Anyone hear if Target Tune is closer to coming to market?
:potstir:
Spoke to DJ in uk regarding other matters, they have been allocated part numbers and gave a guess of around a month. I did see somewhere it was mentioned to be out around end of September. :idunno:
Target Tune is going to start shipping next week. I just posted info in my vendor section.
Outstanding. :up:
Ron
Dynojet just release it.
I got the e-mail today as well. Good to go
Here's hoping it works well enough to save all of us some time and trouble!
Quote from: Mountainman streetbob on July 31, 2015, 02:39:52 PM
Here's hoping it works well enough to save all of us some time and trouble!
good sampling should lead to good results or its the garbage in and garbage out roundabout......
Quote from: Hilly13 on July 31, 2015, 02:49:50 PM
Quote from: Mountainman streetbob on July 31, 2015, 02:39:52 PM
Here's hoping it works well enough to save all of us some time and trouble!
good sampling should lead to good results or its the garbage in and garbage out roundabout......
We'll all be back to yappin' about bad sensor placement very soon........
Quote from: tdkkart on July 31, 2015, 03:16:03 PM
Quote from: Hilly13 on July 31, 2015, 02:49:50 PM
Quote from: Mountainman streetbob on July 31, 2015, 02:39:52 PM
Here's hoping it works well enough to save all of us some time and trouble!
good sampling should lead to good results or its the garbage in and garbage out roundabout......
We'll all be back to yappin' about bad sensor placement very soon........
Haha, yep :up:
We'll all be back to yappin' about bad sensor placement very soon........
[/quote]
Haha, yep :up:
[/quote]
Speaking of which :SM:
http://harleytechtalk.com/htt/index.php/topic,84569.0.html (http://harleytechtalk.com/htt/index.php/topic,84569.0.html)
:potstir:
Just ordered one from fuelmoto.
We are going to give it a try! Down under!
And it will never work because of the made up data that PV generates.... [emoji1]
I wonder if it internally puts the data together better than it does for showing it to us in a log file. I'd sure hope so, but then why show it to us like it does...
I predict the system will work okay on some bikes and not so much on others.
Why the doubt on this product?
Quote from: Wallaby Bob on August 04, 2015, 07:02:44 AM
Why the doubt on this product?
Because "autotune" (target tune) is an oxymoron?
This has been done before by Revolution Performance a few years ago. A techline disaster?
Worked ok for stock and mild stage 2 bikes with popular cams and exhaust.
High performance builds with free flowing open exhaust with difference size injectors cause challenges as well.
Since DJ basically puts the ECM in engineering mode there are normal features that are not used which can prevent the system from some learning which means every time the engine is started and run the system relearns short term but no long term for fueling and timing.
There are other challenges to using the ECM in this mode and time will tell how that unfolds with this product.
What's the build you're going to use this on?
Bob
Was going to give it a go on the 120 when it's finally back together.
A Bit of input, FWIW. As applicable to a 120 build...
I am a tuner so I naturally believe a proper dyno tune is much better than any autotune system on the market for big inch, high performance engines.
There are just so many introduced variables in a big build, autotune systems just can't cover them all.
For example it can't make decisions as to when and where open and closed loop are relied upon for tuning and running. That's a biggie right there!
Then there's ignition timing...a good tuner will find false knock retard and know how to minimize it. For the 10-up bikes it's become a challenge to control knock retard.
Breaking in and tuning a fresh big inch build in a tightly monitored (temps, rpms, load, etc) environment in lieu of you taking your brand new engine with a brand new EFI system added to your bike out on the streets to know how to and be able to do a proper break in when you done know if the new autotune system is dialing in your bike or maybe it's supposed to run like this.
I know the ads say just "hook it up and ride" they fail to say "on a stock bike" cause that's the only ones that the stuff works as advertised.
just a few reasons to treat your fresh 120 to a proper dyno break-in and tune.
Bob
I get where you are coming from, but, it's seems that this is easier said than done around these parts of the Southern Hemisphere. So for the next best thing for me is to have some degree of control over the engine running, albeit, via the gauges on the PV. I would think that a pair of wide bands would be reasonably accurate in giving you some parameters with you tune. To me , an O2 sensor either works or it is junk. Squillions of vehicles gave them all over this planet.
But, I do respect your input and I will consider it all very carefully. Cheers!
Quote from: FLTRI on August 04, 2015, 08:59:03 AM
Quote from: Wallaby Bob on August 04, 2015, 07:02:44 AM
Why the doubt on this product?
Because "autotune" (target tune) is an oxymoron?
This has been done before by Revolution Performance a few years ago. A techline disaster?
Worked ok for stock and mild stage 2 bikes with popular cams and exhaust.
High performance builds with free flowing open exhaust with difference size injectors cause challenges as well.
Since DJ basically puts the ECM in engineering mode there are normal features that are not used which can prevent the system from some learning which means every time the engine is started and run the system relearns short term but no long term for fueling and timing.
There are other challenges to using the ECM in this mode and time will tell how that unfolds with this product.
What's the build you're going to use this on?
Bob
Unfortunately the info in your post is simply incorrect, Engineering Mode?
Target Tune does not change the "normal features" and it uses both short term and long term fuel trims.
Will TT interface with the vision gauge setting and allow you to monitor what it is doing? Monitoring this is key when doing a new engine. If not. I would break it in and tune with the AT-100 and vision. This will allow you to see danger lean/ rich, and manual adjust VE's out of danger zone. This will also let you do timing. Then put on TT if you want to run the bike on after it was tuned and broke in. IIRC DJ can take your tuned vision map and turn that into your TT starter map.
There are no short cuts and I don't think this is any more money to spend since they have a kit out there for guys that already have the Vision and AT-100's. It would be worth while to look into.
Quote from: hrdtail78 on August 05, 2015, 07:59:26 AM
Will TT interface with the vision gauge setting and allow you to monitor what it is doing? Monitoring this is key when doing a new engine. If not. I would break it in and tune with the AT-100 and vision. This will allow you to see danger lean/ rich, and manual adjust VE's out of danger zone. This will also let you do timing. Then put on TT if you want to run the bike on after it was tuned and broke in. IIRC DJ can take your tuned vision map and turn that into your TT starter map.
There are no short cuts and I don't think this is any more money to spend since they have a kit out there for guys that already have the Vision and AT-100's. It would be worth while to look into.
With TT you read/monitor the widebands right off the ECM's databus (you can choose AFR or Lambda), not AT-wideband over CAN like the AT-Pro units. There is also a new TT specific Auto Tune mode on the PV; TT-AT allows users to build their VE tables to the desired AF targets in the base AFR/Lambda table, it does not set the target to 13.0 AF like AT-Pro.
If users have a map they have been working with that they would like converted to a TT map both Dynojet & Fuel Moto have the ability to do so and there is an end user tool on the way.
Quote from: Jamie Long on August 05, 2015, 08:12:45 AM
If users have a map they have been working with that they would like converted to a TT map both Dynojet & Fuel Moto have the ability to do so and there is an end user tool on the way.
Any map? TTS, DL, SEPST, ETC.?
Not sure a conversion will work well due to all the background tables and strategies each mfg uses to build calibrations based their own idea of best calibration practices.
Maybe you meant converting just DJ products maps to TT?
Bob
Quote from: FLTRI on August 05, 2015, 09:10:48 AM
Quote from: Jamie Long on August 05, 2015, 08:12:45 AM
If users have a map they have been working with that they would like converted to a TT map both Dynojet & Fuel Moto have the ability to do so and there is an end user tool on the way.
Any map? TTS, DL, SEPST, ETC.?
Not sure a conversion will work well due to all the background tables and strategies each mfg uses to build calibrations based their own idea of best calibration practices.
Maybe you meant converting just DJ products maps to TT?
Bob
Any closed loop map that can be read by Power Vision and saved as a .pvt can be converted to a TT calibration
Quote from: Jamie Long on August 05, 2015, 09:24:46 AM
Quote from: FLTRI on August 05, 2015, 09:10:48 AM
Quote from: Jamie Long on August 05, 2015, 08:12:45 AM
If users have a map they have been working with that they would like converted to a TT map both Dynojet & Fuel Moto have the ability to do so and there is an end user tool on the way.
Any map? TTS, DL, SEPST, ETC.?
Not sure a conversion will work well due to all the background tables and strategies each mfg uses to build calibrations based their own idea of best calibration practices.
Maybe you meant converting just DJ products maps to TT?
Bob
Any closed loop map that can be read by Power Vision and saved as a .pvt can be converted to a TT calibration
Any guarantee the conversions will provide the same tune quality as the file provided before the conversion?
In other words, if I have a TTS Mastertune calibration how can you convert it to a TT file and expect the same run quality as the TTS file provided?
I have always found conversions take a lot for granted and assume tuning strategies are the same from mfg to mfg. They just never seem to be close enough to justify using a converted file rather than starting from scratch with a purpose build calibration rather than a converted one.
Time will tell how this system will work but we have learned over time tuning assumptions (ie: converted cals) do not turn out as expected...especially as applied to big, high performance builds due to all the inherent variables induced when making big changes.
Bob
TTS locks everything out so no you can't use PV to pull the tune and use target tune with their cals. Copy and paste can go a long way as that has worked for some company's for years. I don't believe dynojet is marketing this as an end all answer for everything but a great tool for getting you closer than other setup could. Live changes is the biggest deal, much better than the record, change, recheck method IMO. Yes there will be some exhaust/motor combos that will bring grief but that's life. Bob if your having some issues with PV cals have you talked to dynojet, Jamie or myself?
Quote from: FLTRI on August 05, 2015, 10:12:35 AM
Any guarantee the conversions will provide the same tune quality as the file provided before the conversion?
In other words, if I have a TTS Mastertune calibration how can you convert it to a TT file and expect the same run quality as the TTS file provided?
I have always found conversions take a lot for granted and assume tuning strategies are the same from mfg to mfg. They just never seem to be close enough to justify using a converted file rather than starting from scratch with a purpose build calibration rather than a converted one.
Time will tell how this system will work but we have learned over time tuning assumptions (ie: converted cals) do not turn out as expected...especially as applied to big, high performance builds due to all the inherent variables induced when making big changes.
Bib
Lets not muddy the water as we are talking about 2 things here now; A) converting a PV map to be Target Tune compatible and B) converting a non PV map to work with PV.
To convert a Power Vision map to be Target Tune compatible it requires starting with a .pvt file which is the standard PV tune format. Changing a "standard" Power Vision tune to a TT tune requires changes in the code to allow the ECM to interpret the 0-5v signal from the TT wideband module. End user will continue to see and work forward with the same familiar tuning tables.
Power Vision allows you to read and extract the tune that is in the ECM, and the tune can be saved as a .pvt file if desired. When doing this process it is not actually converting anything, it is simply assigning the definitions to be read in WinPv. This has been the case since the product was introduced. We do not support calibrations from other manufactures for use with Power Vision nor do we recommend doing so, you also cannot read ECM's that have been locked as joe_lyons noted
What exactly is Target Tune doing? My situation....2007 Heritage...with I guess they call it PV1. So now we have Target Tune on the scene. What is it doing that will help me? Will I have my entire VE table in closed loop now? And then retune the VE tables? Can I run closed loop at say 14:0? is this only for the closed loop fans? I used the PV to set up my VE's but afterwards I run it at 14:0 open loop. Who will benefit from TT and who wouldn't, is what I'm asking? Sorry for being a dumbsht but I'm having a hard time wrapping my head around this new add-on. I'm guessing this will only be a benefit to the closed loop fans. If there's more benefit to it, someone please educate me, and the rest that are scratching their heads.
Thanks for clearing that up Jamie. I didn't think you were referring to calibrations outside the Dynojet family even though technically it can be done by using the aftermarket tune from other tuners but not recommended.
Just trying to get an accurate read on expectations of TT.
Bob
Quote from: 07heri on August 05, 2015, 02:06:53 PM
What exactly is Target Tune doing? My situation....2007 Heritage...with I guess they call it PV1. So now we have Target Tune on the scene. What is it doing that will help me? Will I have my entire VE table in closed loop now? And then retune the VE tables? Can I run closed loop at say 14:0? is this only for the closed loop fans? I used the PV to set up my VE's but afterwards I run it at 14:0 open loop. Who will benefit from TT and who wouldn't, is what I'm asking? Sorry for being a dumbsht but I'm having a hard time wrapping my head around this new add-on. I'm guessing this will only be a benefit to the closed loop fans. If there's more benefit to it, someone please educate me, and the rest that are scratching their heads.
any replies to this?
Quote from: Mirrmu on August 05, 2015, 04:49:05 PM
Quote from: 07heri on August 05, 2015, 02:06:53 PM
What exactly is Target Tune doing? My situation....2007 Heritage...with I guess they call it PV1. So now we have Target Tune on the scene. What is it doing that will help me? Will I have my entire VE table in closed loop now? And then retune the VE tables? Can I run closed loop at say 14:0? is this only for the closed loop fans? I used the PV to set up my VE's but afterwards I run it at 14:0 open loop. Who will benefit from TT and who wouldn't, is what I'm asking? Sorry for being a dumbsht but I'm having a hard time wrapping my head around this new add-on. I'm guessing this will only be a benefit to the closed loop fans. If there's more benefit to it, someone please educate me, and the rest that are scratching their heads.
any replies to this?
Here is one of the prior discussions...
http://harleytechtalk.com/htt/index.php/topic,79964.0.html (http://harleytechtalk.com/htt/index.php/topic,79964.0.html)
there are a couple more if you use the search features.
Quote from: Jamie Long on August 05, 2015, 11:52:25 AM
Quote from: FLTRI on August 05, 2015, 10:12:35 AM
Any guarantee the conversions will provide the same tune quality as the file provided before the conversion?
In other words, if I have a TTS Mastertune calibration how can you convert it to a TT file and expect the same run quality as the TTS file provided?
I have always found conversions take a lot for granted and assume tuning strategies are the same from mfg to mfg. They just never seem to be close enough to justify using a converted file rather than starting from scratch with a purpose build calibration rather than a converted one.
Time will tell how this system will work but we have learned over time tuning assumptions (ie: converted cals) do not turn out as expected...especially as applied to big, high performance builds due to all the inherent variables induced when making big changes.
Bib
Lets not muddy the water as we are talking about 2 things here now; A) converting a PV map to be Target Tune compatible and B) converting a non PV map to work with PV.
To convert a Power Vision map to be Target Tune compatible it requires starting with a .pvt file which is the standard PV tune format. Changing a "standard" Power Vision tune to a TT tune requires changes in the code to allow the ECM to interpret the 0-5v signal from the TT wideband module. End user will continue to see and work forward with the same familiar tuning tables.
Just to make sure on
only the above marked section are you talking about Code or Calibration area? Two completely different things and one has to use the correct terminology when speaking about them.
Have read that.
Lets say have sent current PV map to dj and is now TT ready, I load to PV with winPV then flash to bike.
Have PV mounted on handlebar, start bike and go for ride, what do I do next?
Thanks
Confirm it's working, then unmount the PV and throw it in the drawer. You won't need it for a good long while.
Hopefully.
Quote from: 07heri link=topic=84316.msg952015#msg952015
Can I run closed loop at say 14:0? is this only for the closed loop fans? I used the PV to set up my VE's but afterwards I run it at 14:0 open loop.
Why are you afraid of closed loop operation?
With this setup you're supposed to be able to run closed loop everywhere, at any lambda value you want.
So from a DIY perspective! the purchaser will provide and engine spec and DJ will provide a map and the TT kit. Presumably.
My other unanswered question is- ' what if I install TT, then down the road, change my engine specs, eg. Cams, compression etc etc.
where do I stand??
.
There are a couple of things in the cal to change if cams are changed but you can use the same cal.
Since my understanding is that Target Tune makes closed-loop operation possible for any user-selected lambda value, will open-loop operation still be possible in areas selected by the user and if so, how will these areas be designated? It seems like the current strategy for selecting open-loop areas wouldn't (and shouldn't) work with TT. I ordered a TT from Fuel Moto yesterday so I guess I'll find out soon enough.
Quote from: GregOn2Wheels on August 06, 2015, 08:28:32 AM
Since my understanding is that Target Tune makes closed-loop operation possible for any user-selected lambda value, will open-loop operation still be possible in areas selected by the user and if so, how will these areas be designated? It seems like the current strategy for selecting open-loop areas wouldn't (and shouldn't) work with TT. I ordered a TT from Fuel Moto yesterday so I guess I'll find out soon enough.
Not sure I follow. If You can dial in the required afr in closed with WB why would you want open loop?
Ron
I want to be able to specify open-loop in areas where I'm not getting reliable samples. If perfect sampling from 875 rpms at 10 kpa through 6500 rpms at 100 kpa is a requirement to use TT, I don't think very many will have success with it.
Quote from: 07heri on August 05, 2015, 02:06:53 PM
What exactly is Target Tune doing? My situation....2007 Heritage...with I guess they call it PV1. So now we have Target Tune on the scene. What is it doing that will help me? Will I have my entire VE table in closed loop now? And then retune the VE tables? Can I run closed loop at say 14:0? is this only for the closed loop fans? I used the PV to set up my VE's but afterwards I run it at 14:0 open loop. Who will benefit from TT and who wouldn't, is what I'm asking? Sorry for being a dumbsht but I'm having a hard time wrapping my head around this new add-on. I'm guessing this will only be a benefit to the closed loop fans. If there's more benefit to it, someone please educate me, and the rest that are scratching their heads.
Individual benefits will vary based on the bike, specific modifications, and what the end user is looking for. Target Tune incorporates Bosch wideband sensors into the Delphi ECM and allows for full time closed loop operation over a considerably broader AF range than the factory sensors, much of the the closed loop strategy has also been changed to suit this application. You have full control of your AF/Lambda targets which allows for closed loop fuel control in areas that would normally be open loop such as WOT. The new TT-Auto Tune application on the PV is also unique in that it does not change the AF to 13.0 like AT-Pro allowing users to build their VE table to the same AF target as their calibration.
Quote from: Mirrmu on August 05, 2015, 09:58:03 PM
Have read that.
Lets say have sent current PV map to dj and is now TT ready, I load to PV with winPV then flash to bike.
Have PV mounted on handlebar, start bike and go for ride, what do I do next?
Thanks
The general procedure would be to install the Target Tune hardware, flash your TT calibration, then test run. Target Tune gives you as much as 25-40% +/- closed loop fuel control depending on the calibration and application. If there is not a close base map or if additional tuning is required you would use the TT-Auto Tune application, it all comes down to the complexity of the combination that is being tuned and overall accuracy of the base map. The PV does not need to be mounted with TT unless you are using the TT-Auto Tune application or want to monitor/log data.
Quote from: GregOn2Wheels on August 06, 2015, 08:54:07 AM
I want to be able to specify open-loop in areas where I'm not getting reliable samples. If perfect sampling from 875 rpms at 10 kpa through 6500 rpms at 100 kpa is a requirement to use TT, I don't think very many will have success with it.
Remember what this system does, and have realistic expectations. It changes the software in the ECM to be able to deal with 0-5 volts of a LSU 4.2 wide band sensor. You take out stock sensors and place the WB's in their place.
Garbage in/ garbage out is still in the picture. I don't see anything with this system (or any other) that address this with either hardware or software. It still needs the human element.
Quote from: Wallaby Bob on August 06, 2015, 02:49:00 AM
So from a DIY perspective! the purchaser will provide and engine spec and DJ will provide a map and the TT kit. Presumably.
My other unanswered question is- ' what if I install TT, then down the road, change my engine specs, eg. Cams, compression etc etc.
where do I stand??
.
If you make a major change to your combination it is always best to start with the closest map available for a given combination, however due to the unlimited amount of component changes one can make it is simply not possible to have a map for every setup. If you had a good working calibration and you changed the air cleaner or exhaust system many times you can work off of the same base map, if TT closed loop does not fill in the blanks you can use the TT-AT application to populate corrections. If you were changing the cams for example this would be best suited to an alternate base map, we would then use TT-AT to do the heavy lifting and get the VE's corrected.
Quote from: GregOn2Wheels on August 06, 2015, 08:28:32 AM
Since my understanding is that Target Tune makes closed-loop operation possible for any user-selected lambda value, will open-loop operation still be possible in areas selected by the user and if so, how will these areas be designated? It seems like the current strategy for selecting open-loop areas wouldn't (and shouldn't) work with TT. I ordered a TT from Fuel Moto yesterday so I guess I'll find out soon enough.
Target Tune sets the entire AF/Lambda table to closed loop, we do however have the ability to set the thresholds based on MAP.
Quote from: hrdtail78 on August 06, 2015, 09:58:55 AM
Quote from: GregOn2Wheels on August 06, 2015, 08:54:07 AM
I want to be able to specify open-loop in areas where I'm not getting reliable samples. If perfect sampling from 875 rpms at 10 kpa through 6500 rpms at 100 kpa is a requirement to use TT, I don't think very many will have success with it.
Remember what this system does, and have realistic expectations. It changes the software in the ECM to be able to deal with 0-5 volts of a LSU 4.2 wide band sensor. You take out stock sensors and place the WB's in their place.
Garbage in/ garbage out is still in the picture. I don't see anything with this system (or any other) that address this with either hardware or software. It still needs the human element.
Correct, like any tuning device Target Tune cannot fix the shortcomings of some engine/exhaust combinations and potential tuning issues induced. A tune can only be as good as the rest of the combination.
Some examples that come to mind that widebands, closed loop, and Target Tune simply cannot remedy would be using the inapropriate exhaust system for a given application, poor overall exhaust system design, incorrect O2 location, mismatched engine components, intake & exhaust leaks, just to name a few.
Thanks Jamie
Quote from: hrdtail78 on August 06, 2015, 09:58:55 AM
Quote from: GregOn2Wheels on August 06, 2015, 08:54:07 AM
I want to be able to specify open-loop in areas where I'm not getting reliable samples. If perfect sampling from 875 rpms at 10 kpa through 6500 rpms at 100 kpa is a requirement to use TT, I don't think very many will have success with it.
Remember what this system does, and have realistic expectations. It changes the software in the ECM to be able to deal with 0-5 volts of a LSU 4.2 wide band sensor. You take out stock sensors and place the WB's in their place.
Garbage in/ garbage out is still in the picture. I don't see anything with this system (or any other) that address this with either hardware or software. It still needs the human element.
I understand and agree completely. My question was essentially, how will us "human elements" compensate for the garbage areas that most bikes have? With PV today, we can use open-loop tuning in areas where we find garbage. Jamie's response seems to indicate that we'll have to adapt to a method that requires us to work with (or trick?) the system in "garbage areas" instead of today's method of going open-loop in these areas where garbage sampling would result in erroneous closed loop trims values. As long as these "thresholds" that Jamie mentioned give us adequate flexibility to "throw out garbage", it might be a superior way of doing things since it will/should/might eliminate unwanted trim correction carry-over into open-loop areas of the tune that we see today.
Depth/length of sensors are different between Narrow Bands [more so the 12mm) and Wide Bands, and how/where the sensor samples the air. Narrow Bands have the spiral cuts coming down from the end of the sensor and the cuts need to be directly into the flow. Wide Band sensors read the flow from the very end of the sensor so they do not need to be as deep as NB, but the full ends still need to be in the flow.
Yes if you have bad placement nothing is going to help other than moving them, but WB are less sensitive to death & placement.
Quote from: Steve Cole on August 06, 2015, 05:38:02 PM
Quote from: hrdtail78 on August 06, 2015, 09:58:55 AM
Quote from: GregOn2Wheels on August 06, 2015, 08:54:07 AM
I want to be able to specify open-loop in areas where I'm not getting reliable samples. If perfect sampling from 875 rpms at 10 kpa through 6500 rpms at 100 kpa is a requirement to use TT, I don't think very many will have success with it.
Remember what this system does, and have realistic expectations. It changes the software in the ECM to be able to deal with 0-5 volts of a LSU 4.2 wide band sensor. You take out stock sensors and place the WB's in their place.
Garbage in/ garbage out is still in the picture. I don't see anything with this system (or any other) that address this with either hardware or software. It still needs the human element.
The STOCK ECM already does this! Look at the voltage on the O2 sensors when cold with ANY logging tool and you will see the Delphi system starts at 5100 mv or 5.1 volts and then trims in as the system comes on line! No modification to the Code is necessary to do this. In the calibration area you just turn one set off and the other set on, it's simple for those of us that know. This is just the engineering mode being switched on just the same as Revolution Performance did, with the difference being you get to adjust on it yourself, in a limited manor. Expect the same results as before as that is all it can do and is why, it was NEVER intended to be used as a production environment product to start with. It simply is just not up to the OEM level of expectation for reliability over the various road conditions.
For the record there is several different ways to run the STOCK ECM and CODE with different O2 sensors connected. you can set it up to run one sensor for both cylinders, one per cylinder in one of three modes, Narrow Band, BroadBand (as this is using) or Wide Band using a true Wide Band sensor system. No Code ever gets changed to do this just tell it which mode you want to use in the calibration area just like you would adjusting a VE value. This was all done back in ~1999 when the ECM was developed by Delphi and has been in ALL production level ECM's that HD has used on a Delphi EFI equipped bike. Mind you I would not do it on a 2004 and earlier ECM as there is trouble there!
I would assume that the ECU runs some type of RTOS that allows for different modes, loading and unloading of tables. The questions I have are:
1. Can applications (subroutines is the ancient word) be down loaded and executed?
1a. Can it perform system calls?
2. I would assume that the "engineering" mode allows switching the sensor input through use of a table to get AFR (or some binary representation of it) to the main section that adjusts trims.. May even store AFR for logging.. Is this correct?
3. The fixed modes you talk about mainly use embedded tables for specific Afr sniffers.. Correct?
4. Is there a main execution loop that does all the calculations and performs the operating cycle of the motor that you don't have access to?
5. And,, I assume that all you can really modify is tables that you have access to plus switch some modes?
6. How much of this interface documented and how much is hacked.. (don't really expect an answer here.. :wink: )
I'll agree about using engineering modes as they not be as robust or filter the data differently.. I seen serious issues over using diagnostic modes when the system is up and running for longer periods of time.
The auto industry has switched to wideband sensors meanwhile for better emission control and driveability. Why shouldn't the Delphi engineers put this option into their (widely used) ECM for future upgrades? DJ may have found the "unlock key" and developed the appropriate parameters for our bikes. Just guessing...
Karl
Searching for Utopia!! Just imagine, I mean JUST imagine if the greatest minds could collaborate and sooth sole of the these Vee Twin animals, in all their guises.
Quote from: Wallaby Bob on August 07, 2015, 03:53:30 AM
Searching for Utopia!! Just imagine, I mean JUST imagine if the greatest minds could collaborate and sooth sole of the these Vee Twin animals, in all their guises.
Agreed Bob! But back here in the real world... ;-)
Oh man! That's unreal!
But seriously , we gave this propensity to argue, to disagree , as living proof that one is smarter than the other.
Personally, I don't give a f#ck!
Let's work together ! Let's promote working together.
Clever bastards and all!
Quote from: Max Headflow on August 06, 2015, 07:49:45 PM
Quote from: Steve Cole on August 06, 2015, 05:38:02 PM
Quote from: hrdtail78 on August 06, 2015, 09:58:55 AM
Quote from: GregOn2Wheels on August 06, 2015, 08:54:07 AM
I want to be able to specify open-loop in areas where I'm not getting reliable samples. If perfect sampling from 875 rpms at 10 kpa through 6500 rpms at 100 kpa is a requirement to use TT, I don't think very many will have success with it.
Remember what this system does, and have realistic expectations. It changes the software in the ECM to be able to deal with 0-5 volts of a LSU 4.2 wide band sensor. You take out stock sensors and place the WB's in their place.
Garbage in/ garbage out is still in the picture. I don't see anything with this system (or any other) that address this with either hardware or software. It still needs the human element.
The STOCK ECM already does this! Look at the voltage on the O2 sensors when cold with ANY logging tool and you will see the Delphi system starts at 5100 mv or 5.1 volts and then trims in as the system comes on line! No modification to the Code is necessary to do this. In the calibration area you just turn one set off and the other set on, it's simple for those of us that know. This is just the engineering mode being switched on just the same as Revolution Performance did, with the difference being you get to adjust on it yourself, in a limited manor. Expect the same results as before as that is all it can do and is why, it was NEVER intended to be used as a production environment product to start with. It simply is just not up to the OEM level of expectation for reliability over the various road conditions.
For the record there is several different ways to run the STOCK ECM and CODE with different O2 sensors connected. you can set it up to run one sensor for both cylinders, one per cylinder in one of three modes, Narrow Band, BroadBand (as this is using) or Wide Band using a true Wide Band sensor system. No Code ever gets changed to do this just tell it which mode you want to use in the calibration area just like you would adjusting a VE value. This was all done back in ~1999 when the ECM was developed by Delphi and has been in ALL production level ECM's that HD has used on a Delphi EFI equipped bike. Mind you I would not do it on a 2004 and earlier ECM as there is trouble there!
I would assume that the ECU runs some type of RTOS that allows for different modes, loading and unloading of tables. The questions I have are:
1. Can applications (subroutines is the ancient word) be down loaded and executed?
1a. Can it perform system calls?
Yes, to some levels
2. I would assume that the "engineering" mode allows switching the sensor input through use of a table to get AFR (or some binary representation of it) to the main section that adjusts trims.. May even store AFR for logging.. Is this correct?
Yep
3. The fixed modes you talk about mainly use embedded tables for specific Afr sniffers.. Correct?
The conversion for each type sensor is already populated in the calibration area
4. Is there a main execution loop that does all the calculations and performs the operating cycle of the motor that you don't have access to?
Me or someone else? :wink:
5. And,, I assume that all you can really modify is tables that you have access to plus switch some modes?
Me or someone else? :wink:
6. How much of this interface documented and how much is hacked.. (don't really expect an answer here.. :wink: )
All of it was fully documented back when (1996 - 2007) we did development for HD/Delphi
I'll agree about using engineering modes as they not be as robust or filter the data differently.. I seen serious issues over using diagnostic modes when the system is up and running for longer periods of time.
They were never intended to be, as it is not necessary to do the job they were supposed to do!
The entire reason for the engineering mode is to run along with an engineering ECM or development ECM as HD called it. This is a different ECM than the production ECM and has a bunch more features. These extra features allowed you to do a lot more and checks and balances were/are in place, but you can easily get your self in trouble with one if your not careful. This is all done to help aid in the development of the product cycle and was never intended to be used as they are trying to use it, today in the aftermarket. Will it work................ to some level I'm sure it will, but as Revolution Performance has found out, it's not what they played it up to be.
This is just the same thing with a slightly different twist added in, you are able at some level to make addition adjustments via the PV. No custom code is needed for it at all, no custom "set it up for 5 volt sensors" is needed as it's already there! It is simply learn how to turn it on (engineering mode) and use it properly. Now whether or not they have done that, or done that properly, I have no idea. That will be found out by you the customer who chooses to buy it.
I'll let you know next week Steve.
Quote from: joe_lyons on August 07, 2015, 12:04:00 PM
I'll let you know next week Steve.
Are you going to upload an encrypted file and send it to Steve? Seems that the best way to find out what is going on in the ECM is to pull everything you can and get it to a guy that knows what he is looking at.
I can see the tables that are being changed. But we will see. If it works then I will use it. If it dosent then I won't. I don't need an engineer to tell me that.
Quote from: Steve Cole on August 07, 2015, 09:00:17 AM
The entire reason for the engineering mode is to run along with an engineering ECM or development ECM as HD called it. This is a different ECM than the production ECM and has a bunch more features. These extra features allowed you to do a lot more and checks and balances were/are in place, but you can easily get your self in trouble with one if your not careful. This is all done to help aid in the development of the product cycle and was never intended to be used as they are trying to use it, today in the aftermarket. Will it work................ to some level I'm sure it will, but as Revolution Performance has found out, it's not what they played it up to be.
This is just the same thing with a slightly different twist added in, you are able at some level to make addition adjustments via the PV. No custom code is needed for it at all, no custom "set it up for 5 volt sensors" is needed as it's already there! It is simply learn how to turn it on (engineering mode) and use it properly. Now whether or not they have done that, or done that properly, I have no idea. That will be found out by you the customer who chooses to buy it.
Thanks for the additional info, Steve.
Quote from: joe_lyons on August 07, 2015, 01:45:59 PM
I can see the tables that are being changed.
I think this is the misconception a lot of people have. There is more to a calibration than the tables that we can change. Look at the IAC problem that was recently brought up with the 159 level that wasn't there with the 176. The part of the calibration that did fix this. Isn't seen.
Quote from: joe_lyons on August 07, 2015, 01:45:59 PM
I can see the tables that are being changed. But we will see. If it works then I will use it. If it dosent then I won't. I don't need an engineer to tell me that.
I do not need to see, it to tell what the ECM can and cannot do. The problem I have is when someone comes along and makes up stories about what it already has built into it. The Delphi ECM is very powerful and does lots of thing that are not being used by HD. The whole BS about needing to redo it it for 5 volt sensors is just that and anyone that looks at it with a scantool can clearly see the 5 volts, in it's stock form.
