IAT Relocation Kit

[rbabos]

Anybody know of a source for twin cams for this item? Have them for vrods but no search results for tc's.
Ron

[FSG]

For those interested in the VRod stuff check the Instruction Section

-J03017    VRSCA INTAKE AIR TEMPERATURE SENSOR RELOCATION KIT,   29541-03
-J03016    VRSCA INTAKE AIR TEMPERATURE SENSOR RELOCATION KIT,   29540-03
-J02673    VRSCA INTAKE AIR TEMPERATURE SENSOR RELOCATION KIT,   29434-01A

there is nothing for the TC's.

[rbabos]

Thanks for confirming no kits.
Ron

[glens]

Isn't your IAT part and parcel with the MAP?

What are  you trying to accomplish that you can't get done already with the tuning interface?

[rbabos]

Isn't your IAT part and parcel with the MAP?

What are  you trying to accomplish that you can't get done already with the tuning interface?

glens: IAT sensor is a seperate unit on the tb. I'm looking for a more stable tune . I'm picking up iat temps around 180F at times, which leans the afr out way too much, especially in traffic.  Besides, sticking it into a heat soaked tb is not where it should be in the first place. It should only be reading ambient inlet air. Logging shows this never to be the case, with it at best 40-50F over. If the sensor change was reduced the afr would be more stable too. Remember my post on crappy running when starting after sitting for a while. It turns out to be leaner than normal causing it to run this way until driven for a while to cool things down a bit. The iat heat soaks and when started the afr is leaner than normal. That's what the iat does, as in add or remove fuel depending on intake air temp but it shouldn't be influenced from hot air blasting the tb or cooking inside the tb when engine is shut down. Iat reloacation is also a performance upgrade in many other circles as well.
Ron

[glens]

ahem... Yeah, I know.

Don't you think air getting sucked into a 200+ degree manifold is going to heat up a bit over ambient, especially from where the ambient is it's getting sucked from?  Are the ECM's calculations incorrect with the temperatures it's getting from the IAT?

So you move the IAT and get it sending cooler signals.  The ECM will figure the fuel too high and it will be removed while closed-loop.  Then you'll be exactly where you are again right now.  Except where you're open-loop-only...

[hrdtail78]

That mode in other circles?  Is it to lie to the ECM?  When you can control the ECM you dont need to lie to it.

[rbabos]

ahem... Yeah, I know.

Don't you think air getting sucked into a 200+ degree manifold is going to heat up a bit over ambient, especially from where the ambient is it's getting sucked from?  Are the ECM's calculations incorrect with the temperatures it's getting from the IAT?

So you move the IAT and get it sending cooler signals.  The ECM will figure the fuel too high and it will be removed while closed-loop.  Then you'll be exactly where you are again right now.  Except where you're open-loop-only...

You just validated my reason for doing so. Areas that I must remain in open loop need to be more stable by eliminating faulse input from this sensor and closed loop areas will require less adjustment as a side benifit.
Ron

[BVHOG]

Buy an extra sensor and mount it in the A/C backing plate, then you can swap the plug back and forth and see what the difference is while data logging. I read a few years back in an AIM article about relocating the sensor and the author (DP I believe) claimed that the IAT sensor got hot and leaned out the mixture making things hotter and basically feeding off itself, like most AIM articles it came with very little hard data.

[rbabos]

Buy an extra sensor and mount it in the A/C backing plate, then you can swap the plug back and forth and see what the difference is while data logging. I read a few years back in an AIM article about relocating the sensor and the author (DP I believe) claimed that the IAT sensor got hot and leaned out the mixture making things hotter and basically feeding off itself, like most AIM articles it came with very little hard data.

This is exactly what I think I'm experiencing. While the when head temp increases some, extra fuel is added beyond normal engine heat. This is ok in my book. The fact that the iat pulls fuel at a higher rate than what the slight increase in head temp can add is not equalled out. While my testing is not hard data it goes like this. Start a cold engine an let it warm up. Throttle body is luke warm at this stage and it runs perfectly in all conditions. Drive as far as you want as long as the engine is being cooled normally. Get into city traffic and eventually the light load areas drivabilty start to exibit a lean condition. I know it's lean because I had to make these areas rich to make it run smooth. Get out of the city and drive at highway speeds for about 15 minutes the light load areas are once again running smoothly because the tb has cooled off.  If the iat was in the breather and not being heat soaked from the tb I'm quite sure this leaning would not occur to this extreme. I don't know exactly what % of fuel this sensor pulls with an increase in heat, but at 180F, Id be guessing it would be close to 10%
I mean, let's face it, the brain childs at HD could only have placed this sensor in the exhaust pipe to have a worse location for it.
Ron

[hrdtail78]

So what temps are being indicated while moving and what is it indicating after a ride when your at a light?

[rbabos]

So what temps are being indicated while moving and what is it indicating after a ride when your at a light?

About 120-140 on the road and this is likely lower on cooler days. All testing was done on 80-90 days. I've seen it as high as 180 on a heat soak after stopping for a smoke. In traffic it will sneak up to 180. It will follow the head temp. Throttle body and the elbow on the SE Heavy Breather are really hot at this point as well from radiant heat off of the front head or hot air from cooling blowing it in the general area. Once hot, it takes a long ride to bring it back to a cooler 120F.  Logging shows both head and iat temps matching prior to startup. I have a new iat coming and will relocate it to the back of the SE element and compare. If I can get through town and retain my light load lower rpm afrs with smooth running, and get better mixture during the first few minutes after a hot start, that should prove to point, at least to me.
Ron

[Rider57]

I experimented with this idea about 2 or 3 years ago.
It worked but was somewhat cumbersome.
I posted some info on another forum but cant remember where.
Basically, I left the OEM in place and added on into the air box.
Ran a little richer and smoother. Got rid of the stumble. Extending the harness and having it look neat was the only big issue, if you want to call it that.

[hotroadking]

should be able to get the HD connector for it when you get the sensor

Be interesting to see what the results are by moving it.  Wonder if it's placed
where it is in order to help meet EPA... Otherwise if it improved power
by being in the backing plate you'd think it would be there anyway..

[rbabos]

That mode in other circles?  Is it to lie to the ECM?  When you can control the ECM you dont need to lie to it.

For the hell of it let's look at this from a tuning standpoint. When a bike is tuned, what is the iat at when the calibation is done. Is the afr set when the iat is heat soaked or cooled some or is one area set when cool or another area set when the iat is hot? Does anybody actually look at what temp this sensor is running at when tuning? Would you get a much more exacting tune if the iat was located in an area that sees constant ambient air rather than the up and down temps it sees in the tb? Would this not also reduce the amount of adjustments needed by the ecm to maintain this tune? Something to think about, isn't it?
Ron

[glens]

I'd be inclined to think the Delphi engineers who designed this system know what's happening when and have accommodated it in the programming.  You likely could save yourself some time and expense by locating a datasheet from Delphi showing how the mounting surface temperature of the unit affects its readings.  If any appreciably at all...

[BVHOG]

That mode in other circles?  Is it to lie to the ECM?  When you can control the ECM you dont need to lie to it.

For the hell of it let's look at this from a tuning standpoint. When a bike is tuned, what is the iat at when the calibation is done. Is the afr set when the iat is heat soaked or cooled some or is one area set when cool or another area set when the iat is hot? Does anybody actually look at what temp this sensor is running at when tuning? Would you get a much more exacting tune if the iat was located in an area that sees constant ambient air rather than the up and down temps it sees in the tb? Would this not also reduce the amount of adjustments needed by the ecm to maintain this tune? Something to think about, isn't it?
Ron
[/quote
I have watched this on the real time data display while tuning and it has struck me at how  high it reads. Doesn't seem to correlate with the ambient air temp at all. I would assume in most conditions if the calibration was made with the high reading than it should stay consistent in all but the worst of operating conditons.

[FLTRI]

I'd be inclined to think the Delphi engineers who designed this system know what's happening when and have accommodated it in the programming.  You likely could save yourself some time and expense by locating a datasheet from Delphi showing how the mounting surface temperature of the unit affects its readings.  If any appreciably at all...

Also consider the IAT sensor is sensing the air temp the engine is seeing.....which is exactly what is required to maintain proper AFR.....it is a tuning issue.
Now when you lie to the ECM by telling the ECM it is seeing air temp cooler than reality, the entire system will react and maintain a richer than expected or wanted AFR.....an old trick we used BEFORE tuning devices and software was available. IME, no need to lie or trick the ECM when tuning adjustments are in fact, available.
JMHO,
Bob
PS - IAT is directly affected by the surrounding heat sources, such as cylinders so IAT can be as high as engine temp for a while until the bike has been ridden long enough to cool the intake tract down. The system knows how to handle it...if tuned properly.

[glens]

So you move the IAT and get it sending cooler signals.  The ECM will figure the fuel too high and it will be removed while closed-loop.  Then you'll be exactly where you are again right now.  Except where you're open-loop-only...

You just validated my reason for doing so. Areas that I must remain in open loop need to be more stable by eliminating faulse input from this sensor and closed loop areas will require less adjustment as a side benifit.

I differ with you on this, Ron.  First, you've not proven the sensor is providing false output.  Second, you've not proven the ECU is coming up with the wrong fueling while using this data.  Lastly, you don't know whether or how well-contained your "lower" open-loop area is.  What AFV factors have you eliminated from the equations, if any, and are they affecting only that area or is the effect further-reaching than you'd like if you knew what that effect was?

Post-lastly, I submit that the closed-loop corrections would become greater, not lesser.  Unless you v-tuned it the "new" way, in which case you'll be exactly where you are now, all over again.  Only this time the ECU programming will factor temperature changes incorrectly, probably.  But maybe that's just what you're looking for.

You've got something wrong with your build.  Some way, some shape, some form of some kind of wrongness; even if it''s only an unhappy combination of otherwise good parts.

