Tunning for Spark advance

[N-gin]

OK this is my first V-tune dealing with spark advance. Did I do this right? Acording to the graph I have no spark retard going on.
The first file attached is the Vtune file. The second is My running file.
In the instructions it says to Put the Knock retard to zero so it doesnt interfer with the V-tune but that doesnt make sense. If you were to set the Knock retard to zero how would it show on the graph

[attachment removed after 60 days by system]

[glens]

What instructions say to put the knock retard to zero?  Why would you want to do that?  Do you want to collect vtune data which doesn't disregard abnormal combustion?

[N-gin]

 

What instructions say to put the knock retard to zero?  Why would you want to do that? 

TTS guide, and thats what I was aking why would I do that Are you trying to tell me to add the spark retard and retune

[glens]

Okay, that's not for v-tuning but for doing what you're doing (which will necessitate at least another v-tune session if you make much spark change).  The Adaptive Knock Retard table is the amount of retard that can be learned, not the amount that can be pulled.  At least that's what I'm able to ferret out of all the documentation.  So while v-tuning (setting the VE tables) I guess it'd be okay to zero out that table, but I wouldn't disable the knock control in the constants.

[N-gin]

Attached is the new Tune for the spark. Im going to download this tune before I go out and gather info on spark retard.
Should my PE be set at 10000 so It doesnt interfear with my readings?

[attachment removed after 60 days by system]

[Jeffd]

I think if you are just checking to see if you get timing pulled you need to have it set just like you  would normally run it ie every thing set back to original.

[mayor]

I agree with Jeff.  When I'm checking for spark knocks, I leave the adaptive knock retard table set in active mode (non-zeroed).  I shared my thoughts on this on reply #97 of this thread: http://harleytechtalk.com/htt/index.php/topic,41897.50.html

Should my PE be set at 10000 so It doesnt interfear with my readings?

that's up to you.  I see you already have your PE afr matching the wide open for the first 6 sec., so it shouldn't affect your afr during most timing data recordings. 

I'm curious on what was happening in the zero % throttle range on your cal:

I just can't think that having the ve's that high at 0% is necassary.   

[wolf_59]

Mayor, I've seen that before on my bike, I took the 20 MAP column out of closed loop and I quit having that happen

[N-gin]

That happened when I set my Decell enleanment to 00.00 . Now if I set my decell to normal setting while v-tuning then the ve table will calm that area.

The first attachment is the first spark run. It showed knock Up high. Now My immediate response was to take out timing and it worked(see second attachment),BUT what didnt make sence was why I was getting spark knock in the upper RPMs like 4500-5500. So That leads me to think that my AF needs to be adjusted. To verify this I did a high RPM run and pulled the plugs. Looked like it was lean so I will be adding fuel.

Any thoughts???

[attachment removed after 60 days by system]

[glens]

That happened when I set my Decell enleanment to 00.00 . Now if I set my decell to normal setting while v-tuning then the ve table will calm that area.

And don't you think that (effectively) disabling DE during v-tuning will cause similar effect in "normal" operational areas as well?  At least some of your (now) "good" hits like that will certainly be factored in.  That's precisely why I advocate leaving AE and DE enabled and operational while v-tuning.

As to the rest of that post, I think you're following the correct path.  Though you shouldn't ever find much "color" on the plugs these days.

[Doc 1]

That happened when I set my Decell enleanment to 00.00 . Now if I set my decell to normal setting while v-tuning then the ve table will calm that area.

And don't you think that (effectively) disabling DE during v-tuning will cause similar effect in "normal" operational areas as well?  At least some of your (now) "good" hits like that will certainly be factored in.  That's precisely why I advocate leaving AE and DE enabled and operational while v-tuning.

As to the rest of that post, I think you're following the correct path.  Though you shouldn't ever find much "color" on the plugs these days.

Not so sure you would be negitive about turning off the accel and decel if you know what the benifits are......there IS NO down side to it.
Doc

[glens]

Did you happen to see post #6 and the two posts following it?  That's no downside?

[mayor]

Did you happen to see post #6 and the two posts following it?  That's no downside?

can you explain why turning off decel enleanment would cause the ve's to be greater than needed at 0% tps?  I would think that if there was a negative affect to having this function turned off, the results would show that less pulsewidth would be needed (lower ve's) and not more since the residual fuel would show up in the o2 readings. 

[glens]

If nothing else, the ECM goes out of closed-loop while DE is active, right?  So no "fake" corrective measures would ever get taken and/or no v-tune VE cells get non-pertinent data factored into the results?

[Doc 1]

If nothing else, the ECM goes out of closed-loop while DE is active, right?  So no "fake" corrective measures would ever get taken and/or no v-tune VE cells get non-pertinent data factored into the results?

Glens if you really knew as much as you think you know about this TTS you would know that the Accel and the Decel tables are ADDER TABLES and they work off the VE Table values....they only work as the throttle is being throttled up or throttle down so tell me how this effects the V-Tune when it only records data when the Accel and Decel is not adding or subtracting fuel..........I'll make it easy on you IT DOESN'T.  You highly advocate leaving them activated and I highly avocate to turn them OFF when tuning on the road.
After the VE tables are set you activate the Accel and Decel and they will work fine. Oh and by the way your advice on not turning off the knock control is bunk also......the last thing you want is the timing to retard as your tuning. The only reason we say leave it on while these guys V-Tune is because they don't have a trained ear for hearing detonation and damage can result from this. When the Knock Control removes timing from the ECM it usually removes MUCH more than what is trully needed and removing 6 to 8 degrees (just as an example)  will allow a lot more unburnt fuel to enter the exhaust which will give false data to the 02 sensor and that inturn will screw with the VE tables as you are V-Tuning.
Before you correct someone again that does this every day, you better get all your ducks in a row my friend.
Doc

[glens]

That seems rather an emotional response, certainly much more (and completely different in other respects) than I could have anticipated.

First of all, I'd sure like to know what you understood me to have said as being even an attempt to correct you about anything.  Absolutely "nothing" is what I recall, and a review of the thread confirms that to me.  I did ask you a simple question, however, which you have neglected to address.  It wasn't a mean-spirited question by any means.  Perhaps after you've cooled down you'll care to look at it again?

The review of the transient fuel mechanisms wasn't really necessary, but it sure can't hurt to have that information covered in a thread such as this.  Thank you. 

You somehow got my advocating something characterized as highly advocating it and I neither intended it that way nor believe I said it in such a way as to even express that notion.

Now, I'd like to (attempt to) state some of my thoughts on the whole matter.  If you care to discuss them, please try to keep a cool head, okay?

When transient running conditions are encountered, the "normal" calculations being performed by the ECM in and of themselves are not really so pertinent to the task of populating a VE table.  Agreed?  I mean, if it were necessary to either add or remove fuel for a moment to prevent stumbling or belching, you'd not want those conditions to be present in the data used to figure VE values, would you?  I know I wouldn't.  When riding on a public roadway it's fairly hard to avoid those situations in my experience.

There are at least two ways to handle it.  One would be to leave the ECM's transient-modifying activities up and running in the hopes it would keep the engine running smoother during them.  Granted, the settings in use at the time may not be ideal.  But at least with them up and running, the data collection will be suspended so that in any event there won't be any taint acquired.  This is the notion I entertain.  Another way would be to disable the transient modifying behaviour and include the data obtained during those moments.  Now it might not amount to much in the big picture, but it might just add the one hit which gives a green light to a cell that might otherwise have never gotten that many hits.  Again, it might not amount to much.  But on the other hand, what if that cell rarely gets hit except for an accumulation of a number of such moments?  I'm contemplating doing the v-tune run "blind", with no monitor, so I'd have no way of knowing this was occurring.

That's pretty much where I'm coming from, in a nutshell, regarding the AE and DE while v-tuning on the road.

As to the knock retard, I feel the same (or at least similar) arguments are also applicable.  If there's a moment of a couple of degrees being pulled from the spark timing, and I never heard it happening in the first place, I guess I'd rather just throw away several seconds of data collection as it decays as opposed to disabling the protection and including the data while it was inaudibly knocking.

None of this is meant in any way as a form of trying to correct you, and I hope you take it in the spirit in which it was intended.  If you want to discuss any of it, I'm here.  If not, fine.  But I certainly don't want or expect to get a tongue-lashing over it.  Okay?

Thanks for your time.

[N-gin]

If you were to tune with the enleanment and enrichment on wouldn't that cancel the effects it would have on non tuning conditions? Regular riding.
So in other words you would have to further increase the scale to prevent popping on Deaccel and stumbling on added throttle.
I really think this os a preferences thing. Who is to say that the soft ware ignores this during tunning. All I know is I have absolutely no popping and throttle response is great.
Im just trying to get my spark tables in order.
Now with that in mind I started from scratch with the table front and rear cylinder match. I also added some fuel in the top end. I will post the tune sometime today.

