120R TTS Map?

[robertg]

Is there a specific map for the 120R? I'm thinking the FUF009-03 would be the best to start with. The bike is a 2010 Touring, stock 120R, Ventilator, and Wegner 2-1-2.

[Rider57]

Try it out. I didnt have a problem with it.

[robertg]

Did you just change the displacement to 119.8? Does anything else need to be changed like the cam selector?

[wurk_truk]

Change Ci to like 124 and see how it tunes in.  I got a lot of reversion on my 120r combo in the beginning and I ran out of head room at 121ci. 

Also...  NOTHING is close for the 120.  You will REALLY have to work at cold idle and hot idle.  Playing with the crank to run and crank steps, etc.  It takes time.  Also, fairly soon into v-tuning you will REALLY need to lower the warm idle RPM to 700 and v-tune the 750-1250 areas while sitting in your garage.  Do that until all white and raise the idle back up to 1000.

Once I got the idle straightened out... surging, popping, etc...  The REST of the v-tuning has been going decently.

[Rider57]

truk is right on this. I had to go 125 to get it stable

[Harleyrider09]

 Why with so many 120R's now  is there no map for it?

[Rider57]

There really isn't that many if you think about it and there are plenty of maps to use as a starting point.

[robertg]

So I got the bike running last week and did a couple of short V-tunes. I only went for a couple of short rides because the roads were pretty icy. Around idle the VE's went down around 30-35 to the 49-70 range. Around 2000 rpm some changed quite a bit as well, but some barely changed. I didn't get very many green cells but it seemed to run better after the V-tune. The bike starts instantly and idles pretty good. I set the idle to a little over 700 for a while and it ran pretty smooth there also. The only thing that I noticed is it runs kind of funny at 3000 rpm with no load. Hopefully that goes away. Am I on the right track so far? I am using FUF009-03 and the displacement is set to 124.

[strokerjlk]

The only thing that I noticed is it runs kind of funny at 3000 rpm with no load.

increase the ve's in the 2500-3500 rpms 10% @ 40-60 kpa. then v tune again.

Change Ci to like 124 and see how it tunes in.  I got a lot of reversion on my 120r combo in the beginning and I ran out of head room at 121ci

truk is right on this. I had to go 125 to get it stable

I thought the mt 8 took care of that for you?
I heard you just put the correct inj size and cubic inch size, in the constants ,and v tune it in

[glens]

Jim, now you're just being...

you.

[strokerjlk]

Jim, now you're just being...

you.

ME

smaller number inj.in the constant = more fuel
larger ci in the constant = more fuel.
very seldom on anything more than a stage TWO will you have the ve head room without lying on one or the other.
so you are thinking straight. and that is why they lowered the inj constant.
very seldom will you get by without lying to one or the other in order to have VE headroom . on anything stage two or better

.

HIM

These comments are not true at all for a TTS MT8 calibration. Jim has never learned to use the functions in the software so he has this issue . This was the case  in the older software where you could not adjust the cam and EGR but if you follow the directions and use the software as designed there is no need to lye to the constant settings for the injector or displacement. While you can do it,it is not necessary.

BTW 4.9 is the proper size for the larger injectors in your application with a 50 mm. the larger 5.3 sized injectors are for the 58mm DBW bikes.

It's all right here..
you spoke up and yes I am being me.
I guess everyone else was afraid they would be told they never learned to use the software either.
http://harleytechtalk.com/htt/index.php/topic,47239.0.html

[Steve Cole]

Yes, proper use of the software does not require you to increase the displacement to get what you need,
but as stated before you need to learn how to use it. Don't blame the tool for an operator that refuses to
learn how to use it properly. Sure is funny how we are asked for features to enhance tuning ability then once
we add them some people refuse to learn how to use them. Yes, to do a better job it takes more time but that is
part of tuning.

There are many of you who have learned to use the tools in the software at home and have found that it works but there are still some that wish to stay in the past and not learn.

[strokerjlk]

See told you so
Now you boys knock that ci down to 120 and re v t :soda:une

[1FSTRK]

Steve
With you having a 120r of your own to work with why don't you offer a 120r base map?
Does the map for your bike use 120 CI and work with the correct injector size in the constants?

