

Everyone has the TTS, two have been dyno tuned and picked up power over street tunes using WEGO, and V-tune, none of the "street tunes" were used by the dyno operators, both tossed out
the work and went from scratch....  Makes senses why mess with someone elses stuff.

Basically if you like playing with these things and trying to learn and get EFI tuning right, great, but if you are looking for the tune to be done and just ride then Slik Rik has it right, find the best tuner in your area, buy whatever application you need to tune the bike that he is good with and
go there to spend the green and ride....

[wavlovr1]

I have used the TwinScan/Wego system alot and found it to be quite a lot of work, especially if you change any components down the road and have to set it all up and redo. The powercomander is pretty good, but it basically alters the info coming from the ECU which is kinda adding more complictions, especially if the ecu's base map is not colse enough to compensate for your engines needs. By far the fastest, easiest, system I have used so far is the TTS tuner. It allows access to change settings in the ecu itself that need to be modified for best performance and MPG. Plus you still get to retain the best features of the ecu like the spark knock prevention.

Just my expierence, JimBob

#
# How to get BEST 'Home Made Tune?

yeah right, if I want to spend 2 grand and still have to go dyno it

Granted this conversation is highly informative of the failings of all these devices. And of course the amount of tech knowledge on afr but for the "home" guy its to much bs. The reason I found this post was I was looking at the twinscan/wego thing, but after reading I'm more confused.

So heres my .02  I'm going to get a factory pro tune at big boyz, going to get rid of my power commander and go with what they want to tune with. After reading all the post it seems that the 4 gas setup is best. And cost prohibitive for a home user.

I understand some of you guys have  a distance to get to the tuner and some may want to play with toys....no issue there, but as you guys have shown in this thread its more complicated, work, and expertise than what most of these advertisers state

Great thread tho' learned alot.......

You guys rock and no disrespect but not "Home tune" not even close

[strokerjlk]

Wurk, do what I did, find 4 guys that have similar bike ages that the Wego works with, we split the cost, so it cut it down significantly.

the twin scan works with ALL FI Harley's and will work on carbed Harley's as well. so it dosent matter if your doing a group buy...that the bikes are similar.
FWIW I got a cal gas test sheet from another tuner that just bought a new twin scan wego.
Ends up the DTT TS II WEGO system and DJ system read within one tenth of each other on the 13.0 gas, and read even on the 13.9 gas.

[BVHOG]

Wurk, do what I did, find 4 guys that have similar bike ages that the Wego works with, we split the cost, so it cut it down significantly.

the twin scan works with ALL FI Harley's and will work on carbed Harley's as well. so it dosent matter if your doing a group buy...that the bikes are similar.

FWIW I got a cal gas test sheet from another tuner that just bought a new twin scan wego.
Ends up the DTT TS II WEGO system and DJ system read within one tenth of each other on the 13.0 gas, and read even on the 13.9 gas.

Wow, that's interesting info after reading here so many times about their inaccuracy, but for those of us who have been using the system it comes as no surprise.

[FLTRI]

Wow, that's interesting info after reading here so many times about their inaccuracy, but for those of us who have been using the system it comes as no surprise.

Sounds like some MASTER-BATING goin' on here? Seems you and strokerjlk sit back a wait for oportunities to discredit some expert's knowlegable input.

Since there is NOTHING absolutely accurate in this world we live in it is always a challenge to minimize variables so results are as repeatable as possible. This why there are inexpensive ($70+/-$20) and very expensive  ($700+/-$500) O2 sensors...guess which ones are more accurate?

What a tuner has to answer is; just how accurate does he/she need to be to provide a great running bike that gets good mileage???

Just the way I see it,
Bob

[Eleft36]

I'm not sure there is a I'm better than you discussion going on here, I don't get that...  but maybe the discussion is more along the lines of how can you can prove it. 

Based on the definition that a 100% tune hits all your desired AFR numbers spot on for all conditions, one discussion seams to me to be more about, given the technology available, how you know that you are hitting these desired numbers 100% spot on, even by using high dollar equipment. And if you are compromising on your measurement technique to hit another price point, how can you prove to be spot on?  Are we just kidding ourselves?

The other discussion may be more about which AFR targets are really right or maybe that it really doesn't make any difference AFR wise as long as you are close (until you get into the highly built motors). The difference is in fine tuning the timing perhaps?  I dunno

Perhaps we need more street face offs as the two face offs I've seen published tuned slightly modified bikes with TTS and then a competent pro dyno tuned using his bag of tricks. Both tunes ran the same (on the street), and was within 1HP and 1lBft WOT power. The pro was then able to get a slightly smoother tune and a couple HP by tweaking timing, which may be another black art subject.

I mean there were quite a few years there when everyone thought the earth was flat and proved it using subjective and flawed measurements....

Let’s digress to 1930 and the “Henry Ford” technology for the do it yourself tuner.
From the driver seat I could tune my 1931 Model “A” pickup on the go.
On the steering wheel center is 2 levers, one for the throttle (cruse
Control) the other used to adjust the ignition timing real time. 
On the passenger side, reachable by the driver, under the fuel tank a knurled choke knob which also, when twisted, changed the “high speed jet” setting also real time.
Can we call the driver the first “Alfa N” position sensor? 
Or just the use of "seat of the pants" reality?
Yes, you've come a long way. Just turn the switch push the button and twist the throttle, not to worry.
Al

[Heatwave3]

This thread has been quiet for a while. Does this new Dynojet tuning device with Powercommander software for flashing the HD ECU move "home tuning" up a notch? http://www.fuelmotousa.com/powervision.htm

[BigD]

This thread has been quiet for a while. Does this new Dynojet tuning device with Powercommander software for flashing the HD ECU move "home tuning" up a notch? http://www.fuelmotousa.com/powervision.htm

Or does it just have Dynojet catching up with TTS and SESPT?

Competition is good for everyone.  It keeps the vendors on their toes and bring better products to market.  Of course, they will all have to change in the next year or so because of the new bus Harley is implementing

[hrdtail78]

This thread has been quiet for a while. Does this new Dynojet tuning device with Powercommander software for flashing the HD ECU move "home tuning" up a notch? http://www.fuelmotousa.com/powervision.htm

To give an educated guess, I would wait for the product to actually be released and used.  It's all hearsay untill then.

[mayor]

Wow, that's interesting info after reading here so many times about their inaccuracy, but for those of us who have been using the system it comes as no surprise.

Sounds like some MASTER-BATING goin' on here? Seems you and strokerjlk sit back a wait for oportunities to discredit some expert's knowlegable input.

Just the way I see it,
Bob

and calling it "master-bating" is less offensive?  or less discrediting?   

o2 sensor accuracy has been a point of contention for a long time in this section, I read BVhog's comments as nothing more than a supportive response to comments he's posted previously. 

We all need to be sensitive to the fact that this is an open forum in which one's person opinion should not limit another from voicing their's, whether that person is considered a knowledgeable expert or not.  Also keep in mind, this is a forum where no one member should be presumed more expert than another.   The reader has the option of determining that for themselves.  Besides, there are many on the forum including myself who appreciate getting their technical data from more than one source.