TTS - 96" with 255 cams

[07heri]

I need some help on setting up a map for this configuration.  2007 Heritage, no 103 kit, stock 96.  Stage 1 (AN Big Sucker / Rinehart slipons) and SE255 cams.   I need to get this as close as possible until I can get it on a dyno. 

Should I run the 103 / 255 map?

Sould I run the 103 / 255 map and change the CI to 96?  What exactly happens to the map when ONLY the CI is changed? 

It looks like the 103 and 96 maps have different timing tables.  Which would be more suitable to a 96" with the 255 cams?

Like I said, eventually this will get put on a dyno but for right now I would like to get as close as possible out of the box.

[07heri]

wow not one response.  am i the only one that has put different cams in a stock 96"? 

[mayor]

I need to get this as close as possible until I can get it on a dyno. 

this is accomplished with vtuning what ever cal that you plan on running....(I know, you don't know that yet..see below)

Should I run the 103 / 255 map?

tuning a motorycle involves two variables, fuel (VE's, AE's, WE's, etc.) and timing.  Running a 103/255 map will likely involve adjustments to both.  Unless you have a pretty good handle on what you are doing, you might want to choose a different option. 

Sould I run the 103 / 255 map and change the CI to 96?  What exactly happens to the map when ONLY the CI is changed? 

the VE tables, plus AE and WE tables may need to be adjusted to the new displacement.....but read the last sentence of the previous answer.

It looks like the 103 and 96 maps have different timing tables.  Which would be more suitable to a 96" with the 255 cams?

it looks like CAA176-002 was designed for a 96" w/255's

[07heri]

I need to get this as close as possible until I can get it on a dyno. 

this is accomplished with vtuning what ever cal that you plan on running....(I know, you don't know that yet..see below)

Should I run the 103 / 255 map?

tuning a motorycle involves two variables, fuel (VE's, AE's, WE's, etc.) and timing.  Running a 103/255 map will likely involve adjustments to both.  Unless you have a pretty good handle on what you are doing, you might want to choose a different option. 

Sould I run the 103 / 255 map and change the CI to 96?  What exactly happens to the map when ONLY the CI is changed? 

the VE tables, plus AE and WE tables may need to be adjusted to the new displacement.....but read the last sentence of the previous answer.

It looks like the 103 and 96 maps have different timing tables.  Which would be more suitable to a 96" with the 255 cams?

it looks like CAA176-002 was designed for a 96" w/255's

Thanks Mayor.  I don't have a 2 into 1 but I'll give that map a try and see if it will get me by for now.  I really need to get this dyno'd.  I haven't had much luck with the V-Tunes.  The bike always seems to run worse even after 7 or 8 runs.  The tuners I've talked to say the bike will never run right with it being tuned to 14.6 because of the heat down here.  I'm going to give this TTS thing a little more time before I give up on it though.   

[WVULTRA]

Since Mayor is one of the most knowledgable on this forum, his advise is always top notch!   

If the CAA176 map doesn't feel right, IMO try the EPQ176 map!    Reduce the Engine Displacement to 96.7 in the Tuning Constants table and see how your bike feels/reacts.  See how the bike starts/idles while doing a few stationary Cam Data Recordings.  Take a close look at your MAP values and see if they're in the 30-36KPa range.

It never hurts to try different maps before starting your serious tuning.

[07heri]

Sounds like a plan.  Tomorrow morning I will run the cam analysis tool.  Then check the map reading after loading the results and post here.  I will test both of those maps and see which one starts and idles best.  And then take it from there.  Thanks guys for the help.

[HV]

Just last week we had a bike from another shop come in...running like a POS... it had a 103 with 204 Map in it after checking with the other Dealer we found that the bike was a 96 ...not a 103...and they used the 103 map due to the 204 cams they had installed ... after we Reduced the Engine Displacement to 96.7 in and reflashed it...and did a few Smart tune runs ( using a SESPT ) it ran fine... Data runs after showed no timing being pulled from any place it the runs.....so as Mayor said you still need to check Data runs to check timing...the 255 Maps are far diff timing wise then a 204 would be ....again as he said a complete Dyno tune would be the most complete option

[07heri]

Loaded the CAA176 map. 

Cam estimator says 5 / 2 for 255's
CAA176 has it set at 4 / 3 for 255's
Cam analysis has a break at 3 and a break at 4 for 255's

If I'm going to learn this stuff I should ask questions.  Why the differences? 

I loaded the CAA176 with 3 / 2 (3 from the cam analysis and 2 from the estimator).  The bike started fine and idles okay.  The map stayed pretty much at 35 @ idle.

Should I leave it at 3 / 2 or should I see if it idles/runs better at 4 / 2?  I plan to make a bunch of vtune runs this week so I probably need to get the cam settings in stone before I go any further.

Also any recomendations on CLB settings would be appreciated.  I'd prefer to have them on the richer side due to the heat down here.  I was thinking 739.

Once I hear your feedback on the cam set up and CLB's I will start doing the vtune runs.         

[mayor]

Loaded the CAA176 map. 

Cam estimator says 5 / 2 for 255's
CAA176 has it set at 4 / 3 for 255's
Cam analysis has a break at 3 and a break at 4 for 255's

If I'm going to learn this stuff I should ask questions.  Why the differences? 

I loaded the CAA176 with 3 / 2 (3 from the cam analysis and 2 from the estimator).  The bike started fine and idles okay.  The map stayed pretty much at 35 @ idle.

Should I leave it at 3 / 2 or should I see if it idles/runs better at 4 / 2?  I plan to make a bunch of vtune runs this week so I probably need to get the cam settings in stone before I go any further.

Also any recomendations on CLB settings would be appreciated.  I'd prefer to have them on the richer side due to the heat down here.  I was thinking 739.

can you post your cam data recording files?  you will likely need to open up a Box.net account to post them. the box account will come in handy later, if you want to post your data for scrutiny.   If after your changes the idle is around 35 kPa, you are probably fine. 

I run a slightly richer clb (762).  I just can't bring myself to go any leaner.   

[07heri]

How do I copy the data?  I just opened a box account and ready to copy it over so you can see it.