[Steve Cole]

My personal 120R is still sitting on the bench as I have not had the time to put it into the bike once I rebuilt it. We do have a few out and running but both test bikes have taken very different tune-ups to get running properly. A third bike is done but sitting due to winter weather. So to release something that is not correct is not going to happen here. We will wait until we find why the two bike are so totally different prior to letting them out. At least then we know why and can give something for you all that works. BTW both bikes make within 2 & 2 of each other on the dyno but swap the tunes between them and they do not run correctly! They both have the CID set at 120 and the injectors at 5.32, so yes, using the tools correctly does make it so things work as expected!

[1FSTRK]

My personal 120R is still sitting on the bench as I have not had the time to put it into the bike once I rebuilt it. We do have a few out and running but both test bikes have taken very different tune-ups to get running properly. A third bike is done but sitting due to winter weather. So to release something that is not correct is not going to happen here. We will wait until we find why the two bike are so totally different prior to letting them out. At least then we know why and can give something for you all that works. BTW both bikes make within 2 & 2 of each other on the dyno but swap the tunes between them and they do not run correctly! They both have the CID set at 120 and the injectors at 5.32, so yes, using the tools correctly does make it so things work as expected!

Thanks for the quick reply
Are you saying the two bikes are identical except for the tune, exhaust and air intakes the same? It will be very interesting to hear what you find as the cause.

As for your own motor you’re a better man than I to leave it on the bench and take care of business. 

[Steve Cole]

Both bikes are 120R out of the box, 58 mm DBW, 5.3 injectors, heavy breather and 2:1 exhaust. One a borzilla and the other RB Racing, so they are about as close as your going to get. Both make within 2 &2 on the dyno of each other but you swap the cal's between them and they both turn into turd's. One's at 132 T and 131 Hp the other is 130 T and 133 Hp on our dyno. Both run side by side when riding and turn in within 1 MPG to each other, different days different one wins the MPG. Tunes vary as much as 20% on the VE's and 5 degrees in the timing! Somethings going on that I need to find and understand before I let something out. My "Potty mouth" always gets done last so I'm use to it.

[lonewolf]

Be interesting to see what happened if you also swapped exhausts when swapping calibrations..

[strokerjlk]

Be interesting to see what happened if you also swapped exhausts when swapping calibrations..

for sure. tuning 101.
about all that is the same on those two pipes is... they are a 2-1's.
I have lost count,but I have tuned more than 10 and less than 20 of these 120r's. I have one in my bike that has 15,000 miles on it and has been tuned with a couple diff pipes and a couple diff cams.
nothing rocket science about it...they all are diff. and none just flash and go,with a tuned cal from another 120r.
same stands true for CVO 110 bikes. even with exact pipes and A/C . they are all diff. when tuned,for that particular bike.
now it dosent mean anything to me to have to increase CI to 125.(120R) even had to go 131ci constant on a couple.
but there are a few ..very smart ,hardheaded ,stubborn, guys I know that cant accept the fact that you have to lie in the constants to start a tune. they are in search of that perfect tune without lying to it to start with. maybe they will maybe they wont .
I am not a big fan of letting software smooth any area of the map. if there is any smoothing done I want to do it myself. then sample again and see whats up.

[rbabos]

Be interesting to see what happened if you also swapped exhausts when swapping calibrations..

for sure. tuning 101.
about all that is the same on those two pipes is... they are a 2-1's.
I have lost count,but I have tuned more than 10 and less than 20 of these 120r's. I have one in my bike that has 15,000 miles on it and has been tuned with a couple diff pipes and a couple diff cams.
nothing rocket science about it...they all are diff. and none just flash and go,with a tuned cal from another 120r.
same stands true for CVO 110 bikes. even with exact pipes and A/C . they are all diff. when tuned,for that particular bike.
now it dosent mean anything to me to have to increase CI to 125.(120R) even had to go 131ci constant on a couple.
but there are a few ..very smart ,hardheaded ,stubborn, guys I know that cant accept the fact that you have to lie in the constants to start a tune. they are in search of that perfect tune without lying to it to start with. maybe they will maybe they wont .
I am not a big fan of letting software smooth any area of the map. if there is any smoothing done I want to do it myself. then sample again and see whats up.