[N-gin]

Here is the tune I have programed right now.
Couple of notes. I think I should not go over 45 degrees of timing so I may lower the higher numbers. Yes I did add timing to the area I was getting knock, but I also added fuel to see the effects. Maybe learn something about that. So far the front tire has been getting very light to the point it lifts the front tire after I shift second, but doesnt stay up , just kind of bunny hopps . I want the tire to come up but something tells me Im not going to do that with stock heads.

[attachment removed after 60 days by system]

[HogMike]

I've had a couple of bikes professionally tuned on dyno and V-Tune   (you guys know who you are!) and always wondered about why my spark tables were set where they were. I have noticed on BOTH bikes drive-ability was not what I liked. There were some pinging issues going on under some conditions and some throttle sensitivity issues also. Fortunately, I had my TTS with me on the long trips and can tune that out on the road easily.
The last bike I had V-tuned on the dyno was done by someone who really knows how to do this, and has done dozens of bikes. There was still some tables (such as the throttle blade control) that HE likes, but, I do not. Easily changed, and, for me the outcome is one awesome running bike!
Not to jack the post, but, in MY eyes, having the flexibility of the TTS will allow me to tune to MY riding style, not the dyno's (or operators) riding style. You can get close, but, REAL WORLD riding will show you where YOU need to have YOUR tune on YOUR bike, not anyone else's in any other place in the world.
Is my present tune at 100%? I;m sure Doc (and others) will say no, but, I sure like the way it runs! I had some club members with local tuned bikes swap with me, and, yeah, we screwed with the "professional" tunes a little, but, bottom line: they are happy campers now, and have no desire to "see" where their VE's are now.
Road manners, gas mileage, running with the pack, pinging issues, starting issues, all are dialed in where THEY like it! Real world.
Disclaimer: JMHO, and NO disrespect to Doc and others. I really respect what the tuners do, and have watched them many a time!

[HogMike]

Here is the tune I have programed right now.
Couple of notes. I think I should not go over 45 degrees of timing so I may lower the higher numbers. Yes I did add timing to the area I was getting knock, but I also added fuel to see the effects. Maybe learn something about that. So far the front tire has been getting very light to the point it lifts the front tire after I shift second, but doesnt stay up , just kind of bunny hopps . I want the tire to come up but something tells me Im not going to do that with stock heads.

Ahhhhh............NOW I see what your goals are! LOL 

If I could suggest, get another bike! About 113 or larger, THEN your front wheel will come up more easily!
JUST KIDDING.
I have noticed that riding styles are quite different from East coast to West.

[mayor]

N-grin,
I think you are trying to run way too much timing advance in the higher load areas. Even if the ion knock sensing is ok with the advance you are running, the engine is probably well past max best tq with those values at 90-100 kPa. 

I have doubts that your knock retard would find those advance levels agreeable, so my guess is you haven't fully tested those.  Go back and read reply# 32 of this thread for instructions on testing the wide open throttle timing: http://harleytechtalk.com/htt/index.php/topic,43433.0.html 

the other thing you need to keep in mind is just because it isn't pinging, doesn't mean you are making the most power.  The dyno guys can easily see where max best tq is, diy road tuners can not so it's best to err on the side of caution. 

p.s. I think you should read reply 37 again too.   

[N-gin]

Hogmike: I would love to do a 113 Believe me!! But I just cant get over the fact that my cylinders actually have something to do with the alighnment. Meaning If I go bigger on the cylinders doesnt it make them more weak and more prone to flex during hard riding not to mension the stresses on the engine. Maybe Im just worrying too much. When I finally destroy my stock connecting rods due to engine stress and have to go with H-beam rods maybe then the 113. Almost sounds like I want the engine to go bad just to have an excuse to go bigger and better

[N-gin]

Mayor thank for replying. I was wondering about getting the most torque from best timing. I will be sure to read what you have sugested. I have not run the bike yet due to weather conditions.

[N-gin]

Mayor I noticed you remembered the last post from me tunning.
I was having issues with my O2s then. I had contamination. I have cleaned the O2 sensors and ran the engine pretty good. IT cleaned up my readings. I have since then been messing with tuning. I did extend my tables, I just dont know why it didnt show up. Maybe I just need to do more V-tunes. Finding a place to do a fith gear pull is hard to do with the law. I have a friend who really good friends with a Harley dealer owner. The Harley Dealer also Believes in keeping there customers happy, unlike some others I have delt with. Ill see if he will allow me to hook my computer up next time on the dyno. Again thank you.

[mayor]

the VE values in the 90-100 kPa columns of the ve table has very little to do with wether the o2 sensors were working right at the time when compared to sampled afr. The 90 and 100 kPa columns are open loop columns, so the o2 sensor readings do not necessarily factor into the injector pulsewidths.  The ve values in those columns are what the ECM uses to determine the needed injector pulsewidths.  Based on your sampled results (wide open throttle afr), the ve values listed on reply #37 of your previous thread are closer to what you need than what you have now.

Keep in mind, more fuel does not always mean more power.  There does come a point of deminshed returns, and even reduced results.  Same goes for timing. 

[N-gin]

Mayor the tune you had me correct before was at 13.2, on the AFR table. The new Tune I did was set at 13.0. This would comensate for the higher or additional fuel. Right

Take a look at this tune, should I download this one for Now?

[attachment removed after 60 days by system]

[mayor]

Mayor the tune you had me correct before was at 13.2, on the AFR table. The new Tune I did was set at 13.0. This would comensate for the higher or additional fuel. Right  

no, if you want it richer that's what setting the afr from 13.2 to 13 does.  If your ve's are correct for 13.2, then the sampled results should be close to 13 when the afr table is set to 13 (at least that is the way it is supposed to work    ).   

[mayor]

Take a look at this tune, should I download this one for Now?

I think that there are parts of your timing tables that are a wee bit optimistic:


I marked where I thought the advance might be too much.  I would have a very hard time believing that your bike can handle that much advance.  I'm not sure your bike will take that much at 2,500 and 2,750 either.  My guess would be you are in the neighborhood of about 5-8 degrees or so of too much advance in the boxed in area. 

[N-gin]

Ran the bike tonight.

[attachment removed after 60 days by system]

[Steve Cole]

I would drop your max timing down to 45* anywhere in the tables. With the fuel you can buy today we have found that to be a good upper limit. Several years ago I would have said 48* but times are a changing. Also one needs to remember that once you make timing changes it's wise to rerun Vtune as it can and will change the rate the fuel burns in the cylinder and give you different results.

[N-gin]

Thanks steve I did on this next tune.
Mayor you were right on the money about his spark tables You know your stuff.
I raised some other ares in the lower rpm high map areas. lowered the over 45 degree areas and made some changes were Mayor pointed out.

[attachment removed after 60 days by system]

[mayor]

N-gin,

I think you are still trying to run too much advance in the 90-100 Kpa columns from 3k and up. I think you should be doing data recordings to test your timing.  I really can't imagine that your bike will take that much timing. 

you should run a regular data recording to see if your knock retard function is pulling any timing.  Here's how you record regular data: click on file, then select record data.



when you click on that, the program will then have you select a location that the recording will be saved at on your hard drive, and data recording control center will pop-up.  In the data recording center, select generic data:

The generic data records at a little less speed (frames/sec) than the generic o2 data, but it also records speed which is helpful in getting a better picture of what is happening during the data run.  When you are riding during the data recording, you want to vary the load and rpm's as much as you can.


before you do your data recording, I think you should reduce your timing to the following values:

3k @ 90-100 kPa:  24 degree's
3.5k @ 90-100 kPa: 25 degree's
4k @ 90-100 kPa: 26 degree's
4.5k @ 90-100 kPa: 27 degree's
5k @90-100 kPa: 28 degree's. 

I personally think those values are too high as well, and if it were me I would start at a degree less than those and let the knock retard events dictate what the ion sensing will allow.  Just remember though, running the most advance you can while keeping the ion sensing happy does not guarantee maximum power. You can easily over advance and end up with less power. 

Here's what you need to do to check timing, find a closed course where you can run the bike at high speeds in 5th gear and do a data recording of the bike at wide open throttle from say 2,500 rpm until you run out of steam (or road or gumshin).

[N-gin]

OK. Now maybe get some decent weather so I can get more info.
Here is the tune I will install inthe bike.

[attachment removed after 60 days by system]

[glens]

Your PE mode is still set to 10k RPM.

It's just a tad odd to have timing tables be exactly the same both cylinders, right?  For reference, have a peek at any number of the base calibrations and see if they're like that.