[07heri]

http://www.box.net/shared/bxdfulm11rodvz1ac535

http://www.box.net/shared/6xdxygt97cvi06tuurpd

One is the cam data and the other is a data log.  What I just noticed is the map kpa is lower at idle when I ran a data scan.  Why did I get different numbers on the two processes?  Was it because I did the cam data analysis with the cam settings at 4 / 3 (original settings in map) versus doing the data scan after I changed it to 3 / 2?

[mayor]

One is the cam data and the other is a data log.  What I just noticed is the map kpa is lower at idle when I ran a data scan.  Why did I get different numbers on the two processes?  Was it because I did the cam data analysis with the cam settings at 4 / 3 (original settings in map) versus doing the data scan after I changed it to 3 / 2?

that is probably why you had two values.  I'll review the data and post a response in a little while. 

[mayor]

yep, it looks like the cam IO break point was 3 to me as well 

[07heri]

yep, it looks like the cam IO break point was 3 to me as well 

Any idea why there seems to be so much difference?  I've searched around and I see the same question asked, but no real answer.  Unless the manufacturers of cams aren't telling us the real specs one would think it's a no brainer.  Why even have the estimator in TTS if there's such a difference?  The estimator says 5 / 2...TTS puts out maps that don't follow suit with the estimator...then the cam analyzer comes up with yet another set of numbers.  Seems like alot of guesswork happening, but who knows, surely not me.

Well if you think I'm good with using 3 /2 then I will start doing some vtunes in the morning.  It's 101 outside today so I will get my vtunes in the morning and try to keep them all in the 70 - 75 degree times of the day throughout the week.  Hopefully by the weekend I will be doing some data runs to look at timing.

Thanks mayor 

[Steve Cole]

The issue we found when testing was that the specification cards and the camshafts did not match. This is why we named it an "ESTIMATOR" as we knew we could only get close. What we are looking for is the point that the valve begins to open/close and if you look at all the pieces involved with valve movement it's no wonder they are off. You have to deal with oil pressure, lifter design, pushrod length, rocker box, rocker ratio, valve height, spring pressure, cam gears, cam chain, crank chain, crank gears and then all the machining tolerances of all those parts. So the test is what tells you just exactly what your engine is doing, and it may not be the same as another engine with the same components.

[mayor]

Any idea why there seems to be so much difference?  I've searched around and I see the same question asked, but no real answer.  Unless the manufacturers of cams aren't telling us the real specs one would think it's a no brainer.  Why even have the estimator in TTS if there's such a difference? 

don't forgot when using the estimator that the goal was a setting just prior to the valve opening, so you are only talking a single digit difference in degree's between a setting of 4 or 5 when looking at the estimator values. A setting of 3 is a really only 3% difference in rotation than a 4, so it might seem like a big difference but it's really not. Steve covered the mechanical aspects of why pretty well, but I'll add that the specs are less important than how the engine tests out.  What TTS did was provide a measurement system so that the "tuner" can measure the result of a particular engine, then make an educated decision based on a measured number.  In this case with the intake open, I would believe the test. 

On the intake close, the spec shows the close at 25°.  The difference between a setting of 2 and 3 is 33° and 34°, so you are looking at around 2 1/2% of rotation off of the posted spec...still very small numbers.  My guess is either setting would work in this case. 

[07heri]

Made 2 vtune runs this morning....will continue tomorrow morning if everything looks good so far.  Let me know.



http://www.box.net/shared/4u5dr4fu7uot88ipx77m

http://www.box.net/shared/k34obait120mhl7prroc



http://www.box.net/shared/04e8a805k973e0nlo6hy

http://www.box.net/shared/6jt3j9eil9msisjzrxi1


I'm getting close to the limit on a few cells.  Is this normal on a 96" motor or do I have an issue with the rear cylinder I need to be looking at?

[mayor]

I'm having a hard time downloading the second .pdf, but from what I see it looks like you should make one more vtune run before deciding to change anything.  The red squares with white numbers mean that you can't quite trust that data, so run one more to see where those cells end up.

it is normal that one cylinder might breath better than the other, so no worries. 

[07heri]

Deleted and reloaded and seems to open better now.  I'm pushing the 127 limit on the rear cylinder in a few cells.  I will do 2 more runs in the morning and see if they come down.  The cells around them are lower so will have to see what happens.  Looks like I need to stretch my arms a little longer on the runs tomorrow as well.  I'm not too concerned above 4000 rpm's but I would like get more data farther out to the right.

[Steve Cole]

Look at adjusting the EGR to lower those RPM cells that are reaching into the 127 area. As you lower the EGR value it will cause your VE values to drop as well.

[mayor]

can you repost the 2nd Vtune VE screen shot with the low MAP highlighted.   Here's where you do that:

after you use the Vtune software to generate the VE's, the select settings/ Highlight Low Map

can you also attached the calibration that the 2nd vtune was run off of, and the file created.  You can attach those directly to you posts here using the + Attachments and other options found just below the dialogue box. 

I'm not too concerned above 4000 rpm's but I would like get more data farther out to the right.

keep in mind that you need to tune at least 500 rpm past where you might ride, since all surrounding cells factor into what the ECM decides the values for a particular reading should be. 

[07heri]

here you go

[attachment removed after 60 days by system]

[07heri]

New map after 2nd vtune

...sorry it posted twice

[attachment removed after 60 days by system]

[mayor]

do another vtune run to dial the ve's in closer.  It doesn't look like you have enough info to make a good decision on EGR yet:


you also need to work on getting some higher rpm's (take it to 5k, which should help you get data to 4,500).  to get a higher percentage of TPS in the lower rpm's, try using 5th and 6th gear there....just don't agressively twist the wrist of you will max out the allowable MAP. 

[Steve Cole]

I would pull about 10%- 15% from the rear EGR table from 1750 - 4000 RPM based on what I see, prior to running another Vtune. This is going to lower just the rear cylinder VE values and give you a little more head room

[07heri]

Steve I didn't see your post until now.  AFTER I made another vtune this morning.

Steve and Mayor:  attached is the VE change graph from todays run.  Highlighted it also.

It looks like the high cells calmed down but I now picked some up in higher rpm ranges.  I don't ever see this bike going over 4000 rpm's so not sure how the high rpm cells will affect the tune.

I'm not real happy with todays run.  Somehow I missed a bunch of cells that I really wanted to get. 

