'01 Ultra - Delphi w/T-max efi tuning

[mayor]

Earlier this year I posted a thread about Sonny's S's struggles dialing in the afr's on his CV44 carb bike.  Here's that thread: how do you adjust the VE's on a carb bike?  

Sonny has been struggling with some tuning issues for quite a long time, so after hearing folks talk about some sort of new fangled device that eliminates the enricher knob and sprays gas in each cylinder based on that cylinder's needs...he decided "if you can't beat 'em, join 'em".  He just finished up the conversion from CV44 to Delphi TB assembly using a Zipper's T-max as the ECM.  This being an '01, this was the easiest and most economical way to convert the carb over to the delphi tb efi.   

Sonny rode about 70 miles worth of tuning today, and his direct text message quote was "No regrets! It can only get better."  I'm glad he's happy, since my name may have been mud if he wasn't.   

here's the results of his first 70 miles worth of tuning:

he collected a pretty good amount of learned offset points, and the Tmax control center was indicating that an AutoMap would be necassary to bring the base fuelflow map more in line with the bikes needs:

His current setting is to allow the auto-tune learned offsets to be no further than 25% off of the base map, and as the above indicates he had some offsets get close to that limit.  It's also indicating that the IAC Auto-Tuned points reached it's limit. If Sonny would have stopped there, his bike may have run fine....but, by running an auto-map he's allowing the auto-tune module dial in the fuelflow closer to the bike and reducing the amount of change needed from the base line during tuning sessions.  I believe that one of the reasons folks have issue with auto-tune systems is because they don't know that the auto-tune is out of tuning range.   

here's a more detailed breakdown of today's auto-tune fuelflow offset results:

The starting basemap wasn't quite perfect, but that's what the auto-tune module is for.    Based on the above, 40% of the fuelflow values were with in 5% of the bikes needs on both cylinders...which isn't too bad when you consider that there was not an exact map available that matched Sonny's build (95" 37n, ported -06 heads, and ST Supermeg).   

here's what created the IAC response:

once he runs an IAC-auto calibration, the line should be lowered slightly and allow for less trim to be used. 

he ran the AutoMap, and sent me the before and after.  He said there was two areas that he heard pinging today, around 2,500 and around 5,600. 

his front fuelflow with learned fuelflow offsets at 2,560 chart looked like this:

the majority of the learned offsets were indicating that more fuel was needed to reach the desired afr, and some of the offsets were in the high teen's in % of change.  I also noticed that the rear had some big % of change at this rpm as well (23.826% at 35.190 deg TPS). That could explain the pinging issue that he had while riding. 

The red area had no learned offsets, which means he either didn't hit those TPS settings at this rpm or he didn't spend enough time there to register an offset by the auto-tune module. After the AutoMap process, the base fuelflow was elevated past the point of his last learned offset in an attempt to follow the fuelflow trends:


the front fuelflow with learned fuelflow offsets at 2,816 chart looked a little different.  The A-T module indicated that more fuel was needed for the lighter TPS settings, but less was needed as the TPS increased:

the AutoMap process adjusted the base map accordingly:


front fuelflow with learned fuelflow offsets at 3,072 chart looked like this

the AutoMap made very similar adjustments to this rpm chart as the previous one:


There wasn't very many hits in the upper rpm:

and here's what the AutoMap changed:

as you can see the AutoMap does not take the fuelflow % to the exact value that the offsets suggests, but rather a closer point.  This is why several tuning session may be required before someone should "just ride and forget".   

my guess is the bike should run much better with the new auto-maped map. Hopefully the weather will cooperate and he can get another good tuning run in yet this week.  Once he gets the fule dialed in, we're going to start playing with timing a little in the cruise areas. 


All I can say is, welcome to the dark side Sonny.    

[turboprop]

I am curious Mayor as to the cost to convert a carb TC over to Deplhi/ThunderMax. Could you share a ballpark figure?

[mayor]

that's probably a better question for Sonny, but I would suspect that buying everything new would not make this an overly affordable option for most. If I mind correctly, the list price on the Delphi efi wiring harness on the '02-'03 baggers is over $500 now.  I think Sonny bought just about everything used (including the efi wiring harness) and he's figuring on selling most of his take off carb set up, so that took a good bit of cost out.  He was also able to get a good price on a used Tmax. 

This likely isn't going to be a conversion most would make, but Sonny was stuggling pretty good over the last 3 seasons with making the carb compromise work with his build to no avail.  When one cylinder was lean, the other went rich...and vice a versa.  There's just no comparison when you compare individual cylinder (auto) tuning of an efi to the afr compromise of a carb. 