Good to hear. Are you finding the more of these you tune and the different combos there starts to become a pattern where you can set the map up somewhat closer than the canned versions prior to tuning. I don't want a map that's so far out in left field that I have to worry about the engine during my critical ring seating operations prior to tuning it.  Two identical 120s with a 20% ve spread is not encouraging considering I will have different heads, tb, and exhaust.
Ron

[glens]

I am not a big fan of letting software smooth any area of the map. if there is any smoothing done I want to do it myself. then sample again and see whats up.

Exactly the process used with the .mt8 calibrations and their EGR tables.  No software does any smoothing of anything, it's all manual.  But you can manually smooth the VE tables in such a way that the system still works properly in closed-loop when you're done.  Where did you get the notion that some sort of "software smoothing" goes on?

[Steve Cole]

There is no reason to lie, just need to learn how to use the tools! Doing that results in a smoother running better all around performing bike! Jim's own statements above just goes to show he clearly doesn't know how to use the tools or understand how they work, just what I have been saying all along.
We've got over 15,000 miles on one of the test bikes too, so does that mean it's better or something  . Simple fact is when developing calibrations you need to understand the differences and what is causing them and these two bikes are close enough that the spread should not be as far apart as they are. Some don't care, but we do and until I get to the bottom of it I am not willing to release a final calibration. Do I expect the bikes to be a perfect match, not at all but this is just too much.

[strokerjlk]

Good to hear. Are you finding the more of these you tune and the different combos there starts to become a pattern where you can set the map up somewhat closer than the canned versions prior to tuning. I don't want a map that's so far out in left field that I have to worry about the engine during my critical ring seating operations prior to tuning it.  Two identical 120s with a 20% ve spread is not encouraging considering I will have different heads, tb, and exhaust.
Ron

sure set it up a little fat and tune it lean. of course you will be using v tune so you will have to guess at open loop areas.
but it will be a lot closer than the canned maps that came around with the new mt 7 mt 8 cals.
you know the ones with the ve's all smoothed out
want to guess how many of these final release's were actual tuned motorcycles?
you will get er done Ron. 

[hrdtail78]

This whole discussion proves to me what all of us already know.  Give the build what it wants.  I think staying in the confines of cu. in. is great, and a lot less work for me.  In reality.....  Spent some time with a 12 cvo with 54's, heavy breather, fulsac x pipe, .030 hg, 4in. RH's today.  MT8 hit the ceiling on rear in the 100kpa.  Maybe my problem was I started with Fulsac's cal.  Used that same cal. on almost the same build but the 555.  It was fine.  Did I cc the heads on either build?  No.  I have nothing bad to say about the fulsac head pipe, but...  You guys have seen them.  That's a funky bend before it goes behind the trans.  4500-5000 steady state tuning will put some heat into them at the xpipe.

"Also...  NOTHING is close for the 120.  You will REALLY have to work at cold idle and hot idle.  Playing with the crank to run and crank steps, etc.  It takes time.  Also, fairly soon into v-tuning you will REALLY need to lower the warm idle RPM to 700 and v-tune the 750-1250 areas while sitting in your garage.  Do that until all white and raise the idle back up to 1000."

That's called tuning.  Would love to spend 3 hours vtuning, setting WOT, checking spark knock and kicking them out.  Get off the beat'n path of a stage 1.  You will start leaving it for the night and hitting up warm up lambda in the morn.  Then spending more time tuning.

My point is this.  We understand a VE number is just that.  A number.  The programmers have to put a ceiling on it, just has they do with the bottom number.  My question is:  Does adding 5% really fuck "Potty mouth" up?

[strokerjlk]

This whole discussion proves to me what all of us already know.  Give the build what it wants.  I think staying in the confines of cu. in. is great, and a lot less work for me.  In reality.....  Spent some time with a 12 cvo with 54's, heavy breather, fulsac x pipe, .030 hg, 4in. RH's today.  MT8 hit the ceiling on rear in the 100kpa.  Maybe my problem was I started with Fulsac's cal.  Used that same cal. on almost the same build but the 555.  It was fine.  Did I cc the heads on either build?  No.  I have nothing bad to say about the fulsac head pipe, but...  You guys have seen them.  That's a funky bend before it goes behind the trans.  4500-5000 steady state tuning will put some heat into them at the xpipe.