CODE is typically referred to as the guts of the ECM, the area that controls what it can do and contains the mathematical functions of the ECM. Calibration is the adjustable areas like VE tables, Spark tables, Constants and such. You would need to rewrite CODE to add a function that is not already in the ECM, but, just to switch it, since it's function is already there, is done in the calibration area. Switching on any of the sensor types and how many, is a simple calibration change and nothing in the CODE area needs any changing on a HD/Delphi ECM.
But that is changing calibration levels, so yes there are a lot of underlying things that change. This is not that. Most people will have to use the autotune feature to change the tables to be able to use target tune. I can do it manually.
Steve,
Why is it when I first download a MT calibration it takes about 3 times as long as any other time? Is it just calibration or is it code and calibration on that first time?
Quote from: hrdtail78 on August 07, 2015, 04:24:27 PM
Steve,
Why is it when I first download a MT calibration it takes about 3 times as long as any other time? Is it just calibration or is it code and calibration on that first time?
Are you just talking about changing levels of cals or does it take extra time to go from say a harley 044 to a TTS 044? Changing levels of cals does take extra time and I believe this is due to rewriting code. Sorry not Steve but still wondering.
Does it every time I first download a TTS cal. It did it with the 15 I just got done with and it was a 617 cal I was downloading and I can only assume a 617 was in the bike. Doesn't matter to TTS what is in the ECM. This is after I have saved the MTE. I know it does it automatically but I'm in the habit.
TTS runs their own underlying code which must be written the first time. Once that is installed the first time they only have to update the calibration tables. At least that's how I understand it.
Quote from: Coyote on August 07, 2015, 06:08:03 PM
TTS runs their own underlying code which must be written the first time. Once that is installed the first time they only have to update the calibration tables. At least that's how I understand it.
Me too
Quote from: joe_lyons on August 07, 2015, 12:04:00 PM
I'll let you know next week Steve.
What do you think Joe. Did you use it yet?
I got to mess with it a short bit on Tuesday. I found out that the autotune/ target tune mode that can be set up with the PV through the Autotune box sets the ECM in open loop and just recordes like Autotune Pro does but the difference is that the AFR table is not changed. They are working on getting the closed loop version of the target Tune Auto Tune mode done.
On actually enabling the calibration to use target tune I did not get to try that out because I was pressed for time. I have the access to enable all the tables that need to be changed for using target tune and will try this out tomorrow as I have a power vision tune to do tomorrow.
Doesn't sound like it's ready for market.
Depends on which market I guess. For guys wanting full time closed loop with the widebands then yes it is probably fine but for me using it as a tool on the dyno to tune multiple bikes using the autotune/target tune mode then it looks like I will be a Beta tester soon.
Quote from: BUGLET on July 31, 2015, 05:07:10 AM
Dynojet just release it.
Quote from: joe_lyons on August 13, 2015, 05:45:51 PM
They are working on getting the closed loop version of the target Tune Auto Tune mode done.
Quote from: joe_lyons on August 13, 2015, 07:08:07 PM
Depends on which market I guess. For guys wanting full time closed loop with the widebands then yes it is probably fine but for me using it as a tool on the dyno to tune multiple bikes using the autotune/target tune mode then it looks like I will be a Beta tester soon.
I thought the market was for full time closed loop?
The rest that you are looking for as a pro. Can be found in the HD06 with analog inputs.
Quote from: glens on August 06, 2015, 12:54:51 AM
Quote from: 07heri link=topic=84316.msg952015#msg952015
Can I run closed loop at say 14:0? is this only for the closed loop fans? I used the PV to set up my VE's but afterwards I run it at 14:0 open loop.
Why are you afraid of closed loop operation?
With this setup you're supposed to be able to run closed loop everywhere, at any lambda value you want.
Not afraid of closed loop....afraid of 14.6
Quote from: q1svt on August 05, 2015, 06:10:05 PM
Quote from: Mirrmu on August 05, 2015, 04:49:05 PM
Quote from: 07heri on August 05, 2015, 02:06:53 PM
What exactly is Target Tune doing? My situation....2007 Heritage...with I guess they call it PV1. So now we have Target Tune on the scene. What is it doing that will help me? Will I have my entire VE table in closed loop now? And then retune the VE tables? Can I run closed loop at say 14:0? is this only for the closed loop fans? I used the PV to set up my VE's but afterwards I run it at 14:0 open loop. Who will benefit from TT and who wouldn't, is what I'm asking? Sorry for being a dumbsht but I'm having a hard time wrapping my head around this new add-on. I'm guessing this will only be a benefit to the closed loop fans. If there's more benefit to it, someone please educate me, and the rest that are scratching their heads.
any replies to this?
Here is one of the prior discussions...
http://harleytechtalk.com/htt/index.php/topic,79964.0.html (http://harleytechtalk.com/htt/index.php/topic,79964.0.html)
there are a couple more if you use the search features.
No answers in those links.
Quote from: glens on August 06, 2015, 12:37:33 AM
Confirm it's working, then unmount the PV and throw it in the drawer. You won't need it for a good long while.
Hopefully.
I use it for RPM, and monitoring temp and volts. Are you saying the PV won't be able to be used like this adfter TT is brought into the equation/
Quote from: 07heri on August 13, 2015, 09:43:40 PM
Not afraid of closed loop....afraid of 14.6
14.6 is out dated. That is what use to be stoichiometric. With todays fuels. Shooting for 14.2 cruise, 13.8 idle, and 13 best power doesn't work. .977, 940, and .877 does work.
Quote from: 07heri on August 13, 2015, 09:43:40 PM
Not afraid of closed loop....afraid of 14.6
Why???
There's literally MILLIONS of 2 and 4 wheeled vehicles cruising down the roads every day in the 14.5-15.0 range with no ill effects whatsoever.
What are you afraid of??
Yes but theses millions of vehicules are often water cooled...
:SM:
How many of them are running the head and engine temps seen in an air cooled Harley?
The ability to maintain 200F water temp is a real game changer when it come to compression, timing, and AFR.
hdmanillac
You beat me by seconds.
Quote from: hrdtail78 on August 13, 2015, 09:38:35 PM
Quote from: BUGLET on July 31, 2015, 05:07:10 AM
Dynojet just release it.
Quote from: joe_lyons on August 13, 2015, 05:45:51 PM
They are working on getting the closed loop version of the target Tune Auto Tune mode done.
Quote from: joe_lyons on August 13, 2015, 07:08:07 PM
Depends on which market I guess. For guys wanting full time closed loop with the widebands then yes it is probably fine but for me using it as a tool on the dyno to tune multiple bikes using the autotune/target tune mode then it looks like I will be a Beta tester soon.
I thought the market was for full time closed loop?
The rest that you are looking for as a pro. Can be found in the HD06 with analog inputs.
Maybe I'll get one of those green dongles someday but when I have what I need its hard to spend more money on just extras.
Quote from: hdmanillac on August 14, 2015, 04:15:08 AM
Yes but theses millions of vehicules are often water cooled...
Several hundred thousand, if not millions of them are Harley Davidson Twin Cam powered bikes ridden by owners
completely oblivious to the "problems" those of us on forums wring our hands over every day.
Pick a problem, any problem, cam chain tensioners, lifters, valve seals, valve guides, compensators etc etc and I can show you 10 owners who
haven't a clue what we're talking about.
My 110" CVO RGU runs happy as a clam all day long at 14.5, closed loop, 450lbs of passengers +gear, at 90* ambient on 91 octane fuel.
Coming up on it's 5000mi oil change and hasn't lost a single drop of oil since it's 1000mi service.
Quote from: tdkkart on August 14, 2015, 07:15:07 AM
Quote from: hdmanillac on August 14, 2015, 04:15:08 AM
Yes but theses millions of vehicules are often water cooled...
Several hundred thousand, if not millions of them are Harley Davidson Twin Cam powered bikes ridden by owners
completely oblivious to the "problems" those of us on forums wring our hands over every day.
Pick a problem, any problem, cam chain tensioners, lifters, valve seals, valve guides, compensators etc etc and I can show you 10 owners who
haven't a clue what we're talking about.
My 110" CVO RGU runs happy as a clam all day long at 14.5, closed loop, 450lbs of passengers +gear, at 90* ambient on 91 octane fuel.
Coming up on it's 5000mi oil change and hasn't lost a single drop of oil since it's 1000mi service.
Ignorance is indeed bliss. My problem is that I am ever so slightly above ignorant and once one knows some of these things, they're hard to forget. It's a curse I tell ya!
Quote from: joe_lyons on August 14, 2015, 06:24:34 AM
Quote from: hrdtail78 on August 13, 2015, 09:38:35 PM
Quote from: BUGLET on July 31, 2015, 05:07:10 AM
Dynojet just release it.
Quote from: joe_lyons on August 13, 2015, 05:45:51 PM
They are working on getting the closed loop version of the target Tune Auto Tune mode done.
Quote from: joe_lyons on August 13, 2015, 07:08:07 PM
Depends on which market I guess. For guys wanting full time closed loop with the widebands then yes it is probably fine but for me using it as a tool on the dyno to tune multiple bikes using the autotune/target tune mode then it looks like I will be a Beta tester soon.
I thought the market was for full time closed loop?
The rest that you are looking for as a pro. Can be found in the HD06 with analog inputs.
Maybe I'll get one of those green dongles someday but when I have what I need its hard to spend more money on just extras.
Depends what you consider an extra. At one time. We ran tubes up the exhaust and hand mapped VE tables. Something to map these VE tables was an extra. O2 blocks for better sampling were extras. Look at the tables we had available back in 09 compared to the extra tables we have today. Now we don't look back. It is the extras that has allowed us to step up our game. If we can tune with a single sensor and hand mapping VE's? Isn't target tune an extra?
Bottom line is target tune is released to the public, but it doesn't do closed loop with WB's with the stock ECM. The big selling point of this system to some. What is the point of releasing it? To say it's released? Typical DJ marketing.
It does do closed loop with widebands and the stock ECM. I pointed that out. I just said that the autotune part of it is not closed loop. There is a difference. Read closely.
I have the target tune module already is what I was talking about.
Quote from: joe_lyons on August 13, 2015, 05:45:51 PM
They are working on getting the closed loop version of the target Tune Auto Tune mode done.
Statement that lead to my misunderstanding.
Quote from: hrdtail78 on August 14, 2015, 07:29:17 AM
Bottom line is target tune is released to the public, but it doesn't do closed loop with WB's with the stock ECM. The big selling point of this system to some. What is the point of releasing it? To say it's released? Typical DJ marketing.
Target Tune is closed loop with wideband O2's, thats the whole point of the product. The only time it is open loop is when you are using the TT-AT application to develop VE corrections.
Quote from: Jamie Long on August 14, 2015, 08:50:25 AM
Quote from: hrdtail78 on August 14, 2015, 07:29:17 AM
Bottom line is target tune is released to the public, but it doesn't do closed loop with WB's with the stock ECM. The big selling point of this system to some. What is the point of releasing it? To say it's released? Typical DJ marketing.
Target Tune is closed loop with wideband O2's, thats the whole point of the product. The only time it is open loop is when you are using the TT-AT application to develop VE corrections.
To make things clear. The system works as a closed loop WB ECM, but you can't map VE's with it. There has been some mix info on this. I was under the impression in order for this to work. The VE's need to be mapped to the combo and then the WB will keep it in tune. It wasn't just a plug and play that would pull everything in. Things need to be close to start with. Or atleast with in a certain tolorance. Since it is using the same LT/STFT's as stock. I'd say that tolorance is about 18%. Just a guess.
So, for right now. One needs to map VE's with AT-100's, stock NB or by hand. Then take out the stock sesnors and put on the target tune to help keep the targeted AFR?
Quote from: hrdtail78 on August 14, 2015, 09:28:47 AM
but you can't map VE's with it
This question has been asked to DJ. Here is the answer:
"The best answer I can provide at this time would be to simply run an auto tune session using the Target Tune. Running auto tune with the Target Tune is different than the separate Auto Tune Pro accessory as the Target Tune auto tune will not alter your air to fuel ratio and will not pull timing, it will run whatever targets your fuel map is.
There is no longer a need to mess with auto tune basic (utilizing the factory narrow band sensors) nor would it be beneficial to hook up the auto tune pro accessory. Simply ride the bike with Target Tune installed and allow the trims to calculate automatically or you can dial in the base map utilizing the Target Tune auto tune mode."
:up:
Using the target tune autotune would probably be better as it does not alter the timing or afr table like the other 2 modes.
I can alter my closed loop integrator rich/lean range pretty much as much as I want. For target tune it widens it out a bit more than stock. Adaptive range can not be changed as of right now.
Quote from: hrdtail78 on August 14, 2015, 09:28:47 AM
Quote from: Jamie Long on August 14, 2015, 08:50:25 AM
Quote from: hrdtail78 on August 14, 2015, 07:29:17 AM
Bottom line is target tune is released to the public, but it doesn't do closed loop with WB's with the stock ECM. The big selling point of this system to some. What is the point of releasing it? To say it's released? Typical DJ marketing.
Target Tune is closed loop with wideband O2's, thats the whole point of the product. The only time it is open loop is when you are using the TT-AT application to develop VE corrections.
To make things clear. The system works as a closed loop WB ECM, but you can't map VE's with it. There has been some mix info on this. I was under the impression in order for this to work. The VE's need to be mapped to the combo and then the WB will keep it in tune. It wasn't just a plug and play that would pull everything in. Things need to be close to start with. Or atleast with in a certain tolorance. Since it is using the same LT/STFT's as stock. I'd say that tolorance is about 18%. Just a guess.
So, for right now. One needs to map VE's with AT-100's, stock NB or by hand, Then take out the stock sesnors and put on the target tune to help keep the targeted AFR?
You do not need to use a AT-100, other sensors, or tune by hand. take out the sensors etc.. Once you install the Target Tune and flash a TT-enabled calibration you are ready to test and/or follow thru with the tuning process.
When you install the Target Tune module with a TT-enabled map it will be closed loop with the wb sensors. The initial state of tune will come down to the accuracy of the base map for a given combination, TT uses CLI/AFF however the closed loop tables are significantly different on the back end compared to a "standard" calibration, and most TT-enabled maps have in the range of +/- 40% fuel correction depending on the application. Yes, like anything else you need something in the ballpark to get started but the system does have quite a bit of flexibility/adaptability. For VE tuning you would use the TT-AT application, this sets up various parameters in the tune for best data collection similar to AT-Pro, however it does not change the AF to 13.0 it uses whatever is in the AFR/Lambda table. After a TT-AT session you would export the corrections, flash the map and continue on in closed loop.
Not sure I understand this statement:
"Simply ride the bike with Target Tune installed and allow the trims to calculate automatically or you can dial in the base map utilizing the Target Tune auto tune mode."
Why would anyone opt to dial in the base map when theycan have TT calculate this automatically? :scratch:
Bob
Quote from: FLTRI on August 14, 2015, 10:13:45 AM
Not sure I understand this statement:
"Simply ride the bike with Target Tune installed and allow the trims to calculate automatically or you can dial in the base map utilizing the Target Tune auto tune mode."
Why would anyone opt to dial in the base map when theycan have TT calculate this automatically? :scratch:
Bob
Target Tune is closed loop, the ECM is applying corrections with closed loop multipliers both real time (CLI) and stored block learn (AFF). For VE correction you would utilize the TT-AT application which takes the +/- corrections and applies them directly back to the VE tables. As noted earlier the inital state of tune comes down the overall accuracy of the base map, for example if you have a basic stage 1 exhaust/intake setup and have a good base map it will be really close and Target Tune closed loop will do well for filling in the blanks and maintaining the AF targets written in the tune, if fine tuning is necessary you would run the TT-AT application. On the other end of the spectrum if you have a combination with big bore, cams, ect.. and you do not have just the right map it will require a fair amount or significant tuning just like anything else, however you now have another tool at your disposal and the big benefit with TT is that when you finish up the tune you can roll it out in closed loop with the same AF targets you developed the calibration to.
Thanks Jamie and Joe, many here appreciate the effort you are putting into the communications and the information you are sharing...
Quote from: Jamie Long on August 14, 2015, 10:38:42 AM
Quote from: FLTRI on August 14, 2015, 10:13:45 AM
Not sure I understand this statement:
"Simply ride the bike with Target Tune installed and allow the trims to calculate automatically or you can dial in the base map utilizing the Target Tune auto tune mode."
Why would anyone opt to dial in the base map when theycan have TT calculate this automatically? :scratch:
Bob
Target Tune is closed loop, the ECM is applying corrections with closed loop multipliers both real time (CLI) and stored block learn (AFF). For VE correction you would utilize the TT-AT application which takes the +/- corrections and applies them directly back to the VE tables. As noted earlier the inital state of tune comes down the overall accuracy of the base map, for example if you have a basic stage 1 exhaust/intake setup and have a good base map it will be really close and Target Tune closed loop will do well for filling in the blanks and maintaining the AF targets written in the tune, if fine tuning is necessary you would run the TT-AT application. On the other end of the spectrum if you have a combination with big bore, cams, ect.. and you do not have just the right map it will require a fair amount or significant tuning just like anything else, however you now have another tool at your disposal and the big benefit with TT is that when you finish up the tune you can roll it out in closed loop with the same AF targets you developed the calibration to.
Thank you Jamie that cleared up my question. :up:
Bob
Quote from: Jamie Long on August 14, 2015, 10:38:42 AM
if fine tuning is necessary you would run the TT-AT application.
Quote from: joe_lyons on August 13, 2015, 05:45:51 PM
They are working on getting the closed loop version of the target Tune Auto Tune mode done.
When they get that part of it done, right? Thanks for the info all in one place. I was tired of jumping through several topics trying to make sense.
Quote from: hrdtail78 on August 14, 2015, 12:04:07 PM
Quote from: Jamie Long on August 14, 2015, 10:38:42 AM
if fine tuning is necessary you would run the TT-AT application.
Quote from: joe_lyons on August 13, 2015, 05:45:51 PM
They are working on getting the closed loop version of the target Tune Auto Tune mode done.
When they get that part of it done, right? Thanks for the info all in one place. I was tired of jumping through several topics trying to make sense.
The Target Tune-AT application referred to in my earlier posts is a active/current feature. The application joe_lyons brought up is something that will be likely developed and offered at a later date, this has not been officially announced.
Quote from: hrdtail78 on August 14, 2015, 12:04:07 PM
Quote from: joe_lyons on August 13, 2015, 05:45:51 PM
They are working on getting the closed loop version of the target Tune Auto Tune mode done.
When they get that part of it done, right? Thanks for the info all in one place. I was tired of jumping through several topics trying to make sense.
Hardtail, Your repeating yourself...
It was asked and answered...
Quote from: joe_lyons on August 14, 2015, 08:03:01 AM
It does do closed loop with widebands and the stock ECM. I pointed that out. I just said that the autotune part of it is not closed loop. There is a difference. Read closely.
I have the target tune module already is what I was talking about.
You clarified where you when off track before.
Quote from: hrdtail78 on August 14, 2015, 08:11:34 AM
Quote from: joe_lyons on August 13, 2015, 05:45:51 PM
They are working on getting the closed loop version of the target Tune Auto Tune mode done.
Statement that lead to my misunderstanding.
To help clear up what Target Tune can/cannot do here is some of the information we originally posted:
Allows the factory ECM to interpret and use wideband O2 sensor signals*
User defined AFR/Lambda targets over a broad range
Target fuel table from PV calibration is achieved in real time
Retains OEM closed loop, adaptive fuel control strategy
Learns and uses VE table corrections as you ride
Target Tune enhanced Auto Tune app on PV device
Does NOT interfere with dealer diagnostic / service tools
Direct plug in OEM style connectors connect to factory O2 harness
Model specific applications for Harley Davidson closed loop models
Available as upgrade kit without O2 sensors for owners of Auto Tune Pro
Fits 2006 and newer Harley Davidson motorcycles**
* Requires Power Vision Target Tune specific calibration
** ECM must be "closed loop capable" and have OEM wiring for O2 sensor circuitry
Sorry if I confused some people.
I was getting confused on the difference between OL TT AT and CL TT AT. I still am a bit. CL TT uses the ST/LTFT as set up in the HD Delphi system. Why can't it use the 0-5 volt it uses to give the ECM feed back and be logged at the same time. It works with AT basic and stock NB sensors. Besides Vision gives you VE new. Just average those up and you got it, right?
As of right now there is no Target Tune Auto Tune that is closed loop. There is Target Tune that you have to send your cal the dynojet or Fuel Moto to have altered to use the Target Tune module.
Have you used MLVHD this way and had bad results or are you assuming?
I'm doing a little test, I recorded going though all the same motions that I would normally do when doing a narrowband sensor tune and will use MLVHD and view the VE new F&R and apply those to the VE table and then do a regular narrowband tune and see the differences between the two. It might or might not work. I guess I'll see.
Quote from: joe_lyons on August 14, 2015, 05:59:23 PM
I'm doing a little test, I recorded going though all the same motions that I would normally do when doing a narrowband sensor tune and will use MLVHD and view the VE new F&R and apply those to the VE table and then do a regular narrowband tune and see the differences between the two. It might or might not work. I guess I'll see.
Excellent idea. :idea: :up:
If all things equal they should agree within .5afr
Bob
Quote from: joe_lyons on August 14, 2015, 05:59:23 PM
I'm doing a little test, I recorded going though all the same motions that I would normally do when doing a narrowband sensor tune and will use MLVHD and view the VE new F&R and apply those to the VE table and then do a regular narrowband tune and see the differences between the two. It might or might not work. I guess I'll see.
Your results will be interesting to see. I tried using VE New in MLVHD to dial in VEs using the AT-100 and found that while the MLVHD was showing almost all cells a few points rich, The "Average" VE New was an increase over what was already there. However, when I calculated the "average" delta's between Lambda and Set Lambda that the VE were smaller.
(([Lambda1]/[Set Lambda])*[VE Front])-[VE Front]
Changing based on the delta's moved the Lambda readings in the right direction and was within a .1 or .2 AFR reading in open loop.
I used the word "Average" loosely as I am only guessing how MLVHD calculates and populates a Histogram.
Quote from: Onthefence on August 14, 2015, 07:19:57 PM
Quote from: joe_lyons on August 14, 2015, 05:59:23 PM
I'm doing a little test, I recorded going though all the same motions that I would normally do when doing a narrowband sensor tune and will use MLVHD and view the VE new F&R and apply those to the VE table and then do a regular narrowband tune and see the differences between the two. It might or might not work. I guess I'll see.
Your results will be interesting to see. I tried using VE New in MLVHD to dial in VEs using the AT-100 and found that while the MLVHD was showing almost all cells a few points rich, The "Average" VE New was an increase over what was already there. However, when I calculated the "average" delta's between Lambda and Set Lambda that the VE were smaller.
(([Lambda1]/[Set Lambda])*[VE Front])-[VE Front]
Changing based on the delta's moved the Lambda readings in the right direction and was within a .1 or .2 AFR reading in open loop.
I used the word "Average" loosely as I am only guessing how MLVHD calculates and populates a Histogram.
Did you still have the bike using the narrowband sensors along with the widebands?
When using the widebands through PV to set VEs I like to use megalog viewer and the histogram/table generator. Once you set up the X&Y to match and an Excell file to flip everything correctly it is pretty easy. I use this formula and apply it to a Delta difference of the same calibration I am using (([Lambda2]*14.7)-[Set AFR])*10 and
(([Lambda1]*14.7)-[Set AFR])*10
This gives the difference between what is asked and what is seen so you can copy paste to the Delta table of the cal your messing with. It works pretty well and I use it with older SERT and Vrod SEPST stuff.
Quote from: Onthefence on August 14, 2015, 07:19:57 PM
Quote from: joe_lyons on August 14, 2015, 05:59:23 PM
I'm doing a little test, I recorded going though all the same motions that I would normally do when doing a narrowband sensor tune and will use MLVHD and view the VE new F&R and apply those to the VE table and then do a regular narrowband tune and see the differences between the two. It might or might not work. I guess I'll see.
Your results will be interesting to see. I tried using VE New in MLVHD to dial in VEs using the AT-100 and found that while the MLVHD was showing almost all cells a few points rich, The "Average" VE New was an increase over what was already there. However, when I calculated the "average" delta's between Lambda and Set Lambda that the VE were smaller.
(([Lambda1]/[Set Lambda])*[VE Front])-[VE Front]
Changing based on the delta's moved the Lambda readings in the right direction and was within a .1 or .2 AFR reading in open loop.
I used the word "Average" loosely as I am only guessing how MLVHD calculates and populates a Histogram.
OnTheFence - your formula is close, but it calculates Lambda1 as a percentage of Set Lambda. What you're after here is the Lambda1 to Set Lambda difference (delta) as a percentage of Set Lambda. Try this formula:
-((Lambda1 - Set Lambda)/Set Lambda)
If you take the answer from above and multiple it by VE Front, you will get the delta to VE Front New. Proof of this formula is if you take the answer from above and multiple it by Set Lambda, you'll get the delta to Lambda1.
I don't know if this will eliminate your .1 - .2 AFR difference, because there are still the questions of which observations to filter out before aggregation and the question you raised about the aggregation method MLVHD uses when populating histograms. What I'm fairly sure of is that the formula above is one you want to use.
Quote from: joe_lyons on August 14, 2015, 08:32:40 PM
Quote from: Onthefence on August 14, 2015, 07:19:57 PM
Quote from: joe_lyons on August 14, 2015, 05:59:23 PM
I'm doing a little test, I recorded going though all the same motions that I would normally do when doing a narrowband sensor tune and will use MLVHD and view the VE new F&R and apply those to the VE table and then do a regular narrowband tune and see the differences between the two. It might or might not work. I guess I'll see.
Your results will be interesting to see. I tried using VE New in MLVHD to dial in VEs using the AT-100 and found that while the MLVHD was showing almost all cells a few points rich, The "Average" VE New was an increase over what was already there. However, when I calculated the "average" delta's between Lambda and Set Lambda that the VE were smaller.
(([Lambda1]/[Set Lambda])*[VE Front])-[VE Front]
Changing based on the delta's moved the Lambda readings in the right direction and was within a .1 or .2 AFR reading in open loop.
I used the word "Average" loosely as I am only guessing how MLVHD calculates and populates a Histogram.
Did you still have the bike using the narrowband sensors along with the widebands?
When using the widebands through PV to set VEs I like to use megalog viewer and the histogram/table generator. Once you set up the X&Y to match and an Excell file to flip everything correctly it is pretty easy. I use this formula and apply it to a Delta difference of the same calibration I am using (([Lambda2]*14.7)-[Set AFR])*10 and
(([Lambda1]*14.7)-[Set AFR])*10
This gives the difference between what is asked and what is seen so you can copy paste to the Delta table of the cal your messing with. It works pretty well and I use it with older SERT and Vrod SEPST stuff.
Joe - doesn't this formula assume that 10 VEs equal 1 AFR? I was talking to Jamie about this earlier today and he said that this rule-of-thumb does not apply across the board. Specifically, we were talking about an idle issue and he said that 10:1 isn't accurate at idle. I really don't know - just passing on what I think I heard Jamie say.
Quote from: GregOn2Wheels on August 14, 2015, 08:51:11 PM
that this rule-of-thumb does not apply across the board. Specifically, we were talking about an idle issue and he said that 10:1 isn't accurate at idle.
I would take this as. It is a rule of thumb because it is a starting point. Different cam/ exhaust is going to create different cross talk and reversion. Sometimes 10:1 chases the target rich/ lean and 5:1 fits. Sometimes it might be ?:1. Without any feedback data that can be logged and verified. VE new and set lambda's isn't everything...... and why should it be? Target tune is out and it will do it for us.
Quote from: joe_lyons on August 14, 2015, 08:32:40 PM
Quote from: Onthefence on August 14, 2015, 07:19:57 PM
Quote from: joe_lyons on August 14, 2015, 05:59:23 PM
I'm doing a little test, I recorded going though all the same motions that I would normally do when doing a narrowband sensor tune and will use MLVHD and view the VE new F&R and apply those to the VE table and then do a regular narrowband tune and see the differences between the two. It might or might not work. I guess I'll see.
Your results will be interesting to see. I tried using VE New in MLVHD to dial in VEs using the AT-100 and found that while the MLVHD was showing almost all cells a few points rich, The "Average" VE New was an increase over what was already there. However, when I calculated the "average" delta's between Lambda and Set Lambda that the VE were smaller.
(([Lambda1]/[Set Lambda])*[VE Front])-[VE Front]
Changing based on the delta's moved the Lambda readings in the right direction and was within a .1 or .2 AFR reading in open loop.
I used the word "Average" loosely as I am only guessing how MLVHD calculates and populates a Histogram.
Did you still have the bike using the narrowband sensors along with the widebands?
When I was playing with MLV and AT-100 tuning, I was running both in an FM head pipe. The widebands seemed to report fairly consistently. However, when enabling closed loop it seemed the narrow bands moved the measured Afr .2 - .3 leaner. It seemed that I had the best luck tuning the lCL areas with the narrowbands and the OL with the AT-100.
Quote from: GregOn2Wheels on August 14, 2015, 08:44:00 PM
Quote from: Onthefence on August 14, 2015, 07:19:57 PM
Your results will be interesting to see. I tried using VE New in MLVHD to dial in VEs using the AT-100 and found that while the MLVHD was showing almost all cells a few points rich, The "Average" VE New was an increase over what was already there. However, when I calculated the "average" delta's between Lambda and Set Lambda that the VE were smaller.
(([Lambda1]/[Set Lambda])*[VE Front])-[VE Front]
Changing based on the delta's moved the Lambda readings in the right direction and was within a .1 or .2 AFR reading in open loop.
I used the word "Average" loosely as I am only guessing how MLVHD calculates and populates a Histogram.
OnTheFence - your formula is close, but it calculates Lambda1 as a percentage of Set Lambda. What you're after here is the Lambda1 to Set Lambda difference (delta) as a percentage of Set Lambda. Try this formula:
-((Lambda1 - Set Lambda)/Set Lambda)
If you take the answer from above and multiple it by VE Front, you will get the delta to VE Front New. Proof of this formula is if you take the answer from above and multiple it by Set Lambda, you'll get the delta to Lambda1.
I don't know if this will eliminate your .1 - .2 AFR difference, because there are still the questions of which observations to filter out before aggregation and the question you raised about the aggregation method MLVHD uses when populating histograms. What I'm fairly sure of is that the formula above is one you want to use.
I am on board with your formula * VE = New VE. When discussing the .1 to .2 I just assumed this is about as close as you can get in open loop.
I am interested in seeing what others do with MLVHD and the histogram. MLVHD is a nice log parser for Power Vision users. I am fairly trusting the histogram outputs. And I think filtering has to be done when looking at AFR.
Correctly or incorrectly, I have been filtering out
Acel Enr > 0
Decl Enl > 0
TP < 6 - My bike fairly consistently idles at 5
ET < 176 - 175 and up just seemed like a nice number
Plus I select the "Transients" supplied filter
Quote from: GregOn2Wheels on August 14, 2015, 08:51:11 PM
Quote from: joe_lyons on August 14, 2015, 08:32:40 PM
Quote from: Onthefence on August 14, 2015, 07:19:57 PM
Quote from: joe_lyons on August 14, 2015, 05:59:23 PM
I'm doing a little test, I recorded going though all the same motions that I would normally do when doing a narrowband sensor tune and will use MLVHD and view the VE new F&R and apply those to the VE table and then do a regular narrowband tune and see the differences between the two. It might or might not work. I guess I'll see.
Your results will be interesting to see. I tried using VE New in MLVHD to dial in VEs using the AT-100 and found that while the MLVHD was showing almost all cells a few points rich, The "Average" VE New was an increase over what was already there. However, when I calculated the "average" delta's between Lambda and Set Lambda that the VE were smaller.
(([Lambda1]/[Set Lambda])*[VE Front])-[VE Front]
Changing based on the delta's moved the Lambda readings in the right direction and was within a .1 or .2 AFR reading in open loop.
I used the word "Average" loosely as I am only guessing how MLVHD calculates and populates a Histogram.
Did you still have the bike using the narrowband sensors along with the widebands?
When using the widebands through PV to set VEs I like to use megalog viewer and the histogram/table generator. Once you set up the X&Y to match and an Excell file to flip everything correctly it is pretty easy. I use this formula and apply it to a Delta difference of the same calibration I am using (([Lambda2]*14.7)-[Set AFR])*10 and
(([Lambda1]*14.7)-[Set AFR])*10
This gives the difference between what is asked and what is seen so you can copy paste to the Delta table of the cal your messing with. It works pretty well and I use it with older SERT and Vrod SEPST stuff.
Joe - doesn't this formula assume that 10 VEs equal 1 AFR? I was talking to Jamie about this earlier today and he said that this rule-of-thumb does not apply across the board. Specifically, we were talking about an idle issue and he said that 10:1 isn't accurate at idle. I really don't know - just passing on what I think I heard Jamie say.
It usually works out just fine with the 10-1 ratio. Having a good starting cal for your setup is very nice in helping with this. But 2-3 good logs can help me to see these areas that 10 does not equal 1.