[turboprop]

One of the projects I have is a TC for the FXR. Based on an S&s case with Evo mounts. The plan is to run it on carb and then eventually transition over to FI. Not in any rush right now. More like squatting in the jungle waiting for the right time to pounce.

[mayor]

now that might be a horse of a different color.  Getting a good deal on the TB and associated sensors is the easy part, there's plenty of them floating around.  I think you may run into two other issues that are less easy to solve.  First, you either need to be able to run a fuel pump w/pick up in the tank or run external pump like what some cars use. Finding a place to mount an external pump could be an issue.  Sonny had converted his MM tank to a carb, so it wasn't a hard to reconvert the tank back over to run the Delphi style internals.  The easiest thing to do may be to run a tank that was previously designed for efi internals. 

The other issue is you may have to build your own EFI wiring harness to hook onto your main harness, since there may not be one that is already available for your bike.  The nice thing about the FXR is, the frame is pretty much a touring frame....so I don't think the wiring harness issue is as big of deal as the fuel pump.   

TXCHOP converted his carb bike to run EFI last year.  He used a Delphi ECM and TTS.  I like the TTS system, but folks with '03 and earlier bikes are better off using the Tmax instead if they want to tune the bike themselves.  As far as I know, you need to have a -05 ecm in order to get the closed loop function of Delphi/TTS to work.  The trouble comes in with the speedo interface in the earlier bikes.  The '04 and up bikes interface differently than the previous years, which means there could be much more hardware that would need to be changed in order to make the -05 ecm closed loop conversion work on earlier years.  As afr as I know, no one has tested this theory though.     I think TXCHOP's bike was an '05, so the the speedo interface wasn't that much of an issue. If you aren't planning on running closed loop then I think running a straight Delphi set up would work, but you would still need to buy tuning software and then have someone tune the bike in open loop. 

here's a few threads on the subject:
http://harleytechtalk.com/htt/index.php/topic,35983.msg373188.html#msg373188

http://harleytechtalk.com/htt/index.php/topic,28803.msg294430.html#msg294430

http://harleytechtalk.com/htt/index.php/topic,25370.msg260249.html#msg260249


hopefully Sonny or TX will jump in if I missed any details. 

hth,
mayor

[turboprop]

I have considered the gas tank fuel pump issue and have come up with three workable courses of actions: an existing tank from a FI dyna, or maybe a tank from a FI sportster, or an external pump like the one S&S sells. The dyna and sportster tanks will require a little fab work, but nothing major.

As for the wiring harness, an off the rack harness from a dyna will b e pretty close. Might have to shorten or lengthen a few wires, but will be a good place to start from.

I will add that I am an electronic engineer and very dangerous with a soldering iron and wire cutters. But I did stay at a Holiday Inn last week.

Ed

[mayor]

I don't think the conversion will be an issue for you then.  The only installation issue that I know of that Sonny ran into was matching the '01 main harness up to the '02 efi harness. He just had to trace wires and change th wiring harness plug to match.  Everything seems to be running alright for him, except he's still trying to get his turn signals to auto cancel.    Other than that, it appeared to be straight forward.

is this a new bike, or are you converting your evo over to TC? are you running a custom harness now, or are you running a factory main harness w/carb ignition harness? For referrence, the stock TB's are similar in airflow to a CV44.  if your building a beast of an engine, you'll likely need to look at aftermarket TB's. 

[turboprop]

The TC/FXR project is being referring to as Project Smack-A-Hoe. Not sure of the bore and stroke yet. Today I/we are at 4.250" bore by 4.000 stroke and Hurricane heads. Tommarrow it will probably be different. This is going in my red FXR. Like I said, the plan is to break it on on carb, maybe a Steve Alstead D or set of Gs. Even discussed a modified Mik48. I don't expect to have this engine done until late next year. I am working on the drive train, suspension and brakes now.

The FXR is currently running the uncut OEM harness with the EVO engine. Turn signals and most everything else have been removed. Still waiting on a few parts to put the trans and the Taj-Ma-Motor (3 13/16" bore by 4 5/8" stroke) back together. Last build it made 122 hp SAE at the wheel, should make a bit more this time. Goal is to have the engine drive train back together by new years then strip the frame and repowdercoat. Is very convenient to have several bikes. Takes the rush out of projects like this.

[Sonny S.]

Well my turn signals cancel now :-)
had to get creative with the 01 main harness.