Plan to make another run in the morning after I hear from you guys.

I do have a couple questions though.  What causes the high VE's?  I looked at a bunch of 96" tables and it seems mine are quite a bit higher than norm.

Also, how will the high VE's affect MPG?  I'm guessing not in a positive way which kinda concerns me.

[attachment removed after 60 days by system]

[Steve Cole]

The VE values will change based on how the engine performs and the combination of parts. Dropping the EGR down will lower the value that is needed int he VE table and since your rear cylinder was running higher values than the front I knew you could drop that range to give you a little more room to work with.

[mayor]

Also, how will the high VE's affect MPG?  I'm guessing not in a positive way which kinda concerns me.

no worries, your milage will not suffer due to the high numbers in the majority of the ve tables.  in short- most of the high numbers are not real, the values in those cells are being affected by other tables (hence the bold numbers).  What may affect the milage is not getting good data further out in the TPS % in the early rpm's. 

[07heri]

The VE values will change based on how the engine performs and the combination of parts. Dropping the EGR down will lower the value that is needed int he VE table and since your rear cylinder was running higher values than the front I knew you could drop that range to give you a little more room to work with.

Steve, the cells I was concerned about actually came down on the 3rd run.  But, they're still red/pink so another run may turn them white or drop them a tad more.  Should I still lower the EGR values or make another run and see what happens? 

[07heri]

Also, how will the high VE's affect MPG?  I'm guessing not in a positive way which kinda concerns me.

no worries, your milage will not suffer due to the high numbers in the majority of the ve tables.  in short- most of the high numbers are not real, the values in those cells are being affected by other tables (hence the bold numbers).  What may affect the milage is not getting good data further out in the TPS % in the early rpm's.

Ok here's my question.  Lets say I go out and work on 3000 and below to get the cells filled out to the right.  I figure out a way to make it happen and get them white.  When I run VTune it will only show data in cells 3000 and below correct?

The data above 3000 rpm's will still remain valid because it wasn't changed?

So, could my final tune actually be developed from more than one actual vtune run?  Could I put all the white cell values on a spreadsheet and keep adding white cell values as I turn them white on subsequent vtune runs. 

The reason I'm asking is it's obvious I have more work to do.  But if I can focus on certain weak areas without redoing the same white cells every time it would save time and gas.  When I look at the histogram I'm hitting the same cells 500 times every run for no reason if they're already white. 

So, basically what I'm asking is can the final map be piecemealed together as the cells turn white without having the final vtune look perfect?  If so, I'll go out and spend more time in the cells that need to be worked and not worry about the cells that are already white.

[mayor]

Ok here's my question.  Lets say I go out and work on 3000 and below to get the cells filled out to the right.  I figure out a way to make it happen and get them white.  When I run VTune it will only show data in cells 3000 and below correct?

The data above 3000 rpm's will still remain valid because it wasn't changed?

no, not necessarily.  You may inadvertently collect data in the areas above 3,000, and that data may be used in the subsequent vtuned cal.  If you do try to just target certain areas, what you will want to do is copy the good values from your last vtuned calibration and paste them in the unintentionally populated cells (look for yellow boxes on your vtune ve charts). Just keep in mind that if you adjust the egr tables at 3,200 rpm that the 3,500 rpm ve rows will likely be affected (meaning the values there may no longer be accurate in the affected areas (highlighted cells).

So, could my final tune actually be developed from more than one actual vtune run?  Could I put all the white cell values on a spreadsheet and keep adding white cell values as I turn them white on subsequent vtune runs. 

technically..probably...but things like weather conditions and gas blends can easily change what might be a white cell over to a light pink cell.  I might be in a minority, but I think in the case of vtuning typical closed loop cells light pink is not a big concern.   

Should I still lower the EGR values or make another run and see what happens?

I think you can safely lower the front EGR table 10-15% from 3,600 up to 6,400, and lower the rear EGR table 10-15% from 3,200 up to 6,400.  Just remember, if you adjust that table you must retune to dial in the new values.  You do not have to adjust the EGR tables, but I personally feel that limiting the change between EGR affected and non-EGR affected cells helps prevent potential lean transitions when switching from EGR table affected cells to non EGR table affected cells. 

[07heri]

Mayor the bike runs worse than it did as a Stage 1 without the cams.  Even in the lower rpms where the cells are all white the bike runs terrible.

In your opinion what do I need to do next? 

[Steve Cole]

Do a recording in DataMaster of a cold start up on the bike. You need to record the O2 sensors. Just start the motor and let it sit an run give it no throttle. You should see the O2 sensors start working in about 2 minutes and they should start switching up and down and keep doing it. If it takes too long or they do not come on and stay on then that maybe an issue.

[07heri]

Steve:  Here's the scan.  What voltages should we be seeing?

[attachment removed after 60 days by system]

[mayor]

this one's all Steve....I haven't passed my o2 sensor value correspondnace class yet.     after looking at your ve's again, the rear really doesn't look right.   

[Steve Cole]

Looking at the data there is something going on that's not right. If you look at the length of time from startup until the sensors get going and keep going, it's too long and the front is not switching properly. Then toward the end of the recording the rear stops switching, then goes for a burt and then stops again. My guess is that the sensors are not reading the exhaust correctly. This could be due to sensor placement or the sensors are starting to go bad. You can try to record another test and once the O2's start switching run the engine up to 2000 and hold it for awhile and see if they settle down and work correctly at the high engine speed. If they do then I would say it poor sensor placement if they do not then I would guess at sensors going south.

[07heri]

The head pipes are stock Harley.  Have you seen OEM head pipes that had placement issues?

Also Steve, what voltage should we be seeing?

If it was running at exactly 14.6 as the map is set for what would be an acceptable range?

My CLB is set at 759 so how would that affect the voltage?

I guess these questions could be asked at both idle and also at higher rpm's, if it even matters.

I hope I'm not asking too many questions but it would help me, and other too i bet, if we had a good idea of what the correct voltages look like and what to look for down the road if we suspect a bad sensor.

Lastly, are these Bosch 12028 sensors that I can get at the local parts store?  Either way they have 20,000 miles on them so I will change them tomorrow and run another data log.