Using the ecms integrators is one of the fastest and easiest way to get things close. I got to observe target tune doing its thing yesterday and it is quite amazing how fast and spot on it gets things. I never did get to observe a revolution performance ECM in action but it seems like dyno jet has done their research and got this nailed down pretty decent.
Well Joe, I suspect I will be the first West Australian to launch this product. I will try it on the 103 first. I am happy to report my DIY results.
120r has a new crank coming from the states in 7 weeks, so it will have to wait.
Quote from: tdkkart on August 14, 2015, 07:15:07 AM
Several hundred thousand, if not millions of them are Harley Davidson Twin Cam powered bikes ridden by owners
completely oblivious to the "problems" those of us on forums wring our hands over every day.
Pick a problem, any problem, cam chain tensioners, lifters, valve seals, valve guides, compensators etc etc and I can show you 10 owners who
haven't a clue what we're talking about.
My 110" CVO RGU runs happy as a clam all day long at 14.5, closed loop, 450lbs of passengers +gear, at 90* ambient on 91 octane fuel.
Coming up on it's 5000mi oil change and hasn't lost a single drop of oil since it's 1000mi service.
top post, so true
Do TT need the CAN plug when using the CAN wire, like AT 110 Pro do ?
Quote from: hdmanillac on August 17, 2015, 12:47:34 PM
Do TT need the CAN plug when using the CAN wire, like AT 110 Pro do ?
With Target Tune you do not need the CAN termination plug or CAN cable.
Ok good news. There are enough wires around the TT.
Are there settings to adjust the closed loop response?
How much are you guys finding the Pulse Width moving around when the bike is at constant load?
Andy
Quote from: whittlebeast on August 18, 2015, 03:55:22 AM
Are there settings to adjust the closed loop response?
How much are you guys finding the Pulse Width moving around when the bike is at constant load?
Andy
I am going to put this on my own bike for a trial but I need to make some adapters to go from the 4 wire plugs to the 2 wire plugs. Now I just need time.
Quote from: whittlebeast on August 18, 2015, 03:55:22 AM
How much are you guys finding the Pulse Width moving around when the bike is at constant load
Probably dithers the same.
Is a Closed Loop Lambda Range of [1.013; 0.876] suitable for WB sensors ?
0.876 is the set lambda at WOT in the cal I use.
:scratch:
Quote from: hdmanillac on August 20, 2015, 11:30:35 PM
Is a Closed Loop Lambda Range of [1.013; 0.876] suitable for WB sensors ?
0.876 is the set lambda at WOT in the cal I use.
:scratch:
Sure, why not?
Bob
Well it finally arrived! I I'll install it this weekend on the 103. Watch this space.
So if one was to use the Auto tube feature in the
Target tune,
does it tune like the Auto tune basic ie: real time,
or does one have store the data and re flash it like tuning with AT pro ?
Works like AT Pro, except, it doesn't change your AFR's. I've been using it for a week or so. Happy so far.
Here is some recent information we put together on Target Tune installation:
The first thing to note is that Target Tune equipped bikes require a Target Tune-enabled calibration, to request a new TT-enabled map you can email Fuel Moto at targettune@fuelmotousa.com or if you purchased your unit elsewhere you can request your map from targettune@dynojet.com. For a new map we will need the year/model of your bike as well as all of the modifications you have made, or if you currently have have a map you would like converted to be TT-enabled you can email that and it will be converted. *IMPORTANT* Target Tune requires your Power Vision be updated to the latest Firmware, (2.0.19-1506 or later) and Tune Database (0.0.9.33 or later), and the latest WinPv softare must be installed (2.0.8.1500 or later). If you have earlier version of either of these items Target Tune will not work, if you open a Target Tune enabled map in earlier software it will disable the Target Tune settings, so... just make sure everything is updated before you get started :)
To get started make sure all the updates are current using the PV update client, load your Target Tune-enabled map and flash your ECM. Make sure you reset learned fuel trims when prompted. The bike in this example is a 2015 Street Glide however the following basics apply to all models. There are specific instructions & diagrams for each model in the Target Tune manual.
Install front & rear wideband O2 sensors. *Note* Bosch wideband O2 sensors are 18mm and will require the appropriate bung, many models including the 2010-newer FLH uses a 12mm sensor. These applications require an exhaust with 18mm bungs to accept the new sensors, the other alternative is to weld in the bungs in the appropriate location (weld in bungs are included with all TT kits)
(http://s3.postimg.org/5t0ryxnmr/DSC_0632.jpg)
(http://s16.postimg.org/48spragn9/DSC_0633.jpg)
wire in the O2 sensor leads to the Target Tune wideband controller, note each wire is color coded and is pre-soldered. A good tip is to use a paperclip to pierce the membrane before you push the wire in.
(http://s9.postimg.org/dgsrjemtr/DSC_0634.jpg)
unplug the factory O2 sensors and plug in sensor harness from the Target Tune box. If you have exhaust with both 18mm & 12mm sensor bungs you can leave the factory sensors installed, however you can also remove them and plug the bung. If you need a plug it is 12mm X 1.25 thread.
(http://s17.postimg.org/ybm0h5ptr/DSC_0635.jpg)
Unplug your Power Vision from the dataport and plug in the included Y-splitter, you will now have the ability to plug in your Power Vision and Target Tune at the same time.
(http://s30.postimg.org/fq5995ymp/DSC_0636.jpg)
You will run the Y-splitter under the seat and you can tuck the wires in by the ECM
(http://s23.postimg.org/5rqel4zyj/DSC_0637.jpg)
Mount Target Tune on top of ECM, you can now plug in wideband O2 sensors to the Target Tune box
(http://s28.postimg.org/6g9d4esl9/target_tune1.jpg)
The Target Tune hardware is now installed. We recommend starting the bike and making sure the O2's are reading thru the ECM with your Power Vision. There are new gauge channels for use with Target Tune for allow you to monitor live AFR/Lambda directly off the ECM's databus. To configure these gauges you will go to the Vehicle channel list and select WBO2 Front & Rear AFR or Lambda as shown below (engine not running in this example) *IMPORTANT* because Target Tune reads the wideband O2 sensors directly thru the ECM it does not require a CAN to Power Vision connection. Target Tune does not require a CAN cable or CAN termination plug like the Dynojet AT-110/120 kits.
(http://s11.postimg.org/m1w7axe1f/DSC_0667.jpg)
There is also a new Auto Tune mode on the Power Vision called Target Tune Auto Tune (TT-AT) which is similar to AT-Pro, however TT-AT is enhanced to Target Tune use, it uses the actual AFR targets in your calibration rather than setting the AF table to 13.0 like AT-Pro. *IMPORTANT* you cannot use the AT-Basic or AT-Pro applications with a Target Tune equipped bike.
(http://s11.postimg.org/cgl0dlger/DSC_0668.jpg)
*ALSO NOTE* your Power Vision unit does not need to be installed on the bike when running Target Tune. The only time it needs to be on the bike is when using the Target Tune-Auto tune application, or if you want to display or log data.
Deleted
So to be clear Jamie, if you Engage TT Autoune , you use it as if it were an AT pro. ( the method) .
look forward to your report on it Wallaby Bob
Quote from: Wallaby Bob on August 27, 2015, 04:04:41 PM
So to be clear Jamie, if you Engage TT Autoune , you use it as if it were an AT pro. ( the method) .
If you enable TT auto-tune mode it just records the wideband values with the current AFR table in the calibration. Just run the calibration asit is(without enabling TT AT) and see what it does.
I've got starting issue with my bike since TT is on it.
This evening I could not start it. Battery seems to be a little low. The batterie tender was on.
I don't understand...
:scratch:
I think TT module is responsible. No issue before.
Any experience feed back about that issue ?
Quote from: hdmanillac on September 01, 2015, 10:36:18 AM
I've got starting issue with my bike since TT is on it.
This evening I could not start it. Battery seems to be a little low. The batterie tender was on.
I don't understand...
:scratch:
I think TT module is responsible. No issue before.
Any experience feed back about that issue ?
I would start with checking the battery; load test and voltage drop during crankover. The Target Tune module only draws about 3A and is only powered during key-on, it also shuts off during cranking.
Ok, thanks for your quick answer.
I've got several tenders so I'll make several tests.
:up:
Ok Jamie. I think I've got an issue with my old tender "Optimate 4". I've got a new one and the last test is ok. Bikes runs well.
:up:
PS: I was a little afraid because I have got a big run in few weeks with this bike. :chop:
I initiated TT via corrected map on my 103.
The 120 is still waiting for a crank.
On initiating the TT and running the gauges on PV , I had AFRs constantly around 12:1 in the low area and as much as 19:1 in the mid to high areas.
Do I auto tune or mauanually adjust VEs?
I would do one or two auto tune sessions to get things close and then after that no more enabling autotune. Just ride. The stuff to enable target tune is in the background of the calibration and only requires you to run the bike with no extra steps.
Quote from: Wallaby Bob on September 01, 2015, 04:15:10 PM
I initiated TT via corrected map on my 103.
The 120 is still waiting for a crank.
On initiating the TT and running the gauges on PV , I had AFRs constantly around 12:1 in the low area and as much as 19:1 in the mid to high areas.
Do I auto tune or mauanually adjust VEs?
Something is very wrong somewhere. Your map must be WAY out of tune or there is another issue if you are seeing values this lean. Generally a motor will break up & misfire above 16.0 AF. Please email me a copy of your calibration along with the year/model of your bike and the specific engine mods you have done to jamie@fuelmotousa.com so I can take a look. If you have a log that would be helpful as well.
That's real nice of you Jamie :up:
Bob double check your intake for leaks, 19!
Thanks Joe and Jamie. Will do.
Intakes are good Hilly.
Quote from: Wallaby Bob on September 01, 2015, 04:15:10 PM
I initiated TT via corrected map on my 103.
The 120 is still waiting for a crank.
On initiating the TT and running the gauges on PV , I had AFRs constantly around 12:1 in the low area and as much as 19:1 in the mid to high areas.
Do I auto tune or mauanually adjust VEs?
Are your o2 sensors swapped?
No
Replying here to make it easy to find..
I'd like to nominate this thread for Sticky status.
Quote from: Wallaby Bob on September 01, 2015, 04:15:10 PM
I initiated TT via corrected map on my 103.
The 120 is still waiting for a crank.
On initiating the TT and running the gauges on PV , I had AFRs constantly around 12:1 in the low area and as much as 19:1 in the mid to high areas.
Do I auto tune or mauanually adjust VEs?
This is with TT initiated? Where they pulling toward the target are holding these values?
The log I was emailed did not have the closed loop channels to verify CL was working however the WB02 front & rear were full lean, the map was also questionable as the VE values did not match what was in the log. If I had to speculate I would say the incorrect map was loaded, Target Tune is not working, and the reported AF is not actual as most of the log showed 16.0 or leaner and the motor should have been misfiring and breaking up.
My response to Wallaby Bob is below and I emailed him a new map to test:
Hello, something is not correct. Looking at your log it is showing pretty much full lean everywhere, and of interest the VE in your log does not match up the the calibration you included. The log shows idle VE values are low 40's front and around 50 VE rear, however the values in the calibration are in the 70's, these are VE Front & Rear PID's which come straight from the appropriate tables, not VE New which would be corrected values. This would generally tell me that this was not the map the log was done with, so something else may very well be different with this map as well. Also, looking at the calibration you attached i'm not sure on the source, and even though it does not appear to be the map that was flashed it looks to be a calibration with stock cams as it is very different than typical maps for a setup like you are running. I have attached a Fuel Moto base map to test that is Target Tune enabled, please give this a try. Also note, when logging be sure to include front & rear Closed loop integrator and Adaptive Fuel Factor as they will show us specifically what Target Tune is doing.
With battery problems. The sensors might be dropping off line because of the amperage required for the heaters. I saw you said 3 amps and I agree that is what they normally take during normal steady state, but I have seen controllers wanting more when things like overly rich low area's seem to cool them fast. I have an external 13.5 volt power source capable of 30amps. It has a digital readout that continuously gives the amperage. I have seen it pull more than 3amps.
I understand this still isn't a lot of amperage but if you are charging a lower than normal battery, bike and controller. It can all add up quick. I am in the habit of pulling fuses for headlights and such that I don't need during tuning.
Quote from: hrdtail78 on September 02, 2015, 11:34:03 AM
With battery problems. The sensors might be dropping off line because of the amperage required for the heaters. I saw you said 3 amps and I agree that is what they normally take during normal steady state, but I have seen controllers wanting more when things like overly rich low area's seem to cool them fast. I have an external 13.5 volt power source capable of 30amps. It has a digital readout that continuously gives the amperage. I have seen it pull more than 3amps.
I understand this still isn't a lot of amperage but if you are charging a lower than normal battery, bike and controller. It can all add up quick. I am in the habit of pulling fuses for headlights and such that I don't need during tuning.
Battery voltage is 14+ in the log so we're good there. I have not seen a Dynojet wb controller shut the sensors off due to low voltage on a running motor, however it would not be out of the realm of possibility if the bike has a charging or battery issue. Many times I pull the headlight fuse as well, especially if the bike has a marginal battery. Ever update the firmware on a Thundermax? best to pull the headlight fuse and grab a Snickers, takes about 20 minutes.
Formal apology: yes Jamie , I sent you the wrong log.
I will sort it out !
God bless America ! and Australia - ( mind you! Our current leader is an imposter)
I have the TT on my 2009. Pretty darn cool I think. Since I have been known to tinker a bit.
This is kind of slick, the lower two gauges show how well it is working. This is just the key on, not running, to show the screen. I will try to grab a pic of it running soon.
Jamie, Joe and co ..... Jamie, I tried the Calibration you provided and behold! It worked. I sent you an email including a log with CLI and Adaptive fuel, as requested.
A work in progress, but significantly better.
Here is a pic of the screen with the bike idling. The motor was warm as I returned from a ride. But had been off for some time. So still in the enrichment mode when taken.
You can see how the new brains focus on the targeted AFR.
Side note, just ran about 200 miles and fueled at the same pump before and after. Recorded 47.5 MPG. This is the best this set up has ever done. Target at crusie is 14.2.
Awesome
Mossy78 is running one on his v rod in England now. Seems to work nice. Best it's run in like forever.
Ron
Quote from: Wallaby Bob on September 05, 2015, 07:25:34 AM
Jamie, Joe and co ..... Jamie, I tried the Calibration you provided and behold! It worked. I sent you an email including a log with CLI and Adaptive fuel, as requested.
A work in progress, but significantly better.
Thank you for the update and log. Target Tune is working properly, it is building fuel corections both short term (CLI) and long term (AFF) and is running very close to the target AF, looks pretty darn good for an initial base map with no additional tuning.
In the first chart below you can see the relation of RPM/MAP vs actual AF front & rear from the wideband O2's.
(http://s30.postimg.org/4yo3qokq9/Wallaby_AFR.png)
In the second chart you can note RPM/MAP vs long term/stored corrections, in this example you can see the ECM is correcting a slightly rich mixture from 1750-2500 RPM's. The TT-Auto Tune application it would clean this right up.
(http://s2.postimg.org/wv9v5cxyx/wallaby_AFF.png)
Jamie, can you show us what a "cleaned up" version would look like?
I'm wondering what it looks like when you are "done".
When cleaned up the AFF should be hovering close to 100. So in the instance of the pics shown more green dots than any other color.
Quote from: masstch on September 09, 2015, 10:22:51 AM
Jamie, can you show us what a "cleaned up" version would look like?
I'm wondering what it looks like when you are "done".
The following example was from a huge log from a very well tuned bike. Note front & rear AFF are within a few % of target
(http://s30.postimg.org/56096u48h/good_AFF.png)
THAT is what I needed, exactly!
Suddenly it makes much more sense, now.
Thanks to this post, Jamie, (and others) i will be calling to order my own Target Tune.
Good stuff Jamie! I now gave a greater understanding !
Knowledge!
Here is a log off one doing it's thing. Near spot on...
http://www.nbs-stl.com/HarleyTuning/TargetTuneLog.png (http://www.nbs-stl.com/HarleyTuning/TargetTuneLog.png)
This log recorded with the Power Vision and then was viewed with MegaLogViewerHD. I wonder if this will totally obsolete everything else released to date?
Andy
Quote from: whittlebeast on September 12, 2015, 05:33:27 AM
I wonder if this will totally obsolete everything else released to date?
Andy
Obsoletes everything from past versions of MLV. 👍🏼
Bob
Quote from: whittlebeast on September 12, 2015, 05:33:27 AM
Here is a log off one doing it's thing. Near spot on...
http://www.nbs-stl.com/HarleyTuning/TargetTuneLog.png (http://www.nbs-stl.com/HarleyTuning/TargetTuneLog.png)
This log recorded with the Power Vision and then was viewed with MegaLogViewerHD. I wonder if this will totally obsolete everything else released to date?
Andy
The bottom graph shows a target of .979 with 1.018 and 1.008 as being actual. What is your definition of spot on?
Jason
I simply did not set all three Lambdas to the same scale.
Bob, the target tune stuff is finally getting the stock ECU to behave as designed by the manufacturer of the ECU originally. My bet is Harley was trying to protect its dealers and the "tuning kingdom" they were running. Tuners generally hate good self tuning SW.
Andy
Quote from: whittlebeast on September 12, 2015, 10:07:37 AM
Jason
I simply did not set all three Lambdas to the same scale.
I see that the min are a bit different. How does that affect what it is reading as long as it in scale? Besides I am not looking at colors. I am looking at what is being called out by the pointer only. Post up the file and we can all take a look. I have always posted what you have asked for, or email it to me.
Bob, I play with all sorts of closed loop tuning software all the time. Target Tune appears to simply work.....
The guy that sent me that log was also looking at the log with MLV. He was pumped.
Andy
I was at Nick Trasks' shop yesterday talking to his dyno guy, Ron I think his name was.
In his opinion the PV with TT does a very good job tuning a mild build.
Now he wouldn't put one on a turbo bike or a big inch high compression motor.
Quote from: azlou66 on September 12, 2015, 02:05:36 PM
I was at Nick Trasks' shop yesterday talking to his dyno guy, Ron I think his name was.
In his opinion the PV with TT does a very good job tuning a mild build.
Now he wouldn't put one on a turbo bike or a big inch high compression motor.
I presume you mean Trask/Ron wouldn't put the PV on a big inch high comp motor. Vs using TTS.
IF TTS could come up with a better way to do the auto tune vs riding around with a laptop, maybe it would be in the same boat when it comes to AT?
I am in agreement that a big build is really is a different beast to deal with. There are so many other factors other than VE tables to deal with. AT doesn't touch on proper AFR, or power enrichment and enleanment. Nor does it help deal with proper warm up. Timing can be tweaked to some degrees, but it's limited to pulling timing vs adding where it makes sense. Bob (FLTRI) may be a bit stubborn in his responses to AT stuff. But I don't feel he's far off the mark. He's just not a fan of the interaction with the PV... His knowledge and tuning principles apply to any tuning product. Preference is the human factor.
I am struggling with the thought that this TT tuning method won't be satisfactory for bigger/ higher compression builds.
There are many self regulating types of closed loop tuning on motor vehicles with moderate to high compression on the planet, and they seem to cope. I am sure the parameters, methodology are similar at least.
Can someone perhaps explain why you thing this would be unsuitable?
I don't think it has to do with cubic inch or exactly what the compression ratio is. It has to do more with what else comes along with bigger builds. The cams and the free flowing exhaust that is required not to choke down that top end HP. Bigger flowing TB's and heads. This can all lead to poor sampling of O2.
TT is based on the simple assumption that your sampling is perfect in all areas. If that is the case. TT should be able to hold a target/ desired lambda/AFR with in a tolerances.
All Target Tune does is allows us to hang a better sensor on our ECMs that are more than capable of dealing with that information. No point in building a new ECM if you already have a very good one on the bike.
You still have to determine what you want or need your AFR to be, physical and dynamic factors will change what an engine wants, as will the quality of the data you are collecting. There's still the difference between what's actually happening in the cylinder and what the sensor is seeing. You can't simply set a desired AFR of 12.8 if the sensor's reading is off of reality by .5 one way or the other. I have no doubt that this will raise a whole new chapter in the O2 sensor positioning wars, primarily because people won't be able figure out that you may not be able to run the same (reported) AFR on your pipe "A" as your buddy runs on pipe "B" even if your engines are otherwise identical.
Is Target Tune AFR absolute?? Absolutely not, it's just another tool in the box.
Quote from: tdkkart on September 13, 2015, 07:46:39 AM
All Target Tune does is allows us to hang a better sensor on our ECMs that are more than capable of dealing with that information. No point in building a new ECM if you already have a very good one on the bike.
You still have to determine what you want or need your AFR to be, physical and dynamic factors will change what an engine wants, as will the quality of the data you are collecting. There's still the difference between what's actually happening in the cylinder and what the sensor is seeing. You can't simply set a desired AFR of 12.8 if the sensor's reading is off of reality by .5 one way or the other. I have no doubt that this will raise a whole new chapter in the O2 sensor positioning wars, primarily because people won't be able figure out that you may not be able to run the same (reported) AFR on your pipe "A" as your buddy runs on pipe "B" even if your engines are otherwise identical.
Is Target Tune AFR absolute?? Absolutely not, it's just another tool in the box.
I agree. The WB might make it closer due to better sampling it has, all else being equal. Some areas will just plain need open loop in some cases so the ve needs to be set somehow or the target changed. :nix:
Ron
Ron
Here is two different back to back logs off the same motor. The tune is identical on both logs. The logger and o2 sensor was the only change. The motor was running open loop in both logs.
http://www.nbs-stl.com/MLVDemo/330%20Two%20O2%20Sensors.PNG (http://www.nbs-stl.com/MLVDemo/330%20Two%20O2%20Sensors.PNG)
Check out the difference in the reported AFR. O2 sensors are different.
You can not directly compare your AFR to some other guys AFR.
Andy
Quote from: rageglide on September 12, 2015, 05:22:04 PM
Quote from: azlou66 on September 12, 2015, 02:05:36 PM
I was at Nick Trasks' shop yesterday talking to his dyno guy, Ron I think his name was.
In his opinion the PV with TT does a very good job tuning a mild build.
Now he wouldn't put one on a turbo bike or a big inch high compression motor.
I presume you mean Trask/Ron wouldn't put the PV on a big inch high comp motor. Vs using TTS.
IF TTS could come up with a better way to do the auto tune vs riding around with a laptop, maybe it would be in the same boat when it comes to AT?
I am in agreement that a big build is really is a different beast to deal with. There are so many other factors other than VE tables to deal with. AT doesn't touch on proper AFR, or power enrichment and enleanment. Nor does it help deal with proper warm up. Timing can be tweaked to some degrees, but it's limited to pulling timing vs adding where it makes sense. Bob (FLTRI) may be a bit stubborn in his responses to AT stuff. But I don't feel he's far off the mark. He's just not a fan of the interaction with the PV... His knowledge and tuning principles apply to any tuning product. Preference is the human factor.
He mentioned a different Tuner, neither PV or TTS, for their Turbo builds.
Ron said something about two bar systems................
Quote from: azlou66 on September 13, 2015, 08:18:44 AM
He mentioned a different Tuner, neither PV or TTS, for their Turbo builds.
Ron said something about two bar systems................
Interesting... adds a 2bar sensor and runs TMax
http://traskperformance.com/product/thundermax-fuel-injection-module-wauto-tune/ (http://traskperformance.com/product/thundermax-fuel-injection-module-wauto-tune/)
Quote from: hrdtail78 on September 12, 2015, 07:39:31 PM
I don't think it has to do with cubic inch or exactly what the compression ratio is. It has to do more with what else comes along with bigger builds. The cams and the free flowing exhaust that is required not to choke down that top end HP. Bigger flowing TB's and heads. This can all lead to poor sampling of O2.
TT is based on the simple assumption that your sampling is perfect in all areas. If that is the case. TT should be able to hold a target/ desired lambda/AFR with in a tolerances.
This is what I was told. The further from stock you are the more parameters you need to be able to adjust, maybe more then a target tune device can account for. On a mild motor like mine it should work well and thus far has.
Quote from: q1svt on September 13, 2015, 08:26:41 AM
Quote from: azlou66 on September 13, 2015, 08:18:44 AM
He mentioned a different Tuner, neither PV or TTS, for their Turbo builds.
Ron said something about two bar systems................
Interesting... adds a 2bar sensor and runs TMax
http://traskperformance.com/product/thundermax-fuel-injection-module-wauto-tune/ (http://traskperformance.com/product/thundermax-fuel-injection-module-wauto-tune/)
You nailed it.
:up:
As more factual information becomes known and more people use PV TT with all kinds of builds, we (those interested in full time close loop) might very well have two good options :wink:
Quote from: q1svt on September 13, 2015, 08:37:44 AM
:up:
As more actual information becomes known and more people use PV TT with all kinds of builds, we (those interested in full time close loop) might very well have two good options :wink:
I would look at whole log files to see what is really going on. Not just screen shots guys are posting that are selling the product. Why are they showing us just part of the picture when they could be posting full log files?
https://app.box.com/s/c1u12szjqj4pgp74pwxh09y2hg1c1j6l
Looks like it will have excellent fuel milage.
I've been running Target Tune for about a month now and I am VERY pleased. I'm running a Jackpot 2-1-2 head pipe and Jackpot 4" dyno tuned mufflers. These pieces work well together and the 18mm bungs put the sensors right where they need to be. If I was running something else for an exhaust system, I probably wouldn't be as pleased with TT. It is obviously highly dependent on good sensor location, but if you have that nailed down, it's all good.
Quote from: q1svt on September 13, 2015, 08:37:44 AM
:up:
As more factual information becomes known and more people use PV TT with all kinds of builds, we (those interested in full time close loop) might very well have two good options :wink:
The biggest benefit of PV w/AT IMHO is its always working (tuning) in the rpm range I ride.
The down side is I'm not tuning in the rpm range I don't normally ride in so the overall tune isn't a polished finished product.
Quote from: hrdtail78 on September 13, 2015, 09:07:30 AM
https://app.box.com/s/c1u12szjqj4pgp74pwxh09y2hg1c1j6l
Looks like it will have excellent fuel milage.
If you are referring to the measured AF in this log it is not valid as the incorrect channels were logged for AF. This log has Lambda 1&2 from the wideband controller over CAN ( the CAN cable should not be used with TT) When logging AF with Target Tune the correct channels are WBo2 Lamba/AFR 1&2 from the vehicle channel list. These channels come from the ECM databus.
Lambda 1&2 are used with AT-Pro, the hardware & firmware in these two WB controllers are different.
Quote from: azlou66 on September 13, 2015, 05:00:13 PM
Quote from: q1svt on September 13, 2015, 08:37:44 AM
:up:
As more factual information becomes known and more people use PV TT with all kinds of builds, we (those interested in full time close loop) might very well have two good options :wink:
The biggest benefit of PV w/AT IMHO is its always working (tuning) in the rpm range I ride.
The down side is I'm not tuning in the rpm range I don't normally ride in so the overall tune isn't a polished finished product.
I see no point in developing the upper right area anyway or the lower left. All you need is a well developed tune in the areas you ride and a hair more of those surrounding areas. If you can't hit it on the road there's no point.
Ron
Quote from: rbabos on September 13, 2015, 06:44:36 PM
Quote from: azlou66 on September 13, 2015, 05:00:13 PM
Quote from: q1svt on September 13, 2015, 08:37:44 AM
:up:
As more factual information becomes known and more people use PV TT with all kinds of builds, we (those interested in full time close loop) might very well have two good options :wink:
The biggest benefit of PV w/AT IMHO is its always working (tuning) in the rpm range I ride.
The down side is I'm not tuning in the rpm range I don't normally ride in so the overall tune isn't a polished finished product.
I see no point in developing the upper right area anyway or the lower left. All you need is a well developed tune in the areas you ride and a hair more of those surrounding areas. If you can't hit it on the road there's no point.
Ron
Let me add that any tuning cell that can be hit on a drum can be found on the street...sometimes not intentionally.
Bob
Quote from: FLTRI on September 13, 2015, 07:40:35 PM
Quote from: rbabos on September 13, 2015, 06:44:36 PM
Quote from: azlou66 on September 13, 2015, 05:00:13 PM
Quote from: q1svt on September 13, 2015, 08:37:44 AM
:up:
As more factual information becomes known and more people use PV TT with all kinds of builds, we (those interested in full time close loop) might very well have two good options :wink:
The biggest benefit of PV w/AT IMHO is its always working (tuning) in the rpm range I ride.
The down side is I'm not tuning in the rpm range I don't normally ride in so the overall tune isn't a polished finished product.
I see no point in developing the upper right area anyway or the lower left. All you need is a well developed tune in the areas you ride and a hair more of those surrounding areas. If you can't hit it on the road there's no point.
Ron
Let me add that any tuning cell that can be hit on a drum can be found on the street...sometimes not intentionally.
Bob
CYA
Quote from: Jamie Long on September 13, 2015, 06:36:04 PM
Quote from: hrdtail78 on September 13, 2015, 09:07:30 AM
https://app.box.com/s/c1u12szjqj4pgp74pwxh09y2hg1c1j6l
Looks like it will have excellent fuel milage.
If you are referring to the measured AF in this log it is not valid as the incorrect channels were logged for AF. This log has Lambda 1&2 from the wideband controller over CAN ( the CAN cable should not be used with TT) When logging AF with Target Tune the correct channels are WBo2 Lamba/AFR 1&2 from the vehicle channel list. These channels come from the ECM databus.
Lambda 1&2 are used with AT-Pro, the hardware & firmware in these two WB controllers are different.
If the data is valid enough to show how great it is doing in a screen shot. It is valid enough to show what it isn't doing in a log file.
Same data log as post 161 and reposted in 163.
BUT feel free to post up the log you are getting screen shots from. Lets take a look. We are all here to learn or help others to learn. Right?
Quote from: hrdtail78 on September 13, 2015, 08:12:45 PM
Quote from: Jamie Long on September 13, 2015, 06:36:04 PM
Quote from: hrdtail78 on September 13, 2015, 09:07:30 AM
https://app.box.com/s/c1u12szjqj4pgp74pwxh09y2hg1c1j6l
Looks like it will have excellent fuel milage.
If you are referring to the measured AF in this log it is not valid as the incorrect channels were logged for AF. This log has Lambda 1&2 from the wideband controller over CAN ( the CAN cable should not be used with TT) When logging AF with Target Tune the correct channels are WBo2 Lamba/AFR 1&2 from the vehicle channel list. These channels come from the ECM databus.
Lambda 1&2 are used with AT-Pro, the hardware & firmware in these two WB controllers are different.
If the data is valid enough to show how great it is doing in a screen shot. It is valid enough to show what it isn't doing in a log file.
Same data log as post 161 and reposted in 163.
BUT feel free to post up the log you are getting screen shots from. Lets take a look. We are all here to learn or help others to learn. Right?
The data that was used to for the plots in my examples was completely valid, I used the channels that refer to fuel control, the data used did not include WB 1&2.
I am out of town, when I'm back in the office I will try to put some time aside to post some logs and what to look at/for, as you noted "we are all here to help and learn"
Quote from: rbabos on September 13, 2015, 06:44:36 PM
Quote from: azlou66 on September 13, 2015, 05:00:13 PM
Quote from: q1svt on September 13, 2015, 08:37:44 AM
:up:
As more factual information becomes known and more people use PV TT with all kinds of builds, we (those interested in full time close loop) might very well have two good options :wink:
The biggest benefit of PV w/AT IMHO is its always working (tuning) in the rpm range I ride.
The down side is I'm not tuning in the rpm range I don't normally ride in so the overall tune isn't a polished finished product.
I see no point in developing the upper right area anyway or the lower left. All you need is a well developed tune in the areas you ride and a hair more of those surrounding areas. If you can't hit it on the road there's no point.
Ron
good point Ron,
Quote from: Mirrmu on September 14, 2015, 03:46:57 AM
Quote from: rbabos on September 13, 2015, 06:44:36 PM
Quote from: azlou66 on September 13, 2015, 05:00:13 PM
Quote from: q1svt on September 13, 2015, 08:37:44 AM
:up:
As more factual information becomes known and more people use PV TT with all kinds of builds, we (those interested in full time close loop) might very well have two good options :wink:
The biggest benefit of PV w/AT IMHO is its always working (tuning) in the rpm range I ride.
The down side is I'm not tuning in the rpm range I don't normally ride in so the overall tune isn't a polished finished product.
I see no point in developing the upper right area anyway or the lower left. All you need is a well developed tune in the areas you ride and a hair more of those surrounding areas. If you can't hit it on the road there's no point.
Ron
good point Ron,
If I got sucked into a friendly wager at a dyno shootout , I would want to know that my bike had been tuned to perform in that situation as well.
So for me , not just the areas I ride in ,but anywhere in the performance range.
Quote from: Jamie Long on September 13, 2015, 08:51:23 PM
Quote from: hrdtail78 on September 13, 2015, 08:12:45 PM
Quote from: Jamie Long on September 13, 2015, 06:36:04 PM
Quote from: hrdtail78 on September 13, 2015, 09:07:30 AM
https://app.box.com/s/c1u12szjqj4pgp74pwxh09y2hg1c1j6l
Looks like it will have excellent fuel milage.