"Also...  NOTHING is close for the 120.  You will REALLY have to work at cold idle and hot idle.  Playing with the crank to run and crank steps, etc.  It takes time.  Also, fairly soon into v-tuning you will REALLY need to lower the warm idle RPM to 700 and v-tune the 750-1250 areas while sitting in your garage.  Do that until all white and raise the idle back up to 1000."

That's called tuning.  Would love to spend 3 hours vtuning, setting WOT, checking spark knock and kicking them out.  Get off the beat'n path of a stage 1.  You will start leaving it for the night and hitting up warm up lambda in the morn.  Then spending more time tuning.

My point is this.  We understand a VE number is just that.  A number.  The programmers have to put a ceiling on it, just has they do with the bottom number.  My question is:  Does adding 5% really "potty mouth! " "Potty mouth" up?

got a 12 cvo been on the dyno since cinci.  574 feuling and V&H dresser duals with boom can mufflers.
just working COLD idle and a few other areas.
to fricking cold to tune.
but it's looking like 10% over on a 110 map is going to bring 3000-4000 ve's in at 120 on a mt 7.
I dont care if its 10% over and I tune it down 15 % in some areas. and neither does the motor.
plus I would rather have it rich when I steady state anything over 4000 rpms,because yes if you dont those head pipes start to glow pretty good.

[glens]

We understand a VE number is just that.  A number.  The programmers have to put a ceiling on it, just has they do with the bottom number.  My question is:  Does adding 5% really "potty mouth! " "Potty mouth" up?

Could you elaborate on "adding 5%"?

The ceiling the programmers have put on the VE number is simply because each cell value is held within one byte of memory.  A byte is an eight-place binary number (anywhere from 00000000 to 11111111) which translates into the range of "0" to "255" (2^8 - 1) in base-ten like we're accustomed to using.  Since the VE numbers are incremented by 0.5 (two increments per whole number) that leaves "128" (256÷2) possible discrete values.  Try tuning that with a carb!  Hahaha!

[hrdtail78]

Adding 5% to cubic inch.  Might as well say 20%.   Throw in force induction....?? 

Sorry for the "potty mouth" to my fellow HTT's and the mods.

I will add this. I have had some success fixing high VE's in WOT with PE mode. But my understanding is this is not what this table is for.

[BVHOG]

Both bikes are 120R out of the box, 58 mm DBW, 5.3 injectors, heavy breather and 2:1 exhaust. One a borzilla and the other RB Racing, so they are about as close as your going to get. Both make within 2 &2 on the dyno of each other but you swap the cal's between them and they both turn into turd's. One's at 132 T and 131 Hp the other is 130 T and 133 Hp on our dyno. Both run side by side when riding and turn in within 1 MPG to each other, different days different one wins the MPG. Tunes vary as much as 20% on the VE's and 5 degrees in the timing! Somethings going on that I need to find and understand before I let something out. My "Potty mouth" always gets done last so I'm use to it.

I'm with lonewolf on this one, swap the pipes and the cals and then see what you have, no way in hell are those two pipes going to tune even close to each other and you know that as well as anyone. When I swapped out the Bassani for a Rb on my own bike the Bassani map wasn't even usable, no surprise there either.

[BVHOG]

This whole discussion proves to me what all of us already know.  Give the build what it wants.  I think staying in the confines of cu. in. is great, and a lot less work for me.  In reality.....  Spent some time with a 12 cvo with 54's, heavy breather, fulsac x pipe, .030 hg, 4in. RH's today.  MT8 hit the ceiling on rear in the 100kpa.  Maybe my problem was I started with Fulsac's cal.  Used that same cal. on almost the same build but the 555.  It was fine.  Did I cc the heads on either build?  No.  I have nothing bad to say about the fulsac head pipe, but...  You guys have seen them.  That's a funky bend before it goes behind the trans.  4500-5000 steady state tuning will put some heat into them at the xpipe.

