Which dynojet for '04 V11?

[dlaing]

So it seems that if I want to change timing, I need Tuneboy or Direct Link, but if I want to avoid tedious trial and error tuning, I need PCIII USB mapping on a dyno as the first step. Correct? If so, I think there needs to be an improvement to the PCIII USB to enable the timing modification.

 

Here's how I see my program so far (tell me if this makes sense):

1. Buy PCIII USB and get the bike dynojet tuned.

2. Buy Tuneboy (or Direct Link) so I can change timing if I see the need and to tweak the cylinders separately.

3. Convince the dynojet tech to use all this equipment in tandem so one dyno session does it all. This will probably run up the bill, unless he decides to donate some of the extra time in the interest in learning something new.

4. Disconnect the PCIII USB and use Tuneboy (or Direct Link) to download the mapping developed in the dyno session.

5. Put the PCIII USB on the shelf. I'm confident it's a reliable and valuable device, but the less electronic complexity and potential connector problems on my bike the better. (This is how I feel, in spite of, or because of, 30+ years in electronic design and systems engineering).

 

Now, if only any one of these devices could do it all, that would be lovely. This is a pretty expensive proposition.

I prefer the idea of road tuning with a WBO2 data logger and then modifying with Tuneboy, but your suggested method should work fine, too.

1. Many people are happy just doing step 1.

2. the tuneboy or the PCIII can tweak fueling at cylinders, but neither can tweak timing separately at each cylinder (just making sure you know that)

3. Yep could get expensive. If you could find someone who will map directly to the ECU the dyno time will be more expensive, but you can save over $300 by not buying a PCIII. Of course if you use the PCIII once and then sell it, it could save dyno time and the full $300 is not lost.

4. Excellent idea, but check with Tuneboy about using .djm map

5. It is one of the most reliable electronic devices ever built, but still a potential problem, so I concur.

[dlaing]

Bikes sold in California have different specs. It could be thay have cat convertors. dlaing would know.

As far as I know, there are no O2 sensors or Cats on the California V11 spine frames, but I don't know for sure. Todd would know.

[RacerX]

As far as I know, there are no O2 sensors or Cats on the California V11 spine frames, but I don't know for sure. Todd would know.

 

See my last post under Rear Shocks Options. C'est la vie - feel free to reach me direct or on the GuzziTech.com board.

[Skeeve]

Bikes sold in California have different specs. It could be thay have cat convertors. dlaing would know.

 

Well, sorta. Per Dave Richardson [of Guzziology fame], all post '01 [Aprilia era] Guzzis are 50-state bikes. In other words, any '01-'05 V11 originally imported for U.S. sale is CA-legal and identical to other v11 models of that year whether sold in CA or the other 49 states. Which would also explain why the info for "front x-over models" doesn't work for the ones sold in the U.S., since the Euro-spec front x-over models would have been tuned for the new Euro 3 spec while no specs for U.S. bikes were required to be changed until the '06 model year [new EPA specs went into effect for '06 bikes, which is why almost all 600cc+ streetbikes in the U.S. went to FI from carbs the previous year if they weren't already FI, in case you hadn't noticed... ]

 

As Greg Field has posted, no U.S. Guzzi so far has the cats [altho' I had read otherwise in moto rags, but that could just be blind transcription of Italian "press release" copy targeting the EU market & not intended for U.S. consumption. "Journalism" being a loosely-defined word in these modern times.]

 

Ride on!

[dlaing]

See my last post under Rear Shocks Options. C'est la vie - feel free to reach me direct or on the GuzziTech.com board.

I don't know what to say.

I know, SoCal hooligans don't play well with others...

In any case, you will be missed, unless of course you feel less crabby and come back, and then you won't be missed, right?

See you at an upcoming event.