If you are referring to the measured AF in this log it is not valid as the incorrect channels were logged for AF. This log has Lambda 1&2 from the wideband controller over CAN ( the CAN cable should not be used with TT) When logging AF with Target Tune the correct channels are WBo2 Lamba/AFR 1&2 from the vehicle channel list. These channels come from the ECM databus.
Lambda 1&2 are used with AT-Pro, the hardware & firmware in these two WB controllers are different.
If the data is valid enough to show how great it is doing in a screen shot. It is valid enough to show what it isn't doing in a log file.
Same data log as post 161 and reposted in 163.
BUT feel free to post up the log you are getting screen shots from. Lets take a look. We are all here to learn or help others to learn. Right?
I am out of town, when I'm back in the office I will try to put some time aside to post some logs and what to look at/for, as you noted "we are all here to help and learn"
Jamie I would really appreciate that, I'm sure others would as well.
I have found some really nice hills I use to hit cells I normally can't during SANE normal operation.
Let's just say if I was going to post one of my log files on a public forum vehicle speed would be deleted...........
Quote from: 98fxstc on September 14, 2015, 04:11:10 AM
Quote from: Mirrmu on September 14, 2015, 03:46:57 AM
Quote from: rbabos on September 13, 2015, 06:44:36 PM
Quote from: azlou66 on September 13, 2015, 05:00:13 PM
Quote from: q1svt on September 13, 2015, 08:37:44 AM
:up:
As more factual information becomes known and more people use PV TT with all kinds of builds, we (those interested in full time close loop) might very well have two good options :wink:
The biggest benefit of PV w/AT IMHO is its always working (tuning) in the rpm range I ride.
The down side is I'm not tuning in the rpm range I don't normally ride in so the overall tune isn't a polished finished product.
I see no point in developing the upper right area anyway or the lower left. All you need is a well developed tune in the areas you ride and a hair more of those surrounding areas. If you can't hit it on the road there's no point.
Ron
good point Ron,
If I got sucked into a friendly wager at a dyno shootout , I would want to know that my bike had been tuned to perform in that situation as well.
So for me , not just the areas I ride in ,but anywhere in the performance range.
Well, prior to getting sucked in again, do some wfo runs to dial it in, with the exception of timing. :hyst: To me, you complaint isn't realistic for what most want or need in a tune. A higher percentage of dyno tunes go for max power and run like a shithouse everywhere else even though both are possible. Which is more important? I don't heap the tuners in this forum in that group, but we all know someone who paid big bucks more then once with no satisfaction in the end.
Ron
Quote from: azlou66 on September 13, 2015, 05:00:13 PM
Quote from: q1svt on September 13, 2015, 08:37:44 AM
:up:
As more factual information becomes known and more people use PV TT with all kinds of builds, we (those interested in full time close loop) might very well have two good options :wink:
The biggest benefit of PV w/AT IMHO is its always working (tuning) in the rpm range I ride.
The down side is I'm not tuning in the rpm range I don't normally ride in so the overall tune isn't a polished finished product.
I think you may have meant PV TT is always tuning...
Downside? FWIW Target Tuning it is always tuning, even in areas that you just ride once. So what's better than a tune that continues to learn? Fine yourself needing to pass a big rig convoy, ride along the beach, a nice ride up pikes pike...
I like dyno's but they are just a tool. and not everything found on the road can be duplicated on a stationary dyno.
Nothing better than a long incline and running in first/second gear up/down the rpm ranges.
Quote from: 98fxstc on September 14, 2015, 04:11:10 AM
I would want to know that my bike had been tuned to perform in that situation as well.
Need to ask yourself 'how much can realistically be done in a three hour tune?'
Personally I think the tuners that use a close loop product and develop a process where the tune is a joint effort between the customers riding tune and the dyno tuning will be the killer combo... Kind of like a base break-in tune with a lot of riding [adjusting tune & gathering data], then a final dyno tune.
Quote from: q1svt on September 14, 2015, 07:04:12 AM
Personally I think the tuners that use a close loop product and develop a process where the tune is a joint effort between the customers riding tune and the dyno tuning will be the killer combo... Kind of like a base break-in tune with a lot of riding [adjusting tune & gathering data], then a final dyno tune.
:up:
Quote from: q1svt on September 14, 2015, 07:04:12 AM
Quote from: 98fxstc on September 14, 2015, 04:11:10 AM
I would want to know that my bike had been tuned to perform in that situation as well.
Need to ask yourself 'how much can realistically be done in a three hour tune?'
Personally I think the tuners that use a close loop product and develop a process where the tune is a joint effort between the customers riding tune and the dyno tuning will be the killer combo... Kind of like a base break-in tune with a lot of riding [adjusting tune & gathering data], then a final dyno tune.
If you get an AT device dyno tuned won't it auto tune itself back to where it was???
Now if adaptive fuel is turned off it won't but then why have a device that is AT capable.
Quote from: azlou66 on September 14, 2015, 08:13:53 PM
Quote from: q1svt on September 14, 2015, 07:04:12 AM
Quote from: 98fxstc on September 14, 2015, 04:11:10 AM
I would want to know that my bike had been tuned to perform in that situation as well.
Need to ask yourself 'how much can realistically be done in a three hour tune?'
Personally I think the tuners that use a close loop product and develop a process where the tune is a joint effort between the customers riding tune and the dyno tuning will be the killer combo... Kind of like a base break-in tune with a lot of riding [adjusting tune & gathering data], then a final dyno tune.
If you get an AT device dyno tuned won't it auto tune itself back to where it was???
Now if adaptive fuel is turned off it won't but then why have a device that is AT capable.
In theory it should just get better... However, the unknown factor which kicks in with the trims is the fuel quality. Lambda should handle this better than a fixed AFR tune. AFR is going to have to do some big tweaks if you accidentally load up on 15% ethanol when the tune was built on 100% gasoline. If you don't use adaptive, then the AFR tune is going to get real lean and short term will be very busy always.
At least that's how I understand it.
Going from 10% to 15% Ethanol makes the mixture about 1,5% leaner. Not that much imho.
Karl
You guys with a PowerVision and MLVHD have the tools you need to test all of this. Take a 50 mile ride on the backroads with 100% gas and log the ride recording the AFF. Then fill the tank with E15, ride for 20 or so miles on the backroads to to give the AFFs a little time to reset' Now relog the same ride with E15 corn oil.
Compare the AFFs in MLVHD with scatter plots. Bang... You have the answers you have been debating.
And heck, you get to spend the afternoon riding the fall backroads with the wife. What is better.
Andy
Quote from: Karl H. on September 15, 2015, 12:39:17 AM
Going from 10% to 15% Ethanol makes the mixture about 1,5% leaner. Not that much imho.
Karl
If a bike is tuned with no ethanol in the fuel for best performance and mileage the AFR is on the lean side at cruise. Not lean but on the lean side....like 14.4-14.6:1.
This AFR at cruise is fine...as long as the fuel used is as tuned.
No bring on a tank with 15%+ (can be more..can be less) with out closed loop adaptive fueling and the now the bike is running leaner than Stoich (14.6:1) which increases heat and hurts mileage due to the engine not running at best performance.
The purpose of the O2 sensors are to keep a well tuned bike running at its tuned quality while introducing many different fuel formulae and variables found in different areas around the U.S.
As fuels vary, the system adjusts for the different oxygen contents to keep the tune spot on.
When refilling the system resets the adaptive assuming the bike got a load of the fuel the bike was tuned with...if not the system will relearn the oxygen content keeping the tune correct.
The only down side to adaptive fueling is if the system doesn't work correctly...then, I guess leaving the system to STFT only will just keep the system working overtime to keep up. :nix:
Bob
Quote from: Karl H. on September 15, 2015, 12:39:17 AM
Going from 10% to 15% Ethanol makes the mixture about 1,5% leaner. Not that much imho.
Karl
Except comparing E15 to 100% gasoline (which is still available in many places), it's a big jump. (5.5%)
What about the blender pumps where you get an unknown amount of E85 when you expect 10% ethanol?
Stoich Fixed ratios are about 1 point different between E15 and 100%. We obviously tune for richer mixtures, so you go even richer.
E15 is 13.8:1 AFR
E10 @ 14.13:1 AFR
Gasoline @ 14.7:1
Stoich Lambda is 1.000 for all fuels and the O2 sorts it out.
If the EFI map can use Lambda exclusively it's a very good justification to run closed loop.
Its' not clear to me whether the older maps convert lambda to AFR in the feedback loop or if they convert AFR to lambda up front. Up front conversion would be safer I think.... So I suppose that's what Delphi and others are doing.
Interesting reading and it includes a table of Fuels and their AFR/Lambda values :
http://www.hotrod.com/how-to/engine/1307-wideband-oxygen-sensor/ (http://www.hotrod.com/how-to/engine/1307-wideband-oxygen-sensor/)
Here's the table, Credit to Hot Rod
[attach=0]
It uses the voltage output of the sensor. Voltage of 450 is lambda of 1. A voltage of 872 is .885. This stays the same no matter what type of fuel.
:up: :up: Thanks Rageglide...
Great table, I have always found the E10 data for crap california gas @ lean cruise 14.1, but now know where to tune for power specific to E10
What is the real part number of the Bosch O2 sensors in the TT kit ?
LSU 4.2 or LSU 4.9 ?
:scratch:
TT kit arrived today, of course now I've got about 12 other things on my plate between now and Saturday, and leaving for Bikes-Blues-BBQ next Thursday. Hopefully the TT will be installed and running by then......will post results when I have some.
Someone just sent me a fairly large Target Tune log. All I can say is Wow, nice job Dynojet.
http://www.nbs-stl.com/HarleyTuning/Target%20Tune%20MAPxRPM%20vs%20DC.png (http://www.nbs-stl.com/HarleyTuning/Target%20Tune%20MAPxRPM%20vs%20DC.png)
Andy
Quote from: hrdtail78 on September 15, 2015, 09:02:36 AM
It uses the voltage output of the sensor. Voltage of 450 is lambda of 1. A voltage of 872 is .885. This stays the same no matter what type of fuel.
Right, the O2 should act the same no matter what the strategy. Lambda sensor is an O2 sensors official name.
But is Delphi using the AFR value as the target? Or is it targeting the Lambda equivalent?
Put another way, (because I'm having a hard time putting this in words).
- If .885 lambda is the target value, the actual Air to fuel ratio will change based on the fuel being used, but .885 will remain the target. .885 lambda will be ideal
- If 12.5:1 is our target ratio, the actual Air to fuel ratio will
not change based on the fuel being used. The ECM will target 12.5:1 with diesel, Methanol, Gasoline, etc.. Obviously only one fuel in that list works best with 12.5:1
Notice in the table below Max power for all the fuels listed stays close to .85 lambda.
I am by no means an expert, and I've been trying to wrap my head around EFI tuning for a couple years. Finally seeing the light after beating my head against the wall for a while... Gasoline AFR's are all we ever knew in the "old days". Unfortunately now we're lucky to get Gasoline... We now have blended "Fuels" to contend with and thats' a moving target.
Quote from: rageglide on September 15, 2015, 09:38:32 AM
But is Delphi using the AFR value as the target? Or is it targeting the Lambda equivalent?
No. It is using voltage as a target. Look at an older AFR cal. You actually set the CLB table to the target voltage.
Lambda is absolute. AFR is a representaion of Lambda based on the stoich value of the fuel being used (ie. gasoline 14.68 X .89 Lambda= 13.06 AFR)
If you have a Lambda based calibration the fuel table refer to the actual Lambda targets in the calibration, that is easy because Lambda is absolute. If you have an AFR cal it is based on gasoline so a specific AF value (near 14.6) is used for representation (and an assumed 1.0 Lambda). Because not all fuel blends are the the same there is some math involved as far as the relation of AFR to Lambda, however this is all simply representation as in the end the ECM is looking at actual O2 voltage not AFR.
Quote from: hrdtail78 on September 15, 2015, 09:55:36 AM
Quote from: rageglide on September 15, 2015, 09:38:32 AM
But is Delphi using the AFR value as the target? Or is it targeting the Lambda equivalent?
No. It is using voltage as a target. Look at an older AFR cal. You actually set the CLB table to the target voltage.
This is correct on standard non-Target Tune AFR based calibrations, however Target Tune cals do not use the closed loop bias table(s)
Quote from: hdmanillac on September 15, 2015, 09:25:48 AM
What is the real part number of the Bosch O2 sensors in the TT kit ?
LSU 4.2 or LSU 4.9 ?
:scratch:
LSU 4.2
Quote from: Jamie Long on September 15, 2015, 10:04:51 AM
Quote from: hrdtail78 on September 15, 2015, 09:55:36 AM
Quote from: rageglide on September 15, 2015, 09:38:32 AM
But is Delphi using the AFR value as the target? Or is it targeting the Lambda equivalent?
No. It is using voltage as a target. Look at an older AFR cal. You actually set the CLB table to the target voltage.
This is correct on standard non-Target Tune AFR based calibrations, however Target Tune cals do not use the closed loop bias table(s)
Nor do Lambda based tunes (non-TT).
Sounds as if AFR based cal is a hybrid. Using the CLB table to control the end result more so than the absolute AFR. Presumably this is done to keep things "safe"?
This stuff keeps my brain workin over time ... :embarrassed:
The LSU 4.2 sensors is the one of the two small issues I have with Target Tune. The LSU 4.9 sensors are suppose to last much longer than 4.2s and would seem to be a better choice for Target Tune which will use the sensors whenever the motor is running. The shorter life span of 4.2s is adequate for Autotune modules where the sensors are needed only while tuning, but even in this application, I would think that 4.9s would be as good or better. I'm seeing minimal (if any) price difference between 4.2 and 4.9 and their controllers so it makes me wonder why DJ decided to stick with the 4.2s.
Is there a big difference in the controllers of the 4.9s vs the 4.2s? Meaning would it just be a plug difference or are the feed and signals different from one another?
Quote from: GregOn2Wheels on September 15, 2015, 09:11:06 PM
The LSU 4.2 sensors is the one of the two small issues I have with Target Tune. The LSU 4.9 sensors are suppose to last much longer than 4.2s and would seem to be a better choice for Target Tune which will use the sensors whenever the motor is running. The shorter life span of 4.2s is adequate for Autotune modules where the sensors are needed only while tuning, but even in this application, I would think that 4.9s would be as good or better. I'm seeing minimal (if any) price difference between 4.2 and 4.9 and their controllers so it makes me wonder why DJ decided to stick with the 4.2s.
:agree: It would be easy enough to have it configured both ways. That way if somebody wanted to use thier already purchased AT-100 they could.
Quote from: joe_lyons on September 15, 2015, 09:57:10 PM
Is there a big difference in the controllers of the 4.9s vs the 4.2s? Meaning would it just be a plug difference or are the feed and signals different from one another?
Joe - from what I've read there is a pretty big difference in the controllers.
Quote from: joe_lyons on September 15, 2015, 09:57:10 PM
Is there a big difference in the controllers of the 4.9s vs the 4.2s? Meaning would it just be a plug difference or are the feed and signals different from one another?
The 4.2 & 4.9 LSU sensors require different hardware (wb controller) and firmware. It may be possible to put everything into one module. Target Tune is based on the Dynojet WB2 controller which was developed using the 4.2 sensor, now that Bosch has started distributing the 4.9 sensor to the aftermarket I would expect a transition over to the 4.9 sensor at some point. The 4.2 is still an excellent sensor, we've leaned on these things for over a decade running many thousands of them in various applications.
Quote from: hrdtail78 on September 16, 2015, 06:20:37 AM
:agree: It would be easy enough to have it configured both ways. That way if somebody wanted to use thier already purchased AT-100 they could.
The current/earlier generations of AT-100 would not work with a 4.9 sensor, it also does not have the output required to plug into the OEM harness for the factory O2 sensors. (assuming you were talking about using one for Target Tune)
The controller won't work but that doesn't mean that there isn't controllers out there that already have a can output that could be plugged into the vision or TT unit. The hold up would be on DJ's end to configure the output of the controller so DJ knows what it is doing.
This is the same with techno research and what controller you want to use or with TTS's analog input. These devices let you choose different configured controllers or to configure the inputs yourself. There are even controllers out there that allow you to use either the 2 or 9 if you know how to configure the controller for the correct sensor. Most manufactures of the controllers will tell you what output lines up with what lambda value.
It isn't rocket science. It is writing a user interface to allow the changing of the configuration of the input of the controller to the tuning device.
The input of the controller for heaters is still 12v and doesn't change between .2 and .9's
That would open up DJ to use any controller and not just DJ's stuff. I can't see them doing that.
How much of a difference in life span between the 4.2 and 4.9's are we talking about?
Quote from: rageglide on September 16, 2015, 10:27:42 AM
How much of a difference in life span between the 4.2 and 4.9's are we talking about?
Bosch states in their technical documentation the LSU 4.2 sensor has a service life of up to 160,000 kilometers or 10 years based the application and usage (doc. Y 258 K01 005-000e). They state the 4.9 has an even longer life.
There appears to be some confusion how Target Tune works. It is a stand alone wideband controller that has the ability to plug into the stock Harley harness for power and replaces the stock o2 sensors with wide band sensors. It supplies the heater power as required by the widebands and it processes the data into some voltage that relates to the AFR it is reading in the exhaust. It feeds that voltage into the stock o2 wires in the existing Harley harness.
There is also matching tune/calibration that flips a few switches in the stock ECU to get the ECU to chase this new 0-5 volt (give or take a little). The ECU then chases the AFR target table in the ECU. You do need a Power Vision to flip these switches and the license for the Power Vision to talk to the bike you are tuning. If you own the Power Vision and the license for your bike, all you need is the Target Tune specific cal and the Target Tune Controller. They go for about $450 or so.
The Target Tune hardware is Harley specific. There is no CAN communication between the Target Tune and the bike or the Power Vision. It does not have a 0-5 volt out that is intended to drive an external AFR gauge or controller like the Wideband2 does.
This is all as I understand the system as explained to me by someone in the know. I personally have not played with one, but I have seen several of the logs off one and I am impressed with the results.
Andy
Quote from: Jamie Long on September 16, 2015, 11:51:29 AM
Quote from: rageglide on September 16, 2015, 10:27:42 AM
How much of a difference in life span between the 4.2 and 4.9's are we talking about?
Bosch states in their technical documentation the LSU 4.2 sensor has a service life of up to 160,000 kilometers or 10 years based the application and usage (doc. Y 258 K01 005-000e). They state the 4.9 has an even longer life.
Thanks Jamie.
Quote from: hrdtail78 on September 16, 2015, 09:04:06 AM
The controller won't work but that doesn't mean that there isn't controllers out there that already have a can output that could be plugged into the vision or TT unit. The hold up would be on DJ's end to configure the output of the controller so DJ knows what it is doing.
This is the same with techno research and what controller you want to use or with TTS's analog input. These devices let you choose different configured controllers or to configure the inputs yourself. There are even controllers out there that allow you to use either the 2 or 9 if you know how to configure the controller for the correct sensor. Most manufactures of the controllers will tell you what output lines up with what lambda value.
It isn't rocket science. It is writing a user interface to allow the changing of the configuration of the input of the controller to the tuning device.
The input of the controller for heaters is still 12v and doesn't change between .2 and .9's
That would open up DJ to use any controller and not just DJ's stuff. I can't see them doing that.
Running widebands into the stock ECM and getting everything sorted is much different than configuring an analog input. Using a different wb controller with Target Tune would require the ability to completely control the outputs from the controller; there would need to be changes to the controller firmware, you would need to wire it into the factory harness, and then you have all of the stuff to develop within the ECM calibration to make everything work. As far as CAN, it is not universal; every manufacturer is proprietary so you arent going to simply plug in a different aftermarket controller. Regardless, Target Tune does not use CAN, it outputs directly to the ECM via the factory O2 harness.
Quote from: Jamie Long on September 16, 2015, 12:17:29 PM
Quote from: hrdtail78 on September 16, 2015, 09:04:06 AM
The controller won't work but that doesn't mean that there isn't controllers out there that already have a can output that could be plugged into the vision or TT unit. The hold up would be on DJ's end to configure the output of the controller so DJ knows what it is doing.
This is the same with techno research and what controller you want to use or with TTS's analog input. These devices let you choose different configured controllers or to configure the inputs yourself. There are even controllers out there that allow you to use either the 2 or 9 if you know how to configure the controller for the correct sensor. Most manufactures of the controllers will tell you what output lines up with what lambda value.
It isn't rocket science. It is writing a user interface to allow the changing of the configuration of the input of the controller to the tuning device.
The input of the controller for heaters is still 12v and doesn't change between .2 and .9's
That would open up DJ to use any controller and not just DJ's stuff. I can't see them doing that.
Running widebands into the stock ECM and getting everything sorted is much different than configuring an analog input. Using a different wb controller with Target Tune would require the ability to completely control the outputs from the controller; there would need to be changes to the controller firmware, you would need to wire it into the factory harness, and then you have all of the stuff to develop within the ECM calibration to make everything work. As far as CAN, it is not universal; every manufacturer is proprietary so you arent going to simply plug in a different aftermarket controller. Regardless, Target Tune does not use CAN, it outputs directly to the ECM via the factory O2 harness.
I disagree. With what ever controller you use. The ECM needs to be configured to that controller. Like you state. They are not all the same. As for as plugging into the factory harness. Those are just plugs and can be source many places or one can just pin directly to the ECM plug. Using the factory harness is just a customer convenience.
You don't need to change the controller output. Even though there are controllers out there that allow for you to do this, and it is quit easy to do. You can control the input. What really is so hard or complicated about it. So many volts equals this lambda. This many volts equals this lambda. About as complicated as an Annie decoder ring.
But like I said. DJ isn't going to open it up to use any other brand of controller, but don't blow smoke and try and make it sound like it is impossible. Just say they want the controller sale also.
But there is still not a real longevity issue with the 4.2s as it is so its really not a big issue.
Quote from: hrdtail78 on September 16, 2015, 03:32:04 PM
I disagree. With what ever controller you use. The ECM needs to be configured to that controller. Like you state. They are not all the same. As for as plugging into the factory harness. Those are just plugs and can be source many places or one can just pin directly to the ECM plug. Using the factory harness is just a customer convenience.
OK, who is going to develop the calibrations and do the testing? the consumer? they are also expected to find the plugs/harness to make it work?
Quote from: hrdtail78 on September 16, 2015, 03:32:04 PM
You don't need to change the controller output. Even though there are controllers out there that allow for you to do this, and it is quit easy to do. You can control the input. What really is so hard or complicated about it. So many volts equals this lambda. This many volts equals this lambda. About as complicated as an Annie decoder ring.
Again, who's going to test & develop the ECM calibrations for each controller. And as far as the controller itself what does it do when there is a bad connection or the sensor dies? what does the controller do if things go south, the Dynojet firmware was written specifically for Target Tune.
Quote from: hrdtail78 on September 16, 2015, 03:32:04 PM
But like I said. DJ isn't going to open it up to use any other brand of controller, but don't blow smoke and try and make it sound like it is impossible. Just say they want the controller sale also.
You do realize Target Tune IS a controller right? impossible for Dynojet to make TT work with other controllers? absolutely not as they have already done it for theirs, however it is not realistic to think they would offer Target Tune without it being hardware/software ready and leave it for the consumer to configure rather than a complete plug and play package.
You are simply trying to muddy the water
Quote from: Jamie Long on September 16, 2015, 04:46:27 PM
Quote from: hrdtail78 on September 16, 2015, 03:32:04 PM
I disagree. With what ever controller you use. The ECM needs to be configured to that controller. Like you state. They are not all the same. As for as plugging into the factory harness. Those are just plugs and can be source many places or one can just pin directly to the ECM plug. Using the factory harness is just a customer convenience.
OK, who is going to develop the calibrations and do the testing? the consumer? they are also expected to find the plugs/harness to make it work?
Quote from: hrdtail78 on September 16, 2015, 03:32:04 PM
You don't need to change the controller output. Even though there are controllers out there that allow for you to do this, and it is quit easy to do. You can control the input. What really is so hard or complicated about it. So many volts equals this lambda. This many volts equals this lambda. About as complicated as an Annie decoder ring.
Again, who's going to test & develop the ECM calibrations for each controller. And as far as the controller itself what does it do when there is a bad connection or the sensor dies? what does the controller do if things go south, the Dynojet firmware was written specifically for Target Tune.
Quote from: hrdtail78 on September 16, 2015, 03:32:04 PM
But like I said. DJ isn't going to open it up to use any other brand of controller, but don't blow smoke and try and make it sound like it is impossible. Just say they want the controller sale also.
You do realize Target Tune IS a controller right? impossible for Dynojet to make TT work with other controllers? absolutely not as they have already done it for theirs, however it is not realistic to think they would offer Target Tune without it being hardware/software ready and leave it for the consumer to configure rather than a complete plug and play package.
You are simply trying to muddy the water
No, I am trying to clear them up. I understand it is a controller and that is all it is. That is why I am stating that you can take a controller like the LM2 that allows you to change and set the output. With all the other DJ software. It would work.
The other part of TT. It is already in there and DJ just figured out how to turn it on.
What would you do with an LM2 and "all the other DJ software" not sure what you are referring to?
Obviously all of the stuff is in the ECM to enable use of widebands, that is what Target Tune does. We just had to figure out how to make it work, thank you for the history lesson.
A good friend and common poster on many of these threads, called me and was questioning the ability of a Target Tune to hold a solid AFR. I created a field in MLV to verify this question.
Lambda PCT Error and defined it as
[WBO2 F]/[Set Lambda]
Here is the result of that calc in a trace. Take note of the scales I used.
http://www.nbs-stl.com/HarleyTuning/TargetTuneHoldingFuelTargets.png (http://www.nbs-stl.com/HarleyTuning/TargetTuneHoldingFuelTargets.png)
Andy
Looks like it holds target pretty damn good.
Back to basics.
So I have installed the Target Tune and installed the TT specific map( Thank you Jamie). the map is reasonable but I would like to tweak the timing in some areas and adjust the targeted AFRs.
Presumably I make the adjustments Via winPV and reflash the Cal back in to the ECU via the powervision.
Am I to asume that the TT will carry on doing its thing or perhaps I will need to Autotune it?
All thoughts appreciated.
Does TT handle spark knock ?
Quote from: 98fxstc on September 17, 2015, 03:04:29 AM
Does TT handle spark knock ?
TT has made changes to my timing tables albeit minor chages.
I ran a TT AT session and TT seems to populate cells VERY quickly.
Has anyone else noticed this or is it just my perception?
So if I adjust the AFR and timing tables a tiny bit, I can expect the CLIs and the AFFs to data log as usual!
Is this the case?
I'm seeing references to AFR vs lambda...
The sensors don't know or care the first thing about what the actual AFR is. All they know is lambda. The cals using "AFR" do so only for human convenience, such as that might be. Since we don't usually know stoich for our fuel it's bogus to use "AFR" anyway...
The ECM could derive what the actual AFR is, but I'd bet it's converting to lambda behind the scenes in an "AFR" cal anyway.
The sensor does not know the lambda. It measures the rate of oxygen and returns a corresponding voltage.
The calculator takes into account the voltage and performs processing to inject the amount of fuel that fits. For this it may be using lambda. But that's not even sure.
Lambda is for practical and human comfort.
Jamie
Can TT work on open loop cal .. Let's say full time open loop
Thanks
Quote from: azlou66 on September 17, 2015, 04:40:24 AM
I ran a TT AT session and TT seems to populate cells VERY quickly.
Has anyone else noticed this or is it just my perception?
Seems the same speed as AT was to me.
The big difference is with Target Tune, you can aim for the AFR you really want all the time. That is huge
Quote from: Sarhan on September 18, 2015, 08:44:56 AM
Jamie
Can TT work on open loop cal .. Let's say full time open loop
Thanks
I don't believe there is open loop anymore with TT as it follows the whole AFR table from 12.5-15 if you needed.
Quote from: Sarhan on September 18, 2015, 08:44:56 AM
Jamie
Can TT work on open loop cal .. Let's say full time open loop
Thanks
Not exactly clear on what you are asking, however Target Tune provides full time closed loop operation with the widebands over the entire calibration, this includes areas which in a standard tune would normally be open loop.
Quote from: Jamie Long on September 18, 2015, 11:04:15 AM
Quote from: Sarhan on September 18, 2015, 08:44:56 AM
Jamie
Can TT work on open loop cal .. Let's say full time open loop
Thanks
Not exactly clear on what you are asking, however Target Tune provides full time closed loop operation with the widebands over the entire calibration, this includes areas which in a standard tune would normally be open loop.
For example if I set the AFR at 13.5 cross the table and 12.7 from 70 to 100kpa would TT monitoring the requested AFR
Quote from: Sarhan on September 18, 2015, 11:37:34 AM
Quote from: Jamie Long on September 18, 2015, 11:04:15 AM
Quote from: Sarhan on September 18, 2015, 08:44:56 AM
Jamie
Can TT work on open loop cal .. Let's say full time open loop
Thanks
Not exactly clear on what you are asking, however Target Tune provides full time closed loop operation with the widebands over the entire calibration, this includes areas which in a standard tune would normally be open loop.
For example if I set the AFR at 13.5 cross the table and 12.7 from 70 to 100kpa would TT monitoring the requested AFR
Yes, TT uses whatever AF target you put in the AFR/Lambda table with short term (real time) and long term (stored) corrections
Quote from: Jamie Long on September 18, 2015, 11:50:45 AM
Quote from: Sarhan on September 18, 2015, 11:37:34 AM
Quote from: Jamie Long on September 18, 2015, 11:04:15 AM
Quote from: Sarhan on September 18, 2015, 08:44:56 AM
Jamie
Can TT work on open loop cal .. Let's say full time open loop
Thanks
Not exactly clear on what you are asking, however Target Tune provides full time closed loop operation with the widebands over the entire calibration, this includes areas which in a standard tune would normally be open loop.
For example if I set the AFR at 13.5 cross the table and 12.7 from 70 to 100kpa would TT monitoring the requested AFR
Yes, TT uses whatever AF target you put in the AFR/Lambda table with short term (real time) and long term (stored) corrections
Thanks Jamie
Quote from: Sarhan on September 18, 2015, 12:34:04 PM
Quote from: Jamie Long on September 18, 2015, 11:50:45 AM
Quote from: Sarhan on September 18, 2015, 11:37:34 AM
Quote from: Jamie Long on September 18, 2015, 11:04:15 AM
Quote from: Sarhan on September 18, 2015, 08:44:56 AM
Jamie
Can TT work on open loop cal .. Let's say full time open loop
Thanks
Not exactly clear on what you are asking, however Target Tune provides full time closed loop operation with the widebands over the entire calibration, this includes areas which in a standard tune would normally be open loop.
For example if I set the AFR at 13.5 cross the table and 12.7 from 70 to 100kpa would TT monitoring the requested AFR
Yes, TT uses whatever AF target you put in the AFR/Lambda table with short term (real time) and long term (stored) corrections
Thanks Jamie
Jamie,
does TT change / correct the spark advances?
Geetings from Germany
SAKBM
Quote from: hdmanillac on September 18, 2015, 03:50:26 AM
The sensor does not know the lambda. It measures the rate of oxygen and returns a corresponding voltage.
The calculator takes into account the voltage and performs processing to inject the amount of fuel that fits. For this it may be using lambda. But that's not even sure.
Lambda is for practical and human comfort.
All the sensor knows is lambda. Hence "lambda sensor" (what they actually are properly called). In actual practice, it would seem, most humans are
confused by lambda... so it's rarely a comfort to them.
So Glen, now that you are starting to think thru the limits of the narrow bands, are you going over to the other side to take all the advantages of widebands and start aiming for the AFR you really want to run a motor at?
Andy
Quote from: sakbm on September 20, 2015, 11:38:25 AM
does TT change / correct the spark advances?
Geetings from Germany
SAKBM
The TT-Auto Tune application has a utility that allows you to remove timing based on knock activity. We use this as a guideline to determine the areas that need to be attended to, however we generally correct timing based on datalogs.
Thank you Jamie.
That means, I should make logs an I see where knocking could be. So I can remove timing?
SAKBM
I installed the TT on our '15 CVO RGU and spent a little bit of time with it over the weekend.
Jamie supplied a starting map that seemed to run pretty good from the start and then I proceeded to make a few tuning runs.
Did a couple runs solo, and then piled the wife on and did some work on the higher load cells(yes, I said that).
I didn't spend a lot of effort stretching out to the outer ranges, just mainly in the normal riding areas for now.
I ended up only doing 5 tuning runs, however from all indications watching the CLIs and fuel trims it's dialed in pretty damn close.
My 5th run only had I think 2 VE cells that changed more than 4%, and most were 2% or less.
Watching the numbers it's not doing much correcting. The AFRs do of course wander around a bit, but it stays in a pretty tight range. The cruise AFR is set at 14.2 on this tune, and I'm only seeing it wander by 2 tenths or less, 14.0-14.2 most of the time.
My Dodge Challenger wanders from 13.0-15.0 continuously while at highway speeds.
Overall it runs really nice right now. We're doing a 1500mi run the end of this week and weekend, it'll be a good test.