[Steve Cole]

I hate to see people buy parts to guess at the solution. YES, HD stock pipes have bad sensor positions. It works for them only because they come stock with restrictive mufflers which keeps the exhaust pressure high enough at low engine speeds to force the exhaust in and around the sensor. The reason for running engine speed up is that will increase the exhaust pressure and if the sensors settle down it is a good indication of what is going on. There is no set number that one could use as a pass/fail test for the O2 voltage in this case. We just have to look at how it is responding and in a perfect world the graph would show both cylinders working the same so the O2 voltage should look the same. In your case what I see if them dropping in and out at idle and the pattern on the graph not near the same.

One other thing I did not mention but I probably should have was to check for exhaust leaks, so please make sure that's OK.

CLB setting is an offset the computer uses to set when to switch, so in a perfect world that would be the average voltage of the output of the O2 sensor with no additional offsets. The only issue is that the Delphi code has various offsets based on model year and model of bike and to tell you the truth  I have to look up the offsets, if any, as I do not remember them off the top of my head. The only question that would be too many is the one you do not ask. As for the Bosch 12028 I cannot answer that one, but if it's a replacement sensor that plugs in WITHOUT cutting wires I would think it would be OK. I do not like the universal cut the wire O2's for any application.

[07heri]

I'm not a big fan of throwing parts at a problem either.  Here is another data log for the O2's, warm up, idle, 2000 rpm's.  If you need more data at idle and 2000 let me know and I will run it longer in each area after I swap exhaust seals and plugs.

I have a set of new plugs and exhaust gaskets so I will swap them out this afternoon.

Afterwards I will run another data log and post to see if there are any changes.

[attachment removed after 60 days by system]

[Steve Cole]

Take a look at the Rear O2 sensor voltage on the graph in DataMaster and you can really see a problem when the engine RPM comes up on the rear cylinder. The sensor almost stops switch most of the time. Try swapping the sensors front to rear and rerun the test. If the problem follow to the front cylinder than I would replace that sensor.

[07heri]

Steve....new data log

Exhaust gaskets replaced
All exhaust joints sealed
New plugs
Sensors reversed

[attachment removed after 60 days by system]

[07heri]

Did you guys give up?

[mayor]

nope....just don't know what that data is telling me.    

[Steve Cole]

Just have been buried at work. I will try to look at this over the weekend but the weather is nice and I'm heading out for a ride up the coast.

[Steve Cole]

Well enjoyed several hundred miles of riding in beautiful weather this weekend. Did about 300 yesterday and about 400 more today. Now maybe work tomorrow will not seem so bad.

Looking at your recording, you ran the higher RPM for a little over 1 minute. During that time the O2 sensors were very inconsistent in working in both the front and rear cylinder. Since it seems to be both cylinders and you have already reversed the sensors in there location it would be my guess that the sensor placement maybe the cause of your problem. My next move would be to cut the length of the bung down to get as much of the sensor into the exhaust stream as you can. I really cannot see it being both sensors bad and doing the same thing but it is possible.

[Rider57]

I would have to agree with SC on this one.(rare_lol)
But be careful to get it square.

[On Deck]

Just last week we had a bike from another shop come in...running like a POS... it had a 103 with 204 Map in it after checking with the other Dealer we found that the bike was a 96 ...not a 103...and they used the 103 map due to the 204 cams they had installed ... after we Reduced the Engine Displacement to 96.7 in and reflashed it...and did a few Smart tune runs ( using a SESPT ) it ran fine... Data runs after showed no timing being pulled from any place it the runs.....so as Mayor said you still need to check Data runs to check timing...the 255 Maps are far diff timing wise then a 204 would be ....again as he said a complete Dyno tune would be the most complete option

Ha!  Sounds like my experience a couple months back with a local dyno dude.  Have a 96" w/ 204's and he loaded a 103 map.  Kept stalling out during idle, so I loaded CAA176 map.  After 3 Vtunes it runs only OK.  Need to better understand and do a few more.

[07heri]

Well enjoyed several hundred miles of riding in beautiful weather this weekend. Did about 300 yesterday and about 400 more today. Now maybe work tomorrow will not seem so bad.

Looking at your recording, you ran the higher RPM for a little over 1 minute. During that time the O2 sensors were very inconsistent in working in both the front and rear cylinder. Since it seems to be both cylinders and you have already reversed the sensors in there location it would be my guess that the sensor placement maybe the cause of your problem. My next move would be to cut the length of the bung down to get as much of the sensor into the exhaust stream as you can. I really cannot see it being both sensors bad and doing the same thing but it is possible.

It isn't going to happen with the stock bungs.  I measured them when I swapped fr to rr.  I have approx 1/4" on the short side of the bung.  If I knock that down to just shy of flush with the pipe there won't be any threads left.  What a total hackjob by the folks at HD.  There's plenty of room where they could have mounted the bungs at a 90 degree angle to pipe, yet they chose to mount the bungs at an angle.  I have a good half inch in the pipe on the short side but the long side is still in the bung. 

[07heri]

Steve...I read and read and read all weekend.  My head is spinning....lol.  I basically started from scratch with the tune.  I can't tell for sure but I believe most of my problems came from exhaust leaks.  The exhaust is tight after sealing all the joints and new head seals.  This is an 07 Heritage.  Where the balance tube connects to the front and rear header pipes is a simple push fit seal similar to the head seals.  So I run down to the local HD boutique and look at a newer Heritage.  Low and behold it has clamps to squish the seal.  I had the parts guy look at the 07 diagram and it doesn't list any clamps.  So Harley must have figured out they would leak and did a fix.    I'm sure my head seals were leaking because they have been off without replacing the seals every time.  I know, bad practice, but it is what it is.  Anyway, I got the exhaust all sealed up tight.

Next experiment was to do a little shadetree mod to the baffles.  They are pretty much open baffles, Rineharts...stuffed in a 3" cans.  There really wasn't much restriction to speak of.  Good example of "sounds great...runs like crap".  What I did was cut 3 sides of a 1 1/4 square into the baffle, and bent the tab down into the exhaust flow of the baffle.  Granted, this was a very UNscientific idea but I was grabbing at straws.  I couldn't think that adding a little restriction would be a bad thing so I did it.  I would compare it to how the Cycle Shacks and the SE have the lip inside that is bent inward. 

I ran 3 different maps and the CPZ176 ended being the one that I went with.