"Also...  NOTHING is close for the 120.  You will REALLY have to work at cold idle and hot idle.  Playing with the crank to run and crank steps, etc.  It takes time.  Also, fairly soon into v-tuning you will REALLY need to lower the warm idle RPM to 700 and v-tune the 750-1250 areas while sitting in your garage.  Do that until all white and raise the idle back up to 1000."

That's called tuning.  Would love to spend 3 hours vtuning, setting WOT, checking spark knock and kicking them out.  Get off the beat'n path of a stage 1.  You will start leaving it for the night and hitting up warm up lambda in the morn.  Then spending more time tuning.

My point is this.  We understand a VE number is just that.  A number.  The programmers have to put a ceiling on it, just has they do with the bottom number.  My question is:  Does adding 5% really "potty mouth! " "Potty mouth" up?

Give the build what it wants, that's what it has always been about. I have had to do things at idle with a 120r that I have never seen with any other build.

[wurk_truk]

........


"Also...  NOTHING is close for the 120.  You will REALLY have to work at cold idle and hot idle.  Playing with the crank to run and crank steps, etc.  It takes time.  Also, fairly soon into v-tuning you will REALLY need to lower the warm idle RPM to 700 and v-tune the 750-1250 areas while sitting in your garage.  Do that until all white and raise the idle back up to 1000."

That's called tuning.  Yes it IS tuning and you need to remember that I was 'talking' to the OP here.  I, myself, expect to ALWAYS check all of this out, but some don't bother.  With the 120r... one NEEDS to bother to get a nice idle..

[robertg]

I did a couple more garage V-tunes and everything went well. The only problem that I had is it wouldn't collect data in the 2500-3000 range, the waiting light would just come on. I changed the displacement to 120 from 124 and that seemed to help. It runs really good at 3000 now with no load and it purrs like a kitten at 720 rpm. It might be a couple of months before I can ride it on the road again, depends on the weather. At least I can see what the v-tuning does now.

[wurk_truk]

Robert... since it is too cold for both of us...  I am going to get around to installing the new lifters and tune a bit.

I wish to tune my idle qualities... warm AND cold.  While I await a little better weather for v-tuning. 

I was really happy to see BVBob state HE has seen idle issues, on 120s, too.  Makes me know that I am on the right track having to play with this somewhat.

Yes... it IS reversion that made me raise my CI up a bit.  And, I am sure that once I get to that part it will all smooth out quite a bit.  But for now, I was concentrating on idle and getting the map in shape somewhat before the 'finer' tuning comes into play.  Steve, I am sure that if I smoothed the EGR right at the beginning, maybe I wouldn't have needed to add like 4%, but...  I do things the retarded way I guess, and go with how I know the tune will finally end up being pretty nice.  Besides the 4%, I took my map and added like 10 more % to the VEs.  Then I let V-Tune DROP them into place instead of worrying about lifting them in place.  I know you may bitch, but it is how I figured I wanted to do it.

Plus...  I STILL think closed loop is a good goal to shoot for, but again, I am being 'different' about it.  My CL area is top center of the map.  I do NOT want 3000 and up in closed loop as 2800-3000 is MY cruising range and I wish for a tad bit more fuel in those areas... low 14s, I figure...from past experiences, I guess.  I like to do 75-80 mph and set the cruise for that speed.  I have noticeed that when I do this, the bike WILL get kinda hot after like 50 miles or so if I have that area set at 14.4-5.  If I run 14-14.2ish, the bike will NOT go into ETIMS when I get back into city traffic like 14.4 will.  I do NOT know why this is, but it is for sure doing this.  Its a right on the edge thing for my own bike I guess...  pulling too much fat around?  How in the Fudge can a couple TENTHS of a point make the ETIMS fire or not is beyond me.

After all the v-tuning I can get, I will sample with TS kit and check it all out to look for what 'matches' and what doesn't.. fill out my 80-100...  and THEN make the decision on where the break points will be between the v-tune and the TS+.  My thoughts right now are to use v-tune for like up to 70 kpa... make sure 80 kpa is all open loop and still has v-tune data, then use the data from the TS+... smoothed out... for the 90 and 100 kpa areas.  Then as the RPM climbs.. go backwards like to 60 and then even 50 for my data break points.  Then..  I will also wish to use the higher rpms almost pure TS+ kit, but all the break points on keeping the data copacetic makes my head hurt.