Jamie, listen up here......
There needs to be a serious effort put into getting some better/useable documentation put together for these systems now.
The Power Vision has been out for 5 years or better, yet most of the documentation is at least 3-4 years old, if not more.
It's pretty sad that when people ask for more info on the forums most people point them to the TTS manual for clarification.
Some good how-to's with some explanations of what to do with "what if I see this", and "what do I do when this happens", and just some basic theory of operation and tuning, what to look for when putting together a good tune etc.
:agree:
I'd like to see some informations about:
- How to set the map load normalization with a WOT run.
- How to set IVO & IVC MAP Tooth when new cames are bolt in.
- How to set Charge Dilution Effect Front & Rear. TTS do that automatically now.
:idea:
Quote from: whittlebeast on September 21, 2015, 04:35:38 AM
So Glen, now that you are starting to think thru the limits of the narrow bands, are you going over to the other side to take all the advantages of widebands and start aiming for the AFR you really want to run a motor at?
Andy
No.
What made you think I was thinking through any limits?
Quote from: hdmanillac on September 21, 2015, 10:17:15 PM
:agree:
I'd like to see some informations about:
- How to set the map load normalization with a WOT run.
- How to set IVO & IVC MAP Tooth when new cames are bolt in.
- How to set Charge Dilution Effect Front & Rear. TTS do that automatically now.
:idea:
It's easier in the dyno room but you need to figure out what your baro pressure is for the day and area your in. Record a WOT run from 1500rpm up to 6000 rpm. If you need you can do this in different gears. For example my baro pressure usually hangs around 97-98 KPA here in KC. If the recording does not match the KPA I have here I raise or lower the KPA multiplier by .01. If it shows 100kpa I lower it by .02 and if it shows 94 KPA I raise it by .04. It is a good idea to make sure your air cleaner is very clean, if its a K&N just clean it and not oil it yet.
There is a new user guide as well as a series of how to videos on the way.
Didn't see "on it's way"
I agree with the need for updated PV documentation to include TT operation. As far as I know, there isn't a single page of documentation that addresses TT operation and tuning.
I've griped for a couple of years about the lack of any meaningful guidance from DJ on setting CDE values, but at least we have access to the feature and can experiment. The much bigger concern for me is that end users (does not include tuners apparently) have no access to IVO/IVC. This is close to being unacceptable to me.
Since there is no TT documentation, I'll mention two things I've learned for the benefit of other users: 1) not a huge deal, but Acceleration Enrichment Multiplier and Deceleration Enleanment Multiplier must both be set to 1.0 with TT. You can still change AE and DE values individually, but do NOT use the multipliers. For some reason, setting the multipliers to values other than 1.0 causes some (but not all) lambda targets used when the engine is running to be different than the lambda values the tune has in its target AFR table. 2) Once Jamie or DJ converts your tune to a TT version, do NOT perform a "Update Tune using PV" function in WinPV. DJ had an update since I've had TT and like I always do after installing updates, I updated my tune to add any new features. When I did, I lost the conversion to TT that Jamie did to my tune when I bought my TT. I got a CEL as soon as I started the bike with the WinPV-updated tune loaded and found DTCs for the front and rear O2 sensors. Not a huge issue as long as the heaters got the startup command when the bike started. I know from past experience that a Bosch 4.2 sensor will last for less than a minute with exhaust gases flowing across it and the heaters turned off during a cold start. I'll know tonight whether or not this happened. If it did, I'll let DJ know that I expect free replacement sensors since their software allowed this to happen and since there is no documentation telling TT users not to upgrade their tunes. This also makes me wonder how TT users are suppose to upgrade when new features are added.
Quote from: GregOn2Wheels on September 22, 2015, 11:27:46 AM
The much bigger concern for me is that end users (does not include tuners apparently) have no access to IVO/IVC. This is close to being unacceptable to me.
:agree:
Quote from: GregOn2Wheels on September 22, 2015, 11:27:46 AM
I agree with the need for updated PV documentation to include TT operation. As far as I know, there isn't a single page of documentation that addresses TT operation and tuning.
I've griped for a couple of years about the lack of any meaningful guidance from DJ on setting CDE values, but at least we have access to the feature and can experiment. The much bigger concern for me is that end users (does not include tuners apparently) have no access to IVO/IVC. This is close to being unacceptable to me.
Since there is no TT documentation, I'll mention two things I've learned for the benefit of other users: 1) not a huge deal, but Acceleration Enrichment Multiplier and Deceleration Enleanment Multiplier must both be set to 1.0 with TT. You can still change AE and DE values individually, but do NOT use the multipliers. For some reason, setting the multipliers to values other than 1.0 causes some (but not all) lambda targets used when the engine is running to be different than the lambda values the tune has in its target AFR table. 2) Once Jamie or DJ converts your tune to a TT version, do NOT perform a "Update Tune using PV" function in WinPV. DJ had an update since I've had TT and like I always do after installing updates, I updated my tune to add any new features. When I did, I lost the conversion to TT that Jamie did to my tune when I bought my TT. I got a CEL as soon as I started the bike with the WinPV-updated tune loaded and found DTCs for the front and rear O2 sensors. Not a huge issue as long as the heaters got the startup command when the bike started. I know from past experience that a Bosch 4.2 sensor will last for less than a minute with exhaust gases flowing across it and the heaters turned off during a cold start. I'll know tonight whether or not this happened. If it did, I'll let DJ know that I expect free replacement sensors since their software allowed this to happen and since there is no documentation telling TT users not to upgrade their tunes. This also makes me wonder how TT users are suppose to upgrade when new features are added.
We do not recommend using the AE/DE multipliers, edit the tables directly. The multipliers are also going to be removed in the future, no good reason to have them in there.
You can Update Tune with Pv in WinPv with a Target Tune map. This does require WinPv version 2.0.8.1500, 2.0.19-1506 or later FW, and tune database of 0.0.9.33 or later. Being curious I just updated several TT tunes on various windows machines here with consumer software and then verified everything was still there and correct on my office computer with calibrator mode. If you have a copy of the map that caused the engine light please email it to jamie@fuelmotousa.com along with the specific fw/sw & tune database that was in your PV with this happened.
With Target Tune the O2 heaters are controlled by the TT module not the ECM, the sensors are powered at key-on at all times.
Jamie - it was after I upgraded to WinPV version 2.0.8.1500 and 2.0.19-1506 firmware that I had this problem, so I have the latest versions of everything. To double check, I also verified versions with the WinPV update client. I'll send the offending tune to your email.
Are there issues other than the AE/DE Multipliers I mentioned that TT users should be aware of? Early adopters should expect a problem here and there, but we also expect transparency on the part of the manufacture concerning defects - especially with a product like PV. Not only would it help us early adopters, but it would help DJ and FM as well. I don't think you need a business 101 lesson from me or anyone else to understand why.
Quote from: GregOn2Wheels on September 22, 2015, 12:54:15 PM
Jamie - it was after I upgraded to WinPV version 2.0.8.1500 and 2.0.19-1506 firmware that I had this problem, so I have the latest versions of everything. To double check, I also verified versions with the WinPV update client. I'll send the offending tune to your email.
Are there issues other than the AE/DE Multipliers I mentioned that TT users should be aware of? Early adopters should expect a problem here and there, but we also expect transparency on the part of the manufacture concerning defects - especially with a product like PV. Not only would it help us early adopters, but it would help DJ and FM as well. I don't think you need a business 101 lesson from me or anyone else to understand why.
I received the map that you updated and there was nothing that was affected or changed within the tune. Comparing this tune to one of the earlier maps you sent me in WinPv shows the only differences were the minor edits you made to a few of the tuning tables, everything else is exactly same.
You noted "it was after I upgraded to WinPV version 2.0.8.1500 and 2.0.19-1506 firmware" that you had issues. If this was the case that means you were previously using a non current version before you updated which is likely the root of your issue as 2.0.8.1500 sw and 2.0.19-1506 fw are the minimum versions required for use with Target Tune. Not exactly sure what may have went wrong or where, however I would try updating the tune using PV again and report back with your findings.
Quote from: GregOn2Wheels on September 22, 2015, 12:54:15 PM
Are there issues other than the AE/DE Multipliers I mentioned that TT users should be aware of?
We have ran into the following items. The first is if you open a TT-enabled map in non current software, it can strip the Target Tune tables from the background of the calibration, the same will happen if you load a TT-enabled map to a PV with non-current firmware. It is essential that everything is updated when starting with Target Tune. We have found that using Quick Tune to edit TT-enabled calibrations can affect some TT maps depending on the build level. The only other thing we have seen is a few users have selected the Auto Tune Pro application rather than the Target Tune Auto Tune application, which again can break the tune.
Quote from: Jamie Long on September 22, 2015, 02:36:46 PM
Quote from: GregOn2Wheels on September 22, 2015, 12:54:15 PM
Are there issues other than the AE/DE Multipliers I mentioned that TT users should be aware of?
We have ran into the following items. The first is if you open a TT-enabled map in non current software, it can strip the Target Tune tables from the background of the calibration, the same will happen if you load a TT-enabled map to a PV with non-current firmware. It is essential that everything is updated when starting with Target Tune. We have found that using Quick Tune to edit TT-enabled calibrations can affect some TT maps depending on the build level. The only other thing we have seen is a few users have selected the Auto Tune Pro application rather than the Target Tune Auto Tune application, which again can break the tune.
Thank you Jamie
Jamie -
its easy to hit the wrong auto tune application with big digits in gloves. Not happened yet, but for our information, if suspected, would the fix and to rule out error be as simple as copying and pasting current Ve's to the original TT enabled Cal ?
Manual and the odd how-to video would be a Godsend.
Chris.
Quote from: Jamie Long on September 22, 2015, 12:13:30 PM
We do not recommend using the AE/DE multipliers, edit the tables directly. The multipliers are also going to be removed in the future, no good reason to have them in there.
Are you saying that there is no need to have a AE/DE table in a fuel injection system? Or DJ is going to take away the table but it is still going to be there in the back ground?
Quote from: hrdtail78 on September 23, 2015, 09:31:34 AM
Quote from: Jamie Long on September 22, 2015, 12:13:30 PM
We do not recommend using the AE/DE multipliers, edit the tables directly. The multipliers are also going to be removed in the future, no good reason to have them in there.
Are you saying that there is no need to have a AE/DE table in a fuel injection system? Or DJ is going to take away the table but it is still going to be there in the back ground?
The AE/DE tables will still be there and the engine temperature-specific multiplier values will still be (correctly) applied. The item that can't be used with TT is the AE and DE "multiplier multipliers" or stated differently, the across-the-board multiplier that increases or decreases all of the engine temperature specific AE or DE multipliers.
Quote from: Mossy73 on September 23, 2015, 01:26:53 AM
Jamie -
its easy to hit the wrong auto tune application with big digits in gloves. Not happened yet, but for our information, if suspected, would the fix and to rule out error be as simple as copying and pasting current Ve's to the original TT enabled Cal ?
Manual and the odd how-to video would be a Godsend.
Chris.
You can use the TT-Auto Tune application or WinPv for making tune edits. I do not recommend copying/pasting tables or using value files from other maps into a Target Tune calibration, this can break the tune.
Quote from: hrdtail78 on September 23, 2015, 09:31:34 AM
Quote from: Jamie Long on September 22, 2015, 12:13:30 PM
We do not recommend using the AE/DE multipliers, edit the tables directly. The multipliers are also going to be removed in the future, no good reason to have them in there.
Are you saying that there is no need to have a AE/DE table in a fuel injection system? Or DJ is going to take away the table but it is still going to be there in the back ground?
Not saying anything like that at all. PV calibrations have AE/DE tables which will remain in all cals, however there is also a second Multiplier for each table which is not necessary and will be removed.
Quote from: Jamie Long on September 23, 2015, 10:28:08 AM
Quote from: hrdtail78 on September 23, 2015, 09:31:34 AM
Quote from: Jamie Long on September 22, 2015, 12:13:30 PM
We do not recommend using the AE/DE multipliers, edit the tables directly. The multipliers are also going to be removed in the future, no good reason to have them in there.
Are you saying that there is no need to have a AE/DE table in a fuel injection system? Or DJ is going to take away the table but it is still going to be there in the back ground?
Not saying anything like that at all. PV calibrations have AE/DE tables which will remain in all cals, however there is also a second Multiplier for each table which is not necessary and will be removed.
OK. You are talking the offset table and not the main table. Got it.
I consider myself a retard when it comes to tuning but I do like to tinker and do my own work on the bike. I purchased my PV about 6 months after they first came out and loaded the map that was provided. I did nothing to that map for 6 months because I thought my bike ran great. I then messed with the tune and did a bunch of tuning runs using the narrow band sensors and thought my bike ran even better. I then upgraded to a 103 with cams, etc. and at the same time I purchased an AT100. Got a new map from FM and have done countless runs dialing in my bike and again I thought my bike ran great. Last week I installed the Target Tune module, loaded the map and took it for a 100 mile ride. My bike has never ran so good. The motor just seems happy no matter how I ride it. I think Dyno Jet hit this one out of the ball park when they came out with target tune. It was worth every penny. Oh and I didn't mention it but after going to a 103 w/cams I had it dynode twice and the tuner could never get the ping eliminated totally so I always went back to the map FM provided. My bike is a 2010 FLHTCU.
Nearly the same story for me except I tune my bike myself and there is no more pinging since A48H are in.
Good Job DJ with Target Tune !
:up:
Quote from: Teardrop on October 01, 2015, 08:28:58 PM
I consider myself a retard when it comes to tuning but I do like to tinker and do my own work on the bike. I purchased my PV about 6 months after they first came out and loaded the map that was provided. I did nothing to that map for 6 months because I thought my bike ran great. I then messed with the tune and did a bunch of tuning runs using the narrow band sensors and thought my bike ran even better. I then upgraded to a 103 with cams, etc. and at the same time I purchased an AT100. Got a new map from FM and have done countless runs dialing in my bike and again I thought my bike ran great. Last week I installed the Target Tune module, loaded the map and took it for a 100 mile ride. My bike has never ran so good. The motor just seems happy no matter how I ride it. I think Dyno Jet hit this one out of the ball park when they came out with target tune. It was worth every penny. Oh and I didn't mention it but after going to a 103 w/cams I had it dynode twice and the tuner could never get the ping eliminated totally so I always went back to the map FM provided. My bike is a 2010 FLHTCU.
This exactly mirrors my experience with PV, then PV with AT and now PV with TT.
So with tt you must leave the widebands on and the module on all the time. So it's kinda like thundermax
Quote from: Teardrop on October 01, 2015, 08:28:58 PM
I consider myself a retard when it comes to tuning but I do like to tinker and do my own work on the bike. I purchased my PV about 6 months after they first came out and loaded the map that was provided. I did nothing to that map for 6 months because I thought my bike ran great. I then messed with the tune and did a bunch of tuning runs using the narrow band sensors and thought my bike ran even better. I then upgraded to a 103 with cams, etc. and at the same time I purchased an AT100. Got a new map from FM and have done countless runs dialing in my bike and again I thought my bike ran great. Last week I installed the Target Tune module, loaded the map and took it for a 100 mile ride. My bike has never ran so good. The motor just seems happy no matter how I ride it. I think Dyno Jet hit this one out of the ball park when they came out with target tune. It was worth every penny. Oh and I didn't mention it but after going to a 103 w/cams I had it dynode twice and the tuner could never get the ping eliminated totally so I always went back to the map FM provided. My bike is a 2010 FLHTCU.
This sounds like you purchased a PV tuner to get your bike tuned in...then purchased the AT100 kit to get your bike tuned in...then purchased the target tune to get your bike tuned in...and now you got your bike tuned in.
Have you added up the $$ and time invested in getting your bike tuned in? Then again, maybe you don't want to know. :smileo:
Bob
About $1100 for hardware bought from a dot com.
Too bad target tune just came out now. He could have been done with one call to fuelmotousa and a few hours of riding.
plus the 2 times the tuner couldn't get things right
Quote from: Mirrmu on October 02, 2015, 04:12:11 PM
plus the 2 times the tuner couldn't get things right
But you have auto-tuners!! Why would you need someone else (tuners) involved?
Just need to install and ride, right?
Bob
[/quote]
This sounds like you purchased a PV tuner to get your bike tuned in...then purchased the AT100 kit to get your bike tuned in...then purchased the target tune to get your bike tuned in...and now you got your bike tuned in.
Have you added up the $$ and time invested in getting your bike tuned in? Then again, maybe you don't want to know. :smileo:
Bob
[/quote]
I get your point Bob, but as has been said here many times before, there are so few truly competent tuners out there that spending a grand for an auto-tune system that works is the best option for many if not most Harley owners.
Not everyone's keen on running the ECM in engineering mode and stashing another controller somewhere on the bike in order to do so.
Glen, what's the downside to running engineering mode? Running the stock o2s on a motor that prefers to run richer than 14.7 has lots of down sides.
Right after I purchased the PV my job took me to Colorado where I was able to get it tuned in enough to run good. It was when we moved back to Mesa AZ and the heat is where I started having issues and yes the tuner couldn't get it right. The AT100 got me close and now the target tune has my bike running the best it ever has.
Quote from: glens on October 02, 2015, 11:57:33 PM
Not everyone's keen on running the ECM in engineering mode and stashing another controller somewhere on the bike in order to do so.
On the face of it, engineering mode sounds like I am getting shafted. The net result seems to be pretty decent. By all appearances it holds to the target lambda pretty well. I think ve tuning with the At-100 was just as good though.
I hear the concerns over engineering mode, but am wondering what the downside truly is. My bike is out of warranty, so I am on my own at this point anyway. Should I expect this system to leave me on the side of the road someday?
It might be wise to find out what will happen if the box takes a dump. I just assumed the bike would continue in open loop from there.
Is cost really a concern? $20,000 for a motorcycle regardless of brand isn't money wise to begin with...
Quote from: FLTRI on October 02, 2015, 11:01:53 AM
Quote from: Teardrop on October 01, 2015, 08:28:58 PM
I consider myself a retard when it comes to tuning but I do like to tinker and do my own work on the bike. I purchased my PV about 6 months after they first came out and loaded the map that was provided. I did nothing to that map for 6 months because I thought my bike ran great. I then messed with the tune and did a bunch of tuning runs using the narrow band sensors and thought my bike ran even better. I then upgraded to a 103 with cams, etc. and at the same time I purchased an AT100. Got a new map from FM and have done countless runs dialing in my bike and again I thought my bike ran great. Last week I installed the Target Tune module, loaded the map and took it for a 100 mile ride. My bike has never ran so good. The motor just seems happy no matter how I ride it. I think Dyno Jet hit this one out of the ball park when they came out with target tune. It was worth every penny. Oh and I didn't mention it but after going to a 103 w/cams I had it dynode twice and the tuner could never get the ping eliminated totally so I always went back to the map FM provided. My bike is a 2010 FLHTCU.
This sounds like you purchased a PV tuner to get your bike tuned in...then purchased the AT100 kit to get your bike tuned in...then purchased the target tune to get your bike tuned in...and now you got your bike tuned in.
Have you added up the $$ and time invested in getting your bike tuned in? Then again, maybe you don't want to know. :smileo:
Bob
Ok. Say a person bought the PV and did the NB AT sessions and was happy. 6 mo. later he changed exhaust systems and bought the AT-100 then did some WB tuning and was happy. Then a year later he changed cams and bought the TT and installed it and was happy.
Did the PV, AT-100, and TT cost him more than 3 tuning sessions with a good tuning shop?
Quote from: Ancient on October 03, 2015, 06:33:34 AM
Quote from: FLTRI on October 02, 2015, 11:01:53 AM
Quote from: Teardrop on October 01, 2015, 08:28:58 PM
I consider myself a retard when it comes to tuning but I do like to tinker and do my own work on the bike. I purchased my PV about 6 months after they first came out and loaded the map that was provided. I did nothing to that map for 6 months because I thought my bike ran great. I then messed with the tune and did a bunch of tuning runs using the narrow band sensors and thought my bike ran even better. I then upgraded to a 103 with cams, etc. and at the same time I purchased an AT100. Got a new map from FM and have done countless runs dialing in my bike and again I thought my bike ran great. Last week I installed the Target Tune module, loaded the map and took it for a 100 mile ride. My bike has never ran so good. The motor just seems happy no matter how I ride it. I think Dyno Jet hit this one out of the ball park when they came out with target tune. It was worth every penny. Oh and I didn't mention it but after going to a 103 w/cams I had it dynode twice and the tuner could never get the ping eliminated totally so I always went back to the map FM provided. My bike is a 2010 FLHTCU.
This sounds like you purchased a PV tuner to get your bike tuned in...then purchased the AT100 kit to get your bike tuned in...then purchased the target tune to get your bike tuned in...and now you got your bike tuned in.
Have you added up the $$ and time invested in getting your bike tuned in? Then again, maybe you don't want to know. :smileo:
Bob
Ok. Say a person bought the PV and did the NB AT sessions and was happy. 6 mo. later he changed exhaust systems and bought the AT-100 then did some WB tuning and was happy. Then a year later he changed cams and bought the TT and installed it and was happy.
Did the PV, AT-100, and TT cost him more than 3 tuning sessions with a good tuning shop?
Excellent point.
Ron
Quote from: Ancient on October 03, 2015, 06:33:34 AM
Quote from: FLTRI on October 02, 2015, 11:01:53 AM
Quote from: Teardrop on October 01, 2015, 08:28:58 PM
I consider myself a retard when it comes to tuning but I do like to tinker and do my own work on the bike. I purchased my PV about 6 months after they first came out and loaded the map that was provided. I did nothing to that map for 6 months because I thought my bike ran great. I then messed with the tune and did a bunch of tuning runs using the narrow band sensors and thought my bike ran even better. I then upgraded to a 103 with cams, etc. and at the same time I purchased an AT100. Got a new map from FM and have done countless runs dialing in my bike and again I thought my bike ran great. Last week I installed the Target Tune module, loaded the map and took it for a 100 mile ride. My bike has never ran so good. The motor just seems happy no matter how I ride it. I think Dyno Jet hit this one out of the ball park when they came out with target tune. It was worth every penny. Oh and I didn't mention it but after going to a 103 w/cams I had it dynode twice and the tuner could never get the ping eliminated totally so I always went back to the map FM provided. My bike is a 2010 FLHTCU.
This sounds like you purchased a PV tuner to get your bike tuned in...then purchased the AT100 kit to get your bike tuned in...then purchased the target tune to get your bike tuned in...and now you got your bike tuned in.
Have you added up the $$ and time invested in getting your bike tuned in? Then again, maybe you don't want to know. :smileo:
Bob
Ok. Say a person bought the PV and did the NB AT sessions and was happy. 6 mo. later he changed exhaust systems and bought the AT-100 then did some WB tuning and was happy. Then a year later he changed cams and bought the TT and installed it and was happy.
Did the PV, AT-100, and TT cost him more than 3 tuning sessions with a good tuning shop?
:up:
I would reword it a little since the PV flash tuner was required either way:
Did the AT-100 & TT cost him more compared to 3 tuning sessions?
$600.00 (WBO2's are reusable between AT & TT) $450.00 verses $1500.00 [I don't think so]
Ron, just think, he may never need to go to a tuner again. No matter what he changes. And now he can help all his friends tunexpected their bikes. Sounds like a great tradeoff to me.
Quote from: whittlebeast on October 03, 2015, 09:33:27 AM
Ron, just think, he may never need to go to a tuner again. No matter what he changes. And now he can help all his friends tunexpected their bikes. Sounds like a great tradeoff to me.
Good point Andy. That said, some folks like to actually ride their bikes. Not everyone lives to tune.
Have fun tuning,
Bob
With its ability to tune to lambda values set in the AFR map, PV + TT is DJ's best tuning device yet IMO and if that's all there was to it, that would be enough for me. But it's more than "just a tuner". It also allows the ECM to use wide band sensors in closed loop mode which for me has been a nice improvement over PV + AT tunes running in open loop. Narrow band closed loop came about for one reason and one reason only - to reduce emissions. Across-the-board closed loop with wide bands is an altogether different animal that delivers smooth and responsive operation and does it consistently. That's what I've seen so far. (nearly 3,000 miles)
Quote from: GregOn2Wheels on October 03, 2015, 10:16:38 AM
...Across-the-board closed loop with wide bands is an altogether different animal that delivers smooth and responsive operation and does it consistently...
Wouldn't your bike run the same with an autotuned but rich
open loop map? What AFR are you running with your TT? What's your mileage?
Karl
Quote from: Karl H. on October 03, 2015, 11:03:29 AM
Quote from: GregOn2Wheels on October 03, 2015, 10:16:38 AM
...Across-the-board closed loop with wide bands is an altogether different animal that delivers smooth and responsive operation and does it consistently...
Wouldn't your bike run the same with an autotuned but rich open loop map? What AFR are you running with your TT? What's your mileage?
Karl
No it would not run the same with an open loop map - I know this because I ran it that way for almost a year. An open loop map can't compensate for variables like gas quality from tank-to-tank. One of the nice features of TT is that the AFR is whatever you set it to in your fuel map and it's in closed loop the entire time. Here's mine and I average about 38 mpg (the best milage its ever gotten):
[attach=0]
The 14.2 area is the main cruising range and could easily be controlled by narrow bands. Where do you experince the "smooth and responsive"? Is it outside this area of operation?
Karl
Quote from: GregOn2Wheels on October 03, 2015, 11:22:56 AM
Quote from: Karl H. on October 03, 2015, 11:03:29 AM
Quote from: GregOn2Wheels on October 03, 2015, 10:16:38 AM
...Across-the-board closed loop with wide bands is an altogether different animal that delivers smooth and responsive operation and does it consistently...
Wouldn't your bike run the same with an autotuned but rich open loop map? What AFR are you running with your TT? What's your mileage?
Karl
No it would not run the same with an open loop map - I know this because I ran it that way for almost a year. An open loop map can't compensate for variables like gas quality from tank-to-tank. One of the nice features of TT is that the AFR is whatever you set it to in your fuel map and it's in closed loop the entire time. Here's mine and I average about 38 mpg (the best milage its ever gotten):
[attach=0]
14.5 in the cruise ranges should get you into the low to mid 40s. Just saying.
Ron
14.2 compared to 14.5 is a 2 pct difference.
14.5 in the cruise ranges should get you into the low to mid 40s. Just saying.
Ron
Yeah I've heard that myth before Ron but with E10 combined with a need for speed I think I'm more likely to see a unicorn. I could bump the cruise range up to 14.4 or 14.6 if I wanted better mileage, but the bike seems happier (smoother) at 14.2.
Quote from: GregOn2Wheels on October 03, 2015, 11:22:56 AM
Quote from: Karl H. on October 03, 2015, 11:03:29 AM
Quote from: GregOn2Wheels on October 03, 2015, 10:16:38 AM
...Across-the-board closed loop with wide bands is an altogether different animal that delivers smooth and responsive operation and does it consistently...
Wouldn't your bike run the same with an autotuned but rich open loop map? What AFR are you running with your TT? What's your mileage?
Karl
No it would not run the same with an open loop map - I know this because I ran it that way for almost a year. An open loop map can't compensate for variables like gas quality from tank-to-tank. One of the nice features of TT is that the AFR is whatever you set it to in your fuel map and it's in closed loop the entire time. Here's mine and I average about 38 mpg (the best milage its ever gotten):
[attach=0]
Can you give the details of your build?
Can you give the details of your build?
It's just a basic stage 2, 15 FLHTK with a Jackpot 2-1-2 SS headpipe, Jackpot 4" Dyno-tuned mufflers and Andrews 57H cams.
Quote from: Karl H. on October 03, 2015, 11:50:05 AM
The 14.2 area is the main cruising range and could easily be controlled by narrow bands. Where do you experince the "smooth and responsive"? Is it outside this area of operation?
Karl
Its smoother inside and out of the cruise range and with my headpipe and mufflers (YMWV), the narrow bands do not perform as well as the wide bands even in the cruise range because of where the narrow bands are located. Look I never said or implied that PW+TT is the ultimate tuning solution for everybody. I've only said that for me and my bike, it works great.
What I don't understand is why an engine should run smoother and more responsive with lambda control than just in open loop (privided it's tuned well, it runs in a rich mode and the gas is o.k.). My engine runs with plain AFR 13,2 in open loop and is very smooth and responsive.
Karl
What's a matter with the jackpot bung location?
Quote from: rbabos on October 03, 2015, 06:58:15 AM
Quote from: Ancient on October 03, 2015, 06:33:34 AM
Quote from: FLTRI on October 02, 2015, 11:01:53 AM
Quote from: Teardrop on October 01, 2015, 08:28:58 PM
I consider myself a retard when it comes to tuning but I do like to tinker and do my own work on the bike. I purchased my PV about 6 months after they first came out and loaded the map that was provided. I did nothing to that map for 6 months because I thought my bike ran great. I then messed with the tune and did a bunch of tuning runs using the narrow band sensors and thought my bike ran even better. I then upgraded to a 103 with cams, etc. and at the same time I purchased an AT100. Got a new map from FM and have done countless runs dialing in my bike and again I thought my bike ran great. Last week I installed the Target Tune module, loaded the map and took it for a 100 mile ride. My bike has never ran so good. The motor just seems happy no matter how I ride it. I think Dyno Jet hit this one out of the ball park when they came out with target tune. It was worth every penny. Oh and I didn't mention it but after going to a 103 w/cams I had it dynode twice and the tuner could never get the ping eliminated totally so I always went back to the map FM provided. My bike is a 2010 FLHTCU.
This sounds like you purchased a PV tuner to get your bike tuned in...then purchased the AT100 kit to get your bike tuned in...then purchased the target tune to get your bike tuned in...and now you got your bike tuned in.
Have you added up the $$ and time invested in getting your bike tuned in? Then again, maybe you don't want to know. :smileo:
Bob
Ok. Say a person bought the PV and did the NB AT sessions and was happy. 6 mo. later he changed exhaust systems and bought the AT-100 then did some WB tuning and was happy. Then a year later he changed cams and bought the TT and installed it and was happy.
Did the PV, AT-100, and TT cost him more than 3 tuning sessions with a good tuning shop?
Excellent point.
Ron
I think the key is finding a good tuning shop which I was unable to do so I did what I thought was the next best thing. Just because a shop has a dyno doesn't necessarily mean they know how to use it which I found out the hard way and like I said earlier (not that I know what I'm doing) I like to tinker. I thought my bike ran good with the AT-100 but it runs way better with the Target tune.
Quote from: FLTRI on October 03, 2015, 10:09:54 AM
Quote from: whittlebeast on October 03, 2015, 09:33:27 AM
Ron, just think, he may never need to go to a tuner again. No matter what he changes. And now he can help all his friends tunexpected their bikes. Sounds like a great tradeoff to me.
Good point Andy. That said, some folks like to actually ride their bikes. Not everyone lives to tune.
Have fun tuning,
Bob
I live in AZ I ride my bike daily 24/7/365
Bob,
You get a chance to see any raw data with TT? It really isn't anything like the screen shots. BUT if guys are happy with how things are working. I can only follow what they are saying about the lack of good dyno operators and what they are getting now is better than what they were getting with the system they were using before. Not necessary the best. Just better. Has to make one wonder about the great tunes while using what they used before. Now it is better with this device. Is this device so much better or did the other device just set a low bar. My use with the other device says it's a very low bar. Makes me wonder about the time and effort put into the concept of a vision and a can map is all you need.
Yes, this product definitely serves the DIY guy, and there are many of us out there. There is the issue of finding a quality tuning shop, at least south of the equator.
For me so far, with a little auto tuning and data logging, my bike performs super well done in and around the cruise area.
The anomalies are in the quality of the existing calibration.eg. Cold start, idle , WOT , decel etc.
this is something I am working through - with assistance from HTT.
I don't think us DIY ers are going to put anybody out of a job. In fact quite the opposite.
Having a screen and viewing the existing info is an asset.
Real time tuning would be the icing on the cake. :baby:
Bob, have you been looking at the data off the TT bikes? I am really impressed with what I am seeing.
Yes Andy, I will send you some data soon.
Quote from: hrdtail78 on October 04, 2015, 02:33:47 PM
I can only follow what they are saying about the lack of good dyno operators and what they are getting now is better than what they were getting with the system they were using before. Not necessary the best. Just better. Has to make one wonder about the great tunes while using what they used before. Now it is better with this device. Is this device so much better or did the other device just set a low bar. My use with the other device says it's a very low bar. Makes me wonder about the time and effort put into the concept of a vision and a can map is all you need.
So having the best flash tuner [per you] and three hours dyno time will produce a tune that cannot be improved upon... :scratch:
How many times are you and others going to put up this "just need a map to flash and go" BillShi*... Where there are people with little prior tuning experience, there are many times more people that have been tuning vehicles for decades [Carb, mFI, & EFI]... and fully understand how to set up timing curves and when and where different AFR are needed to be used... The issue that is different when using EFI is knowledge of the motors VE's and that is what the flash tuners that use Wide Band Closed Loop provides to a DIY. AND they [WBO2's] just don't stop doing the job after three hours. :wink:
Maybe like a few years ago when every head porter was professing that their heads where the best and their competitors were just poser... Max HeadFlow suggested a sort of porter shoutout ... where porters submitted a head and it got mailed around to be flow tested by a number of people.