I ran the 5/2 Estimated cam setting, as well as the 4/2 and 3/2.  The cam analysis said 3 but I wanted to "feel" it for myself.  The cam data run ( 3/2 ) was the one I started with and still using.  There wasn't really a huge difference but the idle sounded more stable and tighter, (for lack of a better word) with exactly what the cam data analysis told me.

Got in 4 VTunes and the bike is running is so much better.  It has never been as smooth as it is now.  The rear VE's came down a bunch, the front came down a little too, and both are a hell of alot closer to each other than what they were when I started.  Rear still a little higherbut way better.  I'm not a tuner but I would bet that the exhaust leaks played a big part in the wild numbers I was initially getting.  Still need 4 or 5 more VTunes to get it where I want it.  I should get those done in the next day or two and I will post here for the critics...lol. 

Overall, I'm much happier today than I was last week...and obviously the bike is too.  I think once the VE's are done and I tackle the timing it's going to run pretty nice for a pretty much stock bike. 

The only thing I did notice is a slight rich smell after it starts.  Let it idle for a few minutes, or smell it after a run, and I don't smell anything.  Just right when it starts.

I want to thank you and Mayor for helping me with this.  I'm far from being finished so stand by for more questions when it comes time to get the timing squared away.   

Stay tuned.....(no pun intended)

[mayor]

sounds like you are on the right path.  I would think all the things you mentioned you did, should help make the bike run better.   

[Steve Cole]

Creating the back pressure is what allow HD to get away with how they mount the sensors. As with all things in life you need to take a system approach to it. Since you have now done the same thing as HD did with your exhaust it looks like the system is coming around. Hope it all works out and maybe a few others can learn from what you've gone through.

[07heri]

Well I hope nobody has to go through it but I look at it as a learning experience, as frustrating as it seems at times.  I'd rather go through the hassles and know/learn enough about the bike so I don't have to rely on whether a mechanic working on it. 

Anyway, I want to start getting my head around this timing phase.  It's still mid 90's here so I'd like to get this done before it gets cold.  If changes need to be made due to temperature then now's the time for me to get it done.

1)  I have read where some people attack timing spikes by adding fuel first.  I want to keep it in closed loop, other than maybe lowering the AFR in the 30kPa to 14.0 at idle, for cooling.  During the winter months I may turn this back to closed loop.  If I increase VE's in the cells right before I see a spike won't the ECM try to compensate for the increase and, in time, bring the AFR back to 14.6?  Does the ECM read the VE table first, then read the o2 sensor and make a correction to stay in line with the AFR table?  I'm asking this because I really haven't been able to find much info on how the ECM learns, what it learns, when it learns it, or how it apllies what it learns.  Seems like a big mystery.  I couldn't even find anything on the Delphi website that explains it.

2)  Let's say I make a data run tomorrow and I see no spikes.  My plan was to jack the table 2 degrees and make another run.  What areas of the table need to be increased.  I have read numerous opinions and none seem to come to one definite conclusion of which areas to increase.  Do I increase 0 - 80 kPa at all RPM's or are there certain RPM's to attack?

3)  In reference to #2) all the cals that I COULD have started with have different timing curves so there really isn't a solid baseline to start with.  Having no baseline, and not having a clue (lack of experience) is there a good starting point for the lower RPM's?

4)  How much change should I expect to see from a Stage 1 cal to a current Stage 2 bike with these cams?  I would guess there comes a point of diminishing returns at some point.  Without a dyno I guess all we can do is go by feel?

The biggest question mark above my head right now is where to make the adjustments when I find a spike (VE tables or spark tables)?   

[mayor]

The biggest question mark above my head right now is where to make the adjustments when I find a spike (VE tables or spark tables)?

there is no preset answer...you just have to do the best job you can at interpretting the data available. 

[Steve Cole]

I myself go after timing once the vtunes are done. Once the vtune is done the mixture should be very close and it's time to work on timing. You need to remember one thing and that is that the report of knock you see is after the fact. You cannot see where it really is due to the slow data rate coming from the ECM so when looking at the recording look at the area say 10 frames in front of the knock event and up to the knock event. This will give you an idea of where it is coming from. Make you adjustments in that area then go repeat the test and see if you solved it. If you like you can fine tune by going back after its solved and adding a little back one cell at a time to really zero it in but that is really not necessary unless you want too. Once you have timing handled I also recommend you going back and running a Vtune because as you change the timing the resulting fuel mixture in the exhaust will change a small amount.

[07heri]

So make the adjustments in the spark tables...or the VE's?  If I attempt to rid myself of a spike by increasing the VE cell will the ECM try bring it back to 14.6 today, tomorrow or at some point in time?  Doesn't the ECM read the o2 sensor after it pulls what it needs from the VE tables? 

I understand that the graph will show the spike a little after it happened, and I'll have to experiment with exactly where it happened, until it stops.  What I don't understand is if it's correct to adjust the VE table at all.  Or leave the VE tables as they are and just work the timing tables.  I can see tweaking the AFR a touch in open loop but I'm running closed loop so the AFR table is out of bounds for timing issues. 

One more time with this question...where is all the reading material being hidden that really gets into how the ECM reads, learns, stores, applies, etc. the info it obtains.  I have googled and googled and don't find much more than barely skimming the surface.

[glens]

The VE tables would be the last place you want to go to remedy this.  Look first in the spark tables outside the main one.  If you can't narrow it down to any certain condition which causes the problem (if it's more general than that) then address it in the main spark table.  If you still can't rein it in, only then would you look at the VEs.

If you're using an .mt8 calibration you probably want to mess with the EGR stuff to smooth out the VE tables as best you can anyway, and that in itself may fix your problem.  When any four VE table cells are too divergent from each other the ECM will have a harder time getting you just what you need out of that area outside the center points of those cells.

[mayor]

I take a much different approach than Steve or Glen when it comes to adjusting for knock retard events.  I generally go in with no preconceived notions of what caused the trigger on a vtuned bike, since at this point there is likely no external actual AFR confirmation of the tune.  I just let the data guide me in the decisions.     Adjusting the timing first is more of a certainty, when the afr is more of a certainty.   This works for dyno guys, since they have the ability to read actual afr.

