Engineers: Do We All Need Autotune?

[HansO]

Then Autotune it will be!

If you haven't already put in a TuneECU tune like the one floating around here in one the threads that Wayne Tripp created to de restrict the Touring, this will give you a better ignition curve and allow you to get the full potential out of my map as well

 

[Idaho Red Rocket 3]

What about a better revised TuneEcu map for the older bikes ? What is available for them ?

 

[dobro]

If you haven't already put in a TuneECU tune like the one floating around here in one the threads that Wayne Tripp created to de restrict the Touring, this will give you a better ignition curve and allow you to get the full potential out of my map as well

Hanso, when I put Wayne's tuneEcu in it's my impression that it will actually re-program the bike's ecu unlike PC5 which will only override the bike's ecu/Wayne's tune for the AFR values specified in PC5. Is that correct? As you can tell, I am struggling with the basics of these subjects.

 

[HansO]

What about a better revised TuneEcu map for the older bikes ? What is available for them ?

There are a couple and I can send one if you like but while these sort the ignition restrictions they will only be a compromise as far as fueling is concerned which is why I use the PCV + Auto Tune to then sort out my fueling to the way I want it not some EPA dicks ultra lean fueling the Rocket come with

Hanso, when I put Wayne's tuneEcu in it's my impression that it will actually re-program the bike's ecu unlike PC5 which will only override the bike's ecu/Wayne's tune for the AFR values specified in PC5. Is that correct? As you can tell, I am struggling with the basics of these subjects.

Yes it will reprogram the ECU to gain a better Ignition map then the PCV + Auto Tune overrides the fueling, you can leave the original Tune in the ECU but the first three gears will still be restricted ignition wise

 

[barbagris]

Thats right there is no reason to go over 85 mph

Unless you WANT to be run off the road by white vans.

 

[barbagris]

I'll have to send you my new map once I get a couple of flat spots out of it, come out a tight round about in second gear yesterday and just powering on as I changed direction from leant over right to lean over left the front started to lift .... Gave me a bit of a heart starter as I was not expecting it, I will send it once I get the last little bit right I'll be call it V2.5 and will suit the lower gears better than V3 as I fond it a bit to rich

How close is V2.5 to my V1?.

BTW following some more TPS vs Speed/Rpm analysis - I'm going to alter the F/L values to force the stock ECU onto load tables instead of fuel. PVC will have to retune from zero but I'm fine with that.

If you have not used "Torque" yet to do so - I'd suggest you give it a go. You may also be surprised how close the ECU speed readings are to GPS - Nothing like the Speedo which is obviously been driven fast. This leads to an INTERESTING option for an accurate (more accurate?) speedo using "Torque" and a SmartWatch - Maybe - I'm in R+D mode.

 

[dobro]

There are a couple and I can send one if you like but while these sort the ignition restrictions they will only be a compromise as far as fueling is concerned which is why I use the PCV + Auto Tune to then sort out my fueling to the way I want it not some EPA dicks ultra lean fueling the Rocket come with

Yes it will reprogram the ECU to gain a better Ignition map then the PCV + Auto Tune overrides the fueling, you can leave the original Tune in the ECU but the first three gears will still be restricted ignition wise

Hanso, even if a bike has a PC5 and is tuned on a dyno is it true that for mapped AFR's under 14.3 the bike cannot confirm (and thus that such a particular AFR is actually being employed unless the bike also has Autotune, thus a bike without Autotune cannot correct itself to such a prescribed AFR if it has been altered by the effects of climate (temperature/humidity)?

There are a couple and I can send one if you like but while these sort the ignition restrictions they will only be a compromise as far as fueling is concerned which is why I use the PCV + Auto Tune to then sort out my fueling to the way I want it not some EPA dicks ultra lean fueling the Rocket come with

Yes it will reprogram the ECU to gain a better Ignition map then the PCV + Auto Tune overrides the fueling, you can leave the original Tune in the ECU but the first three gears will still be restricted ignition wise

So I can decide whether Wayne's de-restricting tune on tuneecu is worth installing under PC5, can you quantify (e.g. 5%, 10%) the power increase it's change to the ignition will probably yield in gears 1-2-3?

 

[barbagris]

Hanso, even if a bike has a PC5 and is tuned on a dyno is it true that for mapped AFR's under 14.3 the bike cannot confirm (and thus that such a particular AFR is actually being employed unless the bike also has Autotune, thus a bike without Autotune cannot correct itself to such a prescribed AFR if it has been altered by the effects of climate (temperature/humidity)?