[dlaing]

Well, sorta. Per Dave Richardson [of Guzziology fame], all post '01 [Aprilia era] Guzzis are 50-state bikes. In other words, any '01-'05 V11 originally imported for U.S. sale is CA-legal and identical to other v11 models of that year whether sold in CA or the other 49 states. Which would also explain why the info for "front x-over models" doesn't work for the ones sold in the U.S., since the Euro-spec front x-over models would have been tuned for the new Euro 3 spec while no specs for U.S. bikes were required to be changed until the '06 model year [new EPA specs went into effect for '06 bikes, which is why almost all 600cc+ streetbikes in the U.S. went to FI from carbs the previous year if they weren't already FI, in case you hadn't noticed... ]

 

As Greg Field has posted, no U.S. Guzzi so far has the cats [altho' I had read otherwise in moto rags, but that could just be blind transcription of Italian "press release" copy targeting the EU market & not intended for U.S. consumption. "Journalism" being a loosely-defined word in these modern times.]

 

Ride on!

RIDE ON!

Thanks for the fine post!

[motoguzznix]

Well, sorta. Per Dave Richardson [of Guzziology fame], all post '01 [Aprilia era] Guzzis are 50-state bikes. In other words, any '01-'05 V11 originally imported for U.S. sale is CA-legal and identical to other v11 models of that year whether sold in CA or the other 49 states. Which would also explain why the info for "front x-over models" doesn't work for the ones sold in the U.S., since the Euro-spec front x-over models would have been tuned for the new Euro 3 spec while no specs for U.S. bikes were required to be changed until the '06 model year [new EPA specs went into effect for '06 bikes, which is why almost all 600cc+ streetbikes in the U.S. went to FI from carbs the previous year if they weren't already FI, in case you hadn't noticed... ]

 

As Greg Field has posted, no U.S. Guzzi so far has the cats [altho' I had read otherwise in moto rags, but that could just be blind transcription of Italian "press release" copy targeting the EU market & not intended for U.S. consumption. "Journalism" being a loosely-defined word in these modern times.]

 

Ride on!

Just to make things clearer:

 

The older KR/KS V11s meet the Euro1 figures

The Catalysed V11 meet Euro 2

Only the engines Breva/Griso 1100 with Twinspark meet Euro 3

[Skeeve]

The V11s with the front crossover have exhaust and engine differences from the earlier V11s that would necessitate different mapping/TPS settings regardless of exhaust catalyst: higher compression (9.8 versus 9.5:1) and obviously, more exhaust volume.

 

Au contraire mon frere! Far more expert & clueful folk than myself have stated fairly clearly that there is no difference [as in, no parts# changes] between the later "claimed" 9.8cr vs. the 9.5cr bikes. And that "extra exhaust volume" you mention is static, & a relatively insignificant %age of the overall exhaust system volume. Since the only purpose of the front balance tube is to help deal w/ the 4k rpm powerband dip, wouldn't it merit some changes to the map in just the relevant rpm ranges affected, vs. a change to the TPS setting [which would affect fueling everywhere?] Methinks its all another factory miscommunication...

 

I'm far more trusting of empirical data collected from those Guzzista more technically advanced than myself than I am of factory claims that have been shown over a number of years to be, shall we say, "over enthusiastic" [if not outright BS... <_ who for discussing the flawless implementation of centauro fueling src="%7B___base_url___%7D/uploads/emoticons/default_cheese.gif" alt=":cheese:">

 

Don't get me wrong, I'm not running down Guzzi, I'm just pointing out what is a widely acknowledged fact of life: Moto Guzzi isn't one of the J4, and has been known to release machines & info that's just "not ready for primetime." It's part of the "exotic Italian flair."

[dlaing]

Skeeve, the simple, plain fact remains that THERE IS A DIFFERENCE in TPS settings between the different CR models, as published by Guzzi in several places.

Just for an attempt at clarity, there are two different TPS setting points in the tune up process, one at idle and one with linkage disconnected and throttle butterfly closed to minimum, no set screws or cold start assistant impeding it.

The TPS for all the V11 six speed spines with the Marelli 15m should be set to about 150mV, with linkage disconnected and throttle butterfly closed to minimum, no set screws or cold start assistant impeding it.