I'm not suggesting that the vtune process isn't accurate, but it can only with with-in the boundaries of the data that is collected.  If the bung location or depth is not correct, the populated VE cell during the vtune process may not be as well.  The other issue is one VE cell can be both affected by EGR tables and not affected by the EGR tables (which is what Glen referred to), depending on the load at the time.  I would also rather be on the richer side, and allow the closed loop to trim than be lean during the transition from closed to open loop. 

[Steve Cole]

As you can see people go after it in different ways. To say one way is right and the other is wrong, if we both end up at the same place, doesn't work. I like to deal with spark after I know the mixture is close to being right and that's what you should have after Vtune. But, as Mayor has pointed out nothing is perfect so you have to deal with what works best for you.

[glens]

Well, Mayor, it may be that what the ECM is happy with in terms of VE isn't really resulting in the AFR it thinks it has; I'll grant you that.  But if the ECM is content with it and you go changing the VEs without changing spark, the ECM'll put the VEs (at least effectively) right back where they were, assuming closed-loop operation in the area under consideration.

[mayor]

.....the ECM'll put the VEs (at least effectively) right back where they were, assuming closed-loop operation in the area under consideration.

it's not the closed loop areas that I'm typically worried about.  I take for granted that the closed loop will do it's job in areas of closed loop and reduce if need be.  The part that generally concerns me is when the ECM switches to open loop, the transition between could and does go lean on occasion so I would rather hedge richer than leaner in that case.  When general statements are made about reducing timing first without reveiwing all the data, I get concerned that this might lead someone to continuously reducing the timing advance due to knock retard in an attempt to cover a fuel issue. 

[07heri]

Well, Mayor, it may be that what the ECM is happy with in terms of VE isn't really resulting in the AFR it thinks it has; I'll grant you that.  But if the ECM is content with it and you go changing the VEs without changing spark, the ECM'll put the VEs (at least effectively) right back where they were, assuming closed-loop operation in the area under consideration.

This is exactly what I was getting at.  I wasn't comfortable with tweaking a VE in the closed loop portion if the ECm was going to attempt to put it right back where it was.

Anyway, I think I will go off the spark tables and see how it pans out.

We have some mid/upper 90 degree weather next week so I will make a data run in the morning when it's cool.  Leave everything as it is.  Then make another data run at the highest temperature of the afternoon.  Then compare the two.  If I got some retard at the high temps of the day I will Tweak the temp chart so I don't lose timing in the fr/rr tables at different times/temps during the  year. 

Once I don't have any high temp retards I'll bump the fr/rr tables and adjust from there.

[07heri]

Been messing around with the timing this week.  So far not too bad.  I jacked the table 2 degrees to see what would happen and I did get a few spikes.  Got most of them worked out but still in the playing around stage.

The big thing I see is spikes when I do rollons.  Today I took 2 degrees out of the area of the spike.  I think it was pulling 4.  So I took out 2 to see what would happen.  Came back and it took out 6 this time, after I pulled 2.  After looking at the numbers I think that was from heat.  The engine temp was 30 degrees higher.  But, it happens on rollons.  Normal putting around no timing pulls, just rollons.  Map goes up...timing comes out.

Could this be a result of going a little lean when I get on the throttle?   I can see the increase when the bike was hotter.  What I need to experiment with is the ping I'm getting during rollons.  Should I increase the AE table?

[Steve Cole]

You might try to increase your Accel Enrichment fuel some to give it a shot of fuel when you roll on. Only increase it in the area you need it, as it is temperature it works from so if is OK at cooler temps only do the warmer temps.

[N-gin]

Could you post your current tune for us to see?

[07heri]

You might try to increase your Accel Enrichment fuel some to give it a shot of fuel when you roll on. Only increase it in the area you need it, as it is temperature it works from so if is OK at cooler temps only do the warmer temps.

That's what I did.  I went one cell above and one cell below the trouble spot based on the engine temp from the data log.  I'll try it both in the morning when it's cooler and then again in the afternoon heat to see how it responds.

[07heri]

Steve ....off topic but....when I change the data I want to see in the graph it never stays the way I set it, even after saving it.  DataM always reverts back to whatever is to the right side of the graph and what is above in the data section.

Is there a way to change what I want in the graph without it adding what's already there.  Example:  The right side of the graph has 6 items selected.  I get rid of all but the knock retard....set up.....preferences....display....save display assignments now.  Close DataM.  Open DataM and the crap comes back.  It's as if I can't set up what I want to view without it reverting back to what's there. 

Am I doing something wrong?  Glitch?  Not designed to allow what I'm asking?  I just dont want all that crap on the graph when all I need to see if the spark retard.  I know I can get rid of it after the data run but it's a pita every time.  I just can't seem to get it hold any set up changes I make.

[07heri]

Here is the DM for this afternoon.  Some cells have as much as 50 in the timing.  Is this excessive?  If someone can read follow this data run and let me know what they see I would really appreciate it.

[attachment removed after 60 days by system]

[mayor]

can you post the calibration that was used with that data recording?

[mayor]

there was quite a few areas that timing was being pulled on that data run.....here's as far as I got tonight though:

it appears that the rapid increase in timing on the front caused this knock retard event. 

[mayor]

I think this grouping of pulled timing is timing advance related as well:

[Steve Cole]

Steve ....off topic but....when I change the data I want to see in the graph it never stays the way I set it, even after saving it.  DataM always reverts back to whatever is to the right side of the graph and what is above in the data section.

Is there a way to change what I want in the graph without it adding what's already there.  Example:  The right side of the graph has 6 items selected.  I get rid of all but the knock retard....set up.....preferences....display....save display assignments now.  Close DataM.  Open DataM and the crap comes back.  It's as if I can't set up what I want to view without it reverting back to what's there. 

Am I doing something wrong?  Glitch?  Not designed to allow what I'm asking?  I just dont want all that crap on the graph when all I need to see if the spark retard.  I know I can get rid of it after the data run but it's a pita every time.  I just can't seem to get it hold any set up changes I make.

Display setting are saved into the file at the time you recorded it, so it will appear as it did when you recorded. I will look into it and see if there is anything that we can do about allowing them to be changed after the fact.

[glens]

While you're at it...