[rbabos]

So you move the IAT and get it sending cooler signals.  The ECM will figure the fuel too high and it will be removed while closed-loop.  Then you'll be exactly where you are again right now.  Except where you're open-loop-only...

You just validated my reason for doing so. Areas that I must remain in open loop need to be more stable by eliminating faulse input from this sensor and closed loop areas will require less adjustment as a side benifit.

I differ with you on this, Ron.  First, you've not proven the sensor is providing false output.  Second, you've not proven the ECU is coming up with the wrong fueling while using this data.  Lastly, you don't know whether or how well-contained your "lower" open-loop area is.  What AFV factors have you eliminated from the equations, if any, and are they affecting only that area or is the effect further-reaching than you'd like if you knew what that effect was?

Post-lastly, I submit that the closed-loop corrections would become greater, not lesser.  Unless you v-tuned it the "new" way, in which case you'll be exactly where you are now, all over again.  Only this time the ECU programming will factor temperature changes incorrectly, probably.  But maybe that's just what you're looking for.

You've got something wrong with your build.  Some way, some shape, some form of some kind of wrongness; even if it''s only an unhappy combination of otherwise good parts.

Well, find me another sensor in the tb that makes the engine run like "Potty mouth" when it gets heat soaked and runs smooth until it does.  I'm happy with my testing so far and the observations I've made.
I'm sure the ecm will reset the afrs again or vtune it again.  What I'm trying to eliminate is starting a heat soaked iat, leaning my idle out on a hot start and keep me from leaning out in city traffic. Both of these conditions occur with me and I can't come up with a single reason why I would want either of these conditons. You are not allowed to insult my engine. Only I can call it fkg junk.
Ron

[FLTRI]

Ron,
Are you thinking the IAT is producing erroneous readings due to heat soaking?
My experience is the intake temperature really gets as hot as the engine as measured with my infrared temp gun that I had calibrated by the mfg. Raytek before I used it to measure the intake temp on the outside of the T/B and manifold as well as the inside T/B temps both with the engine off for less than 5 secs, then after it had heat soaked for 5 mins.
My findings pretty much back your data log readings. The intake actually gets that hot so why lie to the ECM?

Have you tried increasing the fuel in the warmup enrichment @ the applicable temps for your hot starts?
The enrichment lasts for quite a while, depending on the calibration used for base mapping.

Just a thought before you toss out the baby with the bath water.
Bob

[rbabos]

Ron,
Are you thinking the IAT is producing erroneous readings due to heat soaking?
My experience is the intake temperature really gets as hot as the engine as measured with my infrared temp gun that I had calibrated by the mfg. Raytek before I used it to measure the intake temp on the outside of the T/B and manifold as well as the inside T/B temps both with the engine off for less than 5 secs, then after it had heat soaked for 5 mins.
My findings pretty much back your data log readings. The intake actually gets that hot so why lie to the ECM?

Have you tried increasing the fuel in the warmup enrichment @ the applicable temps for your hot starts?
The enrichment lasts for quite a while, depending on the calibration used for base mapping.

Just a thought before you toss out the baby with the bath water.
Bob

Bob: I'll give that a shot and see how it behaves. It is a touch low at the moment.
Ron

[glens]

That's what the iat does, as in add or remove fuel depending on intake air temp...

I was just reviewing the thread before closing out the tab when I saw this and remembered I'd wanted to comment on it.  I believe it's stated rather like that a time or two subsequently in the thread by other folks, too.

The IAT sensor doesn't add or subtract fuel any more than an O2 sensor does, or than a TPS does, or than a CKP does.  They're only reference devices which the ECU uses to decide upon fuel quantities.  The sensors don't care what the ECU does.  They just report what they're seeing at the moment.

I'm not suggesting we use such tediously precise language as a lawyer might use, but it's pretty important to get the proper mental image across.  Don't you agree?

[Jamie Long]

That's what the iat does, as in add or remove fuel depending on intake air temp...

I was just reviewing the thread before closing out the tab when I saw this and remembered I'd wanted to comment on it.  I believe it's stated rather like that a time or two subsequently in the thread by other folks, too.

The IAT sensor doesn't add or subtract fuel any more than an O2 sensor does, or than a TPS does, or than a CKP does.  They're only reference devices which the ECU uses to decide upon fuel quantities.  The sensors don't care what the ECU does.  They just report what they're seeing at the moment.

I'm not suggesting we use such tediously precise language as a lawyer might use, but it's pretty important to get the proper mental image across.  Don't you agree?

Glens, you are exactly correct with this information. Sensors are simply a reference, the lookup tables determine how this information is used and applied as an end result

[1FSTRK]

For the hell of it let's look at this from a tuning standpoint. When a bike is tuned, what is the iat at when the calibation is done. Is the afr set when the iat is heat soaked or cooled some or is one area set when cool or another area set when the iat is hot? Does anybody actually look at what temp this sensor is running at when tuning? Would you get a much more exacting tune if the iat was located in an area that sees constant ambient air rather than the up and down temps it sees in the tb? Would this not also reduce the amount of adjustments needed by the ecm to maintain this tune? Something to think about, isn't it?
Ron


I think I follow what you’re saying and think you’re on the right track. Most new autos gather a temp reading from the mass airflow sensor as well as the iat in the manifold. Because we can add or subtract warm-up enrichment and the O2 will tune in the closed loop area then tuning the open loop base map to the area you’re having trouble with and letting the ecm tune the rest makes sense.
The only difference should be that with the way it is set up now you have the correct tune in open loop at normal riding temps and go slightly lean in traffic when the iat sees heat soak.
  With the relocation you should have correct tune in open loop when in traffic because the iat won’t heat soak as much and you might go slightly rich at normal riding temps.
You might loose a little fuel mileage around town if you have a lot of open loop cells but the bike should run cooler and smoother in traffic. Might also have to retune once to correct the closed areas for the new air temp readings and center the CLBs but once tuned it sounds like it would be better in any slow in town traffic. Please post how this works. If you have any luck I think I’ll give it a try.

[hotroadking]

What would be interesting would be to have a sample of outside air temp as you ride,
the temp of the air in the area behind the filter and the temp of the air in the manifold without
the sensor being subject to the temp changes from the manifolds heat.

What is the "real" difference, are we talking 50, 100, or 20 degrees.

[rbabos]

That's what the iat does, as in add or remove fuel depending on intake air temp...

I was just reviewing the thread before closing out the tab when I saw this and remembered I'd wanted to comment on it.  I believe it's stated rather like that a time or two subsequently in the thread by other folks, too.

The IAT sensor doesn't add or subtract fuel any more than an O2 sensor does, or than a TPS does, or than a CKP does.  They're only reference devices which the ECU uses to decide upon fuel quantities.  The sensors don't care what the ECU does.  They just report what they're seeing at the moment.

I'm not suggesting we use such tediously precise language as a lawyer might use, but it's pretty important to get the proper mental image across.  Don't you agree?

glens: I don't agree that the O2 will add fuel to what the iat removes. If so, it's function would be worthless. I think it uses the iat as a guideline for the O2 to be richer or leaner in afr.  Not one case I've read about has the mixture revert back to where it was before relocating the iat to a cooler place that made it slightly richer. This would mean the O2s have a new base to work from. A new tune would be required to restore your original afrs but they would not fluctuate as much now since the iat bias would be more constant. I've never felt the O2 compensate for a heat soaked iat yet. Only when it cools off some does the running return to where it was tuned.Granted, my tune is on the edge and it most likely will show this much quicker than one with a completely dyno tuned operator with an anal attitude for perfection. None the less the condition exists.
Ron

[rbabos]

What would be interesting would be to have a sample of outside air temp as you ride,
the temp of the air in the area behind the filter and the temp of the air in the manifold without
the sensor being subject to the temp changes from the manifolds heat.

What is the "real" difference, are we talking 50, 100, or 20 degrees.

I've seen 90 sitting in traffic and idling. This was at 275 head temp. It could go much higher, given more time to climb. There comes a point where the head temp sensor goes out of it's normal operation range where it has 0% influence on afr and will start adding some fuel as it sees the extra heat.  What that is exactly I don't know but I'm hoping that it would exceed what the iat pulled from the heat soaking or there would be no real gain. As with the iat, the head temp is not counteracted by the O2s
Ron

[1FSTRK]

I've seen 90 sitting in traffic and idling. This was at 275 head temp. It could go much higher, given more time to climb. There comes a point where the head temp sensor goes out of it's normal operation range where it has 0% influence on afr and will start adding some fuel as it sees the extra heat.  What that is exactly I don't know but I'm hoping that it would exceed what the iat pulled from the heat soaking or there would be no real gain. As with the iat, the head temp is not counteracted by the O2s
Ron
[/quote]

Are you saying that the O2s don't have the final say when in closed loop ?

[FLTRI]

I've seen 90 sitting in traffic and idling. This was at 275 head temp. It could go much higher, given more time to climb. There comes a point where the head temp sensor goes out of it's normal operation range where it has 0% influence on afr and will start adding some fuel as it sees the extra heat.  What that is exactly I don't know but I'm hoping that it would exceed what the iat pulled from the heat soaking or there would be no real gain. As with the iat, the head temp is not counteracted by the O2s
Ron

Sure would be nice to see a data log of your running issues! I realize you may feel you are dialed into the Delphi ECM EFI operation, but maybe someone can see something you MAY have overlooked or misunderstood as far as operation is concerned.
....OR just figure ways to trick the system and ECM into doing what you want rather than tuning for the desired results.
Bob
PS - Have you modded the warmup enrichment table yet? ...to see how it affects the run quality when the engine sees high intake tract heat?
There IS a reason for that table and how it affects hot running/restarts, etc.

