ECU

[Guest davidb]

Just one point on physically moving the timing.

 

The trigger is the *missing teeth* on the 'Phonic Wheel' as Guzzi so charmingly call it. This is behind the cam sprocket and the pick-up is mounted in the wall of the timing chest. To change it's position you would either have to make slots and some sort of clamp to enable you to move the pick-up in relation to the sprocket and my guess would be that sealing such a mechanism would be a right frontbottom.

 

The other alternatives would be to slot the 'Phonic Wheel so that it could be moved in relation to the locator peg, this would be probably the easiest but changing it's position would require removal of the timing chest each time you did it, this idea also has whiskers on it!

 

I believe you can change the timing a tiny bit by varying the gap betwixt wheel and pick-up but probably not by a meaningfull amount.

 

For these reasons I think it has been widely assumed that probably the best way of doing it is by programming timing changes into the ECU.

 

Now. NONE of this is my province. Other people may like traffic lights! I like Carbs, I even have a sort of medieval attatchment to point   I make no claim to being able to offer any scintilating insights into this debate but I have to agree that it'd decended into fatuous, masturbatory, tripe. S'probably why Cliff seems to have given up on it. I find the sort of agressive, hectoring and derisory tone of a lot of the contributions tedious beyond belief. If people want to come here and offer help and advice? I'm all for it. If the aim seems to be to belittle other peoples efforts, (For why? To corner the market in tuning FI Guzzis? Well, I wish them a happy retirement to the Bahamas on the strength of that ) and generally big note themselves while putting down other peoples work??? I also find people who post serious tech stuff annonymously tedious, don't you have confidence in your own abilities???

 

Ahhh, bugger it. I'll shut up, s'not worth getting all hot under the collar about.

 

Pete (Who reckons it's about time to hop on the mighty Convert and adjourn to the pub where he'll inject a couple fof Carlton Draught's into his system )

41959[/snapback]

I have been trying to get the instrument tech to make a pot to go between the timing pickup and the ECU to delau/ advance the signal for the timing.

[Guest Jeff in Ohio]

I have been trying to get the instrument tech to make a pot to go between the timing pickup and the ECU to delau/ advance the signal for the timing.

41985[/snapback]

 

 

problem is, the same target wheel is used for RPM also. Compressing or expanding the waveform would be easy for sure, but it would effect the actual RPM reading. Shifting the waveform (you could only really delay the waveform, and thus retard the timing) to try and shift the timing would also shift the time the RPM is taken also - that is, the RPM the ECU is reading would actually lag the actual engine RPM by some amount. Already talked to our guys in the sensor lab here as we actually helped develop small sized sensors like that. We use them for wheel speed pickup in ABS systems and........

 

whoops, I take that back, you could advance the 'missing tooth' but it would be more complicated to do so, as the device would have to keep track of the pulses that have passed and decide when to send a 'blank' one.....

[callison]

I have been trying to get the instrument tech to make a pot to go between the timing pickup and the ECU to delau/ advance the signal for the timing.

41985[/snapback]

 

I rather suspect that a potentiometer will only reduce the amplitude to the point where the unit won't trigger. I would opt for an optical trigger from an interrupter disk bolted to the front of the alternator. Far more flexible approach. Someone is making one know for the older Guzzis, but I can't remember where I saw it.

[dlaing]

So, here's my choices:

 

  for the cheap guy:

            1. PCIII tuned at good ol local cheap tuning link center

            2. new technoresearch adjustment program - why junk the stock ECU yet? Plus they are a REAL company that know there stuff.

            3. Cliffs if you MUST have absolute perfection with adjustability at your finger tips and wanna junk your stock setup

            4. tuneboy - sorry, you loose do to lack of locations that will work with it.  Plus, the jury is still out.  Tuneboy - party of ONE or a legitimate full scale company?