Is there any way you could please have your programs look for a text file in the user's home directory and grab preferences from it, you know, like unix does?  It really gets to be a pain to have to go through and do everything all over again every time there's a software update.  What I'm thinking is that such a text file could remain unmolested by the installer software whereas stuff in the "registry" seems to get wiped out completely during the process.  You could leave all the registry-reading/writing stuff entirely alone, just add the text file reading/writing. [edit: Of course, with no show-stopping faults if the file is not present, and if it doesn't exist at startup, don't create one when doing any writes.  A user could opt in by creating an empty file of the appropriate name (like .ttsrc or .ttsdmrc, .ttsmtrc, etc.) prior to program startup.]  Order wouldn't be important on the writing, but it'd be nice if the text file was read after the registry, so as to have final "say".

[edit: Also, some of us also use MLV, etc., not so much to manipulate data, but for other reasons.  Could you please incorporate into the "Export" function a "dump everything" checkbox so we don't have to trudge through the process of selection when we want all that we can get? (especially after a software update!)]

Thanks.

[WVULTRA]

While you're at it...

...........  Could you please incorporate into the "Export" function a "dump everything" checkbox so we don't have to trudge through the process of selection when we want all that we can get? (especially after a software update!

Thanks.

[07heri]

Mayor how are you getting the graph to open so nice width wise?  Sure makes it easier to read.

[07heri]

there was quite a few areas that timing was being pulled on that data run.....here's as far as I got tonight though:

it appears that the rapid increase in timing on the front caused this knock retard event.

I see timing on a downward trend...yet you see a rapid increase.  Elaborate on this.

Guys, for us trying to learn it doesn't do much good to make one sentence responses.  Explaining what you mean and what you see will help a bunch more.

[07heri]

Steve ....off topic but....when I change the data I want to see in the graph it never stays the way I set it, even after saving it.  DataM always reverts back to whatever is to the right side of the graph and what is above in the data section.

Is there a way to change what I want in the graph without it adding what's already there.  Example:  The right side of the graph has 6 items selected.  I get rid of all but the knock retard....set up.....preferences....display....save display assignments now.  Close DataM.  Open DataM and the crap comes back.  It's as if I can't set up what I want to view without it reverting back to what's there. 

Am I doing something wrong?  Glitch?  Not designed to allow what I'm asking?  I just dont want all that crap on the graph when all I need to see if the spark retard.  I know I can get rid of it after the data run but it's a pita every time.  I just can't seem to get it hold any set up changes I make.

Display setting are saved into the file at the time you recorded it, so it will appear as it did when you recorded. I will look into it and see if there is anything that we can do about allowing them to be changed after the fact.

I selected "none' for everything except spark retard...made the data run....saved the file....reopened it and the crap was back on the graph.  It just doesn't want to save the changes when I delete items from the right.  Yes, I can delete the items to get a less cluttered look at the graph lines...but as soon as I close it and reopen it the extra garble needs to be taken out...over and over.

I open a new datamaster...clear the crap i dont want ....save the new assignments...and it brings the same crap back when i open DM. 

What exactly does "save display assignments now" do?  As far as I can see it does absolutely nothing. 

If that's how it is then I'll deal with it.  But it would be a nice touch to set it up and not have to screw with it every time I make a 20 minute data run to look at spark data. 

[mayor]

Mayor how are you getting the graph to open so nice width wise?  Sure makes it easier to read.

hold the right mouse button and select the area that you would like to view closer, when done hit the restore graph button on the bottom right corner of the graph to restore the graph to the entire run. 

I see timing on a downward trend...yet you see a rapid increase.  Elaborate on this.

look at the green circled area, that's why I circled it     I positioned the black vertical line at the beginning of the area that is climbing in timing (timing is the black line), and I circled the words front timing spark advance and included an arrow pointing to the area on the chart I was referring too so that you knew that that area was timing.  Notice that the knock retard (brown line as indicated by the brown circled area and brown arrow coming from the Knock Retard Front label) happened as the timing climbed (black line inside the green circle), and take notice that the MAP (blue line just below the green circle) was actually climbing at the same time too.   

Guys, for us trying to learn it doesn't do much good to make one sentence responses.  Explaining what you mean and what you see will help a bunch more.

I'm posting charts with circles and arrows, plus making as many notes as possible to give clues to what I'm seeing.... what more can I do.      (and keep in mind, I'm not necassarily right or even trying to claim I actually have a clue on what I'm talking about  )   

[Steve Cole]

Well I tried what you said and you are correct and that does not work. For whatever reason it works as long as you set anything other than <NONE>. I have the software engineer looking into why it works for every setting except none and we will get it fixed, sorry.

[mayor]

I have the software engineer looking into why it works for every setting except none and we will get it fixed, sorry.

while your at it, can you come up with an easy way to add items to be shown in the graph? 

[Steve Cole]

I don't understand what your asking for? A simple double click on the text for the graph and you can change to whatever you like.

[mayor]

ok, let me rephrase.....is there a why to add additional items.  I got the change heading part, but not how to add an additional item.  Is there a way?

[Steve Cole]

Are you asking to have more than 6 items graphed at one time?

[mayor]

yea, I was....but I think I can make do with the 6 that's there now.  I'll just switch the front/rear timing to show the timing of the knock retard affected cylinder. it's probably better that way anyhow, since the two timing lines could make that area look too busy. 

[Coyote]

Why not just list them all with a check box to enable or disable each one? Much faster than double click, select from list, etc.....

[Steve Cole]

If we were to do that and you tried to see it all on a laptop screen you would not be able to see what is going on. Right now I'm open for ideas but they have to work on notebook to PC size screens. We use a 10" screen for testing to see what things look like and it gets really busy really fast when you start putting to many things up at one time. We started with 4 items and move to 6 but I tested at 8 and it was just to busy to make out what was what on smaller screens sizes. So it's a little give and take as to what we want to have and what we feel we can have.

[Coyote]

Understood however it would be much faster to select those items to display I think. Obviously the more items, the more cluttered. But when zoomed in, the screen will take more graphs too. 

[pauly]

Thanks Steve,

There is also the possibility however that your interpretation of 'too busy' is 2 items more than someone else's? Aaaand.. if you were to allow more than the 6 items, if it did get too crowded, we could just remove a few and problem solved. I guess what I'm trying to say is that I understand the intent, but protecting us from ourselves may not always be the best option, particularly when the stakes are so low.