Kind of along the same lines, the front and rear VE tables seem more similar to each other than what I've ever ended up with.

Your 0 TPS column is still obviously weird.  I'd massage that smoother.  I'm supposing it's because you have AE disabled for the v-tune, that you regularly go closed throttle from a higher RPM and open the throttle back up at ~3k, the engine goes lean as you do, closed-loop "corrects" it, and you end up with what you've got as a result because the data is included for the v-tune.  Probably such hits are the predominant ones there.

No, leaving AE and DE enabled for v-tuning won't change a thing regarding the settings required for them to operate normally when you're done.  They'll just function "normally" while you're v-tuning and the software will disregard any data during those moments so you don't get stuff like what's in your 0 TPS column.  I wouldn't be surprised if "regular usage" parts of the VE tables are also similarly influenced if you jack the throttle around much they way you set it to v-tune.  More central areas likely won't be influenced as greatly as the 0 TPS if they have a higher percentages of "good" hits, but there probably is negative influence nonetheless.

[mayor]

It's just a tad odd to have timing tables be exactly the same both cylinders, right?  For reference, have a peek at any number of the base calibrations and see if they're like that.

not odd at all. There's hundred's of thousands of bikes that run exactly the same timing on both cylinders.  Besides, unless I'm mistaken N-gin hasn't done any data recordings, so what we he be using to make any timing decisions off of?  coin toss?    

Your PE mode is still set to 10k RPM.

I personally leave that set there until doing after data recordings.  I have seen the PE mode turn active with very little provocation, so I would rather be able to see if there are closed loop/open loop transitional knock retard events happening at normal cruise afr before I introduce power enrichment afr's. 

N-gin,

I think you should change your afr's in the 90 kPa column.  Running 14:1 at 90 kPa will likely make some heat, plus that factors in to your heavier throttle too (between 90 and 100 kPa afr's).  I wouldn't go any leaner than 13.5 there.    I also think you are trying to run too much timing in the 15-30 kPa columns from 1,500-2,750 rpm's.  I think before you go too much further.....you better do some data recordings to check your timing.....

[N-gin]

Ill do that. Just waiting for better weather. It started to snow flurry over here.

[mayor]

yea, flurried here today too.   

[glens]

It's just a tad odd to have timing tables be exactly the same both cylinders, right?  For reference, have a peek at any number of the base calibrations and see if they're like that.

not odd at all. There's hundred's of thousands of bikes that run exactly the same timing on both cylinders.  Besides, unless I'm mistaken N-gin hasn't done any data recordings, so what we he be using to make any timing decisions off of?  coin toss?    

I've only looked through a relative few of the TTS base calibrations (the only items I'm considering here) but have yet to see one with identical spark timing tables front/rear.  Take, for example, the base calibration in use (at least lately?) in this thread.  Similar, yes.  Identical?  Nope.  Must've been some tossing? 

[whittlebeast]

Have you guys looked at his data?  All the knock retard is happening at WOT / 100 KPA at just one small RPM range. Detonation only happened on the long WOT pull about 8 sec into the pull.   The quick pull in a low gear did not have the issue.  Was the motor fully warmed up?  Why is this motor OK with that much timing?  How cold was the outside temp in this run?

Post an hour or so long Generic 02 data log and we would have lots more data to work with.

Beast

[mayor]

Have you guys looked at his data?

I didn't see any data recordings posted?    what post are you seeing data recordings on?

[whittlebeast]

post 28

[mayor]

  man...how did I miss that, probably cause it said vtune.   

he was running 32 degree's of advance by 3814 rpm, no wonder it pulled.  He only made it about 3 seconds with that much timing before the knock retard pulled it though. 

[whittlebeast]

Mayer

Have you played with the MyTune software to see how they deal with this sort of data log?  What about with the PowerVision stuff?  That would be an interesting bike to test on.

Any more, I almost never ride without the data loggers running just for the fun of learning.  You would not believe the things I have found on the rice bike in the last month.  I can't seem to find any of this stuff has ever been noticed or posted by the tuners in the rice forums.

Beast

[N-gin]

Have you guys looked at his data?  All the knock retard is happening at WOT / 100 KPA at just one small RPM range. Detonation only happened on the long WOT pull about 8 sec into the pull.   The quick pull in a low gear did not have the issue.  Was the motor fully warmed up?  Why is this motor OK with that much timing?  How cold was the outside temp in this run?

Post an hour or so long Generic 02 data log and we would have lots more data to work with.

Beast

Engine was fully warmed. I let it idle for 5 minutes in the garage before leaving for the tune, it was hot to say the least.
That engine knock was when I was entering the highway. I was also going uphill. Outside temp was about 47 degrees. I beleieve that was fourth gear too. If this helps my squish is set up at .030-.035

[N-gin]

This is the tune I have in now. Should I make changes? Before the generic run??

[attachment removed after 60 days by system]

[N-gin]

When I go to record data, am I recording under V-tune data or just data?

[whittlebeast]

It is not the v-tune data.  I think it is called "generic 02 data" or something like that.

Beast

[mayor]

mayor

Have you played with the MyTune software to see how they deal with this sort of data log?  What about with the PowerVision stuff?  That would be an interesting bike to test on.

I haven't tried MyTune yet.  I'm debating on it though. 

The PowerVision stuff is just way out of my price range. 

When I go to record data, am I recording under V-tune data or just data?

see reply #31.  One other note, don't label the data recordings as vtune recordings.  The vtune data is specific to populating the ve's. 

[glens]

When I go to record data, am I recording under V-tune data or just data?

For what you're doing, if it were me, I'd first opt for "Record Data..." (recording.png, attached below), then "Spark Data" (selection.png, attached below).

The documentation is very sparse in this area, but being as it's named "Spark Data" I'd assume it only collects data pertinent to that task.  The less data you're requesting from the ECM the faster it's able to gather it.  Well, that's not as true as saying that if you ask for everything possible it'll come out slower.  There's a limit to the speed with which you can gather stuff.  It's usually best to ask for only what you're working with at the time if you want the greatest chance of seeing the most data regarding it.

[edit: put red circles in images and add reminder that when logging data we're only seeing a small sampling of what's going on, so if you limit the data to only what you need, you'll miss less of what it is you're looking for]

[attachment removed after 60 days by system]

[mayor]

I prefer the generic data myself, since the spark data does not record VE's, AE's, MPH's, and desired AFR's.  I think that viewing the spark data without being able to correlate the afr data can easily lead to trimming timing to compensate for afr conditions.   If the afr values are known (meaning sampled in the open loop areas), then spark data makes sense....but if the AFR's in the open loop areas are unknown (meaning extrapolated vtune ve's), then I think viewing the timing alone can dangerous to the engines health.     

[whittlebeast]

Mayer

If lots of this data off the ECU is total garbage, how do you determine when it is valid and what is total garbage?

Beast

[N-gin]

So, do i Change my AFR table to 13.5 in the 90 Kpa area and change my timing lower?

[whittlebeast]

So, do i Change my AFR table to 13.5 in the 90 Kpa area and change my timing lower?

That question is impossible to answer until you do a data log and see what the bike is doing.  The issue could be the bike is going dead lean up there.  It could be a engine temp issue.  You simply have to look at the data and see what is happening.

Beast

[Steve Cole]

Set the WOT AFR to 13.0 This is to the rich side of things but I would rather be rich in these conditions when starting a tune. Also the fact the engine has the proper squish set up will allow you to run more timing. You need to work one area at a time and not jump all over with timing and fuel when learning. So I would do a quick Spark data only recording (15 minute) to gather enough information to see if you have a pinging issue. If you do then let's make a few quick corrections based on the recording. It would be a waste of time and effort to go out and do hour long recordings. What your looking for is to rough in a safe starting point to then do the fine tune work. Since you already have a few V-tunes under your belt and that's getting closer I would do the spark now just to make sure its safe. Later after we know the spark is safe you will finish the Vtunes.

Start from the tune you have in the bike right now except change the 90 - 100 to 13.0 and record the Spark Data. Then post the recording and the calibration that was in the bike at the time of the recording.

[N-gin]

OK what I did was I studied a lil bit of the tune I had on the dyno day. They measured the AF ratio from the pipe. I have a two into one Thunder Header. See first attachment. From that I Saw that The 100 KPA AFR was rich lower RPMs. So I leaned it out just a tad. I also noticed with some help from another tread from Mayor he pointed out that I was way lean after 3400 RPM and he gave me info how to correct it. So I did. The second attachment is the dyno. The third is the new tune Im going to run for the Generic data and or 02 Data. I made some changes Due to the fact Iv been noteing What the bike does at certain RPM and variing loads. What the plugs are reading, and What you guys have recamended. Is this the best way, No, But it is also not a final tune. Im just basically smoothing some things out so I get good info.
Am I missing something? should I make corrections?