[Steve Cole]

Guys

This is like building a house. Everything stacks on top of the foundation. If the foundation is faulty, so goes the rest. O2's are only one indicator of what is going on but when they show something’s wrong you need to find it and fix it. As I've tried to tell Ron there are three modes that the ECM fuel control works in, Open Loop, Closed Loop and Closed Loop Learning. The only time the AFV's learn anything is in closed loop learning but they are used to correct fuel mixture all the time.

[glens]

glens: I don't agree that the O2 will add fuel to what the iat removes.

Then we agree, because I also don't agree with that statement.  I'm sure I never made it.  Neither of the devices change fuel amounts.

If so, it's function would be worthless. I think it uses the iat as a guideline for the O2 to be richer or leaner in afr.

I don't know which "it's" you're referring to.  But let's look at an example.

Say you got your bike professionally tuned on a dyno with enough airflow to keep the intake manifold at a "roadlike" temperature.  Everything's spot-on.  The AFVs are all within a percent of "100" and staying there.  The ECM's happy and so are you.

Then you take and put the IAT into the back of the intake, outside the throttle plate and inside the filter.  Let's say you even made a little heat-shield/duct to keep the outside of the unit as cool as possible.

Certainly, the air temperature would come in at a lower value.  The ECM will use this lower temperature to increase the amount of fuel, because cooler, denser air will contain more oxygen molecules by volume.  But the air will become the same temperature it did (and was reported as) before (thus less dense), on its way into the engine.  The O2 sensors will increase their mean output as this now-richer mixture works through the system.  The ECU will see this and "take care of it" by decreasing the appropriate AFV to where the O2 sensor set-point matches the sensor output.  The more AFV cells that get learnt with this new IAT location, the more evenly fuel gets pulled everywhere.  This same process is what happens just about every time you fill up at a different station while traveling.  Hell, maybe across town.  In that case, sometimes fuel will get pulled and sometimes it'll get added.

On a side note, I feel that, ideally, all the AFVs but one would be redundant.  The more precisely the VE tables are populated the more closely it should all get to this "ideal".

Not one case I've read about has the mixture revert back to where it was before relocating the iat to a cooler place that made it slightly richer. This would mean the O2s have a new base to work from.

The O2s will still have the same programming setpoint they had before.  Relocating the IAT doesn't change that.  If none of the reported mixtures reverted, then either they weren't checked or the system was running completely open-loop.  There is one more alternative, but it pertains to lack of knowledge/understanding somewhere along the chain of information.

A new tune would be required to restore your original afrs but they would not fluctuate as much now since the iat bias would be more constant.

Granted, it sure would stand to reason that the outside temperature of the IAT would not fluctuate so wildly in a more remote location.  But this has not been proven to cause problems.  You're only suggesting it might.  And I agree, it might.  But I also feel the response of the unit under these varying conditions is well-known by the designers, and more, compensated-for in the ECU programming.

I've never felt the O2 compensate for a heat soaked iat yet. Only when it cools off some does the running return to where it was tuned.Granted, my tune is on the edge and it most likely will show this much quicker than one with a completely dyno tuned operator with an anal attitude for perfection. None the less the condition exists.

I certainly can't argue against that.  If you have a problem, then you have a problem.  How much is an IAT with which to test your theory?

[rbabos]

Guys

This is like building a house. Everything stacks on top of the foundation. If the foundation is faulty, so goes the rest. O2's are only one indicator of what is going on but when they show something’s wrong you need to find it and fix it. As I've tried to tell Ron there are three modes that the ECM fuel control works in, Open Loop, Closed Loop and Closed Loop Learning. The only time the AFV's learn anything is in closed loop learning but they are used to correct fuel mixture all the time.

I knew you couldn't resist this thread.   Once again you are missing my point. You know very well I need to run open loop from 1500-2250 since it didn't vtune with low kpa's. So far the cause has not been determined and I'm frankly tired of you and a few others harping about me fixing it when not one can give a possible cause for it. At some point it might be discoverd,  so with that in mind I tuned to my existing conditions.  What I'm trying to accomplish here is to remove the leaning influence from the heat soaked iat when driving through the city and keep those(open) areas more stable in afr. As you pointed out the O2s and afv have no play in this area and the afr is in a fixed state.  Correct me if I'm wrong but in open loop the only influence in afr is the head temp sensor and the iat sensor? This is a simple question and if I'm wrong in the relationship for open loop regarding the iat influence I'll re-think my plan on iat relocation. Give me some credit here, since I've gotten a stable tune in all other areas running in closed loop, without a dyno, widebands or sniffers. The small open loop area is still a best guess, however without tools to know where I stand.
Ron

[rbabos]

I've seen 90 sitting in traffic and idling. This was at 275 head temp. It could go much higher, given more time to climb. There comes a point where the head temp sensor goes out of it's normal operation range where it has 0% influence on afr and will start adding some fuel as it sees the extra heat.  What that is exactly I don't know but I'm hoping that it would exceed what the iat pulled from the heat soaking or there would be no real gain. As with the iat, the head temp is not counteracted by the O2s
Ron

Sure would be nice to see a data log of your running issues! I realize you may feel you are dialed into the Delphi ECM EFI operation, but maybe someone can see something you MAY have overlooked or misunderstood as far as operation is concerned.
....OR just figure ways to trick the system and ECM into doing what you want rather than tuning for the desired results.
Bob
PS - Have you modded the warmup enrichment table yet? ...to see how it affects the run quality when the engine sees high intake tract heat?
There IS a reason for that table and how it affects hot running/restarts, etc.

Yes, did that right away after your post. Went a bit much because it runs lumpy until the warmup enrichment decays and then jumps to slighly lean again. Drive a couple of blocks the idle returns to what seems to be good afr. I will drop the W-E a tad and drop my idle afr out of closed loop to 14.4 and try again. Has to be a decent setting in there someplace.
Ron

[glens]

As you [Steve] pointed out the O2s and afv have no play in this area and the afr is in a fixed state.  Correct me if I'm wrong but in open loop the only influence in afr is the head temp sensor and the iat sensor?

AFVs do have "play" in that area.  They don't get developed there, but the nearest ones which do get developed will still apply all the same.

If you happen by chance to have wound up with a particular AFV which no longer receives updates, it can affect surrounding areas adversely.  Such as with different fuel where more is needed, it will not happen in the area of that AFV's influence.  But maybe your area is smack dab in the middle of four AFVs which continually get updated and maybe this is why you're noticing changes in that running area under different operational conditions.

Ron, I recommend you sit down with Steve.  Provide him whatever information he wants and to do [edit: damn spell-check said the word was okay...] exactly what he says in response.  If after you've exhausted all possibilities with him and still end up with a "problem", only then would I suggest you start to pursue other avenues like this.

[hotroadking]

Good grief can't we discuss this without someone taking offense, really I didn't see any shots given, just simple advice based on knowledge.

OK so it is about the change and relocation of the IAT as a potential solution, as pointed out there are several other sensors that provide input to the ECM, I would imagine it's logic is to pull all the data from every location and then decisions are made as to what is done based on the total data, not Just the IAT.

When you get your new IAT mounted in the plate it will be interesting to see what temp differences you see and by how much the location differs,  The heat transferred to the intake is also going to travel to the backing plate, and you have heat from the head/cyl that will heat the back of the sensor as well so it might not give you a big difference.

In a car you could stick an IAT way down an intake tube into a piece routed into the front fender, front headlight area or wheel well and see significant changes in temp, but the plates not that much farther away.

Perhaps a reading of the intake temp, then from the backing plate see what you gain or loose via temps...

[rbabos]

Good grief can't we discuss this without someone taking offense, really I didn't see any shots given, just simple advice based on knowledge.

OK so it is about the change and relocation of the IAT as a potential solution, as pointed out there are several other sensors that provide input to the ECM, I would imagine it's logic is to pull all the data from every location and then decisions are made as to what is done based on the total data, not Just the IAT.

When you get your new IAT mounted in the plate it will be interesting to see what temp differences you see and by how much the location differs,  The heat transferred to the intake is also going to travel to the backing plate, and you have heat from the head/cyl that will heat the back of the sensor as well so it might not give you a big difference.

In a car you could stick an IAT way down an intake tube into a piece routed into the front fender, front headlight area or wheel well and see significant changes in temp, but the plates not that much farther away.

Perhaps a reading of the intake temp, then from the backing plate see what you gain or loose via temps...

Did a bit of location testing already. Running the SE Heavy breather I've found the elbow gets really hot from conducting heat off of the tb. The only area that don't seem to change much is the back of the filter element since it's rubber mounted and isolated from conduction. Not sure there would be as much gain with the conventional football cover, but there would be some. Got a new sensor now and all I have to do is get my lazey ass off this internet and do the conversion.
Ron

[rbabos]

As you [Steve] pointed out the O2s and afv have no play in this area and the afr is in a fixed state.  Correct me if I'm wrong but in open loop the only influence in afr is the head temp sensor and the iat sensor?

AFVs do have "play" in that area.  They don't get developed there, but the nearest ones which do get developed will still apply all the same.

If you happen by chance to have wound up with a particular AFV which no longer receives updates, it can affect surrounding areas adversely.  Such as with different fuel where more is needed, it will not happen in the area of that AFV's influence.  But maybe your area is smack dab in the middle of four AFVs which continually get updated and maybe this is why you're noticing changes in that running area under different operational conditions.

Ron, I recommend you sit down with Steve.  Provide him whatever information he wants and to do [edit: damn spell-check said the word was okay...] exactly what he says in response.  If after you've exhausted all possibilities with him and still end up with a "problem", only then would I suggest you start to pursue other avenues like this.