Maybe we need a tuner shoutout between your [Bob too] three hour dyno tune against a PVTT & TMax tunes on the same bike. HTT members can help to submit info an what will be measured to determine a well rounded tuned harley motorcycle.
Q1svt
That is in the works. One bike tuned with TTS on a dyno 3 times, then the same bike tuned by hand and MLV, then tuned with Power Vision and Target Tune. Most likely this will all be done on the low lands and then taken up in the mountains. All logged with huge logs so you can compare them back to back.
The owner of the bike likes to ride. :chop:
:hug:
Here is a screen shot from a Target Tune Vrod from a 24 min ride. I assume this was all done with the autotune built into TT. This tune is amazingly close. I have not talked to the owner yet. I randomly got this log with a "What do you think" type PM.
http://www.nbs-stl.com/HarleyTuning/TargetTuneAFFHistogram.png (http://www.nbs-stl.com/HarleyTuning/TargetTuneAFFHistogram.png)
He did not have PW in the log to do the MAPxRPM stuff. To bad....
Here is the AFR he came up with.
http://www.nbs-stl.com/HarleyTuning/TargetTuneAFRHistogram.png (http://www.nbs-stl.com/HarleyTuning/TargetTuneAFRHistogram.png)
Have fun tuning
Andy
Andy
I know its not what you're used to, but all of our harley tuning software plots RPM on the vertical axis and MAP on the horizontal axis .
Can you flip the plots so that we get a picture that we're used to looking at ?
Thanks
Quote from: whittlebeast on October 04, 2015, 08:18:16 PM
http://www.nbs-stl.com/HarleyTuning/TargetTuneAFFHistogram.png]
(http://www.nbs-stl.com/HarleyTuning/TargetTuneAFFHistogram.png)
Don't you find all those 100% AFVs suspect?
Quote from: 98fxstc on October 04, 2015, 09:51:13 PM
Andy
I know its not what you're used to, but all of our harley tuning software plots RPM on the vertical axis and MAP on the horizontal axis .
Can you flip the plots so that we get a picture that we're used to looking at ?
Thanks
I keep bugging the programmers trying to getting that request to the top of the pile.
Quote from: glens on October 05, 2015, 12:01:19 AM
Quote from: whittlebeast on October 04, 2015, 08:18:16 PM
http://www.nbs-stl.com/HarleyTuning/TargetTuneAFFHistogram.png]
(http://www.nbs-stl.com/HarleyTuning/TargetTuneAFFHistogram.png)
Don't you find all those 100% AFVs suspect?
I just looked at the data and there was only about 100 hits in that entire area with 100s. The CLIs were working in that area.
I can also see in the data that the CLI were 100 below 17.5 KPA but the AFF did continue below 17.5 KPA
Bottom line, I am not concerned at all as long as you look at the data so you understand what the trims are doing to the tune.
Interesting filters applied.
"So having the best flash tuner [per you] and three hours dyno time will produce a tune that cannot be improved upon... :scratch: "
Why is it only 3 hours? That might be fine for a stage 1, but I don't ever limit my time. Bigger builds with free flowing exhaust need more time.
If you send a bike around to get tuned. Let send a big, high compression build, with an overlap cam and a free flowing exhaust.
The bike I have been testing on is a HUGE build. It is the same bike that is climbing the mountains running a TTS code and logging on Power Vision. That same bike is going TT soon for just the fun of it.
Tuning is the fun part. Personally, I tend to move on to a different toy once the tuning is done.
As it turns out, I may be getting the Sporty out soon for testing TT.
Andy
Quote from: hrdtail78 on October 05, 2015, 05:23:25 AM
"So having the best flash tuner [per you] and three hours dyno time will produce a tune that cannot be improved upon... :scratch: "
Why is it only 3 hours? That might be fine for a stage 1, but I don't ever limit my time. Bigger builds with free flowing exhaust need more time.
Good to know... then maybe you can provide your average tuning time and costs so there can be a better direct comparison?
Quote from: hrdtail78 on October 02, 2015, 11:40:08 AM
About $1100 for hardware bought from a dot com.
edited: He posted his numbers but it's not allowed... they are what I would state as normal/average but he does not limit tune time...
Quote from: glens on October 05, 2015, 12:01:19 AM
Quote from: whittlebeast on October 04, 2015, 08:18:16 PM
http://www.nbs-stl.com/HarleyTuning/TargetTuneAFFHistogram.png]
(http://www.nbs-stl.com/HarleyTuning/TargetTuneAFFHistogram.png)
Don't you find all those 100% AFVs suspect?
In this example they simply did not spend a lot of time lugging the motor at low RPM/high map, not a happy spot or strong point on on a V-Rod motor.
Quote from: hrdtail78 on October 05, 2015, 05:14:38 AM
Interesting filters applied.
Interesting filters? there appears to be NO filters used in Andy's example, the filters are all off in his user panel.
See below:
(http://s30.postimg.org/hnj2lv3ch/Untitled.png)
TT looks impressive. I look forward to trying it on the Touring Pig. :up:
As people talk about TT compared to a dyno tune, I need to ask what does one expect from a good dyno tune. Is it just adjusting the VE tables? Do the Fuel Air tables or timing typically get adjusted?
I ask this as someone with a 2009 883XL, with the only mods being slip ons and a SE air cleaner. I do have a PV and used a base map from S&S. (listed as technical partners on Dynojets website) Then several NB auto tune runs.
The real question becomes if I only had $500 to spend is a dyno tune or a TT a better use of my money. I live within 80 Miles of fuel moto. So Access to knowledge turners is not an issue.
Given the choice, I would go TT without any reservations. PS I would trust FuelMoto for a dyno tune if you go that direction.
Quote from: Jamie Long on October 05, 2015, 07:46:02 AM
Quote from: glens on October 05, 2015, 12:01:19 AM
Quote from: whittlebeast on October 04, 2015, 08:18:16 PM
http://www.nbs-stl.com/HarleyTuning/TargetTuneAFFHistogram.png]
(http://www.nbs-stl.com/HarleyTuning/TargetTuneAFFHistogram.png)
Don't you find all those 100% AFVs suspect?
In this example they simply did not spend a lot of time lugging the motor at low RPM/high map, not a happy spot or strong point on on a V-Rod motor.
Impressive in the areas that are hit. :up: Most of those 100s can be hit but true most don't bother since it's so far out of normal operating areas we seldom venture there. Much like trying to hit 100kpa on a big twin at idle. Pointless.
Ron
Quote from: whittlebeast on October 05, 2015, 05:31:00 AM
The bike I have been testing on is a HUGE build....
Andy
Mind sharing the exact build with us? What cubic inch, heads, cams, exhaust, intake, injectors?
HUGE is a matter of opinion don't ya know.
Some folks consider 113", with a conservative cam profile, a HUGE build.
I personally consider 131-up HUGE....as of today. May be 145-up in a couple years.
Whacha been testing? It's not a secret is it?
Bob
Quote from: Jamie Long on October 05, 2015, 07:54:53 AM
Quote from: hrdtail78 on October 05, 2015, 05:14:38 AM
Interesting filters applied.
Interesting filters? there appears to be NO filters used in Andy's example, the filters are all off in his user panel.
See below:
(http://s30.postimg.org/hnj2lv3ch/Untitled.png)
All I know is that the filters were turned off for the picture. Only way to prove that they weren't on while filling out the histogram and then turned off for the screen shot is to post up the raw data. Looks like we don't get to see raw data in this thread. We only get to see prepared data. The raw data I have seen off of TT isn't being represented by a screen shot with filters. I could only get the raw data if I promised not to post it.
It is kind of like scaling LTFT to .9-1.1 and then making a comment about how tight the LTFT is holding in between .9-1.1. Sure it is, because the scaling doesn't show you anything out of that range.
In this example they simply did not spend a lot of time lugging the motor at low RPM/high map, not a happy spot or strong point on on a V-Rod motor.
[/quote
Hi Jamie,
The log I sent Andy was a canned map from Dynojet, and with only 2x 15 minute TT autotune runs. I will do some more but it's all weather dependant in the UK.
From what I've read about one of your maps, bike would be flying after 30 mins autotune.
Jeff
Scaling is very different than filtering. Filtering will throw out data as defined by the filter. Scaling is simply a color thing.
Upnorthbiker can post it here if he wants.
Quote from: whittlebeast on October 05, 2015, 09:30:51 AM
Scaling is very different than filtering. Filtering will throw out data as defined by the filter. Scaling is simply a color thing.
Upnorthbiker can post it here if he wants.
Hey Andy, why not just post up the raw, unfiltered, un scaled data?
Maybe we can follow along with you as you rescale and/or filter the raw data that your pictures are developed from.
Any reason for not wanting to post the raw data?
Bob
Bob
Do you have a registered version of MLV.
Quote from: whittlebeast on October 05, 2015, 12:43:00 PM
Bob
Do you have a registered version of MLV.
Andy, did you actually read my post? What did it ask for?
Why don't you simply answer the questions asked of you?
OR
maybe this will get it done...
POST THE RAW DATA LOG SO WE ALL CAN DRAW OUR OWN CONCLUTIONS AND PICTURE WITH THE PRODUCTS WE WANT TO USE!
Better?
Bob
Try asking nice to the owners of the bikes to post their logs. That might work.
Bob
Have you ever given any evidence of anything?
Quote from: whittlebeast on October 05, 2015, 01:07:54 PM
Bob
Have you ever given any evidence of anything?
So this is why you refuse to answer the questions or post up the data? :wtf: :doh:
Bob
The people that are sending me the data may be so intimidated by a few people on this site, as they don't want to put up with the public ridicule that I put up with.
It is just a guess....
Quote from: whittlebeast on October 05, 2015, 01:18:51 PM
The people that are sending me the data may be so intimidated by a few people on this site, as they don't want to put up with the public ridicule that I put up with.
It is just a guess....
Ever thought that unless you reveal the owner we know nothing about who's data it is.
Remember Andy, we are looking for raw data logs so there is nothing that can be criticized or pointed to other than what the raw data is showing BEFORE scaling, colors, and manipulation takes place.
Try another excuse,
Bob
Here's a raw file for you, not very long but I'm only allowed 300KB so kinda limited, do what you'd like with it.
BTW, there's some spark knock showing up, which is why i did the log. I was able to fix it without editing the map in any way.
Quote from: tdkkart on October 05, 2015, 03:35:38 PM
Here's a raw file for you, not very long but I'm only allowed 300KB so kinda limited, do what you'd like with it.
BTW, there's some spark knock showing up, which is why i did the log. I was able to fix it without editing the map in any way.
You can upload much bigger files to the Media Folder (top main menu)
Here's a log to rip to pieces.
https://www.dropbox.com/s/kvta9iaa5z28o92/OTF-1.csv?dl=0 (https://www.dropbox.com/s/kvta9iaa5z28o92/OTF-1.csv?dl=0)
Stock 103
Se255
Harley CNC Heads (Because I have them)
FM 2-1-2
FM 4" Jackpots
Target Tuned for three passes from map emailed from Dynojet. Accepted big CI changes as nagged. Bike runs fantastic 44mpg.
Edited because link was missing from original post
still waiting on data from an experienced dyno tuner, all the tuning they do should be easy to get a nice log file
It's not that I want to rip anybody or any data apart. A pretty screen shot just doesn't replace raw data for me. The screen shots of it holding a tune isn't real impressive. This speaks more on how close the base map was. I would rather play back the data and watch the system pull in the tune.
Thanks for the data.
Quote from: hrdtail78 on October 05, 2015, 05:47:48 PM
It's not that I want to rip anybody or any data apart. A pretty screen shot just doesn't replace raw data for me. The screen shots of it holding a tune isn't real impressive. This speaks more on how close the base map was. I would rather play back the data and watch the system pull in the tune.
Thanks for the data.
Sorry, I meant rip apart tongue and cheek. Good bad or ugly, the data is what it is. :)
OTF
You are there on the fuel side of things with the VE tables. Did you guys see the MAPxRPM vs Duty Cycle F and R? Wow.
I am a little concerned on the ignition side. Mostly on the rear. Check your plug and plug wire.
Nice job
Andy
Here is what near perfection looks like on a MAPxRPM vs Duty Cycle scatter plot.
http://www.nbs-stl.com/HarleyTuning/HarleyFuelingPerfection.png (http://www.nbs-stl.com/HarleyTuning/HarleyFuelingPerfection.png)
Nice job OTF
Andy
I found a few VEs that may have been slightly missed by the autotunes. If you are crazy for perfection....
http://www.nbs-stl.com/HarleyTuning/HarleyFuelingPerfection2.png (http://www.nbs-stl.com/HarleyTuning/HarleyFuelingPerfection2.png)
A really big log would prove this rich bump in the VE table as a true pattern. The DJ version of CL may be the best closed loop system I have ever run across in the aftermarket.
Andy
Quote from: whittlebeast on October 06, 2015, 04:33:19 AM
I found a few VEs that may have been slightly missed by the autotunes. If you are crazy for perfection....
http://www.nbs-stl.com/HarleyTuning/HarleyFuelingPerfection2.png (http://www.nbs-stl.com/HarleyTuning/HarleyFuelingPerfection2.png)
A really big log would prove this rich bump in the VE table as a true pattern. The DJ version of CL may be the best closed loop system I have ever run across in the aftermarket.
Andy
I don't know if that is perfect or not. But if we are only looking at VE tables from 65-86 and not riding over 3340 rpms. I guess we can label it anything you would like. I usually see VE values spread more like 80-65 not just 20. :scratch:
The screen shot on post 343 showed the full range of VE of places he hit on that ride. The second screen shot on 344 was zoomed way in of the VE color to locate the matched data in the patterns
Question: If, through logs, I see poor O2 sampling in say, the 1750-2250 rpms/ 20-50kpa area.
Can I put the TT system in open loop in that area and leave the rest in closed loop?
Or do I have to globally limit the change available through the system to keep the system from tuning itself out in that area?
Thanks,
Bob
Bob, this is a serious non loaded question....
What are you personally looking at to identify poor o2 sampling? Can you post a log where you can "see" it happening?
I'm still waiting for the same answer... and how does he know the issue is with the O2 from the bike, or was it caused by the sampling tube he sticks up the pipes.
:pop:
Quote from: whittlebeast on October 06, 2015, 09:21:42 AM
Bob, this is a serious non loaded question....
What are you personally looking at to identify poor o2 sampling? Can you post a log where you can "see" it happening?
A serious answer is:
Due to some of the aftermarket exhaust designs, when used on big inch builds with high compression and a lot of cam timing overlap, the low rpm O2 sampling is all but nonexistent.
I have little control of customer supplied configurations but I do have to live with them.
I do realize O2 sampling on mild builds with properly designed exhaust systems with O2 bungs ideally located, can be left in CL 100% of the calibration.
The easiest way to see poor O2 sampling is when trying to run a Vtune, Autotune, or Smartune. The O2 sensors refuse to come online and continue to go offline and online at steady state light load conditions.
I directly address the issue by hand tuning in open loop and leaving the balance of the calibration in closed loop.
My question was,,,and still is,,,
Can I choose open loop for where I see poor O2 sampling and closed loop for the rest of the calibration?
That way I can leave idle in open loop for steady idling and open loop for the problem area(s). By leaving the rest of the calibration in closed loop I generate a win-win situation for the owner.
Bob
PS - I use the sample tube to verify the onboard sensors. Just another check point rather than strictly relying on sensors that my or may not get good readings.
This is the sort of thing I look for to identify an O2 gone crazy issue. I have only seen it once.
http://www.nbs-stl.com/MLVDemo/312%20MAPxRPM%20Closed%20Loop%20Gone%20Bad.png (http://www.nbs-stl.com/MLVDemo/312%20MAPxRPM%20Closed%20Loop%20Gone%20Bad.png)
Andy
I can't answer your question as my personal Target Tune is not here yet. I will be happy to answer your question when I know.
In all fairness, I sure hope it is there...... One of the first tests I do once all "By the Book" tuning is done is knock the closed loop off line and see how well the ECU holds AFR targets. Then retest with the o2s on line in closed loop.
My Sporty was way better in open loop every time. I am out to flat fix that.
Andy
Quote from: whittlebeast on October 06, 2015, 09:40:46 AM
...I have only seen it once...
Andy
Do you regularly tune big inch Harley VTwins with high compression and high overlap cams that breath through short pipes without baffles?
Mild builds are not tuning challenges with properly designed exhaust systems conservative cam profiles.
Bob
Quote from: FLTRI on October 06, 2015, 09:39:18 AM
A serious answer is:
Due to some of the aftermarket exhaust designs, when used on big inch builds with high compression and a lot of cam timing overlap, the low rpm O2 sampling is all but nonexistent.
I have little control of customer supplied configurations but I do have to live with them.
I do realize O2 sampling on mild builds with properly designed exhaust systems with O2 bungs ideally located, can be left in CL 100% of the calibration.
The easiest way to see poor O2 sampling is when trying to run a Vtune, Autotune, or Smartune. The O2 sensors refuse to come online and continue to go offline and online at steady state light load conditions.
I directly address the issue by hand tuning in open loop and leaving the balance of the calibration in closed loop.
My question was,,,and still is,,,
Can I choose open loop for where I see poor O2 sampling and closed loop for the rest of the calibration?
That way I can leave idle in open loop for steady idling and open loop for the problem area(s). By leaving the rest of the calibration in closed loop I generate a win-win situation for the owner.
Bob
PS - I use the sample tube to verify the onboard sensors. Just another check point rather than strictly relying on sensors that my or may not get good readings.
Can you share the data specific to bad O2 reading for wide bands in the the mentioned areas since the thread is about full time WB tuning?
Quote from: FLTRI on October 06, 2015, 09:13:38 AM
Question: If, through logs, I see poor O2 sampling in say, the 1750-2250 rpms/ 20-50kpa area.
edited: from the on-board sensors...
It makes no difference if poor O2 sampling comes from narrow band or broadband sensors. Poor sampling is poor sampling.
As I stated, I see this live, while using the onboard sensors (narrow or broad) to dial in the system.
I correct the issue on the fly, as I tune.
There has been so many logs posted over the years showing pools O2 readings I'm surprised this issue is not common knowledge.
Seems to me there was a long thread a while back addressing poor O2 bung mountings when the exhaust mfgs first started installing bungs into their products (2007?) that failed to provide good O2 sampling.
After a ton of input from calibrators and tuners from all over the US, most mfgs improved, not all completely fixed, the O2 mounting.
Bob
Quote from: FLTRI on October 06, 2015, 10:03:31 AM
It makes no difference if poor O2 sampling comes from narrow band or broadband sensors. Poor sampling is poor sampling.
As I stated, I see this live, while using the onboard sensors (narrow or broad) to dial in the system.
I correct the issue on the fly, as I tune.
There has been so many logs posted over the years showing pools O2 readings I'm surprised this issue is not common knowledge.
Seems to me there was a long thread a while back addressing poor O2 bung mountings when the exhaust mfgs first started installing bungs into their products (2007?) that failed to provide good O2 sampling.
After a ton of input from calibrators and tuners from all over the US, most mfgs improved, not all completely fixed, the O2 mounting.
Bob
Yes you and I have gone back & forth about differences in O2 sensors... Yes there are a lot of problems with narrow band placement... so far you are the only talking up wide bands and talk about seeing it and having the data...
So then you'll have no problem in providing the specific data you see for on-board WIDE BANDS, so everyone will be able to see it too?
Since you point out on a regular bases to whittlebeast, just how important it is to back up his statements... I can only believe that many here would like to see for themselves what you have :nix:
edited:
As a wise person once stated:
Quote from: FLTRI on October 02, 2015, 06:34:38 PM
Any way to show this bust? Other than you simply stating it? Lol
Bob
Quote from: whittlebeast on October 05, 2015, 09:30:51 AM
Scaling is very different than filtering. Filtering will throw out data as defined by the filter. Scaling is simply a color thing.
Upnorthbiker can post it here if he wants.
Due to work commitments and the fact I had to work out how to post 1.25mb of data, at last here is the log that Andy got those screenshots from.
Hope the link works.
Jeff
https://www.dropbox.com/s/wnm0y5w7jv3pspc/log0004.csv?dl=0 (https://www.dropbox.com/s/wnm0y5w7jv3pspc/log0004.csv?dl=0)
Quote from: q1svt on October 06, 2015, 10:15:06 AM
Quote from: FLTRI on October 06, 2015, 10:03:31 AM
It makes no difference if poor O2 sampling comes from narrow band or broadband sensors. Poor sampling is poor sampling.
As I stated, I see this live, while using the onboard sensors (narrow or broad) to dial in the system.
I correct the issue on the fly, as I tune.
There has been so many logs posted over the years showing pools O2 readings I'm surprised this issue is not common knowledge.
Seems to me there was a long thread a while back addressing poor O2 bung mountings when the exhaust mfgs first started installing bungs into their products (2007?) that failed to provide good O2 sampling.
After a ton of input from calibrators and tuners from all over the US, most mfgs improved, not all completely fixed, the O2 mounting.
Bob
Yes you and I have gone back & forth about differences in O2 sensors... Yes there are a lot of problems with narrow band placement... so far you are the only talking up wide bands and talk about seeing it and having the data...
So then you'll have no problem in providing the specific data you see for on-board WIDE BANDS, so everyone will be able to see it too?
Since you point out on a regular bases to whittlebeast, just how important it is to back up his statements... I can only believe that many here would like to see for themselves what you have :nix:
edited:
As a wise person once stated:
Quote from: FLTRI on October 02, 2015, 06:34:38 PM
Any way to show this bust? Other than you simply stating it? Lol
Bob
Actually it really sounds as though you doubt that broadbands can get poor O2 sampling, right?
You may also feel you could place the broadbands virtually anywhere in any exhaust system and, because they're broadbands, they will get good quality, reliable readings?
In other words every exhaust mfg installs the O2 bungs correctly to provide accurate and reliable readings, right?
As I mentioned, I fix tuning issues as related to poor O2 sensing on the fly so I don't need to log data for evaluation later. I watch it live and see it clearly when trying to get Tmax, low rpm/load tunes to stay put without it enrichening fueling based on air reverting to the sensors from the tail pipe.
While I realize I can can limit the system to very little AFR correction?/change IMO that is a bandaid used to keep a bike in tune rather than letting the system pull and/or add fueling as it sees need...unfortunately not always desired or needed.
Should be the same with any fulltime closed loop system, especially as applied to big high performance builds.
Bob
I also see the issue Bob is talking about. I have seen it with the Vision and AT-100, Techno Research and DTT, PC5 and AT-100's, DTT and MyTune, Dynojet sampling, and TTS with analog inputs. And I am positive it is going to show up with Target Tune. It isn't a problem with the tuning device. It is a problem with sampling. They all use the same 4.2. There isn't anything in any of the programs that can ID bad sampling. It doesn't know or care. It puts out a voltage.
I will agree that the 4.2's are a bit more forgiving with placement and penetration over the 18mm NB's but that still leaves them far from perfect. There is a trade off of pros and cons of 18mm NB's and 4.2's. Still boils down to knowing the difference and having realistic expectations of what the sensor can do and how well it can do it in an application.
I'm really glad you both see it... Then either one of you can provide the data so we all can see it too...
Hardtail, it might be true that it will show up with TT ...
BUT FLTRI has seen it with his tuning of Autotune, and we all want to look at that data...
:pop:
FWIW I'm not going to stop asking you over and over again too to put up or :wink: and redirecting the topic, talking around the topic, or any other redirects is not going to work.
Quote from: FLTRI on October 02, 2015, 06:34:38 PM
Any way to show this bust? Other than you simply stating it? Lol
Bob
Over a month ago in this same topic, I had essentially the same question FLTRI is asking:
Quote from: Jamie Long on August 06, 2015, 10:06:09 AM
Quote from: GregOn2Wheels on August 06, 2015, 08:28:32 AM
Since my understanding is that Target Tune makes closed-loop operation possible for any user-selected lambda value, will open-loop operation still be possible in areas selected by the user and if so, how will these areas be designated? It seems like the current strategy for selecting open-loop areas wouldn't (and shouldn't) work with TT. I ordered a TT from Fuel Moto yesterday so I guess I'll find out soon enough.
Target Tune sets the entire AF/Lambda table to closed loop, we do however have the ability to set the thresholds based on MAP.
This "ability to set the thresholds based on MAP." that Jamie mentioned is part of the answer, although end-users don't currently have the ability to set this thresholds. Hopefully this will be included in a future version of WinPV. I feel alot better about it if he had said, "ability to set thresholds based on MAP and RPM."
Another trick that will work in some cases involves using the fuel map in an unconventional way. In areas where o2 sensors are indicating leaner or richer than actual, the target lambda can be set to an artificially hi or low value to offset the error. If the o2s are reading too lean at idle, offset them by bumping up the lambda values in the idle range to values richer than the true target. (don't ask me how one would know the amount of offset to use, but I assume that if a tuner knows the O2s are giving false readings in a given area, he should be able to tell by how much the readings are off.) It won't work in every case and it's not a perfect solution, but just another tool in the box until something better comes along.
I don't really want to get into the middle of this debate, and I am not sure if the few logs collected during the tuning session would tell much...
Bob tuned my 120 using the narrow bands on PowerVision.
When I showed up Bob joked about why I was there for a dyno tune since I have PV and AT100 set up. We talked about what I was seeing, tune drift when adaptive was enabled, also that I was seeing AFR bouncing around quite a bit when monitoring the WB O2s. His first comment was that O2 sensor placement didn't look good, but then retracted the comment for the most part. I run a Dragula gen 1 and in my opinion is known for having very good O2 sensor placement (for both NB and WB).
Ran the bike up through the gears on the dyno and showed Bob the discrepency I was seeing with the WB AFR read outs. Bob saw the AFR bouncing around quite a bit and his comment was "WTF?!". The map had been autotuned a few sessions with WBs. When it came to tuning Bob chose to autotune with the NBs vs the WB's. He ran through the process and afterwards we then checked the resulting tune, tweaked AFR table and VE tables quite a bit. Fired it up again and checked the Wideband AFR display, the result was MUCH more stable.
We didn't get to actually ride the bike because of the 10 cent bolt... So I'm not able to comment about how stable the tune would be long term. (at least not until the engine is back together)
I may have .pvv file from the autotune session, but I'm not sure it would be of much help... I do have a log taken when I rode the bike up to RC Cycles, IMO it's not pretty and it's indicative of what the WBs were showing (adaptive disabled). I also have a short log taken on the dyno after the initial autotune session and before final tweaks. It doesn't have the WB output, but it does have NB voltages.
FWIW
Quote from: GregOn2Wheels on October 06, 2015, 01:17:02 PM
Another trick that will work in some cases involves using the fuel map in an unconventional way. In areas where o2 sensors are indicating leaner or richer than actual, the target lambda can be set to an artificially hi or low value to offset the error. If the o2s are reading too lean at idle, offset them by bumping up the lambda values in the idle range to values richer than the true target. (don't ask me how one would know the amount of offset to use, but I assume that if a tuner knows the O2s are giving false readings in a given area, he should be able to tell by how much the readings are off.) It won't work in every case and it's not a perfect solution, but just another tool in the box until something better comes along.
Would not recommend doing this. Shortcomings or issues with sampling are not linear nor do they typically occur expotentially
Quote from: Jamie Long on October 06, 2015, 01:34:37 PM
Quote from: GregOn2Wheels on October 06, 2015, 01:17:02 PM
Another trick that will work in some cases involves using the fuel map in an unconventional way. In areas where o2 sensors are indicating leaner or richer than actual, the target lambda can be set to an artificially hi or low value to offset the error. If the o2s are reading too lean at idle, offset them by bumping up the lambda values in the idle range to values richer than the true target. (don't ask me how one would know the amount of offset to use, but I assume that if a tuner knows the O2s are giving false readings in a given area, he should be able to tell by how much the readings are off.) It won't work in every case and it's not a perfect solution, but just another tool in the box until something better comes along.
Would not recommend doing this. Shortcomings or issues with sampling are not linear nor do they typically occur expotentially
I understand Jamie and I'd prefer not to, but if not that then what?
Quote from: GregOn2Wheels on October 06, 2015, 01:41:38 PM
Quote from: Jamie Long on October 06, 2015, 01:34:37 PM
Quote from: GregOn2Wheels on October 06, 2015, 01:17:02 PM
Another trick that will work in some cases involves using the fuel map in an unconventional way. In areas where o2 sensors are indicating leaner or richer than actual, the target lambda can be set to an artificially hi or low value to offset the error. If the o2s are reading too lean at idle, offset them by bumping up the lambda values in the idle range to values richer than the true target. (don't ask me how one would know the amount of offset to use, but I assume that if a tuner knows the O2s are giving false readings in a given area, he should be able to tell by how much the readings are off.) It won't work in every case and it's not a perfect solution, but just another tool in the box until something better comes along.
Would not recommend doing this. Shortcomings or issues with sampling are not linear nor do they typically occur expotentially
I understand Jamie and I'd prefer not to, but if not that then what?
Fix the sampling, fix the tune, or fix the combination. Are you having a problem with your tune?
Quote from: rageglide on October 06, 2015, 01:30:55 PM
I don't really want to get into the middle of this debate, and I am not sure if the few logs collected during the tuning session would tell much...
Actually a post of yours kind of open pandora's box so to speak...
http://harleytechtalk.com/htt/index.php/topic,85346.0.html (http://harleytechtalk.com/htt/index.php/topic,85346.0.html)
In reply# 247 & others in this thread, jamie outlines the level at which the systems need to be at for PV-TT... Since it's less invasive to ask someone to provide their data in which they identified issues, allows others to help understand whether there is truly issues as described, or is there a different underlying problem... the other option is to ask the current software/hardware levels that a dyno shop is running.
I don't want to rehash your other post but I think you get the point :wink:
Quote from: rageglide on October 06, 2015, 01:30:55 PM
I don't really want to get into the middle of this debate, and I am not sure if the few logs collected during the tuning session would tell much...
Bob tuned my 120 using the narrow bands on PowerVision.
When I showed up Bob joked about why I was there for a dyno tune since I have PV and AT100 set up. We talked about what I was seeing, tune drift when adaptive was enabled, also that I was seeing AFR bouncing around quite a bit when monitoring the WB O2s. His first comment was that O2 sensor placement didn't look good, but then retracted the comment for the most part. I run a Dragula gen 1 and in my opinion is known for having very good O2 sensor placement (for both NB and WB).
Ran the bike up through the gears on the dyno and showed Bob the discrepency I was seeing with the WB AFR read outs. Bob saw the AFR bouncing around quite a bit and his comment was "WTF?!". The map had been autotuned a few sessions with WBs. When it came to tuning Bob chose to autotune with the NBs vs the WB's. He ran through the process and afterwards we then checked the resulting tune, tweaked AFR table and VE tables quite a bit. Fired it up again and checked the Wideband AFR display, the result was MUCH more stable.
We didn't get to actually ride the bike because of the 10 cent bolt... So I'm not able to comment about how stable the tune would be long term. (at least not until the engine is back together)
I may have .pvv file from the autotune session, but I'm not sure it would be of much help... I do have a log taken when I rode the bike up to RC Cycles, IMO it's not pretty and it's indicative of what the WBs were showing (adaptive disabled). I also have a short log taken on the dyno after the initial autotune session and before final tweaks. It doesn't have the WB output, but it does have NB voltages.
FWIW
Ok, so during the tune were some of these areas placed into open loop? If not, good luck.
Ron
Quote from: rbabos on October 06, 2015, 02:51:00 PM
Ok, so during the tune were some of these areas placed into open loop? If not, good luck.
Ron
No
Confirmed after looking at the AFR table, Closed loop .973 lambda (14.3afr)
Quote from: rageglide on October 06, 2015, 01:30:55 PM
I don't really want to get into the middle of this debate, and I am not sure if the few logs collected during the tuning session would tell much...
Bob tuned my 120 using the narrow bands on PowerVision.
When I showed up Bob joked about why I was there for a dyno tune since I have PV and AT100 set up. We talked about what I was seeing, tune drift when adaptive was enabled, also that I was seeing AFR bouncing around quite a bit when monitoring the WB O2s. His first comment was that O2 sensor placement didn't look good, but then retracted the comment for the most part. I run a Dragula gen 1 and in my opinion is known for having very good O2 sensor placement (for both NB and WB).
Ran the bike up through the gears on the dyno and showed Bob the discrepency I was seeing with the WB AFR read outs. Bob saw the AFR bouncing around quite a bit and his comment was "WTF?!". The map had been autotuned a few sessions with WBs. When it came to tuning Bob chose to autotune with the NBs vs the WB's. He ran through the process and afterwards we then checked the resulting tune, tweaked AFR table and VE tables quite a bit. Fired it up again and checked the Wideband AFR display, the result was MUCH more stable.
We didn't get to actually ride the bike because of the 10 cent bolt... So I'm not able to comment about how stable the tune would be long term. (at least not until the engine is back together)
I may have .pvv file from the autotune session, but I'm not sure it would be of much help... I do have a log taken when I rode the bike up to RC Cycles, IMO it's not pretty and it's indicative of what the WBs were showing (adaptive disabled). I also have a short log taken on the dyno after the initial autotune session and before final tweaks. It doesn't have the WB output, but it does have NB voltages.