[attachment removed after 60 days by system]

[N-gin]

Here is the third.
Im heading out to lunch and will be back. I will also have time to hook the bike up So let me know.

[attachment removed after 60 days by system]

[N-gin]

WOW that was a chilly ride.
Attached are the data files.
1-4 I kept loosing signal from the data port. Frickin USB port 


[attachment removed after 60 days by system]

[N-gin]

Other two files are too large  :doh:how do I post them!

[N-gin]

This is run 6 the other file is too big to post.

[attachment removed after 60 days by system]

[mayor]

Other two files are too large  :doh:how do I post them!

you can open up a BOX.net account to host them there (and post the link), or see if Glen's zip program reduces it enough in size to post. 

[whittlebeast]

Mayor

If you save the file off somewhere and then change the name back to *.dm3, they come up fine.

N-Gin

Your VEs vs VE News are all over the place implying your bike still needs tuning.

Beast

[Coyote]

Other two files are too large  :doh:how do I post them!

you can open up a BOX.net account to host them there (and post the link), or see if Glen's zip program reduces it enough in size to post.

Or create a folder under Media and upload it there. 

[mayor]

yea, I always forget about that. 

[N-gin]

Lets see if i did it right.....
http://harleytechtalk.com/htt/MGalleryItem.php?id=814

[Tsani]

 
This what I see:

ïÿï8RR$=i:3ôã@Ã"uº1ñ{‹Pˆ39§L+’mrPO¬<¤¤”“”Å'$ôÿï9RR$Æ'>i:3ôã@vº1ò{‹Qˆ39¦T+’wtPN«g줤”““Ž#ÿÿï9RR$Æ'?i:3ôã@_wº1 {‹Mˆ39¦¿*’wvML©ó¥¥’Å'$ ÿï9RS#Æ'@i:3ôã@"xº1 {‹M ˆ39§~*’twML§;»¥¥’Š# ÿï9SS#Æ'Ai:3ôã@æxº1 {‹L ˆ39§O*’vwLL¦íÚ¦¦’‰# ÿï9RR#B2_7:3ôã@Â¥yº1 {‹L ˆ39§«*’tuLL¦Ú¦¦’“‰# ÿï9SS#Æ'C2_7:3ôã@gzº1 {‹M ˆ39§M*’vwML§J¤¥¥’’ˆ# ÿï:SS#Æ'D2_7:3ôã@${º1 {‹K ˆ39§Å'*’xuKL¦êÃ'§§’’ˆ# !ÿï:SS#E2_7:3ôã@è{º1 {‹L ˆ39§y*’lsMK¦Sµ¦¦“•‡# (ÿï:SS#Æ'F2_7:3ôã@¯|º1 ){‹J ˆ39§Æ'*’wwJK¢)›§§“”ˆ# 1ÿï:TT#Æ'Gú¤O:3ôã@t}º1 4{‹H ˆ39§K*’xwHK¡ÉŠ©©Å'Æ'# 3ÿï:TT#Æ'Hú¤O:3ôã@.~º1 5{‹H ˆ39§s)’wuHHŸ÷j©©Å'Æ'# :ÿï:TT#Æ'Iú¤O:3ôã@ê~º1 D{‹G ˆ39§s)’wsGHžÃ¥n©©Å'Ž…# :ÿï;TT"Æ'Jú¤O:3ôã@±º1 F{‹F ˆ39§|)’wuEH£ªªÅ'Ž…# Aÿï;UU"Æ'
Kú¤O:3ôã@âºLú¤O:3ôã@Å"â,¬Âº1 L{‹E ˆ39§›(’wwDFâ,,¢²C««

[N-gin]

 
I guess it didnt work.
let me try something else

[N-gin]

Maybe this?
http://harleytechtalk.com/htt/index.php?action=media;sa=item;in=814

[mayor]

it worked that time.   

[glens]

If lots of this data off the ECU is total garbage, how do you determine when it is valid and what is total garbage?

"Lots of" the data is only total garbage when it's collected and served up in an improper manner.  If your data gathering device is representing that it's collecting data multiple times faster than is possible; is replicating data to fill in the gaps; is not collating it properly.  Stuff like that.

[glens]

If you were to tune with the enleanment and enrichment on wouldn't that cancel the effects it would have on non tuning conditions? Regular riding.
So in other words you would have to further increase the scale to prevent popping on Deaccel and stumbling on added throttle.

Something crossed my mind about this today.  In your example, you've got AE disabled while v-tuning.  Around 3k RPM in the 0 TPS column you've got an abnormal bulge in the VE tables (and who knows what effect anywhere else?) evidently as a result.  In effect, it seems, what you've done (in at least that one area) is to wind up with corrective measures to the baseline which tend to mimic the effects of what the AE would do there were it enabled.  When you later re-enable it, I believe the effect will become too much at least in the one obvious spot in question.  So in this case the concern you expressed above will have appeared in the end when it wouldn't have while taking the alternate route.

I really think this os a preferences thing. Who is to say that the soft ware ignores this during tunning.

When you have the transient fuel enabled while over-the-road v-tune logging, the software will indeed ignore those measures while they serve to provide for smooth(er) short-term, quick(er) transitions.  That's what it's designed to do so those momentary conditions can be dealt with nicely while riding to data-log yet not adversely affect the final result.  This as opposed to what evidently can happen when one attempts to circumvent the overall scheme trying for a few extra hits on the road, especially doing so while operating "blindly".

When you've got the bike on a dyno for generating the v-tune data logs, you can disable the transient fueling and save several seconds per transition, immediately getting to your next target location and drowning out with excellent data any blips you'll pick up from the uncorrected transients.  In my experience on the road, it's a different matter altogether.

Steve's been doing this for a while.  If he's willing to lend a hand, I'd recommend you follow his instructions as best you can.  He's recently asked you do take a "Spark data" log of about 15 minutes duration, with certain AFR values to use while doing it.  It'd be worth your time to try it.

[Doc 1]

If you were to tune with the enleanment and enrichment on wouldn't that cancel the effects it would have on non tuning conditions? Regular riding.
So in other words you would have to further increase the scale to prevent popping on Deaccel and stumbling on added throttle.

Something crossed my mind about this today.  In your example, you've got AE disabled while v-tuning.  Around 3k RPM in the 0 TPS column you've got an abnormal bulge in the VE tables (and who knows what effect anywhere else?) evidently as a result.  In effect, it seems, what you've done (in at least that one area) is to wind up with corrective measures to the baseline which tend to mimic the effects of what the AE would do there were it enabled.  When you later re-enable it, I believe the effect will become too much at least in the one obvious spot in question.  So in this case the concern you expressed above will have appeared in the end when it wouldn't have while taking the alternate route.

I really think this os a preferences thing. Who is to say that the soft ware ignores this during tunning.

When you have the transient fuel enabled while over-the-road v-tune logging, the software will indeed ignore those measures while they serve to provide for smooth(er) short-term, quick(er) transitions.  That's what it's designed to do so those momentary conditions can be dealt with nicely while riding to data-log yet not adversely affect the final result.  This as opposed to what evidently can happen when one attempts to circumvent the overall scheme trying for a few extra hits on the road, especially doing so while operating "blindly".

When you've got the bike on a dyno for generating the v-tune data logs, you can disable the transient fueling and save several seconds per transition, immediately getting to your next target location and drowning out with excellent data any blips you'll pick up from the uncorrected transients.  In my experience on the road, it's a different matter altogether.

Steve's been doing this for a while.  If he's willing to lend a hand, I'd recommend you follow his instructions as best you can.  He's recently asked you do take a "Spark data" log of about 15 minutes duration, with certain AFR values to use while doing it.  It'd be worth your time to try it.

Wrong again Glens....you have it totally backwards....duh...!!!!!!!

[whittlebeast]

Doc please expand your answer.  Personally, I never ride the bike on a dyno.  I tend to ride my bike on the street.

Beast

[glens]

Wrong again Glens....you have it totally backwards....duh...!!!!!!!

You quoted the whole damn post.  I'd said a lot.  Every word was backwards?  Hahaha!  You're going to have to do better than that.  Is your blood sugar a little off this morning?

Guy shows a bulge in the VE tables after v-tuning on the road.  Someone points that out and says "what's up with that?  don't look right".  Another says "yeah, I got that too when doing the same thing; if I do it the other way that don't happen".  First guys says "yeah, me too".

Expound upon that and set me straight if you're of the mind I need it.  Don't just pop in and drop off a whatever that was on your way by.  It ain't worth nothing except to indicate maybe you're mad about something or got a bone to pick.