Have only put about another 120 miles on the bike since the first run.
So far I'm very impressed with the Delphi / TMAX set up.   
I'm having some low gear / light throttle surging that we are working on, and I still have to do a data run. I'll do that this weekend. We backed the WFO timing down 2* and leaned out WFO AFR a bit. The pinging at high RPM WFO is gone and the bike is more responsive. Those adjustments were made based on how the bike responded to those settings when it was carbed.
Bike does well when warmed up, most rides have been between 16*-40* air temps. I have had to run Auto IAC 3 times so far to try and bring the idle down. Idle RPM also does not match the bike tach.

Stay tuned 

[wurk_truk]

I am really happy to see this is working out for you Sonny.

Keep all of us posted.

[Blackbaggr]

Was just wondering about this and whether or not you had started or if this was a closer to spring project...

[Sonny S.]

I am really happy to see this is working out for you Sonny.

Keep all of us posted.

Thanks !  As I get more data and the tuning progresses I'll post an update

Dsanchez .... you'll have to stop by 

[Sonny S.]

What would cause the bike Tach to read about 100 rpm's higher than the TMAX monitor Tach?

[Eleft36]

What would cause the bike Tach to read about 100 rpm's higher than the TMAX monitor Tach?

That's a basic non issue, I would say that's close enough to get proper information from the monitor.
TPS % is the matching factor to a page/block.
Keep playing, the results will follow.

Al

[PC_Hater]

As you know, I don't come here very often.
But.
If you have a problem and it is fixed by changing from carb to EFI you know you had a really Bad problem!

[Sonny S.]

My problem is.... my standards are high, and good enough doesn't always work for me. By most people's standards my bike ran... .fine

[hrdtail78]

Glad to see another carb guy converted.

[Overcamber]

My problem is.... my standards are high, and good enough doesn't always work for me. By most people's standards my bike ran... .fine

I know exactly how you feel Sonny

[Sonny S.]

Well, tuning is still in progress but time has been limited.
I can say that my previous rear cylinder lean condition when it was carbed is now gone.
The bike runs very strong and I'm playing with timing mostly now. I'd say AFR tuning is down to the " fine tune " stage. It's been interesting to see the data logged and exactly what the bike is doing as it's running. Still have some surging at VERY light throttle, 1st & 2nd gear stuff. AFR looks fine, so maybe a timing thing..... time will tell.
Mayor says that this motor is quite the.... " air pump " ... must be the grooved heads 
He's the techie guy and will be posting a detailed update....
stay ... Tuned  

[mayor]

Here's the latest info from the Tmax control center:

I'm not sure exactly how many miles or how many times the learned offsets have been applied (3 or 4 times?), but the Tmax control center on the latest map is indicating that the fuelflow settings are getting dialed in pretty well.  There's still some areas that's not quite there, but they may be areas that limited data has been collected. 

Mayor says that this motor is quite the.... " air pump " ...

here's some data I thought was interesting:

The manifold pressure is reading 33.01 in HG on this frame, which would convert to almost a 112 kPa value.     That's impressive. 

we've been working on timing lately.   We've been reviewing data to match up TPS locations with typical MAP values, to custom tweak his timing slopes on the timing vs. TPS @ rpm charts.  The base map Sonny started with wasn't set up for his particular build, and we're noticing that the timing has been over advanced when looking at individual TPS timing settings for his bike. We're hoping to get a much smoother running bike when we get the timing dialed in as well.  The data review process for Tmax is very time consuming.  I think that's an area that can be improved with the software.   

[strokerjlk]

Impressive...you PA guys got it going on
I mean youce guys? .....youence?

[Sonny S.]

Well.... we're getting there.
Still have surging between 2200-2500 RPM's, 2nd gear, Very light throttle. Parking lot speeds.
We have richened it up, and played with timing. Doesn't seam to do it when the bike is cold. I thought going to richer AFR would take care of it.... Nope !   

Any idea's  ?

[mayor]

Your typical idle seems to be trending slightly leaner than set when going from cold to operating temp, so we are going to try adjusting the AFR Correction vs Engine Temp chart to see if that will improve the surging.  I haven't adjusted this table much, so hopefully 7hogs will weight in to give feedback on whether this is the right direction. 

It seem that the afr is trending just about ~.14 leaner than desired in some of the temp ranges, so I took a wild guess and moved the appropriate boxes up two clicks:

the yellow markers are where the previous settings were. 

Since the issue is only there during normal operating temps and not during warm ups, it could be a couple of other charts as well.  This may take a little trial and error until we find the right one.     hang in there, we'll get it. 

[Sonny S.]

still experiencing bad light throttle surging. 
Any idea's folks ? 

[lonewolf]

Too much timing?