 

  For the guy that likes to spend and tinker and DEMANDS perfection

            1. Cliffs.  You can have your cake and eat it too - in your own garage!

            2. technR tool and lots of dyno time

            3. PCIII tuned by moto  - you can still change it later!

            4. tuneboy and lots of dyno time - sorry, still not sold on this above the technoR tool since we don't know if they are a REAL company, or just one really damn smart enthusiast.

41984[/snapback]

Reasonable.

Here are my choices:

 

For the cheap rider:

1. PCIII serial off of eBay. but don't pay more than US$150

2. PCIII USB, people say you can get them for $259...I have seen them for $299, don't pay full price.

3. wait till an open source software tool for the Marelli 15M comes out....and wait ...and wait

 

For those with a little more money and like to tinker:

1. TuneBoy for $300+ dollars you have a great tool to tinker with.

You can use one of the freely downloadable PCIII maps to start you off with your ass dyno.

2.Cliff's ECU, awesome product, but a little intimidating, but I will wait till someone else is the guinea pig. current price in US dollars $543.optionally+WBO2 Much of this discussion has revolved around the effectiveness of the WBO2. You can make your own mind up, but I would be sure to read Moto's and Cliff's posts. They really hammered through some stuff.

3. PCIII Great price and the buttons are a hoot to tinker with! But not diagnostics.

4. DirectLink for $450, a litlle over priced. I still have not heard back from them regarding pricing options....perhaps they sent me something by snail mail and not email.

 

For those with enough money for dyno time, I think you pretty much get what you pay for:

1. PCIII plus tuning link. Dyno rates vary alot. Be sure to tell the dyno operator that it should be cheaper than the 10,000 RPM bikes, because there are less mapping positions. This is number one on my list because I am CHEAP! and I already own a PCIII. But I have not decided if I am going back to the tuning link. Better, more expensive, options are below.

2. Tuneboy. The programmer has gone out of his way to make this dyno friendly. The price is excellent, but you may have to pay more for dyno time to get the same results as a tuning link, and to get better results you will have to pay even more. The result may be worth the extra money. The choice is yours. Moto has convinced me that if my financial situation improves, I will be looking for a dyno tuner with a four gas analyzer.

3. Cliff's ECU the tuning does not have to be a perfect as for the the TuneBoy if you go with the WBO2 option

4. FIM this product confuses me. The diagnostic and mapping software is very expensive, so the non shop will probably not buy it. But if Doug Lofgren is gonna map your bike, this may be the way to go.

 

Note that you can always use a PCIII on a tuning link to get a map and then transcribe it natively using TuneBoy, My15M, FIM, or DirectLink. The PCIII could be borrowed or re-sold. Heck, buy it for $259 and resell it for the same price to some sucker who thinks MSRP is the only retail option.

 

Something you will have to weigh for yourselves, like the value of any product and service.

[moto]

I'm convinced that currently TuningLink will work better for a given throttle position/rpm step than a closed loop ECU using a WBO2 sensor. The WBO2 articles I referenced earlier (http://www.megasquirt2.com/PWC/LSU4.htm, http://www.techedge.com.au/vehicle/wbo2/wblambda.htm & http://www.bgsoflex.com/pwb/0.95/PWBV0.95_QandA.pdf) indicate that with the current controller technology, the sensor works much better at steady state than it does installed on a vehicle and attempting to respond in real time. I would encourage people to read the articles, but the two main points seem to be that abrupt changes probe temperature (on off throttle transitions for instance) and minute changes in voltage/voltage offset (turning lights/accessories on off, changes in charging voltage due to rpm) cause innacurate sensor outputs. According to one of the articles, this is being adressed with a much more sophisticated controller technology. I was not able to derive whether or not this technology is currently available and if so how much it costs, but it could make full closed loop much more feasible. Maybe Cliff could look into this (if he is not already doing so)? One of the other drawbacks that was cited was that the WBO2 sensor needs to "know" how much backpressure is present because of extreme sesitivity to pressure in general. This definitely makes sense when one considers how the thing works. I'm not sure if controller technology adresses this, but if not, it can be remedied by developing individual sensor output targets per rpm/throttle postion/cylinder for a given motorcycle with its particular combination of parts. Of the three drawbacks mentioned (besides O2 content not relating directly to mixture strength, which, admittedly, has bean beaten to death), the TuningLink only suffers from one of them. This brings me to my next question. I'm wondering if it is not possible to get results that are as good or better than without it at a comparable or better price point. So far what hampers direct comparison is that I have not found anyone who has had tuning work done via TuningLink who was willing/able to tell me what throttle positions they had tuned at what rpm increment. The only thing anyone seems to discuss is price. Can anyone here fill in the blanks?