[mayor]

I'd like to see the vtune runs that made the ve's in those "bulge" areas.  It's entirely possible that those "bulge" areas was populated with yellow square values, and the only way to prevent that is try to get better data below (higher rpm) the troubled area or manually smooth the bulge area.  It may be that with DE on, that area doesn't collect any data so the data that is used during the vtune is from the base cal.

[whittlebeast]

I'd like to see the vtune runs that made the ve's in those "bulge" areas.  It's entirely possible that those "bulge" areas was populated with yellow square values, and the only way to prevent that is try to get better data below (higher rpm) the troubled area or manually smooth the bulge area.  It may be that with DE on, that area doesn't collect any data so the data that is used during the vtune is from the base cal.

That is exactly the reason that I do full time data logging and later look at the data to find the lean holes that always seem to be there.  It is sometimes difficult to get your head around exactly what is the combination that gets you that lean spot but none the less, it is there and you have the tool to tune around the issue.  I find that once you have holes filled, the bikes (and cars for that matter) are far smoother and responsive.  Now that I am running wide bands most of the time, I am finding throttle response is very sensitive to what AFR the bike was running right before the AE event happens is a huge factor.   Coming from too rich is really problematic on throttle response.

I tend to tune steady state on a wide band and then I tune the AE/DE with a narrow band and based on watching the RPM change per sec compared the TPS/MAP.  This is a little sketchy on the Harleys are the data rate is so slow.

AE tends to be a balance act with raw throttle response in first and smoothness in shifting.  With the Sporty, I can get the front tire to lift off the ground on a 3000 RPM throttle stab when the AE is getting close.  The FZ1 tends to fly swat you when you get it right.

I personally never tune with AE/DE turned off.  AFR spikes will always show up throwing off whatever method you are using to determine the correct VE.

Beast

[lonewolf]

I'd like to see the vtune runs that made the ve's in those "bulge" areas.  It's entirely possible that those "bulge" areas was populated with yellow square values, and the only way to prevent that is try to get better data below (higher rpm) the troubled area or manually smooth the bulge area.  It may be that with DE on, that area doesn't collect any data so the data that is used during the vtune is from the base cal.

I suspect your right Mayor. That area just has to be manually blended down. Has anyone noticed that in most maps in that during decel that the injectors are shut off until approximately 2000 rpm?  You can leave the AE & De tables enabled on the dyno because of throttle control. Here's a screen shot of tps% on the dyno. There is no way you have that control on the street.

[attachment removed after 60 days by system]

[WVULTRA]

I'd like to see the vtune runs that made the ve's in those "bulge" areas.  It's entirely possible that those "bulge" areas was populated with yellow square values, and the only way to prevent that is try to get better data below (higher rpm) the troubled area or manually smooth the bulge area.  It may be that with DE on, that area doesn't collect any data so the data that is used during the vtune is from the base cal.

I suspect your right Mayor. That area just has to be manually blended down. Has anyone noticed that in most maps in that during decel that the injectors are shut off until approximately 2000 rpm?  You can leave the AE & De tables enabled on the dyno because of throttle control. Here's a screen shot of tps% on the dyno. There is no way you have that control on the street.

Russ:  Been seeing the injectors shut off (during decel) till ~2000 rpm since the SERT days.........especially in the 176 cals.  Easily seen when extrapolating a Data Recording to a .csv file.

FWIW:  I've always disabled AE & DE when vtuning on the street/closed course  , and never have a problem with decel popping, etc.

[Doc 1]

Wrong again Glens....you have it totally backwards....duh...!!!!!!!

You quoted the whole damn post.  I'd said a lot.  Every word was backwards?  Hahaha!  You're going to have to do better than that.  Is your blood sugar a little off this morning?

Guy shows a bulge in the VE tables after v-tuning on the road.  Someone points that out and says "what's up with that?  don't look right".  Another says "yeah, I got that too when doing the same thing; if I do it the other way that don't happen".  First guys says "yeah, me too".

Expound upon that and set me straight if you're of the mind I need it.  Don't just pop in and drop off a whatever that was on your way by.  It ain't worth nothing except to indicate maybe you're mad about something or got a bone to pick.

Wow...didn't know you were a shrink too....what do I owe you for your analysis?
I don't know how to quote just a sentence so I just clicked the post...yes we all know you say a lot believe me....
You are wrong in your thinking about the whole concept with the accel and decell topic....you come off like the GURU of tuning so figure it out. When you give up and submit your wrong maybe then I will tell you where your making your mistake but until you can take correction, mr know it all, I'll just pop in and out when I please. 

[HogMike]

Wrong again Glens....you have it totally backwards....duh...!!!!!!!

You quoted the whole damn post.  I'd said a lot.  Every word was backwards?  Hahaha!  You're going to have to do better than that.  Is your blood sugar a little off this morning?

Guy shows a bulge in the VE tables after v-tuning on the road.  Someone points that out and says "what's up with that?  don't look right".  Another says "yeah, I got that too when doing the same thing; if I do it the other way that don't happen".  First guys says "yeah, me too".

Expound upon that and set me straight if you're of the mind I need it.  Don't just pop in and drop off a whatever that was on your way by.  It ain't worth nothing except to indicate maybe you're mad about something or got a bone to pick.

Wow...didn't know you were a shrink too....what do I owe you for your analysis?
I don't know how to quote just a sentence so I just clicked the post...yes we all know you say a lot believe me....
You are wrong in your thinking about the whole concept with the accel and decell topic....you come off like the GURU of tuning so figure it out. When you give up and submit your wrong maybe then I will tell you where your making your mistake but until you can take correction, mr know it all, I'll just pop in and out when I please. 

[glens]

I'd like to see the vtune runs that made the ve's in those "bulge" areas.  It's entirely possible that those "bulge" areas was populated with yellow square values, and the only way to prevent that is try to get better data below (higher rpm) the troubled area or manually smooth the bulge area.  It may be that with DE on, that area doesn't collect any data so the data that is used during the vtune is from the base cal.

I agree that the obvious "bulge" is likely populated with less-than-green values, but that isn't the factor I'm considering.  I thought I was fairly clear in my earlier musings.  I don't think it's the DE that's causing it.  I think it's primarily the (lack of) AE.  Think about this possibility: he's above 3k RPM collecting data; he closes the throttle; he opens the throttle back up to go through the same range again for more data; as he opens the throttle, there's no AE provided so it goes lean just then; since the AE/DE activity is disabled, the system stays closed-loop collecting data it'll use; it's lean closed-loop, so the condition is corrected there, ultimately in the course of a v-tune the VEs get increased.  Sure sounds plausible to me.

Let's go over something so we can be entirely clear about it, thus all working on the same page.

While v-tune logging, if AE/DE events occur and are "normally" modified by the ECM, those events (and some seconds afterward) get "automatically" excluded from v-tune consideration because the ECM goes out of closed-loop for that.  If those events are not modified by the ECM's transient fueling control there is no exclusion of any data during the run because the ECM stays closed-loop.  The early argument (years ago) against leaving them enabled for use on a dyno was that they disable "good" collection for too long, wasting time, and since on a dyno good throttle control is so possible, the extra data gatherable by disabling AE/DE corrections makes the trade-off worthwhile, definitely "work-aroundable".  Are we all on the same page so far?

I've already said it, but will repeat it now to keep the flow of these thoughts in one place.  When we're on the road doing v-tune data-logging (especially when "blindly" with no computer monitor), our personal "closed-loop" is off-line.  We are working solely by feel/guesswork.  We will undoubtedly cause a greater number of AE/DE events.  More of them while working "blind", less of them if using a computer monitor, but either way there will be more of them than if the bike is strapped to a piece of stationary equipment such that our fuller attention can be devoted to the monitor and we'll not be concerned about any bunnies, bicycles or buggies on the road with us.

I guess what it all boils down to is how greatly the percentage of our on-the-road "would-be" AE/DE events, when disabled in the ECM during the run, will influence our results.  This is really the crux of the "argument" in my opinion.  I'd say it has obviously caused improper influence in this very thread.

Taking that notion and repeating myself further, if what would've been a momentary enrichment that causes an open-loop cessation of data consideration now is instead a while-closed-loop lean condition (or the other way around for enleanment) that results in closed-loop corrective measures being taken, we'll have these results included in or v-tune calibration generation.  In effect, what would've been provided by the ECM as a transient measure will now be present in the basis of our calibration, our VE tables.  Not entirely accounted-for, to be sure, but present nonetheless.  When later re-enabling the transient fuel control, we will be applying that on top of itself to an extent.  If we leave the transient fueling enabled during our logging session, those events will stay out of the end result, our generated calibration, so when they get applied while running that calibration they'll be doing so against what was developed only during steady conditions and will have exactly the intended effect.