I think I have that afv thing covered. My small area of open loop was confined too much in my problem area and like you say by going closed in all the surrounding areas I felt I might have been picking up some influence from afv in my main area of the closed loop. I've moved over one cell column up down and to the right with an afr blend throwing them into open as well. My specific area seems stable now. Heat is the only influence that changes it now. You say, why not just richen the closed a bit more to counteract what the iat pulls from heat soak. Tried that and it's disgustingly rich when cold in those areas until it heats up to normal temp. Second issue is with hot starts with a heat soaked iat. If I set the idle afr to run right on a heat soaked start, it will be too rich after the iat cools off some. This to me this is a mickey mouse way to do things and no doubt a good majority of bike are tuned this way. By relocating the iat to a more stable temp area I'm hopping to eliminate some of this nonsense.
As for Steve, I asked him what data he wanted and was willing to go out and log whatever he needed. The response was basically there was no point until I fixed my problem, which is really low kpa, which won't allow vtune to function in my problem area. Fair enough.  That reason has not been determined so far and I'm working every possible reason but none have panned out so far. If for some strange reason the cause is determined, I doubt I need tech support at that point, do I ?
Ron

[Steve Cole]

As for Steve, I asked him what data he wanted and was willing to go out and log whatever he needed. The response was basically there was no point until I fixed my problem, which is really low kpa, which won't allow vtune to function in my problem area. Fair enough.  That reason has not been determined so far and I'm working every possible reason but none have panned out so far. If for some strange reason the cause is determined, I doubt I need tech support at that point, do I ?
Ron

Ron that's not what I said at all. What I told you was that we needed to track down what was causing the issue and fix it. I then explained how the system works since you do not understand that part of it. You have been given several possible causes for it. Your response was that was not what you were going to do.  First you said Vtune was causing it, then it was closed loop, then its low kPa, now its the IAT causing it when the truth is none of those are the cause of your base issue. Find and fix the base issue and the rest will most likely be solved at the same time.

Since your not wanting to trace down the problem and fix it there is nothing I or anyone else can do to help.

[FLTRI]

If  I'm not mistakes, if Ron goes out and records (he may already have good data files) the issue(s), and sends the data recordings to Steve, that will give Steve some data that he can actually see and diagnose.

I'm under the impression, based on Ron's comment that he had "his reasons" for not doing so, that Ron has not nor will send data log(s) so that the issue(s) can be resolved.

Maybe it's better for Ron to have the issues? Keeps him live on the board courting suggestions from members?

Gotta say most folks with problems are more than willing to ask Steve to take a peek at their data....but not Ron?

Just my observation from watching/reading this and other threads Ron has presented his unresolved issues and asking about and offering unorthodox resolves rather than fixing the problem(s),
Bob

[rbabos]

As for Steve, I asked him what data he wanted and was willing to go out and log whatever he needed. The response was basically there was no point until I fixed my problem, which is really low kpa, which won't allow vtune to function in my problem area. Fair enough.  That reason has not been determined so far and I'm working every possible reason but none have panned out so far. If for some strange reason the cause is determined, I doubt I need tech support at that point, do I ?
Ron

Ron that's not what I said at all. What I told you was that we needed to track down what was causing the issue and fix it. I then explained how the system works since you do not understand that part of it. You have been given several possible causes for it. Your response was that was not what you were going to do.  First you said Vtune was causing it, then it was closed loop, then its low kPa, now its the IAT causing it when the truth is none of those are the cause of your base issue. Find and fix the base issue and the rest will most likely be solved at the same time.

Since your not wanting to trace down the problem and fix it there is nothing I or anyone else can do to help.

Get your facts straight. You know damn well the low kpa is causing my issue, which renders vtune useless in this area. I've ruled out the small tb as the cause, I've ruled out O2 bungs as the cause and have just ruled out the possibility of the cams out of time with each other. I've swapped to new O2 sensors, ruled out intake and exhaust leaks, and any possible cause of my issues. I offered to create any logs you wanted to view my present situation to refine this area and you didn't want them, stating to fix my issue first. Review your pm's.  Then you blame me for not sending data the previous times since you can't determine "Potty mouth" without it. What possible data in datamaster will lead you to why my engine has low kpa. The answer is none because it's mechanical. With no determined cause I'm faced to make the best I can out of the situation and get the best tune I can under the circumstances. Should I want to move my iat wtf do you care. At least I'm making an effort to resolve issues I've seen. Sometimes you have to think outside the box to get the job done. If you don't like it, sue me.
Ron

[hrdtail78]

I'm expecting crickets soon.

[Don D]

Regarding the low KPA
Same here as you recall.
My theory in my case, short cam relative to the cubic inches, mid range compression, and timing on the advanced side at idle and off idle at low throttle openings. Just the perfect factors to make neck snapping torque, plus put the TTS out of the range the software works efficiently.
Maybe we need to pot the voltage to the MAP and trick it?
Fix the problem?
What problem? Nothing is wrong mechanically except this motor combination just doesn't tune well with the parameters designed into the software.

[FLTRI]

"What possible data in datamaster will lead you to why my engine has low kpa."

Ron,
Please post your DataMaster files here and we will all take a look to see where this anomaly is occurring. We all can possibly learn from this.
Thanks
Bob

[hotroadking]

that is why I suggest he move  to a Power Commander
and have it dyno tuned, the PCV might just solve the problem

It's one of the things you just have to chalk up to experience
and hang on the wall of shame or fame and move on.

If I put in cams that came on at 4K and I wanted cams that came
on at 2500, then relocating all the sensors, changing pipes, changing
intakes etc are not going to make the cam change it's way.

So I need to pull them, sell them and get a different set of cams.

Same with pipes etc, put on some XYZ and find they are too loud for
cruising, change the pipes.

Have you talked to any of the manufacturing companies for your cams,
intake, injectors, heads or pipes?  What do they say (besides our product
is designed to work perfectly)   You have something in the combo
that isn't working, so you have to figure it out vs simply trying to
trick the system into a solution.   

[Steve Cole]

Ron

I have my facts straight and all your PM's along with what you've posted. There is an issue we all can agree on that, it has nothing to do with Mastertune, Vtune or Datamaster. Yet I've asked you for information to try and help you. If you do not want my help that is fine.

[glens]

I've never felt the O2 compensate for a heat soaked iat yet. Only when it cools off some does the running return to where it was tuned.

Here's a thought, Ron.  Maybe your lambda probes are toasting and operating more non-linearly than the ECU is considering, and this is why you get what you described in that excerpt?  Maybe your bungs are too short?  Hahaha!

[rbabos]

Regarding the low KPA
Same here as you recall.
My theory in my case, short cam relative to the cubic inches, mid range compression, and timing on the advanced side at idle and off idle at low throttle openings. Just the perfect factors to make neck snapping torque, plus put the TTS out of the range the software works efficiently.
Maybe we need to pot the voltage to the MAP and trick it?
Fix the problem?
What problem? Nothing is wrong mechanically except this motor combination just doesn't tune well with the parameters designed into the software.

Your post pretty much sums it up.
Regarding my iat, comparison testing the old and new, the new has more resistance than the old when hot so I shoved it back in the hole to compare. Between FLTRI's afr suggestion and the new sensor I go three heat soaked starts that I would consider normal. As for the light load areas, don't think it made much if any difference. Still get the odd miss every few seconds in third gear steady state rpm around the 2000 area.
Ron

[glens]

... there are three modes that the ECM fuel control works in, Open Loop, Closed Loop and Closed Loop Learning.

So what exactly triggers CLL?  Can we understand it to be occurring by seeing certain O2 integrator activity in our intermittent data snapshots?

The only time the AFV's learn anything is in closed loop learning but they are used to correct fuel mixture all the time.

That's a very clear statement.

that is why I suggest he move  to a Power Commander
and have it dyno tuned, the PCV might just solve the problem

It may well not if indeed there's a problem such that the stock ECM is having trouble.  He's already running this area open-loop, and this presently wobbly platform is precisely what the PC-V would be working off of.

[FLTRI]

SHOW         US         THE         DATA!!!

[rbabos]

SHOW         US         THE         DATA!!!

You should have it.
Ron

[hotroadking]

that is why I suggest he move  to a Power Commander
and have it dyno tuned, the PCV might just solve the problem

It may well not if indeed there's a problem such that the stock ECM is having trouble.  He's already running this area open-loop, and this presently wobbly platform is precisely what the PC-V would be working off of.

Precisely my point....

[BVHOG]

Power Commander cure the problem? Not a snowballs chance.

[hrdtail78]

SHOW         US         THE         DATA!!!

You should have it.
Ron

Can you post the datamaster files here?  I would also like to take a look.

[hotroadking]

Power Commander cure the problem? Not a snowballs chance.

So if another tuner will not cure this, then what will
and why all the fussing about TTS, if a powercommander won't do it...
or even a Zippers...

The source of the problem is mechanical, either by mismatched parts or defect.

My presumption is moving sensors around isn't going to cure it either, if location was a problem then we'd all be having big issues....

[Dennis The Menace]

Ron, this may not help much, but I have some rough running at certain low rpm and heat conditions. Sucks in traffic, but thats how it is.  These arent indy cars that require ultra precise fuel delivery and management.  They are plain vanilla, air cooled twin cylinder motors that can never be made to run perfectly across every RPM range and condition imaginable.  Accept that you have a pretty good tune as it is, and ride it.  IMO.

But, I have read a lot of your posts and I understand you like to try different things and experiment.  Nothing wrong with that at all.  Just remember, that when you experiment you will have more failures than successes.  Its how things work. But, with failures comes knowledge.  I guess that is what drives experimentation in the first place.

In the spirit of experimentation, let us in on it and share the files you have generated, so we can all learn.  Nobody is here to second guess you, or think you are an idiot.  Because, bottom line, if we knew the answer to your problems, they would have already been stated here.  We all just want to help, and having a better idea of what you are seeing would help.  Again, JMO.

Either way, I hope you get it sorted out.  As for my bike, I am happy enough with it and will just ride it, when I have time.  Good luck with yours, brother.

Dennis

[rbabos]

Ron, this may not help much, but I have some rough running at certain low rpm and heat conditions. Sucks in traffic, but thats how it is.  These arent indy cars that require ultra precise fuel delivery and management.  They are plain vanilla, air cooled twin cylinder motors that can never be made to run perfectly across every RPM range and condition imaginable.  Accept that you have a pretty good tune as it is, and ride it.  IMO.

