How I tune using POD-300/AT/PC-V/TuneECU

[Claviger]

For those interested in doing it yourself, or who are nowhere near a dyno, I figured I'd show how I do it and how you can adapt the bike quickly.

WARNINGS -

o If at any time you see AFRs in the 15.5:1 or leaner range that's a problem, stop, add fuel to that RPM/TPS area of the table in PC-V, about 10% and start again.

o The more power you make, the harder this is to do! It's very very difficult to do on my bike, for example, at the 70% and higher TPS values I'm either accelerating very quickly, or, I'm traveling at go to jail speeds if using 5th gear.

o Use high octane gas, and if you have it, add 6oz of Torco Accelerator to a full tank of fuel to end up with 95/96 octane. This will prevent most knocking while the engine's at it's highest risk, during early tuning efforts. More Accelerator is not necessary so do not go dumping the whole can in lol.

o I am a HOBBYIST and my methods are MINE. They're what I've come up with that works for me over the years on various vehicles. This will get the bike into a state it can be ridden safely and running fairly well.

o There WILL be more power to be found when put on a dyno and tuned by a pro (which is why I take it to get it's final tune when I'm satisfied that I'm fairly close). I am positive this will be cringe worthy for pro's who do it on a dyno, which allows it to be done much quicker, safer, and more accurately.

Initial Adaptation:
Set the AT target something like below and go ride the bike with the closest starting TuneECU tune you have loaded, eg if tuning Reband/Sidewinder/Brute/Viking pipes but you only have a CES tune, that's fine. If tuning a Carp 240 kit and you only have the CES tune that's not close enough!! Give the AT 20% enrichment and 10% enleanment authority. For this ride, you want little traffic, and a road where you can hold the throttle at various positions without getting run over or a ticket. I like using 5th gear and holding a throttle position for each TPS column in PC-V e.g. 1%, 2%, 3% ---- 50%. 5th will slow the data rate down enough for the AT algorithm to do it's thing, climbing a hill helps even more. You want to sweep through each TPS setting a few times, like 3-5 at a minimum.

Trying to tune using 1st and 2nd gear is nearly useless over 10% throttle because the rate of gain for RPM is just too high for the AT to be accurate.


Now stop, accept all trims and then make your PC-V Target AFR table look like this:



Now you need to datalog.

Datalogging Portion:
o POD-300 - enable logging of the following at a minimum (don't try to log everything, it'll fill the memory quickly) - Injector Duty Cycle, AFR, RPM, TPS
o Set the sample rate to "raw" or maximum, whichever it's named, but you want the fastest possible speed.

Go ride the bike, doing the same thing you did during initial adaptation, but datalog the ride in the POD-300. Ensure you end the log before turning the bike off, I've had corruption issues when forgetting to do so.

So now pull the datalog off the POD-300 using the Power Core POD-300 Device Manager "export to WinPEP 8 Data Center" option. I set up my WinPEP8 to look like this:



What you want to look for is areas of constant throttle position that sweep through RPMs. Then go into the PC-V software and add the amount of fuel or remove it to hit the AFR you're after.

For example, in the above photo, I'm working with the 2% TPS column and 2750 RPM bin. To find the percentages you'll want to use Lambda to AFR conversion to estimate the % to add/remove. Lambda is a percentage, so 5% fueling adjustment should be about 0.7 AFR shift.

So for the above log, I will add 5% fuel to the 2% TPS and 2750 RPM bin to bring the AFR down to around 14:1 instead of 14.7.



You want to do this for all the areas that have a 0 in the Target AFR table you set earlier. This might take 2 or 3 sessions to get it dialed in right. Don't try to manually tune the log file areas that the AT is still active, those areas in the Target AFR table that are not 0s. You'll end up over compensating, because the AT will have made some adjustment already.

As you work through the whole table, slowly put 0s into the Target AFR table more and more until you're satisfied with your work. It is time consuming and the whole process is predicated on having a tune that is close enough to be ridden around in the first place.

 

[Claviger]

TUNE ECU:

A note on TuneECU files. The stock tune and many floating around on the net have lumpy fuel curves, shown below circled in yellow. These are usually the result of tuning with only TuneECU, because the engine wants the fuel in that RPM range due to flow harmonics/efficiency islands of the engines general VE performance. If tuning with TuneECU only, that's fine, but with PC-V it's easier to do it without the lumps.



These lumps effect the PC-V fuel trims. For example, say your at 40% throttle logging a 2500-7000 pull to get good data to adjust the 40% part of the table. When doing so, the 4400-4800 section of the above tune is going to be a lot richer than the 4400 and the 5000 section. As a result you'll need to pull fuel in the PC-V from 4500 and 4750 at 40% bins in the table, but the 4250 and 5000 bins might be perfect with no trims. This creates some problems because PC-V extrapolates for RPM between the bin values to get all the RPMs between the bins.

So, to start, you want a TuneECU file that is fairly smooth when viewed using graphical view and cycle through the TPS columns on the top. The below is a custom TuneECU file that is much easier to work with as a base file:



This is easier to use because it's more intuitive when working in PowerCommander 5 software. In the above you'll notice a bike jump in fueling at 4000 and 4200, which is right where i get a massive torque surge on my bike. This is part of understanding the relationship between the table and your torque curve and why you want a close starting tune.