I get the feeling Doc will tell me this is wrong.  If it is indeed wrong then let's hear what's right, not just that this is wrong... 

Well, I went to submit it and that's what he did.

Doc,  how can I admit to something that I don't know I've done or feel to be true?  I never said or implied I was a "tuning guru", merely that I understand the system.  You're saying I don't understand it, want me to admit I don't (while I think I do), and offer to only provide for correct understanding after I've done so.

but until you can take correction, mr know it all, I'll just pop in and out when I please

That's patently false.  I've asked several times already in this thread for you to provide the correction you insist is necessary.  I stayed out of the thread for what, a couple of days, after your last accusation and my request for clarification.  You didn't bother to provide it for whatever reason so I figured you didn't care or that you understood what it was I was saying maybe wasn't so wrong at all.  At any rate, the ball's back in your court on this.

I'll stipulate that I've never v-tuned on a dyno.  When was the last time you did so without one?

[N-gin]

Mayor I think these are the ones.

[attachment removed after 60 days by system]

[N-gin]

I tried some generic o2 data today. and took it out for a spin.
This is what I have. Just a short ride. took the parkway for a bit then hit the highway for an exit.

[attachment removed after 60 days by system]

[N-gin]

Sometimes you forget things with time.
Reveiwing the dat I was looking at the o2s. MAn it just never accured to me the info. I use this data all the time when Im working on cars. It just never accured to me to use it on the bike . I guess I was just so into v-tunes and spark tunes I got distracted.
This is the tune I have in the bike for this ride when I was reading generic o2.

[attachment removed after 60 days by system]

[glens]

In your GenericO2 log you got a max of 4 degrees pulled on the rear cylinder at record 2467, with 2 degrees pulled there at 2163.  Since you're primarily looking for such events at this time, if you'd used the "Spark" data set you may have found the numbers both to be higher, and you may have found other instances of smaller levels.  The data rate coming off the bus for the "Spark" data set is almost twice that of the GenericO2 set.  I realize how nice it is to have as much varied information as possible but sometimes you need to focus a little closer and sacrifice the other stuff.

I'm not going to offer any particular advice (like what numbers to change where); I don't believe I've ever done that in the forums, since I've never claimed to be a tuning guru.  Just trying to help you with the big picture if I can.

[whittlebeast]

N-gin

The big problem with your setup it the bike simply needs tuning.  The o2 integrators are all over the map.

Beast

[Doc 1]

I'd like to see the vtune runs that made the f's in those "bulge" areas.  It's entirely possible that those "bulge" areas was populated with yellow square values, and the only way to prevent that is try to get better data below (higher rpm) the troubled area or manually smooth the bulge area.  It may be that with DE on, that area doesn't collect any data so the data that is used during the vtune is from the base cal.

I agree that the obvious "bulge" is likely populated with less-than-green values, but that isn't the factor I'm considering.  I thought I was fairly clear in my earlier musings.  I don't think it's the DE that's causing it.  I think it's primarily the (lack of) AE.  Think about this possibility: he's above 3k RPM collecting data; he closes the throttle; he opens the throttle back up to go through the same range again for more data; as he opens the throttle, there's no AE provided so it goes lean just then; since the AE/DE activity is disabled, the system stays closed-loop collecting data it'll use; it's lean closed-loop, so the condition is corrected there, ultimately in the course of a v-tune the VINEs get increased.  Sure sounds plausible to me.

Let's go over something so we can be entirely clear about it, thus all working on the same page.

While v-tune logging, if AE/DE events occur and are "normally" modified by the ECM, those events (and some seconds afterward) get "automatically" excluded from v-tune consideration because the ECM goes out of closed-loop for that.  If those events are not modified by the ECU's transient fueling control there is no exclusion of any data during the run because the ECM stays closed-loop.  The early argument (years ago) against leaving them enabled for use on a dyno was that they disable "good" collection for too long, wasting time, and since on a dyno good throttle control is so possible, the extra data gatherable by disabling AE/DE corrections makes the trade-off worthwhile, definitely "work-around table".  Are we all on the same page so far?

I've already said it, but will repeat it now to keep the flow of these thoughts in one place.  When we're on the road doing v-tune data-logging (especially when "blindly" with no computer monitor), our personal "closed-loop" is off-line.  We are working solely by feel/guesswork.  We will undoubtedly cause a greater number of AE/DE events.  More of them while working "blind", less of them if using a computer monitor, but either way there will be more of them than if the bike is strapped to a piece of stationary equipment such that our fuller attention can be devoted to the monitor and we'll not be concerned about any bunnies, bicycles or buggies on the road with us.

I guess what it all boils down to is how greatly the percentage of our on-the-road "would-be" AE/DE events, when disabled in the ECM during the run, will influence our results.  This is really the crux of the "argument" in my opinion.  I'd say it has obviously caused improper influence in this very thread.

Taking that notion and repeating myself further, if what would've been a momentary enrichment that causes an open-loop cessation of data consideration now is instead a while-closed-loop lean condition (or the other way around for enleanment) that results in closed-loop corrective measures being taken, we'll have these results included in or v-tune calibration generation.  In effect, what would've been provided by the ECM as a transient measure will now be present in the basis of our calibration, our VE tables.  Not entirely accounted-for, to be sure, but present nonetheless.  When later re-enabling the transient fuel control, we will be applying that on top of itself to an extent.  If we leave the transient fueling enabled during our logging session, those events will stay out of the end result, our generated calibration, so when they get applied while running that calibration they'll be doing so against what was developed only during steady conditions and will have exactly the intended effect.

I get the feeling Doc will tell me this is wrong.  If it is indeed wrong then let's hear what's right, not just that this is wrong... 

Well, I went to submit it and that's what he did.

Doc,  how can I admit to something that I don't know I've done or feel to be true?  I never said or implied I was a "tuning guru", merely that I understand the system.  You're saying I don't understand it, want me to admit I don't (while I think I do), and offer to only provide for correct understanding after I've done so.

but until you can take correction, mr know it all, I'll just pop in and out when I please

That's patently false.  I've asked several times already in this thread for you to provide the correction you insist is necessary.  I stayed out of the thread for what, a couple of days, after your last accusation and my request for clarification.  You didn't bother to provide it for whatever reason so I figured you didn't care or that you understood what it was I was saying maybe wasn't so wrong at all.  At any rate, the ball's back in your court on this.

I'll stipulate that I've never v-tuned on a dyno.  When was the last time you did so without one?

Look, bottom line is you can V-Tune with or without the Decel and Accel tables and the tune will come out fine. This whole thing has now become about you and me Glens and quiet frankly I'm done with this BS. I didn't have a problem with you as a person I have a problem with guys like you misleading other people who don't know the difference and you, with others, fit that box. Yes I will say you know the program well however you DON'T know it all (neither do I ) and you can't take correction without shred remarks so now it's personal between us. You have burned bridges on other forums for the same direction you're taking here. You have a tendency to over think situations and with a lack of experience it gets you into trouble....I say lack of experience meaning compaired to a person that does this for a living...not a person that post for a living.
What is the purpose of V-Tuning......it's to set the VE tables...! What is the VE Table showing....AIR FLOW....! You start with all this transit fuel crap that throws you way off track then your college, or should I say your Professor brain takes over and runs off on the wrong track. Yes fuel plays a part...we set a target in Closed Loop to synchronize the VE Table however the main object is to let the ECM know how much AIR is flowing into the engine. It just so happens that this has to be done in Closed Loop....V-Tune DOESN'T work in open loop and anytime the throttle is moved even a smidged it kicks the ECM out of closed loop and it takes several mili seconds for the ECM to get back in closed loop so I started turning off the Decel and Accel as I V-Tuned on the road (which by the way I did more than you could ever amagine....mater of fact I have a trike to do on Monday, I have held several classes on at dealerships and indy shops without dyno's, so there is that experience thing again....how does your foot taste?) so the V-Tune process would collect more data in a given time frame. Again with fuel injection it doesn't mater if you turn the tables off or leave them on...the tune will be the same however when  you tune a carb the first thing you do is remove the accel fuel so it doesn't skew the readings in the fuel circuts to be adjusted.....opps there's that experience thing again. I relize this thread has nothing to do with carbs however this process is what led me to start turning off the tables in the first place.
Well I don't want to write a book, like some people ,so I will let this go at this and I'm done playing with you Glens...I won't endulge this post any more and maybe just maybe they willing to learn might get the info they seek without you and myself making it ugly.
Sorry guys
Glens I believe you do help a lot of guys with tuning but you also get carried away with these long post that ends up confusing most people and in fact does harm at times......try to keep it short and quit trying to baffle those with the knowledge you do have. 
Mayor....your doing a good job with these guys...keep it up.
Doc 

[Jeffd]

Good post Doc.  I know for a fact when you call TTS and Steve is out of town you get directed to Doc.  This has happened to me 2X kind of tells you who Steve trusts to know the TTS inside and out..p.s you might not remember but I remember you giving me that tip about pulling the accel pump rod back in 2005 or so.