The idle TPS readings vary depending on which instructions you read. The idle should be set to the recommended RPM and the TPS should read whatever is recommended for that bike, but the TPS should not be adjusted at idle. The idle should be adjusted to obtain the correct idle TPS reading.

The manuals are not clear about what TPS reading each model should have at idle, so be sure to set the fully closed TPS reading to 150mV and then set the idle and air-bypass screws to whatever works well. Bypass screws should PROBABLY be somewhere between one half and one full turn out. Idle should be about 1150RPM, but documentation on what the idle RPMs should be set to, is inconsistent, and there is no definitive fixed number for the turns out on the bypass screws, although one half turn out is mentioned.

If someone could come up with a list of recommended idle TPS readings per bike, that would be appreciated!

[Skeeve]

And I believe that you are mistaken about the US Guzzis with catalyst: All Breva, Norge, Griso, Cal Vintage models imported have them as well as the requisite lambda sensor.

 

Those are all post-'05, non-V11 models. "World" bikes. Why make special models for the U.S. when the Euro smog regs have finally surpassed our restrictions?

[dlaing]

Excellent point, Dave. Thanks for pointing that out. Do you know offhand the typical difference between those two TPS settings?

In all the manuals that I could find an entry, they say the TPS should be set to 150mV

[Skeeve]

Actually the Breva 750 began in '03 YM.

 

Smallblock. I wasn't thinking about s/b, only the big blocks in my "post '05" comment. My bad.

 

Why did the factory make different versions of the V11s in '03-'04 for the US without cat/lambda when the emissions regulations situation was essentially the same as it is now?

 

Just a guess based upon past company behaviour: because the non-catalysed muffler parts cost less? Because there were already a gaggle of pre-Euro smog rule changes parts sitting around? Because the U.S. is a big or sensitive enough market that running a special production run was deemed worthwhile? Who knows....

 

Euro 3 was implemented in '03. Actually, your home state is fighting the feds in court as we speak to have carbon tailpipe emissions regulated under CARB.

 

Yes, I'm aware that I live in the land of Fruits & Nuts. If there was another state in the Union that enabled me to ride good motorcycle roads year-round & still have great scuba diving within easy driving distance without CA's astoundling stupid attempts at firearms regulation, I'd be there. Florida has potential, except for the poor riding [long flat straight roads infested w/ bluehairs, dinosaurs & bugs]; Oregon would be ideal except for the sketchy job climate. [sigh] Sometimes I just want to chuck it all & found my own country, based upon the sound principles of "an armed society is a polite society" and "pave the planet, my street bike needs more tarmac!" [The Greenies outside the grocery stores trying to get me to sign their latest idiot legislative effort really get snooty when I tell'em that... wonder why? ]

 

Anyway, CARB has outlasted their original charter, & like any other bureaucratic dept. created wishes to propagate their own continued existence [paychecks.] Ergo, the continued insistence on ever more draconian regulations, so that they have a reason to be kept around to enforce them. Vicious cycle. Heck, CARB was behind the "zero emission vehicle" rating for electric cars, despite the fact that they're worse lifetime polluters than a 2-cycle motorbike!

[Ryland3210]

Smallblock. I wasn't thinking about s/b, only the big blocks in my "post '05" comment. My bad.

 

Just a guess based upon past company behaviour: because the non-catalysed muffler parts cost less? Because there were already a gaggle of pre-Euro smog rule changes parts sitting around? Because the U.S. is a big or sensitive enough market that running a special production run was deemed worthwhile? Who knows....