Tune ECU Correlation:

Now what I do after the tuning is all done, is open this up in TuneECU:


In this table, I transfer over the PC-V "Fuel" table. You may have noticed at this point, that I'm using a PC-V table where the TPS columns match the TPS columns in the TuneECU file. Doing so makes this part much easier and more accurate than using the default PC-V configuration. When transfering, don't do a straight transfer of the values, as the PC-V Fuel adjustment table isn't strictly a percentage. I usually do 75% of the PC-V value into TuneECU e.g. if PC-V Fuel adjustment says to add 20% fuel, I'll put 15% in the corresponding TuneECU bin. When you're all complete, accept trims (don't apply to L tables, only F tables in the "Edit" section of TuneECU). Now save and load that TuneECU file into the bike.
At this point your TuneECU graphical display will have some of the lumpiness I said to avoid before, that is ok and desired. This represents the non-linear flow of an engine/intake/exhaust system.

Go back and start over at the "Initial Adaptation" step above, weee fun isn't it!! This time though, the whole process will be MUCH quicker than the first because the base file is already far more accurate to your engine than the one you started with.

 

[Claviger]

From here, there are four more things I'd like to mention:

1: Why go back and incorporate the PC-V trims into TuneECU, isn't it good enough as is since it's tailored to my engine?
- Yes it's accurate, at YOUR elevation on THAT day. What I learned on my recent trip is that PC-V doesn't do or doesn't do as well, a compensation for Density Altitude. The stock ECU does it very well. So if you want the bike consistent day to day and at both high and low elevation, incorporate it into TuneECU and rebase your TuneECU file.
- Secondly, the ultimate goal is to turn the AT OFF so it's no longer adjusting, but is fueling properly and accurately immediately. This will be smoother to ride than with the AT constantly fiddling with the fueling trying to get it perfect. It never will, which is why I say you need to manually tune even after the AT work. Having done this process with probably 50 different engine/injector etc configurations, I can say the bike always runs better when the AT is turned off and the fueling is all done with no computer tom foolery.

2: What about low RPM, you have it at 0s all the time.
- Tuning the 1250/1500 RPM and lower areas is not likely to be successful using the AT to adjust. I leave it at 0s and manually adjust it in TuneECU not PC-V, that includes idle. The exhaust pulse spacing, strength, and rapid changes in vacuum at those low RPM areas cause all kinds of chaos for the AT.

3: Professionals like Neville and Nels, know this is not the right way to do it, but it is a way to do it and end up quite close to a good tune, I usually only gain 2% or so power when visiting Nels after I've gone through this process, but I gain an unquantifiable smoothness as well. The right way is to measure power output for various mixtures at various RPMs and give the bike what it wants. While I generally shoot for 13-13.5:1 AFRs, that is only a kind of temporary "close enough" calibration. The bike might make more power at 12:1, 12.5:1 or at 14:1, but, I don't have an easy way to test that, nor is it easily repeatable enough to use rate of acceleration, wind being the variable that will screw up trying to use rate of acceleration every time. When you visit a proficient tuner, you're not just paying for the time strapped to a dyno, you're paying for their knowledge and experience in knowing how to extract everything safely from your engine in a controlled manner that will FEEL good, not just targeting an AFR.

4: Ensure your exhaust is fully sealed when doing this, leaks will upset the AT readings and thus the ability to tune horribly.

 

[Claviger]

Final Notes:

In my experience the AT algorithm will ALWAYS end up about .3 AFR leaner than you target e.g. if you set 14 it'll go to 14.3, if you set 13, it'll go to 13.3. This is why my AFR targets in the table above are slightly richer than I actually want.

This method has allowed me to develop tunes for my bike using 3 bar fuel pressure and 550cc injectors, 4 bar and stockers, 4 bar and 550s and 4 bar with 450s.

The 450 bosch injectors are by far the best in comparison to the stockers (which were at over 95% duty cycle using 4 bar) or the 550s (which are custom and balanced Siemens Deka internals with a 4 orifice spray plate). Despite the Bosch 450s only having 1 opening, its a much broader and finer spray pattern than the Dekas and the stockers are just too small.

450s at 4 BAR are actually 531cc flow rate, stockers were about 400cc at 4 BAR, I base that on the scaling of the tables required when switching between them.

 

[Kevin frazier]

Oh he’s definitely in the Because He Can club, nice how to instructions, when I become a member of the 200 hp club this will be real nice info

 

[barbagris]

In my experience the AT algorithm will ALWAYS end up about .3 AFR leaner than you target e.g. if you set 14 it'll go to 14.3, if you set 13, it'll go to 13.3. This is why my AFR targets in the table above are slightly richer than I actually want.

Using TPS I assume - Using MAP I find the blighter runs richer.

And Yes - Altitude is a bugger. So is HEAT.

Just my opinion - but for anybody living where there is MASSIVE variance in temperatures an/or altitude - This is going to get a bit frustrating.