But, I have read a lot of your posts and I understand you like to try different things and experiment.  Nothing wrong with that at all.  Just remember, that when you experiment you will have more failures than successes.  Its how things work. But, with failures comes knowledge.  I guess that is what drives experimentation in the first place.

In the spirit of experimentation, let us in on it and share the files you have generated, so we can all learn.  Nobody is here to second guess you, or think you are an idiot.  Because, bottom line, if we knew the answer to your problems, they would have already been stated here.  We all just want to help, and having a better idea of what you are seeing would help.  Again, JMO.

Either way, I hope you get it sorted out.  As for my bike, I am happy enough with it and will just ride it, when I have time.  Good luck with yours, brother.

Dennis

Dennis: Sometimes people might get the impression my bike barely runs by some of these posts. It actually runs quite good and likely better than a lot of tuned bikes out there. My problem is I can see areas that are not quite right which could improve it even more. Trying to pull enough fuel at 19kpa is my major obstacle for perfection, since the new iat seemed to have fixed my hot start idle. My sure fire fix would be to slap a tmax back on and be done with the problem once and for all since it's tps,rpm based and could care less about vacume. For now I choose to battle with the Delphi and try to come up with a solution to a problem that seems unique to some builds. I think most of us on this forum are experimenters to some degree and hope some of this information exchange is at least entertaining if nothing else.
I've cleaned my files out of my computer with the intent of making new current ones for Steve. At present I only have the log to determine the problem location  and the existing map I'm presently running. The last time I posted something there were complaints about the program I chose had a virus, so I just sent FLTRI the files since he was yelling the loudest . Most likely he will post them once he stops scratching his head, wondering how this thing even runs.
Ron

[Don D]

I appreciate your tenacity
Looking at my logs I am actually at lower map on the road at 2k 2% throttle than at idle.
When I get uncovered with head projects I wil get back to the tuning with the help of a real tuner, not just me. I am also adding a boarzilla with a trap muffler (PhilM copy) and will be sure the o2 sensors are in the exhaust properly.

[rbabos]

I appreciate your tenacity
Looking at my logs I am actually at lower map on the road at 2k 2% throttle than at idle.
When I get uncovered with head projects I wil get back to the tuning with the help of a real tuner, not just me. I am also adding a boarzilla with a trap muffler (PhilM copy) and will be sure the o2 sensors are in the exhaust properly.

Same here. Runs about 29-30 idle and 19kpa at 2k in light load, steady rpms.
Ron

[strokerjlk]

Ron
just to catch up here.
this problem is while your running some areas in closed loop?
running all open loop, does the bike still run fine?

[Don D]

SHOW         US         THE         DATA!!!

Tellya what
I will trade ya for the compare and contrast report of Vtune VS AFR by sampling...
SHOW         US         THE         DATA!!!

[rbabos]

Ron
just to catch up here.
this problem is while your running some areas in closed loop?
running all open loop, does the bike still run fine?

Bike runs fine except in the 1500-2250 areas that run a bit erratic when in light load conditions. This is mainly when heat soaked. No apparent issues with closed loop areas that I can feel or hear as to how it runs. Since the kpa reading is 19, it draws fuel from the 20 kpa and surrounding area of the afr map, which for everybody else on the planet, except for maybe Deweysheads, this is a decel area and all maps are in open loop here. Whether the map was set to closed loop or open, the light load area does not seem to change much regarding it's present tune. I'm suspecting heat was what was changing the tune in this area rather than the afvs when in closed loop. The more I played back and forth between open and closed it became obvious the leaning influence when hot was from another source. That's what spawned the iat thread. It's influence is obvious, especially on a boarderline lean state as in my light load area when hot. When cold or normal operating temps the ill running is not detected. Hit the city, it's pooched. The ve's are rediculously high in my problem area in attempt to give more fuel in this region of operation and have even dropped to 12.5 in the problem areas but it's like it won't respond to correct it. At 12.5 afr on a decel, too much fuel noticed as it seems to load up and then clear. 13.0 or 13.2 or whatever it is now is the best overall so far. Major timing drops in this area has had no effect on clearing up the light load area. It just turns the bike into a dog, with the occaisonal miss still present when hot. Go on a slight down hill grade in these rpms and light load the running is worse and with a very slight hill it goes perfectly smooth. I never expect the down hill to be smooth, but level ground should be at the very least. If all else fails, I can live with it in it's present condition. There is no more driveline jerking to be felt as in the early stages and more just the sound of the occaisional light missing every now and then. It just pisses me off that I can't totally remove it. Now you are up to speed.
Ron

[ORork]

I don't have a dog in this fight, as you all know I run a Mik 45 on my bike and do driveability diagnosis on Nissan EFI cars. I will say my bike has extremely low manifold pressure w/cruising. I've come to the conclusion by extensive testing that it results from extremely easy breathing due to the sizing of the flow components. Case in point; 95" displacement, 2" intake valves, 1.8" intake ports, 1.623" exhaust valves, .600"+ lift, long cam duration and very low exhaust system restriction.

This is a "built" engine. Purpose built for acceleration, similar to the one in question. One cannot expect docile performance off the cam, off the pipe. Basically you can't have your cake and eat it too. Unless you have dual track intakes w/tuning plates, articulating cam timing and now articulating cam lift and dual track articulating exhaust.

IMHO the hot soak issue is more related to liquid condensation effect and less to do with IAT data during the event.

There may not be a problem with this bike, rather a characteristic/effect of high performance modifications on a bygone era, pushrod operated, static controlled component system.

Sounds to me like a good argument for direct injection.

[rbabos]

Agree, there's a lot lacking to get the best of both worlds. Direct injection, variable cam timing would be sweet, but don't see it happening. Tell me more about this condensation effect and how it plays out. You make a valid point about having cake and eat it too. I may have been taken down the garden path with claims of perfectly tuned and smooth running engines here. Maybe they all run like "Potty mouth". I have nothing to compare it to and any dealer builds I've seen are pretty lame around here when the wick is twisted.
Ron

[Dennis The Menace]

Ron, I dont think they all run like "Potty mouth".  But, I do think its possible to put a build together that would would great on the strip, but suck for around town riding.  I am starting to wonder that about my own bike, as I have same problems you have.  However, once I make my mind up to keep the new ProPipe on or not (O2 in stream issue), I will take it to a tuner and let them try to get it smoothed out.  If not, I will try a different setup

But, no MoCo motor will run perfect.  As you stated earlier, you were striving for perfection, but that is an impossibility.  But, you can get it running well if all the parts are carefully chosen for the application design.  I thought I built my motor right for good town and mountan riding, but not sure yet.  Once I get a good tune, I will know.

Dennis

[ORork]

Ron, when you shut down the bike, the aluminum allows the temperature to drop like mad. Then on a restart the inflow of ambient air causes the fuel to bunch up, have dense spots until the temps in the tract become stable. Even if the EFI has start enrichment, it won't work well if there is a leak. What I have found is very, very critical to smooth running is leaks on either side of the head/s. This is not to be overlooked, ever. With your bike running on the stand take your favorite liquid (water or solvent will do), in a spray bottle and direct the spray around the intake where it meets the head/s. Then, spray around the exhaust where it mounts to the head/s. NO LEAK can be tolerated at all, on either intake or exhaust. A leak (shown by the liquid going in) will affect the speed and smoothness of the idle.  Any foreign air influence on the flow will drive the map nuts (at any speed) and the harmonious flow of PROPER A/F ratio. You can tune for days, weeks and months and not get satisfaction if there is any leak. I highly recommend using 2 circle clips under each exhaust pipe flange to ensure the best possibility of a good, tight seal (the exhaust flange should not touch the head). I have fought intake side leaks until I was blue in the face. Even new seals could/would/did leak. So, I grabbed some spray, aviation, Permatex gasket sealer, mounted a nozzle with a straw/tube on the can and sprayed around the inlet flanges while the engine was idling and hit the kill switch after getting a decent amount of sealer applied (it got sucked into the leak). I then let the bike set overnight and the next morning I found my leak troubles were gone. This made a HUGE difference in getting the thing tuned. By all means check yours for a leak. You might be surprised what you find. Whoever makes those intake seals should make them thicker IMHO, so they actually get compressed tight by the flange.

[rbabos]

Yup. I've spent a great amount of time trying different things on this intake leak checking. My favorite tool is propane, but have tried water, wd 40 and brake cleaner several times. Tested both cold and hot and have no indication of a leak. Ran the hose close to the filter once and the engine quit instantly. On restart it behaved as if flooded. That actually surprised me since it was so hard to restart. Anyway during the leak tests the whole casting was checked as well as around all sensors. Nothing.
Same with the exhaust. Could not detect anything, but changed the sealing rings anyway. Did find a bit of soot at the collector and used ultra copper on the reinstal but it made no difference. O2 placement was checked in light of a recent thread regarding sensor function and I gave it the green light. Now here's the kicker that keeps me persisting on trying to make it better. Todays ride was cooler than any previous rides for the last two months . About 65-70 degrees today. The damn thing ran 100% in light loads, even going down hills. That's a first and could have sworn I was riding the stock 96". Other than the outside temp, nothing has been changed. At least for today I did have my cake and ate it too. . Now, we both know what contributed to this, don't we?
Ron

[ORork]

Yep, we sure do. Ambient air temp made a big difference. Now, was it IAT sensor signal or is it just too rich at 80-90 degree ambient air temperature? Good observation. Now you're getting somewhere.

[rbabos]

Yep, we sure do. Ambient air temp made a big difference. Now, was it IAT sensor signal or is it just too rich at 80-90 degree ambient air temperature? Good observation. Now you're getting somewhere.