I totally 'get' the idea of making the ECM happy.  I was driving home, like 150 miles, tonight and thot about the van I was driving.  250k on the clock and still runs good.  Every time the battery goes dead from lack of use, the van runs like crap until all the AFVs get re - installed from driving.  My question is why do the AFVs REALLY help my van dial in, but we wish to make AFVs do minimal damage to the bikes?  My thought was...  Happy ECM.

I already feel that I should pull the pipe and weld some half nuts as bungs before I go much further.  Install the EGT bungs and 12mm bungs while I am at it.  What I really should do is stop my efforts trying for an AFR tune, weld the bungs in and go with my 2010 ECM and do Lambda tuning instead.  Then... while doing all of this road tuning, I could data log off of some LC1s I have and finally actually see what the BB sensors say at the same time the NBs are in and working.  THAT will be the goal at some point.....  the Data loggers I have right now simply can NOT import the various traces into one 'readable' data run.  I wonder if MLV will do this?   Anyways...I am IMpatiently waiting for you, Steve, to come up with some analog inputs for me to use...  use them I will!!  HAHA!

[1FSTRK]

Both bikes are 120R out of the box, 58 mm DBW, 5.3 injectors, heavy breather and 2:1 exhaust. One a borzilla and the other RB Racing, so they are about as close as your going to get. Both make within 2 &2 on the dyno of each other but you swap the cal's between them and they both turn into turd's. One's at 132 T and 131 Hp the other is 130 T and 133 Hp on our dyno. Both run side by side when riding and turn in within 1 MPG to each other, different days different one wins the MPG. Tunes vary as much as 20% on the VE's and 5 degrees in the timing! Somethings going on that I need to find and understand before I let something out. My "Potty mouth" always gets done last so I'm use to it.

Steve
I've been thinking about this post for the last 2 weeks and it has really kept me guessing. Hope you have made some progress on the 120r maps (I won't need one for at least a month)  but I also hope you will post the information on what you find when you figure out these two bikes and their maps. Alot to be learned here by all. Thanks for sharing so much here with us.

[bulldog]

Like to ask few questions:

Need a TTS map for 120r build for just startup;

Build:
R&R cast heads
662-2 cams
Fatcat 2-1 pipe
6.2 injectors
55mm HP TB

Need it only for startup,just to make sure it has good oil pressure and everything sounds correct.Then straight to the tuner!!
Or should I just build the motor then take it to the tuner and just cross my fingers that everything goes alright?

will

[Rdub]

Both bikes are 120R out of the box, 58 mm DBW, 5.3 injectors, heavy breather and 2:1 exhaust. One a borzilla and the other RB Racing, so they are about as close as your going to get. Both make within 2 &2 on the dyno of each other but you swap the cal's between them and they both turn into turd's. One's at 132 T and 131 Hp the other is 130 T and 133 Hp on our dyno. Both run side by side when riding and turn in within 1 MPG to each other, different days different one wins the MPG. Tunes vary as much as 20% on the VE's and 5 degrees in the timing! Somethings going on that I need to find and understand before I let something out. My "Potty mouth" always gets done last so I'm use to it.

Steve,

Any chance you would post the cal from the bike with the Boarzilla or email it to me?

[Rdub]

I guess i should have read all the previous posts before i asked for the cal...sorry. do you anything more figured out?

[Rider57]

Both bikes are 120R out of the box, 58 mm DBW, 5.3 injectors, heavy breather and 2:1 exhaust. One a borzilla and the other RB Racing, so they are about as close as your going to get. Both make within 2 &2 on the dyno of each other but you swap the cal's between them and they both turn into turd's. One's at 132 T and 131 Hp the other is 130 T and 133 Hp on our dyno. Both run side by side when riding and turn in within 1 MPG to each other, different days different one wins the MPG. Tunes vary as much as 20% on the VE's and 5 degrees in the timing! Somethings going on that I need to find and understand before I let something out. My "Potty mouth" always gets done last so I'm use to it.

Ditto on the 20% crap.Redid the valves and seats. Checked coil bind. Ahhhhh....

[Rdub]

So... are you saying the out of the box engines have the springs going into coil bind?