[Guest Jeff in Ohio]

So far what hampers direct comparison is that I have not found anyone who has had tuning work done via TuningLink who was willing/able to tell me what throttle positions they had tuned at what rpm increment. The only thing anyone seems to discuss is price. Can anyone here fill in the blanks?

42020[/snapback]

 

 

It is my understanding, that the tuning link software does every throttle position in the table at either 500 rpm or 250 rpm increments depending on the model of PCIII you have. This works in a realtime environment, The operator holds the throttle at the prescribed position and then the eddy current brake starts to let loose and lets the motor rev thru the rpm ranges as the software takes data for each cell. They wont exactly tell you how it works - some say the dyno just takes data and then calculates what the adjustment is made so the map can be uploaded later. It makes more sense to me that the computer would use a simple PID loop (controls engineering speak) to quickly hone in on the correct fuel adjustment to achieve the desired output at the O2 sensor at each RPM step as the eddy current brake releases to let the engine rev. I have been told that if the shops computer is slow, one can definatly hear is pause at each RPM position as it sweeps up thru. That leads me to beleive it is making a realtime adjustment using some type of afformentioned PID loop. Can't say for sure, the shop that did my bike did it over about a 3 hour period in the morning when I was not there.

 

Clarkie on the Aprilia board does indicate the tuning link operates in a 'realtime' environment which goes against what some people say about it just taking data and then making adustments later for upload to the unit. That frankly is PCIII's claim to fame - adjustments are made realtime where with programs such as tuneboy, FIM, etc, data is taken, adjustments are made, map is uploaded, more data taken, more adjusmtents, more uploading etc. You cannot directly work with the map in the ECU in realtime mode while the bike is running. It must be flashed everytime an adjustment is made. Alledgedly, the tuninglink software is making all the adjustments and measuring while the bike is running. So they say, once again, I was not there - I was at work while they did mine.

 

 

Also, the operator can tune in 'static' mode where they pic an RPM and throttle position and then let the eddy current brake hold it there and let the program fine tune the cell instead of doing the whole dynamic roll up thru the range thing. MOST places will not save the monitored data for each throttle position. They give you the last full roll on pass because us silly Americans want to see that final HP figure. Plus, they don;t like keeping all them files ont he computer!! If asked, I'm sure the shop could save the run data for each throttle position. I know that Racer X likes to keep that sorta data on his bike. The shop that did mine only saves the final full throttle roll on curves.

 

Anyway, when one of my buds get his new Duc, I am going to try and get it tuning linked at a friends HD shop. If so, I'll be standing right next to it while it is done, then we will no for sure what really happens. Anybody out there been there at the time of tuning link operation???

 

Recently, dynojet has added some new features to their controls to let operators simulate riding - that is, going up hills etc. What this means is that a mechanic can take a 'test ride' on the dyno when there is 3 feet of snow on the ground to help sort out problems with a bike. Previously the operator could only monkey around with the eddy current brake when in tuning link mode.......