All I can tell you is in order to get it as good as it is, more fuel had to be thrown at this light load area. The colder weather brings up two possibilties. One is the iat running cooler, or the map sensor is at a different reading giving more fuel. Don't think it's the map sensor since I'm thinking if any effect was noticed it would pull even more vacume with denser air and the condition would be worse. I don't know for sure. The iat function is the most likely sensor to keep it rich in my light load areas that are open loop. I saw no difference in the closed loop areas .Even though most here are starting to think I have chit for brains, I still feel relocating the iat to more ambient air would give a more stable tune between fluctuating temps in my small area of open loop especially if todays run was any indication. Hell, there wasn't even any jerking in the decels, just smooth even firing.
Ron

[ORork]

By all means, move the IAT sensor and log the data. Maybe put it out front on that horizontal bar, high on the front of the frame. Doesn't it make sense that IAT should reflect ambient air temp, not engine induced heat? Only your testing will tell if you're on to something.

[FLTRI]

Doesn't it make sense that IAT should reflect ambient air temp, not engine induced heat?

Actually the ECM should get the actual intake air temperature to use it to modify fueling as intake temperature changes.

Ambient air temperature is not what the engine ingests, so using the IAT to get more fuel into the engine changes the IAT sensor's usefullness as a key input for the system to make it's decisions.

Bob

[rbabos]

Doesn't it make sense that IAT should reflect ambient air temp, not engine induced heat?

Actually the ECM should get the actual intake air temperature to use it to modify fueling as intake temperature changes.

Ambient air temperature is not what the engine ingests, so using the IAT to get more fuel into the engine changes the IAT sensor's usefullness as a key input for the system to make it's decisions.

Bob

I agree to a point but having the sensor heat soak by running in traffic and leaning the mixture is not an ideal situation either. At times it's reading temps that should not apply or are incorrect for the running needs of the engine. One example I've logged is having a 150 head temp on a startup and seeing 150 on the iat. How is that benifit the tune? I can't believe somebody would design this in and call it good or expect a good tune out of it. I understand the calibrations are done with how the iat functions, but that doesn't make it right. To me, it's a compromise situation that sorta works but could be better. In my view of course.
Ron

[FLTRI]

Ron,
Do you not believe the intake air temp was actually 150?
Just trying to understand why you feel you need to lie to the system?
Bob

[rbabos]

Ron,
Do you not believe the intake air temp was actually 150?
Just trying to understand why you feel you need to lie to the system?
Bob

Of course it's 150. That's my point. It's preheated and not constant in temp. This causes the ecm to make incorrect adjustments for a given head temp.Sitting in stop and go traffic on a 90* day having the iat climb to 180+ and lean the afr. Where's the logic here? Wouldn't the tune be more stable in afr if the iat was reading the actual ambient air rather than what the sensor is getting cooked at in traffic. Are you telling me that tuning with the present iat location is not a lie in itself? Wouldn't a bike tuned to a relocated iat be a more accurate tune overall and adjust better to real ambient temps? You have the equipment, why not test it yourself? If I can hear and feel the differences I'm sure you could pull some really interesting data when monitoring the afrs.
Ron

[1FSTRK]

Anybody know of a source for twin cams for this item? Have them for vrods but no search results for tc's.
Ron

The zippers/ thundermax catalog has a kit to do what you want. The thundermax backing plate comes cnc'd with a spot to install the sensor. Seems like someone else thought this was a problem or they wouldn't make a kit to change it.. You can buy the extention harness  and sensor  separately

[Rider57]

Ron,
Do you not believe the intake air temp was actually 150?
Just trying to understand why you feel you need to lie to the system?
Bob

Of course it's 150. That's my point. It's preheated and not constant in temp. This causes the ecm to make incorrect adjustments for a given head temp.Sitting in stop and go traffic on a 90* day having the iat climb to 180+ and lean the afr. Where's the logic here? Wouldn't the tune be more stable in afr if the iat was reading the actual ambient air rather than what the sensor is getting cooked at in traffic. Are you telling me that tuning with the present iat location is not a lie in itself? Wouldn't a bike tuned to a relocated iat be a more accurate tune overall and adjust better to real ambient temps? You have the equipment, why not test it yourself? If I can hear and feel the differences I'm sure you could pull some really interesting data when monitoring the afrs.
Ron

I tried this quite a few years ago.
The ecu knows the temp from the IAT and adjusts accordingly,even at 150*.
Like they say, change the recipe and it's not a cake anymore.
A retune will fix it but it just my guess that you will be back to square 1.

[hrdtail78]

Ron,
Do you not believe the intake air temp was actually 150?
Just trying to understand why you feel you need to lie to the system?
Bob

Of course it's 150. That's my point. It's preheated and not constant in temp. This causes the ecm to make incorrect adjustments for a given head temp.Sitting in stop and go traffic on a 90* day having the iat climb to 180+ and lean the afr. Where's the logic here? Wouldn't the tune be more stable in afr if the iat was reading the actual ambient air rather than what the sensor is getting cooked at in traffic. Are you telling me that tuning with the present iat location is not a lie in itself? Wouldn't a bike tuned to a relocated iat be a more accurate tune overall and adjust better to real ambient temps? You have the equipment, why not test it yourself? If I can hear and feel the differences I'm sure you could pull some really interesting data when monitoring the afrs.
Ron

I tried this quite a few years ago.
The ecu knows the temp from the IAT and adjusts accordingly,even at 150*.
Like they say, change the recipe and it's not a cake anymore.
A retune will fix it but it just my guess that you will be back to square 1.

Square 1.  Correctly calibrating VE tables.

[glens]

Ron, I tried to explain all this, with what I'd thought was good mental imagery, a couple pages back.  Are you saying you didn't read it?

[ORork]

Right. Get the tables to get the effect desired in open loop. That's all Ron wants, is to have it ride right. So what if the IAT is this or that. Just get the garbage out to work by working with the garbage in. And if the IAT sens sig is proven the be susceptible to hot soak and you can't make a table mod for it, then move it.

[glens]

That post contains a point I've touched on several times already in this thread.  There has been no "proof" that the IAT is ever indicating falsely, thus bringing about incorrect fueling calculations; merely supposition about it.

Ron, at the start you stated the IAT and head-temp sensors provided similar information at hot starts.  You said the new IAT showed a different resistance than the old.  How well does the new IAT correlate with the head-temp on a hot start now?  How did they both do in comparison with the head-temp on a cold start?

[rbabos]

That post contains a point I've touched on several times already in this thread.  There has been no "proof" that the IAT is ever indicating falsely, thus bringing about incorrect fueling calculations; merely supposition about it.

Ron, at the start you stated the IAT and head-temp sensors provided similar information at hot starts.  You said the new IAT showed a different resistance than the old.  How well does the new IAT correlate with the head-temp on a hot start now?  How did they both do in comparison with the head-temp on a cold start?

I havn't logged it. I saw a 100 ohm difference between the two in the same cup of hot water. Stuck the damn thing in the hole and went riding. It is what it is and will still be relocated eventually. Wife just started riding so for now I've stopped experimenting and just ride it. First ride with the new iat was in cooler weather so I don't know if it was due to the new iat, or cooler air, but the whole riding day did not produce a single skipped beat in my light load areas.
Ron

[rbabos]

Anybody know of a source for twin cams for this item? Have them for vrods but no search results for tc's.
Ron

The zippers/ thundermax catalog has a kit to do what you want. The thundermax backing plate comes cnc'd with a spot to install the sensor. Seems like someone else thought this was a problem or they wouldn't make a kit to change it.. You can buy the extention harness  and sensor  separately

Fantastic. I will check this out. Beats hacking up the oem harness.
Ron

[1FSTRK]

That post contains a point I've touched on several times already in this thread.  There has been no "proof" that the IAT is ever indicating falsely, thus bringing about incorrect fueling calculations; merely supposition about it.

glens
What test would one conduct to prove to you that this is a lean condition caused by the ecm correcting based on the IAT reporting a higher air temp than actually entered the cylinder?

In traffic at low throttle positions isn't it possible that the small amount of air flowing above and below the butterfly and into the motor does not pass directly through the IAT? It mounts directly in the center behind the throttle shaft. Maybe the port, cam combination that is responsible for the lower map pressures creates an air stream that does not pass through the sensor until the throttle is opened more. There is no way that all the air in a large throttle body is moving at very low TPs, and any slower moving air that is in contact with the TB will pick up heat from the TB.

[FLTRI]

Just a guess but if you thought about this maybe the engineers who could have mounted it wherever they wanted, figured where the put it would/did work?
Bob

[rbabos]

Just a guess but if you thought about this maybe the engineers who could have mounted it wherever they wanted, figured where the put it would/did work?
Bob

Or the bean counters felt by having it all in one neat package would speed up assembly time. Don't forget that exta wire made shorter will save money too.  . Remember the engineers screwed up the vrod also. An iat relocation kit was the fix for poor running in certain conditions. How dare those bastards try and fool the ecm. This can go on forever since obviously it works to a reasonable degree as is. I'm only stating it can be made better by eliminating the heat soaking. I feel we both have made valid points here for or against. Let's call it a draw and move on.
Ron

[glens]

That's not fair.  I was working on this while you posted "let's move on"!

What test would one conduct to prove to you that this is a lean condition caused by the ecm correcting based on the IAT reporting a higher air temp than actually entered the cylinder?

One thing that readily comes to mind would be to:

- Set the whole upper-left area to "14.6" AFR in the calibration and load it
- Attach harness to IAT in stock location
- Ride bike to operating temperature, or close-enough, and reset AFVs
- Datalog a specific route
- Attach harness to IAT in airbox
- Reset AFVs and do another datalog on that specific route
- Ideally, swap IATs and repeat the series

Look in the datalogs and compare O2 integrator activity, both at the start of the log and at the end.  It'd be nice to see what values the AFVs become, but perhaps not entirely necessary here.