Pauly 

[glens]

I like the idea of checkboxes on every item in a list.  The list area can have a scrollbar, and the items can be reordered to suit, so that the favorite values to monitor can all be placed at the top of the list.  And the appropriate individual values can be right-clicked as needed to switch values from metric and back as desired.

[07heri]

Well I tried what you said and you are correct and that does not work. For whatever reason it works as long as you set anything other than <NONE>. I have the software engineer looking into why it works for every setting except none and we will get it fixed, sorry.

Steve thanks for taking a look at that. 

[07heri]

Well I'm finally flat lined on timing.  What I ended up doing, right or wrong, was wrote down the record number, map and rpm of exactly where the spike began.  Then reversed the scan to go back 5 record numbers and compared the data from the actual charted ping and 5 frames before.  Sometimes I was in the same MAP and rpm cell, sometimes 5 frames before put me in a different cell.  If the charted cell and the 5 frames before cell were in the same timing table cell  I just changed that one cell.  If the 5 frames before the ping location was different than the actual charted location I changed both timing table cells.  Some spikes would be at 50.1 (example) map so I changed 40 and 50 map cells.  A bunch of playing around but finally flat lined...

1)  Now, should I start increasing all the other cells, leaving the changed cells where they are, and bring those areas to spike and then flat line them? 

2)  Is there a rule of thumb for the lower rpm, say 750 to 1500, where these things like to run best.  The reason I'm asking is I have a slight surge at just off idle.  Also noticed that of the different cals I could have started with there are different timing numbers so obviously some like more or less timing.  So, more timing down low?  Less down low?  Or get them all to ping and flat line?

3)  How critical is timing at idle?  Can I fart around with timing at idle to get the smoothest idle?  As far as cooling goes, does more or less timing at idle help with cooling?

Thanks for the help guys.  It's a slow process due to the learning curve but well worth it so far.  After I get the timing curve finished I plan to make 3 or 4 more VTune runs and I should be good to go. 

[Steve Cole]

If you decide to start adding timing just take your time and work on a small area so you can go ride, just that area to make sure you've got it right. One thing about pinging is that it takes almost twice as much timing to be pulled to stop it once it starts. So many times you can see a ping with 4 degrees remove and once you find the right spot you remove 0.5 degrees and the ping is gone. I tend to add about 2 degrees and then go check the results as that is well with in the system limits to pull back if needed. Surging at low speeds with the mixture right is usually an indication of too much timing. Just because it doesn't ping doesn't mean you cannot put too much in. Typically you will get ping from too much timing above 60 kPa but below that you can over advance the timing and not see pinging.

[mayor]

Surging at low speeds with the mixture right is usually an indication of too much timing.

Keep in mind that Steve added an if in that statement.  The "if" is "with the mixture right".  The ECM uses surrounding ve cells to determine what the fuel part of the mixture should be,  so make sure you did the best job you could to populate those ve cells so that the ecm makes the best mixture decision. 

as far as idle timing.  I've tried anywhere from mid-teens to mid 20's and have not seen much difference in how happy that makes the engine smoothness.  I feel that mid 20's makes the bike idle slightly cooler than running timing in the teens, but ymmv.  Just don't go below mid teens, or the pipes will likely turn quite blue.   

[07heri]

These are the tables as of current.  Do you guys see anything weird that jumps out at you?  Any changes I should/could make by just looking at the tables?

[attachment removed after 60 days by system]

[Steve Cole]

You have a few cells with more timing than I find necessary. On twin cam engines I have never found they need more than 45 degrees anywhere. I would take a first cut at reducing those cells above 45 to 45 and then see how it rides.

[07heri]

You have a few cells with more timing than I find necessary. On twin cam engines I have never found they need more than 45 degrees anywhere. I would take a first cut at reducing those cells above 45 to 45 and then see how it rides.

I will lower them to 45.

There are cals in the TTS listing that have more than 45 degrees.  Those were the timing numbers right out of the TTS cal listing.   

[mayor]

those were probably developed before Steve had a chance to form that opinion from real world findings.  I would guess it's really a difference between analytical findings compared to actual findings (lab vs. real world). 

[Steve Cole]

There are a few that I did not go back and redo but just as you we all learn the more we do. As the fuel has changed so must the way that we tune for it all.

[mayor]

  great reply

[07heri]

It's definitely a learning process.  Hopefully these threads that go from start to finish will help the next rider that's just starting with TTS.  I don't mind asking the dumb questions or bringing up things I see.  If it helps me I'm sure it will help someone else down the line, so everyone wins.   

I just figured out a function that I haven't used that is pretty neat.  I'm a numbers guy moreso than looking at graphs.  In DM if you use the export data function it shows the entire datarun in a spreadsheet type format.  Once the retard is shown it's easy to just look backwards and see what changes, map, rpm, temp, etc might have caused the ping.       

[N-gin]

Could you please post the tune file so I can see the finishing VE tables after the exhaust mod you did?
I have followed this thread and have learned a lot of useful information.   

[07heri]

Could you please post the tune file so I can see the finishing VE tables after the exhaust mod you did?
I have followed this thread and have learned a lot of useful information.   

NGin my VE tables still need work.  I plan to make a few more runs this week now that the weather has gotten bearable.  Right now I've just been tinkering with the timing.

The exhaust mod probably did more to compensate for the way the O2 sensors are mounted than anything else.  My exhaust was pretty open so all I did was introduce a little more restriction in the mufflers by creating a tab (on the baffle) to bend down into the exhaust flow.

[N-gin]

 

[pauly]

So - How's it going?
Any improvement in the way the bike is running?

Pauly

[07heri]

The bike seems to be running fine.  No decel pops, sputters, etc.  Mileage mixed between city and highway is around 42/43.  Starts fine, never any kickback.  It's not pulling any timing out anywhere.  Overall it runs pretty smooth.  I didn't make any VTune runs after the timing changes so I'm sure there's still more to do to make it better, but for now I'm pretty happy with the way it runs.  I'll screw around with it some more after I get a monitor to view while tuning.  I kinda got tired of making tuning runs and not being able to see exactly which cells were being hit and having to go back out again and again.  I love the program and the flexability it gives but having the external monitor will be a big a plus to cutting down the time and frustration of not seeing what's happening.