luhbo

Just for getting a better understanding: in this case the last sentence could be: "...is the logical place where the fuel is completely injected" ? Not to correct you, I just ask for better understanding, foreign language and so And for the protocol: is it possible to enter values above 720 deg? Hubert

That's what I'd call conservative This map won't ping even with lighter fuel. The idea of varying the injection advance, which Ivan brought up, is a nice one. I actually see a very stable consumption of 5.4 l/100 km, and regardless what spark advance or lambda targets I dial in - somehow the front wheel stays solidly grounded So playing around with injection advance will definitely be the number one topic next spring. Hubert

Dainese Leathers to be dressed, textil jacket above that to stay warm and dry, Daytona boots of course, and Pirelli Diablo Strada to keep up on this niveau. Not much room for discussions, unfortunately. Hubert

One should know the name of who had done this design! If anything is an all-time classic then it's this orange striping. Tenni - Tonti - This_Guy - Marabese (V11 Sport) Does anybody know something about him? Hubert

I'd suggest to bleed the switch. Loosen the switch and rev the engine with the starter (fuel pump fuse pulled) until oil comes out. Then quickly retighten it. Maybe this helps. Hubert

I think it should not say 32 degrees. The resistance of the functional layer should go up if its thickness goes down, so the TPS should show lower opening angles in the same position. Also I'd expect a slower, a degrading process, not a thing like "it pulled like a champ and suddenly the TPS went nuts". But hey, just hook up a volt meter, an analog one preferably, and check it. Measure voltage, not resistance, important! Hubert

Hi back, what you're writing looks rather strange I'd say. You better get a voltage meter and check the TPS yourself. There's a very long thread under "How to" which deals with how to adjust the TPS properly. A reading of 36° sounds not very reasonable. I think a worn out TPS behaves differently. In case you want to check a different one you should either ask yor dealer whether he could lend you one or instead you buy nearly the same TPS from Buell/HD. The charateristics are only slightly different, but between the prices lays a gap as broad as from here to Singapore. Have you checked all concerned cables, its connectors and the temperature sensors as I had suggested? Hubert

That's some brave head design: a 4 valve minus 2 or so. To go this way obviously needed some audacious decisions. And to show it this frankly lays on the same line. Hubert

I'm afraid that when things are like that, means not stock, then you're down to "could be this and could be that". Good luck. Hubert

Can be everything. It makes not really sense to give you tips like could be this or that and look here or there. First go through the connectors. Correctly paired? Corrosion free? Any cables damaged/clamped? Sensor cables especially? Second go through the sensors. They have a definite resistance, varying with temperature. Check them. It's NOT the fuel pump, if this was your only question. The pressure is regulated by the pressure regulator. At least one easy thing. Details to this regulator can be found in the different manuals. You have them? Probably, as you've rebuild the whole engine already. HTH, Hubert

That's annoying then, in fact. On the other hand I've experienced no advantage of running the ECU in continuous autotune mode. I'm comuting with the V11, 70km one way, and in the morning I often start at around 10°C, while in the evening it has 20, 25, even 30°C. Same with the barometric pressure. To find correction curves for such relatively extrem differences is a bigger task, and as long as I haven't found suitable ones it makes no sense to alter the map every second fart or so. The more as I found the autotuning to slow down the ecu (despite that most of this action is done by the Optimiser). BTW, I think it's quite commonly agreed that the OEM ecus mostly suffer from unsuitable correction tables/maps, just to point out that this is not a trivial point. I'd spend my time with this point, not so much with the map itself. Hubert PS: the number of write cycles for such a CPU is limited by the way.

Does Autotune really override switch 3? I'm asking, because since some time I don't have any tach mounted. So I'm not aware of this. Hubert

If I had this opportunity I'd do the same. A brake dyno is the best way, of course, the more as a lambda probe will never tell what spark advance is best for your wishes. Nevertheless, I never could imagine how different maps shall give different power output or really different behaviour. There are probably not that much optimal solutions for a given setup, if not only one. I think such talk is mostly only a marketing trick and tests in the press usually report the same. Hubert

Right, but what mechanism should tell the programm that the cell is indeed correctly set? Remember, each cell is more or less influenced by the surrounding cells. An isolated cell is difficult to adjust. Hubert

I call transit cells those that are quickly passed while the engine moves trough the map. The natural opposite are those where the engine sits while cruising. I wouldn't even waste my time with optimising those transit cells (for instance the lowest row. It's just nuts to optimise them to a certain O2 value (in my eyes, but to each after his gusto...) I don't know whether such an "Optimise A Cell Only Once" option would be worth the time to code it. In case you follow the recommended noodle pastry method it will be of no use, if you don't and instead jump around in the map while flattening it out it would be rather counterproductive. The better idea was what you mentioned before: lock the cells of which you know they're ok (setting the target to zero) in order to not carry along any correction factors. Hubert