 

oh yes, by every throttle position, I mean 0%, 2%, 5%, 10%, 20%, 40%, 60%, 80%, 100% (based on total voltage span). It should be noted here also that the TPS in a GUZZI is NOT a straight line. That is, the voltage out per degrees of twist is not a constant slope straight line. It is actually 2 lines of different slopes (see pic). This arises from the fact that the teh 1.5M is an 8bit system, so it has 256 steps spread out over the 0-5 volt signal for the TPS. Since the slope is steeper below 32 degrees of opening, effectively, more of these 256 steps are crammed in below there (each step is about 19mv) - that is the ECU will see a difference in a slight change of throttle below 32 degrees better than it will above 32 degrees. Why? most of your crusing and part throttle stuff is below 32 - thats where you want the bike to be smoothhhhhhh. Anything above 30 degrees, you are basically accelerating and not cruising. Don't ask how I got the drawing I ahve the one for the PF4C TPS also......

[callison]

I'm convinced that currently TuningLink will work better for a given throttle position/rpm step than a closed loop ECU using a WBO2 sensor.

 

I'm getting the sense that perhaps the most viable combination is a fully optimized map with an O2 sensor that can only affect a small percentage of change to the map in accordance with longer term variables such as gas octane, humidity or altitude etc. I think Cliff initially had his O2 sensing to use a max of 10% change but that would probably be too much for a known optimized map.

 

So far what hampers direct comparison is that I have not found anyone who has had tuning work done via TuningLink who was willing/able to tell me what throttle positions they had tuned at what rpm increment. The only thing anyone seems to discuss is price. Can anyone here fill in the blanks?

42020[/snapback]

 

That's not too surprising. Not many of us have the funds/time to accomodate a number of tuning schemes for comparison. I do have a Sport 1100i and a V11 Sport, both with stock and Cliff computers. Neither bike is fully functional at the moment and neither of the Cliff computers have the necessary software updates, or I'd offer to let you experiment with one of those bikes for comparison purposes.

 

At least I'm almost local to you - 90 miles. I had the V11 Sport running with either computer just 4 days ago, but last night it left a fairly large puddle of transmission oil on the floor so I'm contemplating the disassembly of it again. If you didn't mind oil all over the place during a dyno run...

 

The Sport 1100i currently has Mike Rich Stage 2 heads with dual plugging (ignition coils not installed though) which would certainly foul the evaluation although I have a set of stock heads as well (condition supposedly good but unknown).

 

Neither bike is currently fitted for O2 sensors.

 

Oddly enough, the existence of the two bikes with Cliff computers makes for an interesting possibility of comparison. Cliff very likely uses the same program in both computers for either model of bike - only the maps should differ. I'm not certain you could say the same for the WM1.6 (Sport 1100i) vs the WM1.5 (V11 Sport) because they sure don't act the same. The WM1.5 is actually a pretty sweet little ECU, the WM1.6 is decidedly working for the dark side of the force.

[moto]

Of the three drawbacks mentioned (besides O2 content not relating directly to mixture strength, which, admittedly, has bean beaten to death), the TuningLink only suffers from one of them.

42020[/snapback]

In thinking about this further, the TuningLink probably doesn't have any of the problems mentioned in the articles, as it doesn't use a sensor that screws into the exhaust system.

[dlaing]

In thinking about this further, the TuningLink probably doesn't have any of the problem mentioned in the articles, as it doesn't use a sensor that screws into the exhaust system.

42034[/snapback]

Why would that be a problem?

I was under the impression that the best readings occurred when you threaded the sensor into the header pipe rather than probing the rear exhaust exit.

Am I mistaken?

Sounds like we really have to Tuning Link tune a bike and take it to MotoLab to compare.

[moto]

Why would that be a problem?

I was under the impression that the best readings occurred when you threaded the sensor into the header pipe rather than probing the rear exhaust exit.

Am I mistaken?