FWIW
I believe we saw the N/Bs were able to bring in the VEs better than the W/Bs.
This why I suggested to tune with and run the N/B (heated) sensors.
Not sure why the broadbands had so much trouble but didn't spend the time to dianose.
The bike seemed to run very well after hand tuning the high rpm/load area.
Also should have left idle area and decel/low kpa in open loop.
Bob
Quote from: FLTRI on October 06, 2015, 04:25:12 PM
I believe we saw the N/Bs were able to bring in the VEs better than the W/Bs.
This why I suggested to tune with and run the N/B (heated) sensors.
Not sure why the broadbands had so much trouble but didn't spend the time to dianose.
The bike seemed to run very well after hand tuning the high rpm/load area.
Also should have left idle area and decel/low kpa in open loop.
Bob
I don't about the first comment. I do recall that after tuning and the manual changes we saw WBs showing stable values. Could very well be the case that the NBs worked better, but we didnt try WB AT to know for sure. That said the VE changes are quite different in a few areas after the NB AT.
And yes, we left the low and idle in open loop, also open loop in 75kPA+ cells.
Anyway... probably not relevent to the thread.
Bump.......... post 357 :pop:
Quote from: Mossy73 on October 07, 2015, 05:19:22 AM
Bump.......... post 357 :pop:
Just thinking of you this morning. I'm really interested on how well TT deals with that spastic 20-30 kpa area that pisses the three of us off. Not being able to establish a delta within 6 in that area with NB makes me wonder how in long term it will dial it in. :scratch: As you know, I picked the highest generated ve's in that area out of many, many log events and went open loop there. It' amazing how much the table can change, same temp, same route and driven the same. No way to know if the ve table in that area is spot on but the lower generated ve's never pan out. So best guess is the higher ve tables are the ticket. So far , so good. It's also interesting that the idle kpa can range from 27-22 in the same ride. This must play hell with sampling also for these light load inconsistencies when logging for the ve's? Only guessing on that one. :nix: Below is an example of how much it can change from one event to another. Obviously Test 1 sucks in the 5% area. Test 2 ve table runs fine and continues to do so with the low end open loop.
Ron
Just a guess here but I bet once we watch TT doing its magic for a wile, lots of us will get way better at tuning all of these systems.
Quote from: q1svt on October 06, 2015, 12:35:30 PM
I'm really glad you both see it... Then either one of you can provide the data so we all can see it too...
Hardtail, it might be true that it will show up with TT ...
BUT FLTRI has seen it with his tuning of Autotune, and we all want to look at that data...
:pop:
FWIW I'm not going to stop asking you over and over again too to put up or :wink: and redirecting the topic, talking around the topic, or any other redirects is not going to work.
Quote from: FLTRI on October 02, 2015, 06:34:38 PM
Any way to show this bust? Other than you simply stating it? Lol
Bob
https://app.box.com/s/w5hqbzfqve7mox60d19xqyjxjpv1mm4e
TT log off a Vrod. Notice the indicated lean areas in the lower KPA areas. Typical of what I see with reversion and 4.2's. Sampling problem area's are problem sample areas. Tuning devices don't fix poor sample quality.
TT log off a Vrod. Notice the indicated lean areas in the lower KPA areas. Typical of what I see with reversion and 4.2's. Sampling problem area's are problem sample areas. Tuning devices don't fix poor sample quality.
[/quote]
Hi Hardtail78,
I am no expert so excuse me for asking what might be stupid questions,
Is it reversion that causes the poor sampling or poor lambda install locations ? Or both.
Reduce the reversion, get some back pressure by say modify baffle or go closed endcap on Supertrapp exhaust, could that be a fix ?
Do you the expert have a logical routine to find out what's causing bad sampling through your experiences or is it just try something and run tests until it's good enough to setup a tune ?
Thanks for your input.
Jeff
Jason
It looks like the Vrod is railing the MAP sensor at 10.3 KPA
This is almost impossible to troubleshoot without PW front and rear
Andy
Quote from: whittlebeast on October 07, 2015, 12:02:38 PM
Jason
It looks like the Vrod is railing the MAP sensor at 10.3 KPA
This is almost impossible to troubleshoot without PW front and rear
Andy
Hi Andy,
What does "railing" the map sensor actually mean in English ?
Jeff
All sensors have upper and lower limits. In the case of lots of engine sensors the limits of the outputs is say .2 volts on the low side to say 4.8 volts on the high side.
.2 volts may be calibrated in the sensor in this case to be equal to 10.3 KPA and 4.8 volts may be 103 KPA. PS I made up the numbers to make the point. Someone will soon chine in to call my a lair.
If the sensor ever gets to on of these limits, it is refereed to railing the sensor. Like hitting the rails of a train track. You can't go any farther.
The dead giveaway is the voltage on a log does not move at all for a long period of time.
Quote from: whittlebeast on October 07, 2015, 12:02:38 PM
Jason
It looks like the Vrod is railing the MAP sensor at 10.3 KPA
This is almost impossible to troubleshoot without PW front and rear
Andy
That's how I received the file. No target AFR either.
Hi,
When the MAP is at 10.3 the bikes on the over run, slowing down from 60mph tps 28 to TPS 0 and 1, then he gets the throttle on again and the MAP rises. Is that not how it works ?
Jeff
Yes. The only thing is that the 10.3 most likely is a result of railing the sensor. Who knows what the exact real MAP is? 10.3 is not way wrong.
Andy
Thanks Andy, so because it's reached the lower limit of the MAP sensor it's a fault or problem ?
I'm only trying to learn and make spence of it.
Jeff
I can see a kind of clipping of the lower MAP sensor voltage. What's indicating the "lean area" mentioned by hrdtail?
(http://harleytechtalk.com/htt/MGalleryItem.php?id=2169)
Karl
Quote from: upnorthbiker on October 07, 2015, 11:25:39 AM
TT log off a Vrod. Notice the indicated lean areas in the lower KPA areas. Typical of what I see with reversion and 4.2's. Sampling problem area's are problem sample areas. Tuning devices don't fix poor sample quality.
Hi Hardtail78,
I am no expert so excuse me for asking what might be stupid questions,
Is it reversion that causes the poor sampling or poor lambda install locations ? Or both.
Reduce the reversion, get some back pressure by say modify baffle or go closed endcap on Supertrapp exhaust, could that be a fix ?
Do you the expert have a logical routine to find out what's causing bad sampling through your experiences or is it just try something and run tests until it's good enough to setup a tune ?
Thanks for your input.
Jeff
[/quote]
All pipes have reversion. That's how they work. Plenty of exhaust theory out there based on steps, tunable disc, anti reversion cones........ Plenty of books written on the subject by smarter people than me.
"Is it reversion that causes the poor sampling or poor lambda install locations ? Or both."
Both because they are different problems. Reversion that is a problem is going to pull fresh air into the exhaust over the sensor and into the chamber. This can skew the readings at the sensor to the lean side. This can also cause fuel standoff that can affect the air fuel charge going into the cylinder. Not so much a problem with choked up stock exhaust that is also choked up with a cat. Problems get worse when you have a combo and a pipe that will support 160hp but still wants to be rode on the street and parking lots with manors. This has nothing to do with sensor placement. A great placed sensor might just be getting a good reading of the reverted air.
The fix. Choke down the exhaust. Map VE's and set up the calibration so the ECM wont change the area. Unchoke exhaust and see how it runs in the area. I have seen the O2 bounce around at idle from 14-15 something. Shove something up the exhaust and watch the AFR level and settle at 13.8. When that test works. It is a good sign that reversion is skewing the input.
Probably why this thing came out. To stop lean decel popping cause by reversion. That is still fresh air in the pipe. I have making them out of freeze plugs for years. I just debur the thing.
http://www.zippersperformance.com/all-products/exhaust-systems-components/exhaust-accessories-and-components/dual-exhaust-pop-stopper.html (http://www.zippersperformance.com/all-products/exhaust-systems-components/exhaust-accessories-and-components/dual-exhaust-pop-stopper.html)
Thanks for the info Hrdtail78.
This is what's great about this forum.
Jeff
Quote from: upnorthbiker on October 07, 2015, 01:19:54 PM
Thanks Andy, so because it's reached the lower limit of the MAP sensor it's a fault or problem ?
I'm only trying to learn and make spence of it.
Jeff
I have never seen it as a problem. That is a hard decel that is 10.3. Some of the BT cals have 20 as the lowest and some have 15. All matters on what you are idling at and when map is being polled.
Basically we are telling the ECM that we are decelerating. I can't speak for TT but with the HD ECM code. We aren't in CL mode. We are in decel mode.
I am curious about what TT does to the mode the ECM is in. It is only my assumption that it still works like stock. Steady state is in CL. While rapid throttle or RPM change will take it out of CL and fuel is based back on VE table. I haven't heard of a CL system that is 100% full time CL.
I think this is an example of this "Reversion" "Bad Sampling" thing.
http://www.nbs-stl.com/HarleyTuning/PossibleReversion1.png (http://www.nbs-stl.com/HarleyTuning/PossibleReversion1.png)
http://www.nbs-stl.com/HarleyTuning/PossibleReversion2.png (http://www.nbs-stl.com/HarleyTuning/PossibleReversion2.png)
http://www.nbs-stl.com/HarleyTuning/PossibleReversion3.png (http://www.nbs-stl.com/HarleyTuning/PossibleReversion3.png)
Here is the raw data log
http://www.nbs-stl.com/HarleyTuning/log0013.csv (http://www.nbs-stl.com/HarleyTuning/log0013.csv)
Quote from: Karl H. on October 07, 2015, 01:31:27 PM
I can see a kind of clipping of the lower MAP sensor voltage. What's indicating the "lean area" mentioned by hrdtail?
(http://harleytechtalk.com/htt/MGalleryItem.php?id=2169)
Karl
Look right past the 700 Zeit mark. Map is right at 18 and slowly climbing as the WBO2 is above 15. The low KPA between 760 and 780 is info that I would filter out of the equation, and most systems have a CL low limit of around 20 kpa depending on how it is set up.
Well, it's no secret that it was my log you put on, and that's no problem at all.
I know it's a bit lean below 3000rpm, but I only did 2 x 15 minute autotune runs before the log and that was with a canned map from DJ closest to my configuration. And to be honest the bike runs ok, could be better, but sings over 3000rpm always has.
Weather permitting I will do some more at the weekend and include Pulse width front and rear on the log. Anything other channels ?
Might do with a closed end cap as well to see the difference.
Be good to do this before the real winter sets in,
Jeff
I believe the vrod drops out of closed loop at just below 20. I see 10 on harder decels also. General idle kpa are in the mid to high 20s.
Ron
I thought you had a touring rig with a 255 cam? The log I posted was emailed to me and is a Vrod. Which is perfect for the example others were looking for. They are known to be poor sampling bikes in the lower KPA areas, and I have tuned enough to know that what I described in the above post on how I deal with poor sampling seems to work for me.
Quote from: rbabos on October 07, 2015, 03:21:19 PM
I believe the vrod drops out of closed loop at just below 20. I see 10 on harder decels also. General idle kpa are in the mid to high 20s.
Ron
That's part of why I asked about this. Regular HD code is 20-80. (for Vrod) How does TT do this and what are the limits. We know the raised the upper limit. Did the lower the low limit?
Quote from: upnorthbiker on October 07, 2015, 02:45:14 PM
Well, it's no secret that it was my log you put on, and that's no problem at all.
I know it's a bit lean below 3000rpm, but I only did 2 x 15 minute autotune runs before the log and that was with a canned map from DJ closest to my configuration. And to be honest the bike runs ok, could be better, but sings over 3000rpm always has.
Weather permitting I will do some more at the weekend and include Pulse width front and rear on the log. Anything other channels ?
Might do with a closed end cap as well to see the difference.
Be good to do this before the real winter sets in,
Jeff
Are you running fatshots on the factory 3rd volume like me? I have closed end caps and still went through the same bs with 12 discs per can. Wonder if like Jason said, possibly remove more discs and closed cap to dial in the low end ve's with more restriction? However, if that works it will need to be placed into open loop in that area after the fact. Mossy73 has an Akro pipe with the same issue. One can so a custom made frost plug might work there. Two completely different pipes and sensor locations makes one believe reversion is the main culprit in these bikes.
If you have fatshots, the discs can be reduced with either cutting bands out of thin metal, bending a couple of tabs and screw the tabs with the band snuggly on the discs od. Or be lazy like me and use rad hose clamps to reduce exhaust outflow. :wink:
Ron
Quote from: rbabos on October 07, 2015, 03:42:40 PM
Mossy73 has an Akro pipe with the same issue.
Almost brought up that pipe as an example. 2007 FL 96" S&S 510 procharged and that pipe.
I'm running fatshots, open end caps with 2discs in each slipon which is equal to closed endcap and 12 discs. Plus we have a cat in the UK. Not sure about getting ve right then going open loop in those areas, TT is a fully closed loop system using the wide bands enables it to be closed loop at all afr.
Jeff
Quote from: whittlebeast on October 07, 2015, 12:27:26 PM
All sensors have upper and lower limits. In the case of lots of engine sensors the limits of the outputs is say .2 volts on the low side to say 4.8 volts on the high side.
.2 volts may be calibrated in the sensor in this case to be equal to 10.3 KPA and 4.8 volts may be 103 KPA. PS I made up the numbers to make the point.
Hi Andy,
Your no liar and very close on the numbers you made up,
MAP sensor range 0v to 5.1v. 10 kpa to 104 kpa
Jeff
Quote from: upnorthbiker on October 07, 2015, 11:57:16 PM
I'm running fatshots, open end caps with 2discs in each slipon which is equal to closed endcap and 12 discs. Plus we have a cat in the UK. Not sure about getting ve right then going open loop in those areas, TT is a fully closed loop system using the wide bands enables it to be closed loop at all afr.
Jeff
That's the holy grail, getting the ve right. Will it do this or keep spinning it's wheels in rich/lean cycles in the low end depending on conditions? That's what I'm curious about.
Forgot to add, location of wide bands. Stock 12mm bung holes were drilled out to accept 18mm bungs. You are a bit limited to bung locations with stock head pipes.
Jeff
Quote from: upnorthbiker on October 08, 2015, 07:40:03 AM
Forgot to add, location of wide bands. Stock 12mm bung holes were drilled out to accept 18mm bungs. You are a bit limited to bung locations with stock head pipes.
Jeff
I was going to ask about that. I came to the conclusion drill and tap was a possible. How tight was it near the clutch on the rear with larger WB sensors? Funny how the front location looks better then the rear, yet the front is the problem child, even Chris's with the Akro pipe with totally different locations. Leads one to believe it's reversion more then anything else. :nix: Stock cans look really restrictive in comparision, reducing the problem.
Ron
Quote from: upnorthbiker on October 08, 2015, 07:40:03 AM
Forgot to add, location of wide bands. Stock 12mm bung holes were drilled out to accept 18mm bungs. You are a bit limited to bung locations with stock head pipes.
Jeff
Do you have a specific reason for not putting the 18mm bungs up about 6" from the exhaust port as normally spec'd?
Bob
Quote from: FLTRI on October 08, 2015, 08:33:51 AM
Quote from: upnorthbiker on October 08, 2015, 07:40:03 AM
Forgot to add, location of wide bands. Stock 12mm bung holes were drilled out to accept 18mm bungs. You are a bit limited to bung locations with stock head pipes.
Jeff
Do you have a specific reason for not putting the 18mm bungs up about 6" from the exhaust port as normally spec'd?
Bob
They may not be 6 inches from the port but are not far off. The rear pipe install is compromised by the lack of space, it's tight to the cylinder and engine casting.
So, it was easier and more convenient to install where I put them plus I was expecting the wide bands to be more forgiving to the location than the narrow bands.
At the end of the day, I've tried the location and if it doesn't work out I will move them, probably having to modify the heat shields as I go. Next step for the moment tho is to put the end caps on the exhaust and see if that helps reduce the reversion.
Jeff
I was going to ask about that. I came to the conclusion drill and tap was a possible. How tight was it near the clutch on the rear with larger WB sensors? Funny how the front location looks better then the rear, yet the front is the problem child, even Chris's with the Akro pipe with totally different locations. Leads one to believe it's reversion more then anything else. :nix: Stock cans look really restrictive in comparision, reducing the problem.
Ron
[/quote]
Hi Ron,
The sensor fitted nicely right in the middle between pipe and cylinder. Looked real tidy.
Hopefully with some back pressure from the end caps reversion will be a bit more controllable.
How can I tell which cylinder is causing the problem, or could it be both ?
Jeff
Quote from: upnorthbiker on October 08, 2015, 11:39:28 AM
I was going to ask about that. I came to the conclusion drill and tap was a possible. How tight was it near the clutch on the rear with larger WB sensors? Funny how the front location looks better then the rear, yet the front is the problem child, even Chris's with the Akro pipe with totally different locations. Leads one to believe it's reversion more then anything else. :nix: Stock cans look really restrictive in comparision, reducing the problem.
Ron
Hi Ron,
The sensor fitted nicely right in the middle between pipe and cylinder. Looked real tidy.
Hopefully with some back pressure from the end caps reversion will be a bit more controllable.
How can I tell which cylinder is causing the problem, or could it be both ?
Jeff
[/quote]
You will likely see unstable integrators and large aff drifting in the problem cyl. The good one will change very little. I'd suspect the front one.
Ron
My TT is working well on the 103. The Autotune is faster than the previous A/T pro.
My CLI's and AFFs are nearly , and mostly , 100% time after time in cruise.
So far so good.
And then the issues appeared!
2 different TT cals have worked successfully until I tried to introduce a variation to the tune .
I auto tuned both cals on separate occasions successfully.
The problem cane when I attempted to alter the target AFRs,then accel enrichment and timing.
I took the Autotune result and looked at the tune in winpv.
Made my alteration and flashed the tune back into the bike ( on both cals @ separate times).
When I rode the bike the AFRs went haywire. Tried A/tuning the set cal but to no avail.
Maybe I am doing it wrong but I thing I have it right.
Seeking answers and please.
Quote from: Wallaby Bob on October 17, 2015, 01:40:34 AM
And then the issues appeared!
2 different TT cals have worked successfully until I tried to introduce a variation to the tune .
I auto tuned both cals on separate occasions successfully.
The problem cane when I attempted to alter the target AFRs,then accel enrichment and timing.
I took the Autotune result and looked at the tune in winpv.
Made my alteration and flashed the tune back into the bike ( on both cals @ separate times).
When I rode the bike the AFRs went haywire. Tried A/tuning the set cal but to no avail.
Maybe I am doing it wrong but I thing I have it right.
Seeking answers and please.
Oh great. I modified Mossy73's vrod cal to what I felt were better afr for the v rod in the idle and low end. Warmup table as well. I've not heard back from him so either it's ok or he wants to kick me in the nuts. :banghead:
Should be a simple edit and it just retunes to the new value. Maybe not. :scratch: :scratch:
Ron
If you had 2 calibrations that were working properly and then you made some adjustments and now TT is not working, something was likely adjusted or set incorrectly. Please email me the original cals as well as the altered ones to jamie@fuelmotousa.com and I will take a look. As a test simply re-load your earlier tune and verify it works correctly, as a side note make sure you did not open your TT maps in an earlier version of WinPv as this will bust the tune.
Quote from: rbabos on October 17, 2015, 07:23:50 AM
Should be a simple edit and it just retunes to the new value. Maybe not. :scratch: :scratch:
Ron
Target Tune calibration adjustments are no different than anything else, just make absolutely sure the TT cal is opened in WinPv software 2.0.18-1500 software. Opening a TT map in an earlier version of sw strips out the Target Tune tables
Quote from: Jamie Long on October 17, 2015, 07:39:04 AM
Quote from: rbabos on October 17, 2015, 07:23:50 AM
Should be a simple edit and it just retunes to the new value. Maybe not. :scratch: :scratch:
Ron
Target Tune calibration adjustments are no different than anything else, just make absolutely sure the TT cal is opened in WinPv software 2.0.18-1500 software. Opening a TT map in an earlier version of sw strips out the Target Tune tables
Good to know. I'm sure he's updated and if I recall I only sent him a jpg sample to go by.
Ron
Jamie, I will check it tomorrow and send info. I did reset the original TT cals and they both worked fine. I felt certain my software was correct especially that I can select the wideband TT Autotune option.
As I said I may be doing something wrong.
I will follow it up tomorrow now I am on break.
Might I add, the cals worked exceptionally well after a couple. Of ATs.
It was when I made the slightest alteration that they both independently went haywire.
That option is from the Power Vision itself which uses firmware, Jamie is talking about the software version on the computer
Joe,Presumably that is in update client software.
Quote from: Wallaby Bob on October 17, 2015, 04:28:58 PM
Joe,Presumably that is in update client software.
Or
http://www.dynojet.com/powervision/powervision-software-firmware-downloads.aspx?ProdType=Power%20Vision (http://www.dynojet.com/powervision/powervision-software-firmware-downloads.aspx?ProdType=Power%20Vision)
5.00pm here.
Started from the beginning.
Downloaded correct software again as Jamie suggested.
Checked everything throughly.
Loaded the FM cal provided.
Ran bike - installed variations to the cal/ flashed cal and road bike.
Bingo!🏁
Everything is sweet.
Software!
No more issues!
Bike has never run better.
We will try it on the 120r in a few weeks.
Thanks again HTT.- Gold!👌
Quote from: Wallaby Bob on October 18, 2015, 02:27:22 AM
5.00pm here.
Started from the beginning.
Downloaded correct software again as Jamie suggested.
Checked everything throughly.
Loaded the FM cal provided.
Ran bike - installed variations to the cal/ flashed cal and road bike.
Bingo!🏁
Everything is sweet.
Software!
No more issues!
Bike has never run better.
We will try it on the 120r in a few weeks.
Thanks again HTT.- Gold!👌
Could you get a big log and post it up. I would love to see how the tuning is coming along.
Glad to here it is running great for you.
Andy
Andy, happy to do so, but it will probably not eventuate until next week end. Stay tuned! (No pun intended)
Quote from: whittlebeast on October 18, 2015, 04:56:44 AM
Quote from: Wallaby Bob on October 18, 2015, 02:27:22 AM
5.00pm here.
Started from the beginning.
Downloaded correct software again as Jamie suggested.
Checked everything throughly.
Loaded the FM cal provided.
Ran bike - installed variations to the cal/ flashed cal and road bike.
Bingo!🏁
Everything is sweet.
Software!
No more issues!
Bike has never run better.
We will try it on the 120r in a few weeks.
Thanks again HTT.- Gold!👌
Could you get a big log and post it up. I would love to see how the tuning is coming along.
Glad to here it is running great for you.
Andy
Just curious, what's the list of channels to be logged?
We normally log
MAP
Front AFF
Front CLI
RPM
Rear AFF
Rear CLI
TP
ET
Set Lambda
Spark Knock F
Spark Knock R
Acel Enr
Decl Enl
VE Front
VE Rear
VE New Front
VE New Rear
IAT
Front O2 V
Rear O2 V
Advance F
Advance R
INJ PW F
INJ PW R
VSS
Thank you for the info.
My Target Tune showed up today.
Andy
☑️
I did some testing today with the new Target Tune...
Here is a plot coming off the Target Tune after I made just a few tweaks of what Jamie at Fuelmoto sent me as a first try.
http://www.nbs-stl.com/HarleyTuning/Sporty%20TT%20Scatter.png (http://www.nbs-stl.com/HarleyTuning/Sporty%20TT%20Scatter.png)
Compared to what I got several years ago after a year of tuning.
http://www.nbs-stl.com/HarleyTuning/Sporty%20Wideband%20Scatter%2000.png (http://www.nbs-stl.com/HarleyTuning/Sporty%20Wideband%20Scatter%2000.png)
This thing flat works.
Andy
whittlebeast, can you share of few details of your build?
2007 Sporty with Harley Heavy Breather to keep IATs in check. Now the IATs average about 20 degrees over ambient. That is it on the engine side of things.
I do have BIG Brembo brakes, custom rear shocks, air assist front forks and a custom wind screen. It rides just as you would expect it to ride. Stock, I could not stand it. The stock fueling was horrible, it constantly bounced off the shock limiters, and simply did not stop.
http://www.nbs-stl.com/motorcycle/Front3_4.JPG (http://www.nbs-stl.com/motorcycle/Front3_4.JPG)
Andy
Thanks :up:
Now we need to hop up your sportster Andy. You can't ride that thing stock.;)
Quote from: joe_lyons on October 25, 2015, 04:49:53 PM
Now we need to hop up your sportster Andy. You can't ride that thing stock.;)
I'm good, thank you. You may be shocked how good a Sporty can be. Very few people ever opt to fix the EFI tune first.
By the way, the O2s screwing with the Pulse Width in a huge way is now gone with TT. I have no clue if DJ found that bust or if Harley did and fixed it on later code.
Any
But faster is funner
Here is data off the Sporty running Target Tune. Not bad for a first shot tune. The Target Tune is doing it's job beautifully.
http://www.nbs-stl.com/HarleyTuning/Sporty%20TT%20Hitting%20Targets.png (http://www.nbs-stl.com/HarleyTuning/Sporty%20TT%20Hitting%20Targets.png)
On the left is the Target AFR and on the right is the actual AFR.
Andy
Quote from: whittlebeast on October 25, 2015, 05:00:56 PM
Quote from: joe_lyons on October 25, 2015, 04:49:53 PM
Now we need to hop up your sportster Andy. You can't ride that thing stock.;)
I'm good, thank you. You may be shocked how good a Sporty can be. Very few people ever opt to fix the EFI tune first.
By the way, the O2s screwing with the Pulse Width in a huge way is now gone with TT. I have no clue if DJ found that bust or if Harley did and fixed it on later code.
Any
Got to agree Andy, stage one and tuned as opposed to flashed is chalk an cheese from my personal experience with several bikes recently, 08 cvo 110 springer, 08 96" Streetbob, 2015 103 Streetglide, all stockers except for air and exhaust, owners can't believe the difference, 3 out of 3 and they all ran the bikes in flashed form for some time beforehand. I totally relied on the SEPST software though, I have no doubt they could be better.
Quote from: whittlebeast on October 27, 2015, 04:00:03 AM
Here is data off the Sporty running Target Tune. Not bad for a first shot tune. The Target Tune is doing it's job beautifully.
http://www.nbs-stl.com/HarleyTuning/Sporty%20TT%20Hitting%20Targets.png (http://www.nbs-stl.com/HarleyTuning/Sporty%20TT%20Hitting%20Targets.png)
On the left is the Target AFR and on the right is the actual AFR.
Andy
If what's being shown as reported is accurate then it does look pretty good if I'm reading these dots right, might be a good thing?
Quote from: whittlebeast on October 27, 2015, 04:00:03 AM
Here is data off the Sporty running Target Tune. Not bad for a first shot tune. The Target Tune is doing it's job beautifully.
http://www.nbs-stl.com/HarleyTuning/Sporty%20TT%20Hitting%20Targets.png (http://www.nbs-stl.com/HarleyTuning/Sporty%20TT%20Hitting%20Targets.png)
On the left is the Target AFR and on the right is the actual AFR.
Andy
Is this your Sporty? What was the state of tune when you started?
Bob
Jamie converted the tune I did 5 years ago to a TT tune. It was reasonably close. Closed loop trims were within about +/- about 7% when I went to Target Tune. That screen shot was the TT correcting the tune I started with. I have not done any of the autotuning stuff yet. I was just starting to play with the system.
Updating the SW and the total install, including hiding all of the wires, took about 2 hours total. It had been about 5 years since I had played with a Power Vision so it took a little wile to dial myself back in to the routine.
Here is the autotune video. I will try it this weekend.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=y-x9NcQ5TWc (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=y-x9NcQ5TWc)
A few details are apparently a little different when you go TT compared to this Pro Tune video.
Andy
Quote from: whittlebeast on October 27, 2015, 08:38:12 AM
Jamie converted the tune I did 5 years ago to a TT tune. It was reasonably close. Closed loop trims were within about +/- about 7% when I went to Target Tune. That screen shot was the TT correcting the tune I started with. I have not done any of the autotuning stuff yet. I was just starting to play with the system.
Updating the SW and the total install, including hiding all of the wires, took about 2 hours total. It had been about 5 years since I had played with a Power Vision so it took a little wile to dial myself back in to the routine.
Here is the autotune video. I will try it this weekend.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=y-x9NcQ5TWc (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=y-x9NcQ5TWc)
A few details are apparently a little different when you go TT compared to this Pro Tune video.
Andy
Maybe a fun test would be to put a known
poor tune into the bike and watch the magic as the autotune system pulls the tune in?
Taking a really close tune and using autotune to trim it in (5-10%) is certainly an indication of the system working but most who will use this product have a bike that runs poorly to begin with.
Also what exhaust design is on this bike? Is it a stock headpipe and O2 bungs with the balance tube in place?
Bob
see post 424
Quote from: FLTRI on October 27, 2015, 09:07:16 AM
Maybe a fun test would be to put a known poor tune into the bike and watch the magic as the autotune system pulls the tune in?
Taking a really close tune and using autotune to trim it in (5-10%) is certainly an indication of the system working but most who will use this product have a bike that runs poorly to begin with.
Bob
:up:
Let's think out of the Harley box here...... if all I care about is smooth running and outrageous throttle response, when running Target Tune, what is the perfect Target AFR off idle and thru the midrange?
I did not buy the bike for gas mileage and simply don't care about it.
Andy
Quote from: whittlebeast on October 27, 2015, 07:10:59 PM
Let's think out of the Harley box here...... if all I care about is smooth running and outrageous throttle response, when running Target Tune, what is the perfect Target AFR off idle and thru the midrange?
I did not buy the bike for gas mileage and simply don't care about it.
Andy
2 questions come from that post...
Why do we need to think outside the Harley box (world)'for tuning?
Why would ideal AFR be different for any system for off idle through the midrange?
Lean and mean off idle through midrange. On a Sporty it equates to 14:1-14.4:1
How's that?
Bob
Quote from: FLTRI on October 27, 2015, 09:07:16 AM
Quote from: whittlebeast on October 27, 2015, 08:38:12 AM
Jamie converted the tune I did 5 years ago to a TT tune. It was reasonably close. Closed loop trims were within about +/- about 7% when I went to Target Tune. That screen shot was the TT correcting the tune I started with. I have not done any of the autotuning stuff yet. I was just starting to play with the system.
Updating the SW and the total install, including hiding all of the wires, took about 2 hours total. It had been about 5 years since I had played with a Power Vision so it took a little wile to dial myself back in to the routine.
Here is the autotune video. I will try it this weekend.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=y-x9NcQ5TWc (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=y-x9NcQ5TWc)
A few details are apparently a little different when you go TT compared to this Pro Tune video.
Andy
Maybe a fun test would be to put a known poor tune into the bike and watch the magic as the autotune system pulls the tune in?
Taking a really close tune and using autotune to trim it in (5-10%) is certainly an indication of the system working but most who will use this product have a bike that runs poorly to begin with.
Also what exhaust design is on this bike? Is it a stock headpipe and O2 bungs with the balance tube in place?
Bob
Better yet put the bad tune in, put bike on a dyno and do a base line pull. Run TT until AAF and CLI are both +/-5% then put the bike back on the dyno and do another base line pull. Now do a complete dyno tune and post the results from the three. Might learn something here.
The problem with a dyno is there is no "smoothness gauge". It only knows torque and RPM. EFI tuning is all about hitting your Target AFRs no mater what you throw at the motor in real world conditions.
Lots of the Harley mind set on perfect AFR is tweaked by the very narrow limits limits of a narrow band sensor. They only excel at one AFR, 14.7. They simply suck everywhere else.
I want to run as close to where the motor extremely happy as I can get. Not 14.7 as that is the only place I can get a quality reading.
Target tune has given the Harley world the keys to the kingdom that everyone else has had for years. Now you can even do it at home.
Wide bands may have their limits also but they are way more helpful away from 14.7
Andy
I did some Autotuning and testing and the results are insanely good. I will try to get a big log this weekend.
Andy
Quote from: whittlebeast on October 28, 2015, 07:00:31 PM
I did some Autotuning and testing and the results are insanely good. I will try to get a big log this weekend.
Andy
Careful Andy, you might get a little on you! :wink:
Better than perfect?
Bob
Quote from: whittlebeast on October 28, 2015, 07:00:31 PM
I did some Autotuning and testing and the results are insanely good. I will try to get a big log this weekend.
Andy
Can you spend some time above 4000. I would like to see it do it's thing at higher RPM's and KPA where the narrow band system don't work.
Quote from: whittlebeast on October 28, 2015, 04:37:01 AM
The problem with a dyno is there is no "smoothness gauge". It only knows torque and RPM. EFI tuning is all about hitting your Target AFRs no mater what you throw at the motor in real world conditions.
Lots of the Harley mind set on perfect AFR is tweaked by the very narrow limits limits of a narrow band sensor. They only excel at one AFR, 14.7. They simply suck everywhere else.