[N-gin]

N-gin

The big problem with your setup it the bike simply needs tuning.  The o2 integrators are all over the map.

Beast

I thought that's what you guys were helping me with?

[mayor]

I thought that's what you guys were helping me with?

what Andy is indirectly referring to is your ve's values.  If I'm reading into his comments correctly, he's saying that the ve's are likely not dialed into very well causing the closed loop to frequently adjust the injector pulsewidths. The scan data that you are posting is more geared towards timing, and under careful scrutiny may show lean areas....but it does not take the place of vtuning for populating the ve tables. 


thanks Doc.    I appreciate the kind words.

[whittlebeast]

N-gin

Have you gone thru the V-Tune process per the directions?  Is this bike anything out of the ordinary?  Is the motor camed for the under 3500 RPM that you normally ride?  Is there any chance you have an exhaust leak?

Beast

[Doc 1]

N-gin

The big problem with your setup it the bike simply needs tuning.  The o2 integrators are all over the map.

Beast

Andy
The intergrators are NOT accurate....you have been told that several times in the past....they will jump all over the place and they are very late giving information do to the lag time. You would be way better off not using that information for tuning.
Doc

[whittlebeast]

Doc

Could you put together a list of fields that are known to be not accurate.

Beast

[Doc 1]

Doc

Could you put together a list of fields that are known to be not accurate.

Beast

I would say that the Intergrators are the only one I can say is inaccurate....this is why they where eliminated from the data in the TTS. You can use them to see if the 02 sensors are hunting the target AFR however to take that data and use it for a certian rpm/throttle position change, for tuning, or to say HERE is a problem you will be way off.

[Steve Cole]

Andy

How about you make a list of what you think is right and when that data is accurate? You've been told repeatedly how it works, yet you continue to mislead people with your comments. The data that comes out has to be used properly yet you want to ignore those facts. The OP is trying to get his bike running correctly and when you come on and tell him it needs to be tuned isn't helping him any.

[whittlebeast]

So if his VEs and VE News are 30% apart, do you ignore it as all bad data?  I consider about 3% a far more reasonable answer.

[Steve Cole]

Again, you've been told that VE new does not get used in the TTS product. It was removed years ago mainly because you and a few others would not listen. So now your back to the same old issue and you still are trying to use something that is not there.

Still waiting for you to make a list.

[whittlebeast]

Here is my list of ignored data feeds.

none

[whittlebeast]

Again, you've been told that VE new does not get used in the TTS product. It was removed years ago mainly because you and a few others would not listen. So now your back to the same old issue and you still are trying to use something that is not there.

Still waiting for you to make a list.

So your telling me that if I go into the raw DM3 V-Tune file and scramble the VE New field in every record, I will still get the same answer in the v-tune results?

I may have to try that....

Beast

[N-gin]

I really been lugging the engine for the spark and o2 tunning. Normally when I ride RPMs are north of 2500.

[Tsani]

I really been lugging the engine for the spark and o2 tunning. Normally when I ride RPMs are north of 2500.

Impossible. It's a Big Twin and those in the know say BT riders never exceed 2500 RPM. North of 2500 is reserved for sportster riders. 

[whittlebeast]

Impossible. It's a Big Twin and those in the know say BT riders never exceed 2500 RPM. North of 2500 is reserved for sportster riders. 

Here is a friend of mine running his bagger on a typical his Sunday ride.



Beast

[Steve Cole]

I really been lugging the engine for the spark and o2 tunning. Normally when I ride RPMs are north of 2500.

Impossible. It's a Big Twin and those in the know say BT riders never exceed 2500 RPM. North of 2500 is reserved for sportster riders. 

You know those sportster riders............. they tell a new tale every few hours! 

[Tsani]

Impossible. It's a Big Twin and those in the know say BT riders never exceed 2500 RPM. North of 2500 is reserved for sportster riders. 

Here is a friend of mine running his bagger on a typical his Sunday ride.



Beast

I gotta walk away. This is too damn easy.

[60wt]

Just went through a tune myself on a 2007 RK and somewere i saw where some said max spark advance shouldnt be more than 40 degrees max.... I see that in the Master Tune program under table selection theres front and rear spark advance the chart shows up to 49 degrees... was wondering if one should  bring thoese numbers down to 40 degrees???

[Doc 1]

Just went through a tune myself on a 2007 RK and somewere i saw where some said max spark advance shouldnt be more than 40 degrees max.... I see that in the Master Tune program under table selection theres front and rear spark advance the chart shows up to 49 degrees... was wondering if one should  bring thoese numbers down to 40 degrees???

It all depends on the build what timing is needed, higher compression, larger displacments, require less timing than a bike with stock cams and stock heads. I've seen stock timing tables over 50 degrees in areas.
Doc

[whittlebeast]

Doc

What is making these motors so slow burn that makes them require 45 degrees in the midrange?

Beast

[Doc 1]

Doc

What is making these motors so slow burn that makes them require 45 degrees in the midrange?

Beast

Low compression and restricted air flow is the main items that allows the timing to be at 45* or more.

[build it]

Doc,
Could you be a little more specific regarding timing advance and engine configuration? Meaning, in general terms, is it displacement that necessitates less spark advance, or is spark advance related more to bore or stroke values? Also, does rod length factor into this?

On a slightly different note, is it possible to put together an engine with a configuration that requires less spark advance compared to the more traditional means to accomplish a given displacement? What are the positive and negative consequences for this within the context of spark advance?     

[whittlebeast]

Doc

So would you expect a small bore motor with 230 lbs of cold cranking compression to hammer with 40 degrees in the midrange?  What about with 89 or 91 octane fuel would you expect it to hammer?

Beast

[mayor]

On a slightly different note, is it possible to put together an engine with a configuration that requires less spark advance compared to more traditional means to accomplish the same displacement? What are the positive and negative consequences for this within the context of spark advance?   

the more efficient the combustion process, the less advance is needed to achieve MBT.  If you can keep the flame front from happening in the edges of the combustion chamber, you can improve the efficiency.  That's were the thinner head gaskets come in.  The thinner head gaskets push the flame front back into the chamber rather than out in the squish band.  It also increases compression, which is another method of improving the combustion process.  There are points of diminished returns for both of these though.   Another method to improve the combustion process is adding the squish grooves to direct the combustion process back into the chamber, but there are folks that swear by them and folks that swear at them. 

So would you expect a small bore motor with 230 lbs of cold cranking compression to hammer with 40 degrees in the midrange?  What about with 89 or 91 octane fuel would you expect it to hammer?

why would anyone be stupid enough to try to run mid grade gas in an air cooled engine with 230# of ccp, and why are you asking the question when you have the ability to see knock retard events for yourself? 

[whittlebeast]

why would anyone be stupid enough to try to run mid grade gas in an air cooled engine with 230# of ccp, and why are you asking the question when you have the ability to see knock retard events for yourself?

Mayor

Would you expect even worse results if the intake air temps are in the 160 degree range?

Beast

[mayor]

Mayor

Would you expect even worse results if the intake air temps are in the 160 degree range?

do you believe that that air temp is real?  The intake air temps in a car efi system is likely more believable since the intake tract can be longer, and routed under a hood near a giant heat source.  I seriously doubt that the actual air temp going through a short motorcycle intake port is as warm as the sensor is showing.  The sensor on a bike is likely showing the transfer of heat through the metal intake manifold, and not the actual air temp.  Air acts as an insulater and is not a good heat conductor, so I highly doubt that the air gets that warm for the few milliseconds it's traveling through the manifold. 

[rbabos]

Mayor

Would you expect even worse results if the intake air temps are in the 160 degree range?

do you believe that that air temp is real?  The intake air temps in a car efi system is likely more believable since the intake tract can be longer, and routed under a hood near a giant heat source.  I seriously doubt that the actual air temp going through a short motorcycle intake port is as warm as the sensor is showing.  The sensor on a bike is likely showing the transfer of heat through the metal intake manifold, and not the actual air temp.  Air acts as an insulater and is not a good heat conductor, so I highly doubt that the air gets that warm for the few milliseconds it's traveling through the manifold.

Real or not, that's what it's telling the ecm.
Ron

[wolf_59]

Did anyone notice the IAT on Thumper Buttercups post here? http://harleytechtalk.com/htt/index.php/topic,41897.150.html
Could it be the air cleaner set up? still would be interesting to see how that effects the tune and fuel milage, may have to try one out

[Doc 1]

Doc,
Could you be a little more specific regarding timing advance and engine configuration? Meaning, in general terms, is it displacement that necessitates less spark advance, or is spark advance related more to bore or stroke values? Also, does rod length factor into this?