I totally overread this posting. What is the newer TPS the red line shows - is it on a Guzzi? What type of TPS is used with the P8 ecus? Thanks Hubert

That's a good practice, Ivan. I did a lot of work on my maps with excel. You find some points onroad, using the Optimiser, and then adjust the rest with excel. Why not. Spikes or holes have nothing to do in a good map (I've read the argument about harmonics or other things - I just don't need them in my map). Ofcourse it's not a linear slope from idle to WOT, it goes up and down, but no spikes and no holes please. I think you're on a good way, Ivan. Stick to it. And start optimising on the lean side. Running the engine lean (reasonable) is not a dangerous thing and smoothing the map out is much easier this way. What Cliff told me was: start at a comfortable cell, maybe around 4000, below half throttle or so (120 km/h) and then correct the cells around this starting point (rolling it out like a pizza pasta ) With the use of different gears, front and rear brake or, the best "tool", long straight mountain roads of different incline you'll find a very solid map in at least one hour or so. Next step is excel for a counter check. Then put the Lambda target for all or at least most of the "transit" cells to Zero (open loop). This will make life much easier for the ecu and this way it does greatly improve the response behaviour of the whole thing (no diverted correction factors). I, for myself, know that lean cells are responsive, the rich ones are just lazy and do the plugs no good. Your target should be a consumption very well below 6l /100km, btw If I stick to our speed limits of 100km/h and below I'm coming well under 5l/100km every time. Nevertheless I prefer 5.4 Hubert

It's a DIY aluminium fairing. Don't know what clamps he uses, but overall it's very fine craftmanship! Hubert

Grebenhain 2007 Hubert

What do you have in mind? Controling and logging while you have the bike standing in the garage or logging and controling while driving. Sounds a bit like "have a drink, have a ride...(Mungo Jerry, btw.)" ^^ It should be mentioned that you've to load as well the matching map to your logfile. Otherwise you'll get nothing. Maybe that's why Control says 'intuitively' "open file" again. Load dump - load map - save log, if I remember right. You've tried that before? (edit: it's 'load map - load dump - save parse file'. The "open file" is the same as "press start to shut down Windows" ) Generally I wouldn't overstress the Log thing. If all else has failed - ok, but keep in mind: one unexpected bump and you've lost everything to a nice and squeeky headcrash Hubert

No no, Emry, stay relaxed. You cannot come close to my skin, not to say under my skin. My stuff is working, since 2004. Interesting times nevertheless. Hubert

Ok, the changes look impressive. But do you really need them? I say most of the changes you've done to the bottom line for instance or those done to the 1100 column are just useless. What makes you think you need that much fuel when you have the throttle closed? Or do cells 7 or 8 in the 1100 column really have to do with driveability or starting problems? To keep it fair: I think those are the maps you've received from other guys, aren't they? A map sent to whoever here from Cliff is probably as good as every other map spread by me or other people. What makes you think that on my bike the basics are set up the same way as on your's? How can you know the one coming from let's say Caymans comes closer or is more suitable? Before you make any changes to the map or even have the idea of mixing parts of different maps (sort of a MyEcu Euro Cocktail) make one thing very sure: you really understand each part of this MyEcu map and how they interact and also you have your bike properly set up and properly running with the stock ECU. Some have wildly changed maps and like to complain that things aren't working as they expected. No problem so far, but how come they have so much questions about how the map works? This makes no sense, right? If a bike pops, feels really lean or has no stable idle with the standard ECU then one shouldn't expect the MyEcu to cure these problems, the more if a standard map coming from a better running bike should to the trick. This can't work. Hubert

The originals are close to optimal and if you compare their noise emission to that of Mistrals they are really astonishing. At midrange revs they're even better in my eyes. The only problem with them: heavy, ugly, and without any discussion just too silent. (BTW, Lafranconi delivers to BMW - that speaks for itself. They're doing a very good job). To keep the posting topic related: on my bike the Optimiser shows clearly that without the rubber intake nozzles in front of the airbox/filterhousing remarkable less fuel is needed to achieve the same AFR. I'm curious what results your experiments with single pod filters will bring. I bet the results will be worse than those with standard air box. Hubert

Ah, yes I remember this thread, as you can probably guess. I even posted in it So again it looks as if there is no information available for the older Veglias. Pity... Hubert

Why not. It's winter anyway. They said tomorrow we'll see the first snow. Besides that the MyEcu maps now are already very well commented. cu, Hubert