I want to run as close to where the motor extremely happy as I can get. Not 14.7 as that is the only place I can get a quality reading.
Target tune has given the Harley world the keys to the kingdom that everyone else has had for years. Now you can even do it at home.
Wide bands may have their limits also but they are way more helpful away from 14.7
Andy
Andy if I don't put my bike on a dyno how can I measure what my TT has done for my tune? I can go by my but dyno but that is subjective to say the least. Can I use MLVHD to assign numbers to TQ and HP? I am trying to learn to interpret what MLVHD is telling me but a lot of it is still Greek to me.
It is difficult to to put a true HP or Torque number on a motor based on looking at data logs. What you can do is acceleration testing from the same stretch of road and compare the RPM per sec or the MPH per sec rate.
I am finding the MAPxRPM vs Duty Cycle is a very good visual way of figuring out if the motor is tuning in. Especially valid over the 90% of the time you spend below about 85 KPA. On the high power end of the motor operating range, it is better to just use MAP vs RPM and average AFR as your basis of making fueling decisions.
Bob, you have been convinced me that the only way you will ever buy any of this is by having you play with a Target Tune and then if you look at the data afterwards, you will see the same patterns developing.
Andy
The Sporty is really dialing in with Target Tune. This is after one quick tweak based on what I was seeing in MegaLogViewer and then one Target Tune Autotune session.
http://www.nbs-stl.com/HarleyTuning/Sporty%20TT%20MAPxRPM%20vs%20PW%20%20View.png (http://www.nbs-stl.com/HarleyTuning/Sporty%20TT%20MAPxRPM%20vs%20PW%20%20View.png)
As I ride, the CLIs are running in the 97 to 103 range most all the time.
I am running mostly 14 AFR and fade to 13 at WOT. The little blue tail on the bottom left is the cold start enrichment. Not a concern.
Great job Dynojet. This thing works as well as any system I play with.
Andy
And this is my Sporty and the Target Tune system doing it's magic.
http://www.nbs-stl.com/HarleyTuning/Sporty%20TT%20Hitting%20AFR%20Targets.png (http://www.nbs-stl.com/HarleyTuning/Sporty%20TT%20Hitting%20AFR%20Targets.png)
Andy
Quote from: whittlebeast on October 29, 2015, 09:01:24 AM
It is difficult to to put a true HP or Torque number on a motor based on looking at data logs. What you can do is acceleration testing from the same stretch of road and compare the RPM per sec or the MPH per sec rate.
I am finding the MAPxRPM vs Duty Cycle is a very good visual way of figuring out if the motor is tuning in. Especially valid over the 90% of the time you spend below about 85 KPA. On the high power end of the motor operating range, it is better to just use MAP vs RPM and average AFR as your basis of making fueling decisions.
Andy
Andy can you post screen shots of the scatter plots you use for these?
I can't seem to get the axis' set correctly.
Quote from: whittlebeast on October 28, 2015, 04:37:01 AM
The problem with a dyno is there is no "smoothness gauge". It only knows torque and RPM. EFI tuning is all about hitting your Target AFRs no mater what you throw at the motor in real world conditions.
And how do you know, first, that the AFR you're targeting is really what it says it is, and second, that it's really what's best if so?
Glens, I have found that any one wideband AFR gauge to be fairly consistant. 14 on my gauge is just a number. Richer than 15 in my gauge, but 15 is also just a number. My motor likes my gauge to be at 14 around town and 13 at WOT. I typically set the VEs first to give consistent AFRs and then test with the target AFR table to see what my motor wants.
What else can you do until the really good AFR gauges hit the market?
Everything I have seen in the logs indicates the TT is the best system out there. By a huge margin.
Andy
Here is back to back testing of the same motor on the same day and the same tune running open loop. The only change is the wideband and data logger.
http://www.nbs-stl.com/MLVDemo/330%20Two%20O2%20Sensors.PNG (http://www.nbs-stl.com/MLVDemo/330%20Two%20O2%20Sensors.PNG)
Widebands can be different.
Andy
Quote from: whittlebeast on November 03, 2015, 04:41:54 AM
Here is back to back testing of the same motor on the same day and the same tune running open loop. The only change is the wideband and data logger.
http://www.nbs-stl.com/MLVDemo/330%20Two%20O2%20Sensors.PNG (http://www.nbs-stl.com/MLVDemo/330%20Two%20O2%20Sensors.PNG)
Widebands can be different.
Andy
Hello Andy
This raises all sorts of new questions .. Are these bikes tuned well? what's the alternative to over come the wideband reading differences? Exciting subject...
Cheers
Sarhan
Tune to the max power for WOT .
Quote from: GMR-PERFORMANCE on November 04, 2015, 02:10:54 PM
Tune to the max power for WOT .
What do you go for first up ?
What is usual difference you may find ?
Quote from: 98fxstc on November 04, 2015, 03:47:38 PM
Quote from: GMR-PERFORMANCE on November 04, 2015, 02:10:54 PM
Tune to the max power for WOT .
What do you go for first up ?
What is usual difference you may find ?
Difference ?? How would I know ??? I use test gas and that is the best I can do.. I use the tools I have and tune the bike.. If the bike is very happy with a timing curve and I set it at 12.8 AFR WOT and at hot temps no ping then there you have it.. Will AFR vary with the wide band sure . always been that way. But the HD is not extremely sensitive to that so good thing.
Quote from: GMR-PERFORMANCE on November 05, 2015, 05:44:51 AM
Quote from: 98fxstc on November 04, 2015, 03:47:38 PM
Quote from: GMR-PERFORMANCE on November 04, 2015, 02:10:54 PM
Tune to the max power for WOT .
What do you go for first up ?
What is usual difference you may find ?
Difference ?? How would I know ??? I use test gas and that is the best I can do.. I use the tools I have and tune the bike.. If the bike is very happy with a timing curve and I set it at 12.8 AFR WOT and at hot temps no ping then there you have it.. Will AFR vary with the wide band sure . always been that way. But the HD is not extremely sensitive to that so good thing.
I was wondering about your preferred AFR for max power at WOT
(After VE's have been done)
So you start with 12.8 , and I guess you would look at , say 12.6 and 13.0 , either side of 12.8 , for a WOT pull ,to see if max power goes up ?
The difference I was asking about was in the end result .
Thanks
I start at 13 and then add 3 units, then record results, same with minus 3. While also testing adding 2 and minus 2 degrees of timing to each iteration. This is where a PCV comes in handy on a dyno for quick changes and steady results, but handy as a tool only.
Adjust the pc5 live can you Joe?
Quote from: joe_lyons on November 05, 2015, 07:54:55 PM
I start at 13 and then add 3 units, then record results, same with minus 3. While also testing adding 2 and minus 2 degrees of timing to each iteration. This is where a PCV comes in handy on a dyno for quick changes and steady results, but handy as a tool only.
A guy I know swears by PCVs and swears at PVs. For exactly the reasons you mention. He tunes for several heavy hitters who are land speed record holders. One might argue, ok, he knows the 100% throttle thing well.. I tell him, but dude, I ride the bike at all RPMs. He laughs. Bob (FLTRI) taught him EFI tuning and he has a lot of respect for him. But he seriously hates all flash tuners. Bobs not far behind since he only loves one. :-)
Quote from: Hilly13 on November 05, 2015, 08:17:05 PM
Adjust the pc5 live can you Joe?
Yes..?
Quote from: rageglide on November 05, 2015, 09:02:20 PM
Quote from: joe_lyons on November 05, 2015, 07:54:55 PM
I start at 13 and then add 3 units, then record results, same with minus 3. While also testing adding 2 and minus 2 degrees of timing to each iteration. This is where a PCV comes in handy on a dyno for quick changes and steady results, but handy as a tool only.
A guy I know swears by PCVs and swears at PVs. For exactly the reasons you mention. He tunes for several heavy hitters who are land speed record holders. One might argue, ok, he knows the 100% throttle thing well.. I tell him, but dude, I ride the bike at all RPMs. He laughs. Bob (FLTRI) taught him EFI tuning and he has a lot of respect for him. But he seriously hates all flash tuners. Bobs not far behind since he only loves one. :-)
Some people have their own ideas. There is a local guy that is revered as a great engine builder and tuner but all he can use is PCV as its the simplest for him to understand coming from carbs and not wanting to learn about FI tuning. He also believes that in a PCV map there should never be a minus number because he never went smaller jetting on a carburetor. Lol
Quote from: joe_lyons on November 06, 2015, 06:02:41 AM
Quote from: Hilly13 on November 05, 2015, 08:17:05 PM
Adjust the pc5 live can you Joe?
Yes..?
Quote from: rageglide on November 05, 2015, 09:02:20 PM
Quote from: joe_lyons on November 05, 2015, 07:54:55 PM
I start at 13 and then add 3 units, then record results, same with minus 3. While also testing adding 2 and minus 2 degrees of timing to each iteration. This is where a PCV comes in handy on a dyno for quick changes and steady results, but handy as a tool only.
A guy I know swears by PCVs and swears at PVs. For exactly the reasons you mention. He tunes for several heavy hitters who are land speed record holders. One might argue, ok, he knows the 100% throttle thing well.. I tell him, but dude, I ride the bike at all RPMs. He laughs. Bob (FLTRI) taught him EFI tuning and he has a lot of respect for him. But he seriously hates all flash tuners. Bobs not far behind since he only loves one. :-)
Some people have their own ideas. There is a local guy that is revered as a great engine builder and tuner but all he can use is PCV as its the simplest for him to understand coming from carbs and not wanting to learn about FI tuning. He also believes that in a PCV map there should never be a minus number because he never went smaller jetting on a carburetor. Lol
And he went to the same factory race tuner class :wtf:
Some people get it and some people don't.
I use the 12.8 as 99% of the all tunes are E10 so with the approx .3 leaner afr due to the corn juice .. works out the best.. The funny thing is al cruise the afr needs to be more precise for great MPG and no ping. BUT WOT you can run them at 11.8 to 13.0 and not see a huge increase or decrease.. Just had one that was running 10.8 approx flat.. so some one had tuned it but it was rich. Leaned it out and it made 3-4 + across the board. No try that on a import multi valve and you are in for a rude awakening ..
If you run Target Tune with WBs, how will you know if the values are actually correct?
Below is a log snippet for a bike NOT running TT, but running off the NBs and monitoring with WBs... steady state, closed loop. The tune was done on a dyno. Notice the Set Lambda is close-ish when compared to the Lambda1/2 (NBs), but the WBO2s are significantly different. It seems to me, if this tune was converted to run off the WBs using TT it would run leaner using the same AFR and VE tables. So, in that case it would make NO difference that it was a well developed VE table.
[attach=0]
Quote from: rageglide on November 06, 2015, 01:17:15 PM
If you run Target Tune with WBs, how will you know if the values are actually correct?
Do about an hour long log and post up the data.
Andy
Quote from: whittlebeast on November 06, 2015, 04:59:39 PM
Quote from: rageglide on November 06, 2015, 01:17:15 PM
If you run Target Tune with WBs, how will you know if the values are actually correct?
Do about an hour long log and post up the data.
Andy
I'm not running TT, I have the AT-110 kit and an monitoring the NB. I'm wearing two watches lol My point is, if the WBs are reading drastically different than the NBs, What happens when running TT using the same professional tuned map?
Or are you just suggesting I log more data because you'd like to see if you can see a problem?
Bob
Quote from: rageglide on November 06, 2015, 06:08:06 PM
Quote from: whittlebeast on November 06, 2015, 04:59:39 PM
Quote from: rageglide on November 06, 2015, 01:17:15 PM
If you run Target Tune with WBs, how will you know if the values are actually correct?
Do about an hour long log and post up the data.
Andy
I'm not running TT, I have the AT-110 kit and an monitoring the NB. I'm wearing two watches lol My point is, if the WBs are reading drastically different than the NBs, What happens when running TT using the same professional tuned map?
Or are you just suggesting I log more data because you'd like to see if you can see a problem?
Bob
None of these systems are any better than the sensors gathering data, period.
Quote from: rageglide on November 06, 2015, 06:08:06 PM
I'm not running TT, I have the AT-110 kit and an monitoring the NB. I'm wearing two watches lol My point is, if the WBs are reading drastically different than the NBs, What happens when running TT using the same professional tuned map?
Or are you just suggesting I log more data because you'd like to see if you can see a problem?
Bob
Yes, I would love to see a data log. A screen shot form excel is way too painful.
Andy
Quote from: harleytuner on November 06, 2015, 06:20:14 PM
None of these systems are any better than the sensors gathering data, period.
May as well run Carbs :-)
Quote from: whittlebeast on November 06, 2015, 06:28:54 PM
Quote from: rageglide on November 06, 2015, 06:08:06 PM
I'm not running TT, I have the AT-110 kit and an monitoring the NB. I'm wearing two watches lol My point is, if the WBs are reading drastically different than the NBs, What happens when running TT using the same professional tuned map?
Or are you just suggesting I log more data because you'd like to see if you can see a problem?
Bob
Yes, I would love to see a data log. A screen shot form excel is way too painful.
Andy
The screen shot was just showing how completely out of whack things look. I'll send you the log (and tonights) if you want, combined it's about 50 mins. ok?
Bob
50 min is fine.
That is why test gas is used at most dyno facilities- gives them a way to verify the WBs are reading accurately. If the 02 sensor reports something different than what the test gas normally reads, it's time for a new sensor.
Quick video shows how DynoJet does it. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=h57zcZtfixc (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=h57zcZtfixc)
Quote from: rageglide on November 06, 2015, 01:17:15 PM
If you run Target Tune with WBs, how will you know if the values are actually correct?
Below is a log snippet for a bike NOT running TT, but running off the NBs and monitoring with WBs... steady state, closed loop. The tune was done on a dyno. Notice the Set Lambda is close-ish when compared to the Lambda1/2 (NBs), but the WBO2s are significantly different. It seems to me, if this tune was converted to run off the WBs using TT it would run leaner using the same AFR and VE tables. So, in that case it would make NO difference that it was a well developed VE table.
[attach=0]
Wbo2 and lambda are different on mine as well. Are the Wbo2 and the lambda channels calculated from the same device? I thought the Ecm calculated the Wbo2 and lambda was calculated by TT or AT.
My converted AT to TT Tune didn't want to make any significant adjustments when tuned with TT. My guess is the difference in output lies in the calculation.
The only sure way to know is to compare to yet a third measurement and hopefully two of the 3 agree ish.
Post up a log and let's see what is going on.
Quote from: rigidthumper on November 07, 2015, 05:47:52 AM
That is why test gas is used at most dyno facilities- gives them a way to verify the WBs are reading accurately. If the 02 sensor reports something different than what the test gas normally reads, it's time for a new sensor.
Quick video shows how DynoJet does it. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=h57zcZtfixc (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=h57zcZtfixc)
That is a great test for one condition, room temperature and pressure. All the magic in wideband controllers is in these compensations on the fly. We have no way to change that part.
When tuning at home, you have to deal with what you have and learn to work with it to your best advantage.
On my 2015 FLHTK, the bungs on the stock headpipe are, I'm guessing, around 18" from the exhaust ports. The Fullsac DX pipe I'm running locates the NBs in about the same spot as the factory headpipe, and so did the Jackpot 2-1-2 I used to run, but the WBs (on the Fullsac and the Jackpot) are located 3-4" from the exhaust ports. So - why would one expect the WBs 3" from the ports to read the same as NBs that are maybe 18" away? My advise is, when you switch to WBs, roll with the WBs and ignore what the NBs are saying. If you don't trust the WBs, why did you switch to a system that depends on them?
I just wanted to chime in and say I recently completed approx 1000 km Om my SG 103. It has PV with TT. 030. HG , 54s with 4 degree adv, fullsac and monster rounds. The map was ex dynojet for target tune. It's been Auto tuned several times.
The bike has never ran better.
Cruising on 14.3:1. The AFR s are spot on. CLIs are centralising back to 100 constantly.
It's a little rich on decel but that is DIY adjustable.
It will be dynoed soon., so we will see the anomalies in the tune.
Very happy on this bike.
I haven't read all 20 pages so I apologize if it's already been answered, is TT able to dial in timing as well as AFR & is it a constant thing or do you have readjust it using the PV? Would it be of help when encountering different grades of fuel on a trip? TIA
Once you get it dialed in, they are amazing.
So do you have to log knock occurrences & adjust with the PV or does it do it on it's own. It would be great if it worked like the newer auto ECMs that adjust spark advance depending on the fuel being run. Guess I'll have to give Fuel Moto a call to get the answer.
No, you won't; it don't. It's not "auto-tune" but rather "auto-fuel." It's not even really that. It merely adjusts fuel to meet the targets you've manually entered.
Quote from: whittlebeast on November 28, 2015, 05:41:12 PM
Once you get it dialed in, they are amazing.
As with most EFI in general...
Autotune is how fast and effectivly the system helps you.
Glens, have you installed and tested a Target Tune? Please post up the logs and let everyone see the results.
Andy
Quote from: whittlebeast on December 01, 2015, 03:45:12 AM
Autotune is how fast and effectivly the system helps you.
Andy
:hyst: :hyst: :hyst: :horse:
Quote from: DTTJGlide on November 30, 2015, 07:47:47 PM
So do you have to log knock occurrences & adjust with the PV or does it do it on it's own. It would be great if it worked like the newer auto ECMs that adjust spark advance depending on the fuel being run. Guess I'll have to give Fuel Moto a call to get the answer.
No auto correct . You have to log and then make the correction manual , There are systems that do , but this is not the post to put that info up.
[/quote]
No auto correct . You have to log and then make the correction manual , There are systems that do , but this is not the post to put that info up.
[/quote]
You can log and make corrections to the spark table manually with TT, but that's not the only way. TT can programmatically decrease advance in the spark tables in its autotune mode.
Have a log with it in and out ( auto tune) showing recorded timing numbers and see if its pulling timing out just because you are in auto tune??
Quote from: GregOn2Wheels on December 01, 2015, 07:30:44 AM
You can log and make corrections to the spark table manually with TT, but that's not the only way. TT can programmatically decrease advance in the spark tables in its autotune mode.
I did not find the timing feature but maybe I just missed it or maybe you have to enable it? I did my timing edits manually but I'd be interested to see what it would do with my map in the 107. If you have more details on how it's used, that would be great.
You have to set the min-max in the settings menu for any of the auto tunes. It's at the bottom left of the screen before you get to the green screen.
(http://images.tapatalk-cdn.com/15/12/01/2cdc0aad6b4f299f4deead901d3eb733.jpg)
(http://images.tapatalk-cdn.com/15/12/01/b3783db94b81a4854825f9201dba0055.jpg)
(http://images.tapatalk-cdn.com/15/12/01/c19a81f6a1d858f94e6f02f23ed9f13a.jpg)
Quote from: joe_lyons on December 01, 2015, 07:42:54 AM
You have to set the min-max in the settings menu for any of the auto tunes. It's at the bottom left of the screen before you get to the green screen.
Cool, I'll take a look. Have you found the feature to be fairly reliable? I know I had some timing pulls initially that seem to be false on my tune. I think those are resolved now and what little I see now seems to be legit.
To enable spark tune, go to the autotune menu on your PV and select settings. From this menu, change Max Spark Learn to something like 10. It will probably be set to 0 initially. To prevent spark and VE learn from happening simultaneously, which Dynojet does not recommend, change Max VE Learn to 0. Now enable autotune and ride. Note that the data log screen displays cell hits for VE learn only so if you're tuning spark only, it won't show you which cells you've hit. The only way to know those cells is to export the tune when your finished and use the modified cell coloring in WinPV when comparing to the tune you started with.
Added some pics to my previous post.
Quote from: GregOn2Wheels on December 01, 2015, 07:50:48 AM
To enable spark tune, go to the autotune menu on your PV and select settings. From this menu, change Max Spark Learn to something like 10. It will probably be set to 0 initially. To prevent spark and VE learn from happening simultaneously, which Dynojet does not recommend, change Max VE Learn to 0. Now enable autotune and ride. Note that the data log screen displays cell hits for VE learn only so if you're tuning spark only, it won't show you which cells you've hit. The only way to know those cells is to export the tune when your finished and use the modified cell coloring in WinPV when comparing to the tune you started with.
Thanks
I have found that if you are getting alot of knock retard but none of it is audible then going back and reviewing the logs and looking at the MAP right before the knock event happens and see if it dips or not. Remember that knock retard is reactive so moving the numbers down an rpm spot would be a good idea.
Quote from: joe_lyons on December 01, 2015, 07:57:53 AM
I have found that if you are getting alot of knock retard but none of it is audible then going back and reviewing the logs and looking at the MAP right before the knock event happens and see if it dips or not. Remember that knock retard is reactive so moving the numbers down an rpm spot would be a good idea.
Good info Joe. So if there is a MAP dip just before the knock event, does this mean it's an event you can ignore?
Quote from: joe_lyons on December 01, 2015, 07:57:53 AM
I have found that if you are getting alot of knock retard but none of it is audible then going back and reviewing the logs and looking at the MAP right before the knock event happens and see if it dips or not. Remember that knock retard is reactive so moving the numbers down an rpm spot would be a good idea.
So how many samples back in the log do you need to go for the adjustment? Or does it vary and it's a WAG?
Quote from: GregOn2Wheels on December 01, 2015, 08:00:55 AM
Quote from: joe_lyons on December 01, 2015, 07:57:53 AM
I have found that if you are getting alot of knock retard but none of it is audible then going back and reviewing the logs and looking at the MAP right before the knock event happens and see if it dips or not. Remember that knock retard is reactive so moving the numbers down an rpm spot would be a good idea.
Good info Joe. So if there is a MAP dip just before the knock event, does this mean it's an event you can ignore?
Yes, if I see a dip in the MAP then that is usually a good indicator that was a knock event
Quote from: Coyote on December 01, 2015, 08:01:11 AM
Quote from: joe_lyons on December 01, 2015, 07:57:53 AM
I have found that if you are getting alot of knock retard but none of it is audible then going back and reviewing the logs and looking at the MAP right before the knock event happens and see if it dips or not. Remember that knock retard is reactive so moving the numbers down an rpm spot would be a good idea.
So how many samples back in the log do you need to go for the adjustment? Or does it vary and it's a WAG?
For knock be altered be autotuning I believe it only needs one hit to make an adjustment but I could be wrong.
Here is an example what somewhat random knock looks like in a big log.
http://www.nbs-stl.com/HarleyTuning/HarleyNearIgnitionPerfection.png (http://www.nbs-stl.com/HarleyTuning/HarleyNearIgnitionPerfection.png)
Andy
AFR at those points? I see that many of these can be very picky for timing at 1750 to 2250 in the 70+ KPA range. Not all builds but some.. If they run a short duration cam with slightly elevated compression
Quote from: GMR-PERFORMANCE on December 01, 2015, 08:12:34 AM
AFR at those points? I see that many of these can be very picky for timing at 1750 to 2250 in the 70+ KPA range. Not all builds but some.. If they run a short duration cam with slightly elevated compression
That's where I saw my real issues. I seem to have eliminated the false ones when I reduced my plug gap some.
So what's acceptable? Last log (which was short), I only pulled timing a few times. Worst place was 2 deg but the rest where 1/2 or 1. All during a hard throttle up between 2-2.7k
I believe there is no right or wrong only what it will handle or want. That area is common for ping and in some cases its about your AFR mapping there as well.. By 80 KPA I am at 13.5 and heading richer as the KPA goes up.. In the past there was no need to be as aggressive with AFR. But todays fuel , trying to get more power the taller gearing ..
Most of us have a timing table that we use for a particular set up. Its a starting point based on what worked on another build. And that is based on how it runs in the real world not just the dyno booth.
Those numbers do not seem out of the normal range.. Again it goes back to AFR I fail to see the reason to try and run a lean AFR if the bike is trying to accelerate rapidly and the KPA is over 80 . That 70-80 area is by far the most normal to see what you are seeing.
If you can get good MPG in the light throttle cruise range and have it roll into the higher KPA without issue then its done. Very generic statement but simple way to describe it . The smoothing function is a nice tool there. But watch closely that it does not add timing back in .
I see what I believe are ECM adaptive spark retard when I view Spark Knock F & R. I ignore these and only look at Spark Knock immediately after KnockCntF & R increases.
Quote from: Coyote on December 01, 2015, 08:17:28 AM
I seem to have eliminated the false ones when I reduced my plug gap some.
Coyote, would you share details? engine size, compression, CCP, plug type/brand, and before/after plug gaps...
TIA
Quote from: q1svt on December 01, 2015, 08:31:30 AM
Quote from: Coyote on December 01, 2015, 08:17:28 AM
I seem to have eliminated the false ones when I reduced my plug gap some.
Coyote, would you share details? engine size, compression, CCP, plug type/brand, and before/after plug gaps...
TIA
107 w/GMR577 cam. Comp around 10.45 Plug was a DCPR7EIX6046. Initial gap was set to 0.040. Current gap is set to 0.035.
I also tried a stock plug gapped at 035 but I can't say I saw any real change (I did not try the stock plug at 040).
At 040, I could see timing being pulled in light load areas that didn't make sense. After reducing the gap, those went away.
On avg the 35 gap seems to work the best. Stock wires , etc Being that its a voltage feedback system running a larger gap can create some of that..
Quote from: GMR-PERFORMANCE on December 01, 2015, 08:40:35 AM
On avg the 35 gap seems to work the best. Stock wires , etc Being that its a voltage feedback system running a larger gap can create some of that..
:up: That's what I found. I did try a run with a gap of 32 but it showed no improvement so I went back to 35. I'm stock on the plug wires.
Here is a LOG (http://harleytechtalk.com/htt/MGalleryItem.php?id=2536) from today. Only pulled timing in a few places. Looking like this may be much lower in MAP than I originally thought. It's right in the area Steve mentioned though. I'm still pretty leaned out at this point.
Appreciate any thoughts. Thanks.
This 2 deg event from the above log caught my attention.
[attach=0]
Plot RPM, MAP and Spark Knock Rear and plot RPM, MAP and Spark Advance Rear
Let's see what shows up. At first glance your AFR is reporting a little lean. AE may help.
Andy
[attach=0]
It's after the knock event, but isn't it unusual for the MAP to spike like that without RPMs moving in the same direction?
Speed and RPM are both going up the whole time. I was probably on a very steep climb at the time in 5th or 6th so accel was not fast.
What became of this? Running lean on rear, and pinging. Seems everybody was all excited and then problems came up. Now it slides to the bottom of the page.
My tuner told me. Every tuner is good when things go well. A great tuner will stick out when things don't go well.
Best bet is he is making a change or two and data logging it to find out step by step where the issue is at..
I also bet he is having a blast learning how all this stuff is related.
Andy
Quote from: GMR-PERFORMANCE on December 04, 2015, 06:38:51 AM
Best bet is he is making a change or two and data logging it to find out step by step where the issue is at..
:up: Weather went to crap here last week with rain all day yesterday. I have a little more data logging to do.
Quote from: crowgo on December 04, 2015, 06:08:37 AM
What became of this? Running lean on rear, and pinging. Seems everybody was all excited and then problems came up. Now it slides to the bottom of the page.
My tuner told me. Every tuner is good when things go well. A great tuner will stick out when things don't go well.
Just what Steve said. Keep in mind I'm picking nits at this point. The bike runs great. I would not even have known about this small amount of timing pull if I had not been logging. This is a learning exercise for me. Weather is looking better today so I may get to take the bike out.
Quote from: crowgo on December 04, 2015, 06:08:37 AM
What became of this? Running lean on rear, and pinging. Seems everybody was all excited and then problems came up. Now it slides to the bottom of the page.
My tuner told me. Every tuner is good when things go well. A great tuner will stick out when things don't go well.
Since I'm included in "everyone"...
Could we try not to throw this baby out with the bath water? I'm still very excited about Target Tune! Overall, my bike has been incredibly smooth, responsive, powerful and fun to ride since installing it. Is it perfect? Nothing is in my opinion, but I will say that it does what it does VERY well. If this product has shortcomings, its in the things that it makes no attempt to do at all like allowing open loop in areas where sampling is poor or erratic. Dynojet could remedy this at any time if they choose to, but Target Tune will be an awesome product for many builds even if they never do. What I'm trying to say here is that I wish early adopters of TT could help one another as we work through small issues that come up without others interpreting this to mean that its a bad product. I don't know which products crowgo is comparing TT to, but I can just about guarantee that whatever those products are, they had much bigger issues at this this stage in their life cycles than Target Tune does!
Thanks for the replies. Been following along and then it seemed to stop. Never considered weather.
No logs to post, no big data to brag about.
But my TT on the 103 is exceptional.
Big thanks to Jamie and a quality base map.
I was just on the phone with a Fuel Moto rep. He recommended Target tune, over Auto tune Pro. I'm running an 07 SERK, with the 110 motor, and Basanni exhaust. I'm not ordering until Monday, because I want to make sure my 02 bungs are 18 mm. How is everybody liking the Target tune so far? Do you think I need to swap out the Bassani 2-1 exhaust for the Jackpot E series?
I'm going to start a new thread, you guys are talking way over my head, and tuning highly modified motors. Mines a stock 110
This is a technical section on tuning.. IF you plan on using the TT then you will need to learn how to use it .. OR have some tune the bike for you. Not being a jerk just stating that it is a tech tuner and requires learning and understanding on how it works to be able to achieve a proper tune.
stock 110 or built 113 the same tuning methods apply..
Quote from: jclark311 on December 18, 2015, 01:33:05 PM
I was just on the phone with a Fuel Moto rep. He recommended Target tune, over Auto tune Pro. I'm running an 07 SERK, with the 110 motor, and Basanni exhaust. I'm not ordering until Monday, because I want to make sure my 02 bungs are 18 mm. How is everybody liking the Target tune so far? Do you think I need to swap out the Bassani 2-1 exhaust for the Jackpot E series?
I'm running Bassani RR2 2-1 on my 107 and TT seems to be doing a good job. Fuel Moto is very good at looking at logs if you have an issue and helping to resolve them.
Quote from: GMR-PERFORMANCE on December 18, 2015, 02:03:12 PM
This is a technical section on tuning.. IF you plan on using the TT then you will need to learn how to use it .. OR have some tune the bike for you. Not being a jerk just stating that it is a tech tuner and requires learning and understanding on how it works to be able to achieve a proper tune.
stock 110 or built 113 the same tuning methods apply..
Cmon Steve. What next, if you don't own a dyno don't bother asking stupid questions. :hyst:
Ron
I here you, not that i dont want to learn, or unable to. Im a tech savy guy, i work on internet routers, VOD, and IP telephone everyday. Im not going to modify this bike. I want to ride it more than i work on it. I have modified every motorcycle or car i had for the last 40 years. Now i want to ride, and I want something easy to use. Most i will do with this bike, is throw a bolt on cam in. So with that said, Powervision looks like the way to go. Im sure Fuel Moto has a good base tune to get me started. So which one do you guys recomend?
The abilities of target tune is the best on the market. Great for anything short of an insane build.
Jamie at FuelmotoUSA has the tools now to tune most anything remotely. That can save almost anyone the money they used to spend at the dyno.
Andy
Quote from: jclark311 on December 18, 2015, 04:56:38 PM
I here you, not that i dont want to learn, or unable to. Im a tech savy guy, i work on internet routers, VOD, and IP telephone everyday. Im not going to modify this bike. I want to ride it more than i work on it. I have modified every motorcycle or car i had for the last 40 years. Now i want to ride, and I want something easy to use. Most i will do with this bike, is throw a bolt on cam in. So with that said, Powervision looks like the way to go. Im sure Fuel Moto has a good base tune to get me started. So which one do you guys recomend?
Find a pro tuner who uses Powervision and pay $200 for a licence
You will have someone who has the knowledge and equipment to to give you a good tune
You pay for a dyno tune for your setup and away you go
No need to try to learn everything you need to know to tune your own bike
You have the wrong attitude for a DIY tuner
Quote from: jclark311 on December 18, 2015, 04:56:38 PM
Im a tech savy guy, i work on internet routers, VOD, and IP telephone everyday.
These should be of great assistance in learning how the software tools work :wink:
Some over think the actual tuning part (air, fuel, spark, timing), but that hasn't changed since a caveman walked pass after a lightening strike...
Quote from: whittlebeast on December 18, 2015, 05:16:17 PM
The abilities of target tune is the best on the market. Great for anything short of an insane build.
Jamie at FuelmotoUSA has the tools now to tune most anything remotely. That can save almost anyone the money they used to spend at the dyno.
Andy
You may be right however many buy them and do not want to learn the rest of what goes along with it . I do this for a living and get the TT and PRO tuners in all the time., And yes they bought them from FM.. They are tired of messing around gathering logs re loading the the tunes. They just want to ride the bike and it be tuned. Not a bash just facts. SO they are happy to pay for the dyno tune and we tune it, the bikes is ready and they no longer have to mess with it.. Not wrong or right just the way it is.. That was more my point.. without :horse: .
Its one more tuner out there that, once they get the rest of it out done it will be even better :wink: Nice to have options.
I ordered my TT from Fuel Moto today. Ill keep you guys posted on the results. I have been a carb guy from day 1.