 

[leatal]

Very nice write-up! I have the POD-300 and tried using the data logging feature but being a simpleton got way in over my head. I just let the autotune feature adjust the trim and saved that to the fuel map. I did get an excellent dyno tune from Neville for my configuration (Unifilters, custom intake, Carpenter Sidewinders) which I put into my ECU. I then copied the AFR values from his tune in the ECU into the target AFR in the PC5. His tune was very close as it never needed more than 5% and mostly 0% throughout the throttle/speed ranges (I did average excessive fuel change values at low throttle to above/below values in the chart as I figured it was reversion in the exhaust). I am very satisfied with his tune and the PC5 adjusted fuel. It pulls scary fast in all gears and is smooth as silk. Only thing I could not adjust is the higher gear/speed as it is way too fast for me to achieve! Seems to run from 13.2 to 13.8 from full throttle to just off idle throttle. Does the autotune constantly adjust fuel? I think it just records fuel changes needed to achieve the target fuel in the map. I could be wrong but if I recall correctly on a previous ECU map, I had high 14.5-15.0% readings in the POD-300 until I accepted and sent fuel changes to the map. It then brought the fuel values into the 13s.

 

[Claviger]

In my experience the AT remains active at all times if the box is checked and targets are set in the AFR table.

In a case like yours with a very accurate tune already in the ECU, there's never a need to accept changes, the "Trim" table is still applies, so if the trim values are under the limitation you've placed on the ATs authority you can just leave it alone.

One note on the AT and O2 sensors in general:

Good Dyno operators will have calibrated and usually much more expensive and accurate systems. The consumer grade O2 sensors that we as hobbyists generally use like the AT, the LC2, LC3, PLX, AEM Ugo etc will all be off by some amount, usually that amount gets worse the further you get from 14.7 AFR.

The AT, in my experience is off in the rich direction, where a 13 on the AT will actually be richer like 12 or 12.5, but I don't know if that's true across all ATs.

The modules at a Dyno are typically calibrated more often and are more accurate to start with, they also cost way way more money.

For that reason, and the fact that sometimes engines want to be lean or rich, I do not recommend leaving the AT active (zero the whole targets table) after a good tuner like Neville, Nels, or the guy Steel used have done a tune.

My Daytona for example makes best power at 14.5:1 above 10,000 RPM, but it's not the safest thing for a bike that sees the track, so we agreed to sacrifice 4whp but drop the AFR to 13.8:1.

 

[Claviger]

I'll add a note on ignition timing....

Setting spark timing takes a lot of things into consideration, many of which, can be ballparked, but like a heimholtz resonant intake, needs to be tested at various settings.

Our engines are not particularly prone to knock. Many factors contribute to this, chamber design, quench area, dual spark plug, piston shape etc. Do not try to use info you find that pertains to V8s, they use more timing and need it because their chambers are not as efficient. Likewise, Honda or other 4 valve DOHC motors kind of translate, but very few (and no modern ones I know of) are dual plug, so, again, they need more timing.

Spark timing has a best academic value, unlike fueling which is a range, but in practice spark timing really a range. If you leave fueling alone and adjust spark timing you'll notice the AFRs displayed will change, which is why simply copying one tunes fuel table and using another tunes ignition table will require a retune. Like so many people do with I1, I2 and I3 to remove the factory timing retard.

Timing can ONLY be set right in two ways IMHO, on a Dyno and at a drag strip, so I won't go into how to optimize it.

What you do need to know is, at a given timing value, a certain AFR will provide best power. So, if you can get to a drag strip, you can test this once you've a solid base tune. Do 3 passes and ignore the ET, just look at trap speed, average the value of three consistent runs.

Adjust the fuel 3% richer, do 3 more, average and compare. If nothing changed, add 3% more and repeat. You should see a difference by now. Was it faster or slower trap speed? If slower go back to baseline and do 3 more to ensure you're still consistent. Now lean it out 3% and 3 more passes, see the trap speed changes.

More timing will provide more time for the burn to occur, meaning, it's beneficial for lean tunes/areas like cruising zones. Less timing needs a faster flame to achieve optimal burn, and gasoline burns fastest down in the 11:1 AFR range! These optimal points are known as mean best torque (rich area) and lean best torque (cruising area).

The difference between MBT and LBT is not a huge amount of power, but can be a big difference in heat output on the leg and in mileage.

Think about that in a high compression motor. The extra compression makes the flame travel faster already + dual plug + pentroof design + greater than 100% VE filling = you don't need much timing for best running.

As a rule, you want the least amount of timing that provides you the best torque at a given condition. So if you're at 20 degrees but backing off to 17 doesn't cost you any power, stay at 17, now you've a 3 degree margin of safety for bad gas etc.

 

[Jvheli]

Very well thought out write up Rob. I am very fortunate to have a local tuner. I know that’s rare, so your insight I’m sure will be very helpful to those having to go it alone. Thanks for the effort!

To put into context just how difficult it can be to tune a bike, even with the right tooling (calibrated dyno) it took 4 hours to tune my Carpenter bike! And that’s with a good base tune!