The point is that with absolutely ANY piggyback system - you disable the stock ECU's ability to correct AFR - Because either you fit a SENSOR eliminator (which tells the ECU it's always dead on Lambda=1) or you switch off the O2 sensing in the ECU which effectively does the same thing.

Failing to do this WILL mess up ANY piggy-back's fuelling (dyno'd or not) . As the the ECU will hunt around all aver trying to compensate for something it's no longer able to. And (on the R3) you'll be getting constant error messages about a defective sensor - which I'm guessing will eventually force the ECU into limp-home mode. I say guessing as I do not know - but every other ECU I've ever messed with (petrol or diesel) eventually does. And no, I do not intend to try it on my R3.

The only way that the piggy back systems can compensate is by having their own independant O2 sensor. This could be (for example) the Dobeck-AF or a PCV WITH AT. So not only can a PC5 (without AT) not correct AFR - neither can ANYTHING ELSE without a sensor. Anybody who says different needs to explain to me how something with no sensor can sense. Folk - these are really nothing but simple computers - They're a LOOOOOOOOOOOOOOONG way from Artificial Intelligence.

SENSORS DO NOT KNOW WHAT AFR IS - THEY RETURN A LAMBDA VALUE - basically a voltage value. L=1 being stoichiometric-ally correct. This is just chemistry. It is man that says - I know this is a petrol engine so L=1 is therefore equivalent to 14.7 (by mass).

WIDE BAND SENSORS can detect very wide lamba variation and return a linear and calibrated voltage - NARROW BAND do not - they are not designed to.

Also eventually ALL WBO2 sensor will drift off their book value and need replacing. NBO2 either work or break. Most modern Lamba systems have a pre and post cat sensor to also see if the cat works or not. R3's do not. So you can have L=1 and still fail emissions tests due to the cat being off.

I find this all so easy - but then I've always been gifted at sciences.

I strongly recommend anybody with interest to read the info published by Tech Edge in Australia http://wbo2.com/
Their web is a bit of a disaster but there is an awful lot of good info in there - though you have to sort of hunt about.

 

[captain jack]

Thats right there is no reason to go over 85 mph

The speed limit over here is 70mph & I make sure I never go below it.

 

[captain jack]

The point is that with absolutely ANY piggyback system - you disable the stock ECU's ability to correct AFR - Because either you fit a SENSOR eliminator (which tells the ECU it's always dead on Lambda=1) or you switch off the O2 sensing in the ECU which effectively does the same thing.

Failing to do this WILL mess up ANY piggy-back's fuelling (dyno'd or not) . As the the ECU will hunt around all aver trying to compensate for something it's no longer able to. And (on the R3) you'll be getting constant error messages about a defective sensor - which I'm guessing will eventually force the ECU into limp-home mode. I say guessing as I do not know - but every other ECU I've ever messed with (petrol or diesel) eventually does. And no, I do not intend to try it on my R3.

The only way that the piggy back systems can compensate is by having their own independant O2 sensor. This could be (for example) the Dobeck-AF or a PCV WITH AT. So not only can a PC5 (without AT) not correct AFR - neither can ANYTHING ELSE without a sensor. Anybody who says different needs to explain to me how something with no sensor can sense. Folk - these are really nothing but simple computers - They're a LOOOOOOOOOOOOOOONG way from Artificial Intelligence.

SENSORS DO NOT KNOW WHAT AFR IS - THEY RETURN A LAMBDA VALUE - basically a voltage value. L=1 being stoichiometric-ally correct. This is just chemistry. It is man that says - I know this is a petrol engine so L=1 is therefore equivalent to 14.7 (by mass).

WIDE BAND SENSORS can detect very wide lamba variation and return a linear and calibrated voltage - NARROW BAND do not - they are not designed to.

Also eventually ALL WBO2 sensor will drift off their book value and need replacing. NBO2 either work or break. Most modern Lamba systems have a pre and post cat sensor to also see if the cat works or not. R3's do not. So you can have L=1 and still fail emissions tests due to the cat being off.

I find this all so easy - but then I've always been gifted at sciences.

I strongly recommend anybody with interest to read the info published by Tech Edge in Australia http://wbo2.com/
Their web is a bit of a disaster but there is an awful lot of good info in there - though you have to sort of hunt about.

Think I'll just take your word for it Chris.