On a slightly different note, is it possible to put together an engine with a configuration that requires less spark advance compared to the more traditional means to accomplish a given displacement? What are the positive and negative consequences for this within the context of spark advance?   

There is too much involved in what the advance should be for optimum power and I know this is going to turn into a long thread once we get going on it. First off lets talk about when the max cylinder pressure should occur in a Twin Cam motor (Iron Head Sportsters, Shovel Heads, Pan Heads, etc are much different so lets keep this to Twinkies). Max Cylinder Pressure, BMEP, (Break Mean Effected Pressure) in a Twinkie should happen at 12 to 17 degrees ATDC (After Top Dead Center). To achieve this pressure at 12* to 17* combustion has to start some where between 5* and 50* BTDC (Before Top Dead Center) depending on the RPM, the rate the mixture burns. There are several factors that determine the optimum ignition advance, some internal and some external. The internal factors are; combustion chamber design, piston shape, turbulence, compression ratio, cam timing, bore, rod/stroke relationship, number of plugs, AFR, fuel quality, and RPM. Some of the external factors are; bike weight, gear ratios, air temperature, altitude, and humidity. As you can see this gets very complicated.
The reason we want the max pressure at the 12 to 17* is this is where you will fine the most torque....a few degrees before 12* will drop power because the advance was way too early and the cylinder pressure is pushing down on the piston as it tries to reach TDC causing the flywheels to slow down. A few degrees after 17* you will have the piston out running the flame front....ie...the piston travels the fastest around 45 degrees ATDC and as the piston travels down the cylinder the combustion pressure drops very quickly so the pressure being too late will not push on the piston and again the flywheels slow down.
Also when more of the cylinder is exposed to the flame front, from retarded timing, the engine will run much hotter.
We want the timing as far advanced as we can get it without detonation happening. On a dyno I can find the sweet spot 12* to 17* ATDC buy watching the power increase or decrease with 2* timing changes....however without a dyno advancing the timing to detonation then backing it off a few degrees seems to be the norm. (being able to read the timing line on the spark plug works very well when you don't have a test track or a dyno.....another topic for another time).
Lets say the timing is set at 20* at idle or 1000 rpms, the time or interval we have to burn the mixture is about .0025 of a second, at 2000 rpm that time is cut in half, and at 4000 rpm it is cut in half again, so the higher the rpm the less time we have to burn the fuel so more advance is needed to get a jump on the less time we have. Now in reality after 3000 rpm the timing advance levels off because the rate of burn is offset by increased combustion turbulence and heat so less timing advance is needed on top end.
The higher the compression the less advance you need because the higher compression generates more heat as the mixture is compressed, the molecules are finer (a mist) and the activity is greater which is the rate of burn......if the mixture burns faster the less advance is needed to reach the sweet spot. Lets put it this way...a leaner mixture, less turbulence, lower combustion chamber temperature, lower density of air, and residual combustion gases all lengthen combustion time which needs more advance. Shortening combustion time to have less advance your conditions will need to have a richer mixture, more turbulence, higher temperature, higher pressure, and higher air density.
As mayor pointed out there are squish settings that promote better fuel rate of burn.....your squish is most effective between .025 and .040. Any thing below .025 you are very close to detonation with ever stroke and as carbon starts to build this gap closes even further, anything above .040 the squish is now ineffective and no longer promotes turbulence.....I like to see .030~.035.
I hope this gets your mind rolling and helps you to understand all involved in finding what the advance should be....each engine will be different however for a basic street bike a few degrees here and there chang is all you guys should be seeing for max power from the TTS timing tables. I see a lot of maps from people sending me their tunes from all over this world and I must say there are a few so called tuners out there that are killing these timing tables......you can't expect to remove 15 to 20 degrees of timing and expect the bike to run crisp with good throttle response....the bike will be sluggish to say the least.
Be careful just changing values without knowing the consequences.....
There is a lot more to all this, however, I'll leave it open to questions and discussion from here.

Andy if you are trying to jerk me around like you do Steve with those off the wall questions there wil be no answers.
Doc   

[wolf_59]

Doc, Thanks that is the best explaination of timing that I have seen on this forum as of yet

[Jeffd]

Doc refresh my memeory is the timing line on the plug on the threads or on the strap?

[Doc 1]

Doc refresh my memeory is the timing line on the plug on the threads or on the strap?

Ahhh...I knew someone would have to get to that question....lol
The timing line is on the negative electrobe strap......your timing looks very good however those plugs need to be relaced......

[Jeffd]

I just did about a week ago lol they had about 16000 miles on them.  thanks jeff

[N-gin]

N-gin

Have you gone thru the V-Tune process per the directions?  Is this bike anything out of the ordinary?  Is the motor camed for the under 3500 RPM that you normally ride?  Is there any chance you have an exhaust leak?

Beast

Engine is as follows
crank is trued, welded, pro plugged, lightened,  balanced, and has oversize rod bearings.
pistons are cast SE flat tops 103, has woods 555cam and SE tappered push rods.
Heads have been bead blasted to remove the powdercoat from the ports and chamber. The have been cut. 035 to get 80.5 cc. The valve springs were checked and have 135 psi of seat presure. Head gaskets are custom made,  they have a 3.875 bore and are. .027 thick. Stock throttle body, injectors, lifters, valve springs, stock gearing. ThunderHeader exhaust.

[Tsani]

Damn Doc, That is a mindful.

[pauly]

Cool Doc,
I've got a few questions too but am on a tablet keyboard - soon 
Pauly

[N-gin]

I have new info in the media section. I did three tunes this morning. Some side streets and mostly highway.
This is the tune that was loaded.

[attachment removed after 60 days by system]

[Thumper Buttercup]

Did anyone notice the IAT on Thumper Buttercups post here? http://harleytechtalk.com/htt/index.php/topic,41897.150.html
Could it be the air cleaner set up? still would be interesting to see how that effects the tune and fuel milage, may have to try one out

Wolf,

    We are adding the HPI backplate and 51mm throttle body to the mix while
we are in here fixing things.  We'll report back when we get to ride in the spring.



Doc,

    Thanks for taking all the time to explain all of this.

Mark & Kim

[build it]

Doc,
I've got one last question for you, and my purposes here will come to a close. It is another factor, maybe; I'd like to know if case vacuum has an affect on the advance curve? Lets say you built a motor with a short stroke, long rod, big bore configuration, and hooked up a vacuum pump to a relay that kicked in at a certain RPM only, would THAT affect the advance curve? Am I talking about pumping losses here? I know this is in far left field fwiw.   

Thank you.

[Doc 1]

Doc,
I've got one last question for you, and my purposes here will come to a close. It is another factor, maybe; I'd like to know if case vacuum has an affect on the advance curve? Lets say you built a motor with a short stroke, long rod, big bore configuration, and hooked up a vacuum pump to a relay that kicked in at a certain RPM only, would THAT affect the advance curve? Am I talking about pumping losses here? I know this is in far left field fwiw.   

Thank you.

If you where building a EVO, Shovel, Pan, or Sporty the case vacuum would be an issue and yes a vac pump or two would help greatly to improve power. However the Twin Cam is a internal breathing motor and there is no case vacuum as the pistons travel up the cylinders or too much pressure in the crankcase as the pistons travel down the cylinders. The air moves from the crankcase into the cam compartment, and vise versa, through the large case bearing....so I would say no, a Vac pump is not necessary nor would it help to gain power.
Vac pumps are generaly used to provide better ring seal for better power at higher piston speeds. Pro Stock Harleys and some Modifed Harleys classes used the concept of vac pumps at the drags.
Doc

[HogBag]

Doc 1
Have you ever tuned any bikes with a before and after Singh grove. From what I have read this is supposed to help torque with a cleaner running motor with better fuel consumption. A win win for any engine builder ? whats your call on the Singh groves as a engine tuner.   

[Doc 1]

Doc 1
Have you ever tuned any bikes with a before and after Singh grove. From what I have read this is supposed to help torque with a cleaner running motor with better fuel consumption. A win win for any engine builder ? whats your call on the Singh groves as a engine tuner.

There has never been any proof that the groves actually do anything at all, however, if it makes you feel better to have them go for it because there is no proof that they hinder the performance either. Personally I think they are snake oil at best.
Doc

[HogBag]

Doc1
Thanks for the advice on the groves. It's one of those things I want to try but there's no way a can take a hacksaw to good set of flowing heads.

[FSG]

but there's no way a can take a hacksaw to good set of flowing heads.

Pass it to me, I'll do it for you.