If the system gets v-tuned for both locations, when running on whichever calibration, the "other" IAT location will undoubtedly provide much greater O2 integrator activity in a test like this.  I'm guessing that activity would be the least amount using the calibration for the stock-mounted IAT and with that location in use.

Not all engineers are idiots, and in most every other way the Dephi stuff shows good judgment calls in my opinion.  I tend to think they probably got this right, too, and likely not in an haphazard way.

[rbabos]

That's not fair.  I was working on this while you posted "let's move on"!

What test would one conduct to prove to you that this is a lean condition caused by the ecm correcting based on the IAT reporting a higher air temp than actually entered the cylinder?

One thing that readily comes to mind would be to:

- Set the whole upper-left area to "14.6" AFR in the calibration and load it
- Attach harness to IAT in stock location
- Ride bike to operating temperature, or close-enough, and reset AFVs
- Datalog a specific route
- Attach harness to IAT in airbox
- Reset AFVs and do another datalog on that specific route
- Ideally, swap IATs and repeat the series

Look in the datalogs and compare O2 integrator activity, both at the start of the log and at the end.  It'd be nice to see what values the AFVs become, but perhaps not entirely necessary here.

If the system gets v-tuned for both locations, when running on whichever calibration, the "other" IAT location will undoubtedly provide much greater O2 integrator activity in a test like this.  I'm guessing that activity would be the least amount using the calibration for the stock-mounted IAT and with that location in use.

Not all engineers are idiots, and in most every other way the Dephi stuff shows good judgment calls in my opinion.  I tend to think they probably got this right, too, and likely not in an haphazard way.

glens:  You guys have beat me down. I don't want to play any more.
Ron

[1FSTRK]

You had me going for a minute, then I got to the part where engineers never make a mistake. I flashedback to a company that had a timken bearing  setup that worked for about 40 years and changed to a roller bearing setup, that they upgraded to a lefty bearing setup, and then for the ultimate performance upgrade offered a timken bearing setup.
I didn't say that the original design didn't work on the stock bike. But like everthing else that needs a scaled adjustment when we make performance changes to these bikes, I say maybe the IAT falls it to this category.

[glens]

What thread were you reading where it was said engineers never make a mistake?

The first person who does the test I outlined above and posts the results in this thread will certainly have the gratitude of many.  I'd probably do it just for kicks, but my IAT is part of the MAP sensor, so I can't.

[glens]

Ron:  http://delphi.com/shared/pdf/ppd/sensors/et_airtemp.pdf

Get an "intake air temp" sensor for mounting in your "airbox" instead of the "manifold air temp" sensor which you have.  The "intake" sensor has 4x quicker response time.  Other than that (as a result of the packaging to insulate from mount-point heat and pressure) there's no difference in the specifications between them.

[FLTRI]

Good info glens, now Ron just has to get Steve to modify the software to use airbox temps rather than manifold temps. 
Bob

[1FSTRK]

Good info glens
  You may want to check your stock harley sensor. It appears that Harley is misusing a Intake Air Temperature Sensor as a Manifold Air Temperature Sensor already.

[rbabos]

Good info glens, now Ron just has to get Steve to modify the software to use airbox temps rather than manifold temps. 
Bob

I think an iat correction table would do the trick. Then I could set the upper limit of heat soak and not be influenced by it. In other words cap the hot resistance limit to a realistic temp . Like that's going to happen? Let's get one thing straight here. The reading the iat is sending to the ecm to pull fuel when (heat soaked) is not the actual temp the cyls are getting filled with or it would not exibit a lean condition.  You've got the equipment, prove me wrong on that. This has been proven over and over in the auto industry to cause the exact same issues I've seen with my tune. I was bored today so I came back to play again.
Ron

[Dennis The Menace]

Ron, sounds like you have hit the limits inherent in the Delphi system, as designed for Harley. This is really good input from the field that should be taken up with them, IMO.  Remember, the ECM is an electronic component that has theoretical limits based on the physical construction.  Much like outgrowing the old 8086/286/386...Pentium processors for PC's, perhaps Dephi and MoCo need to look at the next generation of hardware design that could incorporate the additional tables required to tune for additional parameters, much like autos do today.

In this aspect, I believe MoCo still lags the electronic controls best practices.  I am sure that you and others would come up with other data points needing to be monitored and managed by the ECM.  I would agree.  But, todays ECM is limited, and there isnt any way a SESPT or TTS or any other tuner pack can make it any better.  The ECM is at its theoretical max, and needs to be upgraded to a next generation system in order to do what you propose to do with it.

But, what do I know, I am only a computer architect guy, making a living with these things for decades.  lol

Dennis

[glens]

Dennis, with a proper networking stack and hardware, our ECM could probably saturate a halfway-decent connection serving static web pages.  The task it has has got to be well within its capabilities.

I'm sure H-D worked with Delphi a little on the system, but would be surprised to find out it was much more than some optional stuff on an off-the-shelf product.

Delphi would probably be glad to work with anyone so long as there was a sizable order forthcoming.  But getting them or H-D to just help make the ECU more tunable?  Not likely, because then they'd start showing up modified like that on the street, and that's quite against the law.

Maybe Ron just needs to get a cam more suitable for his usage habits?

[hrdtail78]

Good info glens, now Ron just has to get Steve to modify the software to use airbox temps rather than manifold temps. 
Bob

I think an iat correction table would do the trick. Then I could set the upper limit of heat soak and not be influenced by it. In other words cap the hot resistance limit to a realistic temp . Like that's going to happen? Let's get one thing straight here. The reading the iat is sending to the ecm to pull fuel when (heat soaked) is not the actual temp the cyls are getting filled with or it would not exibit a lean condition.  You've got the equipment, prove me wrong on that. This has been proven over and over in the auto industry to cause the exact same issues I've seen with my tune. I was bored today so I came back to play again.
Ron

Lets keep in mind how Ron has calibrated his VE tables.  Seems most of the problems he has posted on has been conditions he says he can't vtune. 

[rbabos]

Good info glens, now Ron just has to get Steve to modify the software to use airbox temps rather than manifold temps. 
Bob

I think an iat correction table would do the trick. Then I could set the upper limit of heat soak and not be influenced by it. In other words cap the hot resistance limit to a realistic temp . Like that's going to happen? Let's get one thing straight here. The reading the iat is sending to the ecm to pull fuel when (heat soaked) is not the actual temp the cyls are getting filled with or it would not exibit a lean condition.  You've got the equipment, prove me wrong on that. This has been proven over and over in the auto industry to cause the exact same issues I've seen with my tune. I was bored today so I came back to play again.
Ron

Lets keep in mind how Ron has calibrated his VE tables.  Seems most of the problems he has posted on has been conditions he says he can't vtune.

Fair enough, however if I wasn't tuned on the ragged edge this iat behaviour would have been harder to detect and may never have gone looking for the cause.  For me, heat soaked is like an on/off switch between good running and not so good. It will still have an effect on a perfectly (at a given temp) tuned engine as well. Might not be as dramatic, however the symptoms will be there to some extent. They all will lean with heat soak beyond the tuning temps.
Ron

[glens]

But then again, if you were to (could?) leave the area closed-loop this "heat-soaked IAC" might not be any sort of problem at all for you.

There is one other possibility which I don't remember being discussed, and that is that when the mixture gets so rich the O2 sensors can report it all the same as being lean.  I don't guess you've had that problem though.

Do you have a large overlap on the cams and maybe fresh charge is getting through at these operational areas for you?  That would cause closed-loop "tuning" problems, I'm sure.

Is this merely a pipes/cams combo that doesn't work well there and if so, are you sure it's worth it on a street-going bike?

[1FSTRK]

The harley engineers have corrected the problem on the v-rod by moving the IAT to the air box and retuning the ecm. They must have had a reason that they didn't change the cam and pipes.
Why does it seem that rbabos could not be helped by the very same solution?

[HV]

I think his whole problem is using the TTS... he should switch to a SEST and Smart Tune it..and enjoy the ride...







( Now that should start something.. ) 

[Steve Cole]

I think his whole problem is using the TTS... he should switch to a SEST and Smart Tune it..and enjoy the ride...


I think he just needs to move the IAT into the fuel tank, That should solve it all! 






( Now that should start something.. ) 

[rbabos]

I think his whole problem is using the TTS... he should switch to a SEST and Smart Tune it..and enjoy the ride...


I think he just needs to move the IAT into the fuel tank, That should solve it all! 






( Now that should start something.. ) 

Once again, very professional , Steve. 
Ron

[Dennis The Menace]

Oh yippee, the show is starting....

[Rider57]

And the OSCAR goes to.......

[HV]

 

[HV]

Chill guys.... just messin with yas... 

[hrdtail78]

I think he needs to let somebody else have a crack at it.

[FBRR]

I just read this post and thought I would chip in!
First the difference between "closed loop" and closed loop learn" from a fuel control standpoint is ONLY the activation of the "learning". Learn is only enabled depending on several calibrations. Those can include engine run time, engine temp. "IAT" temperature, and engine temperature(model based). The reason for not activating CLL every time closed loop in enabled, is precisely because the engine operating condition can cause a bad learned value. ( Engine too hot, engine temp. not "normalized", IAT temperature too high, etc.)

So once everything is within a "normal" opreating range and an engine run time has expired, the "Learn" is enabled!

Secondly, as to the IAT discussion and how that affects fuel, the IAT temperature is not the "single" input to
"charge temperature." There is a calibration that allows the engineers to "weight" the IAT sensor input based on LOAD and speed. I do not know how Harley calibrates that table. But the way "we" did that was to place less perecnt of IAT at low speed and IDLE, while changing the percentage of "CHARGE TEMPERATURE" to more IAT at higher speed and loads. The thought here was at low speeds and loads, the "CHARGE TEMPERATURE" is influenced more by "metal" temperature ( both throttle body and chamber/port temperatures at low flow. As flow increase and higher airflow, the IAT temperature has more inpact to "CHARGE TEMPERATURE."