 

Yes, I'm aware that I live in the land of Fruits & Nuts. If there was another state in the Union that enabled me to ride good motorcycle roads year-round & still have great scuba diving within easy driving distance without CA's astoundling stupid attempts at firearms regulation, I'd be there. Florida has potential, except for the poor riding [long flat straight roads infested w/ bluehairs, dinosaurs & bugs]; Oregon would be ideal except for the sketchy job climate. [sigh] Sometimes I just want to chuck it all & found my own country, based upon the sound principles of "an armed society is a polite society" and "pave the planet, my street bike needs more tarmac!" [The Greenies outside the grocery stores trying to get me to sign their latest idiot legislative effort really get snooty when I tell'em that... wonder why? ]

 

Anyway, CARB has outlasted their original charter, & like any other bureaucratic dept. created wishes to propagate their own continued existence [paychecks.] Ergo, the continued insistence on ever more draconian regulations, so that they have a reason to be kept around to enforce them. Vicious cycle. Heck, CARB was behind the "zero emission vehicle" rating for electric cars, despite the fact that they're worse lifetime polluters than a 2-cycle motorbike!

 

I have heard that Guzzi pushed out many '04's in hard times at discount prices.

 

Zero emissions electric vehicles are fine, except where does the electricity come from? Unless we expand the nuclear plant plant capacity, frozen since the junk science "China syndrome" movie, we create more pollution and greenhouse gases burning coal and oil in power plants than we do burning gasoline in the extremely well controlled vehicles of today.

 

You're right on in the bureaucratic leviathan creating problems for them to solve, regardless of merit or benefit to the environment. We can only hope voters someday figure out how they are being manipulated.

[dlaing]

Heck, CARB was behind the "zero emission vehicle" rating for electric cars, despite the fact that they're worse lifetime polluters than a 2-cycle motorbike!

Huh!?! Where do you get this information?

I suppose it depends on how you define lifetime polluter.

Two strokes sure can stink. Following old Vespas down the road is worse than following old British bikes.

But the life time of your average 2 cycle motorbike might only be 10,000 miles, and it weighs a little less than a car, so it is not a fair comparison to a car.

Comparing an electric scooter to a 2 stroke scooter might be more fair.

My dream is to have solar powered electricity charge an electric motorcycle.

Right now, both are too expensive, despite the Government created incentives.

Since they are such expensive technologies, are they really better for the environment?

If the motorcycle costs twice as much as regular one, and solar system costs 50,000 or whatever before tax breaks and rebates, does it mean it is good by creating jobs or does it mean more pollution hidden in the cost of production? Not just the lead of the batteries and the energy costs for the factories, but also the employees that make the products need to consume too and we know consumers pollute.

Ideally I would love to see a tyrannical requirement for solar panels on the roof tops of every new house built in SoCal, but I would like to see the numbers crunched to prove that it really is significantly greener.

The right and left wings probably have different sets of numbers.

Imagine the toxic emissions of the solar panels burning during the recent so cal fires. Would that be greener? Or are they made of metal and heat resistant glass, and are more fire resistant than the composite shingles????

[Ryland3210]

Food for thought, then I think we should move this discussion over to Banter, or Jaap can please do it for us. I'm reluctant to stay off the thread topic.

 

A 5 megawatt solar panel system is being installed in a landfill in New Jersey.

It will supply power to the aluminum extrusion plant next door.

This is important because the government rules say you cannot be a net supplier of power to the grid. This, of course, is a case of government, which is supposed to be representing the interests of its people, protecting a regulated power utility from competition to that extent. The landfill will have not problem with this because of the huge power needs of the aluminum extrusion plant.

I'm told it is the largest installation east of the Mississippi.

The landfill manager also considered installing a system on his house, but even with 80% NJ goverment subsidizing the cost, he calculates a 7 year payback. It isn't worth it to him.

Here's the punchline: The solar panels for this massively government subsidized installation are being imported either from Mexico or Germany. They would like to purchase the German ones because they are more costly but more efficient. However, there is such high demand created by government subsidies, there is a 18-24 month long waiting list to get them.

It's absurd to subsidize solar power while protecting the utilities from it on the other.

This boondoggle is an economic ripoff to NJ taxpayers, the U.S. doesn't even get the job creation to make the panels, and piles on more damage to our trade imbalance.