The point here fuel is based on a calibratable "weighting system" for injested air temperature. That value is "CHARGE TEMPERATURE." So changing the placement of the sensor may have "only slight " impact at idle if Harley took the same approach and ignores( or lessens the input from the  IAT sensor) at low RPMs and IDLE!

One other thought on your low MAP values and poor running. I didn't go back and examine what injectors you are running, or if they are production. ( I assume you have larger injectors!)

Injectors have a linear range ( called DYNAMIC RANGE!) within their DYNAMIC RANGE, they are linear ( or nearly so!!). The absolute "dynamic range" of injectors is almost the same!! That is a critical point to understand! While Max. Flow rates change with SIZE, because the "design" are not really any different, as MAX. Flow increase, you also RAISE the lower limit of that "linear range." ( absolute dynamic ranges are almost the same no matter what the flow rate!!)

As an injector reaches that "low limit" of it's dynamic range ( or linear range) there is a point at very low MAP readings where the injector in NOT LINEAR. It is a little "BUMP" in the injector flow! There is some software to try and address that area, but as every single injector acts slightly different in that area, it is not possible to predict "fuel delivery" based on pulse width at those very low MAP readings. There is a point where as "COMMAND pulse width" decrease, actual FUEL delivered increases. ( remember is is NON-Linear! in those low MAP areas!)
There is a calibration that "sets" that LOW LIMIT pulse width!! So at very low MAP readings, below the calibration value, no matter what the closed loop may "request" the delivered pulse width is constant to avoid that "non-linear" range..

If you have followed all that the OP stated he has "LOW MAP." If that "input" combined with a calibration value intended for "production" injectors dynamic range", it may possible you are rolling up against this calibration limit (that you DO NOT HAVE ACCESS TO CHANGE!)with "LARGE" injectors. Or you may be trying to drive those LARGER injectors below their actual "dynamic range" where they truely go NON-LINEAR and fuel delivery is "variable" when you think it should be "LINEAR."

If that is unclear, I would be happy to elaborate a little more.
Hope that helps!

( P.S. My wife is bitching for the computer, so I didn't spell check this message! )

[rbabos]

I just read this post and thought I would chip in!
First the difference between "closed loop" and closed loop learn" from a fuel control standpoint is ONLY the activation of the "learning". Learn is only enabled depending on several calibrations. Those can include engine run time, engine temp. "IAT" temperature, and engine temperature(model based). The reason for not activating CLL every time closed loop in enabled, is precisely because the engine operating condition can cause a bad learned value. ( Engine too hot, engine temp. not "normalized", IAT temperature too high, etc.)

So once everything is within a "normal" opreating range and an engine run time has expired, the "Learn" is enabled!

Secondly, as to the IAT discussion and how that affects fuel, the IAT temperature is not the "single" input to
"charge temperature." There is a calibration that allows the engineers to "weight" the IAT sensor input based on LOAD and speed. I do not know how Harley calibrates that table. But the way "we" did that was to place less perecnt of IAT at low speed and IDLE, while changing the percentage of "CHARGE TEMPERATURE" to more IAT at higher speed and loads. The thought here was at low speeds and loads, the "CHARGE TEMPERATURE" is influenced more by "metal" temperature ( both throttle body and chamber/port temperatures at low flow. As flow increase and higher airflow, the IAT temperature has more inpact to "CHARGE TEMPERATURE."

The point here fuel is based on a calibratable "weighting system" for injested air temperature. That value is "CHARGE TEMPERATURE." So changing the placement of the sensor may have "only slight " impact at idle if Harley took the same approach and ignores( or lessens the input from the  IAT sensor) at low RPMs and IDLE!

One other thought on your low MAP values and poor running. I didn't go back and examine what injectors you are running, or if they are production. ( I assume you have larger injectors!)

Injectors have a linear range ( called DYNAMIC RANGE!) within their DYNAMIC RANGE, they are linear ( or nearly so!!). The absolute "dynamic range" of injectors is almost the same!! That is a critical point to understand! While Max. Flow rates change with SIZE, because the "design" are not really any different, as MAX. Flow increase, you also RAISE the lower limit of that "linear range." ( absolute dynamic ranges are almost the same no matter what the flow rate!!)

As an injector reaches that "low limit" of it's dynamic range ( or linear range) there is a point at very low MAP readings where the injector in NOT LINEAR. It is a little "BUMP" in the injector flow! There is some software to try and address that area, but as every single injector acts slightly different in that area, it is not possible to predict "fuel delivery" based on pulse width at those very low MAP readings. There is a point where as "COMMAND pulse width" decrease, actual FUEL delivered increases. ( remember is is NON-Linear! in those low MAP areas!)
There is a calibration that "sets" that LOW LIMIT pulse width!! So at very low MAP readings, below the calibration value, no matter what the closed loop may "request" the delivered pulse width is constant to avoid that "non-linear" range..

If you have followed all that the OP stated he has "LOW MAP." If that "input" combined with a calibration value intended for "production" injectors dynamic range", it may possible you are rolling up against this calibration limit (that you DO NOT HAVE ACCESS TO CHANGE!)with "LARGE" injectors. Or you may be trying to drive those LARGER injectors below their actual "dynamic range" where they truely go NON-LINEAR and fuel delivery is "variable" when you think it should be "LINEAR."

If that is unclear, I would be happy to elaborate a little more.
Hope that helps!

( P.S. My wife is bitching for the computer, so I didn't spell check this message! )

I was going to let this thread vanish, but since you brought up some very interesting points I'd say you nailed it on the head. Logging my low kpa areas with the map set in closed loop everywhere showed less fuel at 2250 than at idle. I then upped the ve's to compensate, but this did very little with improvement. Then I threw more fuel at it in the 20 kpa range which helped the most. At this point it was almost perfect in light load areas, so I threw a bit more fuel at it, 12.5 I believe. The running did not improve but it seemed to load up on decels so it was put back to 13.0, or 13.2, I don't remember now. All through this nonsense I detected as long as I stayed away from the city it ran decent, but once heat soaked it ran like crap again.  Since I seemed to have hit a wall with delivering the correct amount of fuel with existing adjustments and keep good running on decels I felt to eliminate the heat soaked iat problem to at least keep what existing fuel I set for it and not have it change. That worked.It's like you said, I have no control over the injectors in this light load area due to the low kpa.
That leaves me with three options, get a different engine, like that's going to happen, or go back to Alpha-N Tmax, which eliminates the vacume issues and should be able to get the correct afrs in the light load areas. Or, be happy with a 99% tune as it is now.
Present injectors are SE 4.89, and have considered the stock ones but with a 113 I'd be causing other issues since the low kpa will still be present plus inducing high rpm issues as well.
Good post, by the way, with some interesting info. So, basically I'm screwed in regards to keeping the injectors linear in low kpa settings with the present calibrations?
Ron

[07SG]

Is it something like this you were looking for?

#309-305 - M.A.T. Sensor Extension Harness
This extension harness will allow relocation of the Manifold Air Temperature sensor to the air cleaner backing plate from behind the throttle plate, where it is susceptible to “heat soaking” from a hot engine. Our ThunderMax air filter backplates are machined to accept the MAT sensor; MAT sensors on 2005 and earlier models can simply be moved from the TB to the backplate; relocation on 2006-up models requires the purchase of the ’95-’05 style MAT sensor (listed). Fits all EFI model Big Twins.

http://www.zippersperformance.com/catalogue/showproduct.asp?cat=583&prod=2182

[rbabos]

I took a different route, but yes that is one option.
Ron

[FLTRI]

I took a different route, but yes that is one option.
Ron

How did you change the readings?
Bob

[rbabos]

I took a different route, but yes that is one option.
Ron

How did you change the readings?
Bob

The readings are what they are. I did this to eliminate stupid lean hot starts after the bikes heat soaks from sitting for a few minutes.  It now starts and runs as it should at idle. Nothing else could be detected in the running other than city driving at low speeds seem to be smoother. Sometimes you just have to break away from the supposedly correct Delphi placement  and claims of the ecm will adjust to heat soak. My results show it won't as evident of the improved running from relocating this sensor. In fact the higher than normal heat soaked iat temp forces a leaner than desired afr during certain operating conditions.
While this won't add up to much on a stock build, it sure plays hell with my build.
Ron

[FLTRI]

Ron,
Glad to hear you are happy with the way your bike runs now.

Ya got a taste how we tuners, who do this for a living, must think sometimes, even outside the box to eliminate ill-running effects of cam timing, exhaust systems, and other not stock-type breathing mods.

Sometimes all it takes is a bit of time and understanding to resolve running issues and other times it seems it is impossible....at least until someone comes with a fresh approach to try.

I learn every day and realize the more I know the more there is to learn and understand.

Bob

[rbabos]

Yup, frustrating and rewarding at the same time. Funny how life is. Didn't know absolute crap about efi. Now between the AlphaN Tmax and the Delphi speed density, I'm half assed competent enought to get a decent running bike with either. Still rewarding even being an amateur half assed tuner. There's a never ending learning curve with this stuff and I'm still trying to get a better handle on things.
Ron

[FLTRI]

...There's a never ending learning curve with this stuff and I'm still trying to get a better handle on things.
Ron

I don't believe I read what you ended up doing? What have you done for your IAT dilemma?
Bob

[rbabos]

...There's a never ending learning curve with this stuff and I'm still trying to get a better handle on things.
Ron

I don't believe I read what you ended up doing? What have you done for your IAT dilemma?
Bob

Don't think I posted it due to all the flack I got over it. I stuck it about 1" back behind the filter element on the SE heavy breather elbow at the bottom.  While I haven't logged anything due to going to a different cal in the spring the afrs seemed way more stable between hot and cold, especially with mid temp engine starts or city traffic and hot engine. For me, it worked out just ducky. Obviously a few more vtune runs are in order to reset the ve's to the different sensor input, but I ran out of good weather.
Ron