Well according to the articles, some of the issues that cause problems with a WBO2 sensors are abrupt changes probe temperature (on off throttle transitions for instance), minute changes in voltage/voltage offset (turning lights/accessories on and off, changes in charging voltage due to rpm), and changes in backpressure. With Tuning Link changes in voltage are likely eliminated by the presence of a regulated power supply, changes in pressure are likely eliminated by a pump, and abrupt temperature fluctuations are likely eliminated by the fact that the sample will have given up some of its heat by the time it reaches the sensor. The drawbacks of a probe on the other hand are slow/fluctuating response time and, if you can't get the probe in far enough, sample contamination. The former is not a big problem in steady state testing. Although this has nothing to do with a screw in sensor vs. a probe per se, sensor output/logging device (or ECU) input impedance mismatches must also be compensated for. I would ass-u-me that DynoJet has adressed this, whereas with closed loop ECUs this is an unknown, especially if the sensor controller does not come from the same source as the ECU and/or the people manufacturing the ECU are unaware of this issue. (I'm not trying to imply anything, Cliff!)

Sounds like we really have to Tuning Link tune a bike and take it to MotoLab to compare.

That would be great! But I'll bet other Factory Pro EC997a equipped facilities with the appropriately skilled personnel would be willing to assist as well.

[dlaing]

So here is my tuning link generated map

 

0 2 5 10 20 40 60 80 100

500 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0

1000 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0

1500 0 26 23 14 27 11 17 20 20

2000 0 0 17 0 5 -3 -2 -12 2

2500 0 0 15 17 -2 2 9 3 17

3000 0 0 0 20 1 17 15 21 29

3500 0 0 0 11 5 3 15 11 15

4000 0 0 0 17 7 1 14 22 24

4500 0 0 0 18 13 4 9 15 4

5000 0 0 0 18 20 4 -3 -6 -1

5500 0 0 0 0 24 1 -6 -7 -4

6000 0 0 0 0 0 1 -8 -6 -7

7000 0 0 0 0 0 -2 -2 -13 -10

8000 0 0 0 0 0 0 -3 -14 -17

 

to see the dyno graph again, go here

From all the zeros I would assume they are not mapping everywhere, nor do I think they have to.

Todd Eagan adds numbers to some of the spots that the dyno does not map to help with low throttle transitions or something like that.

One thing I don't like is that they are lugging it with 100% throttle at only 1500RPM.

I am not sure if it hurts anything, but it is not how I would drive my bike.

It is also interesting that you can have a 17 adjacent to a -2 or a -6 next to a 15.

I wish I could remember if they run an RPM range at a time or a throttle position at a time.

I remember they took many pauses like they were waiting for the temperature to settle.

Also, it is clear now that the area that was pinging, 5000-6000rpms and 80% throttle they had actually leaned it out. I did re-enrich it there in my own maps to combat the pinging, but never completely got rid of it.

Aside from the pinging, which existed before the mapping the bike ran much better.

But may have consumed about 1or 2 mpg more.

If anyone wants to copy the map, it is for 2000 US model V11S with QuatD muffler, FBF/BMC airbox kit, valves set to 0.15/0.20mm and the TPS may be a little low

EDIT

here are the WOT Map numbers in blue on the A:F graph

I just don't get how the numbers jive with the curve. Especially at 5000 and 5500 rpm(where I was getting pinging). could the dyno tuner have made a mistake on my final map?

29 rich number reverse effect, 15 ok, 24 fine, 4 not sure, -1 reverse effect, -4 delayed?, -7 ok, -10 ok, -17 ok.

[dlaing]

I apologize if this has been covered to death, but I can't find anything on the search engine.

39364[/snapback]

I just went back to look at the post that started this whole thread.

Brian must be a psychic or something, as if it was not covered to death before the post, it sure has been covered now!

But the best part is we have only seen the tip of this iceberg.

[callison]

we have only seen the tip of this iceberg.

42129[/snapback]

 

Titanic

[callison]

Here's a reasonably priced O2 sensor and interface. A bit less than the price I paid for a kit and includes the sensor. My kit didn't. Presumably this works as well. Can't say the same for my kit - haven't finished it yet.

 

Daytona TwinTec

 

They have a bit more information along the lines of this rather extensive thread. WEGO II Wide-band Exhaust Gas Oxygen Sensor System. Interesting to see that gas with ethanol causes slight errors. How much and what direction is not specified.

[dlaing]

Brings a whole 'nother meaning to getting jiggy with it.

The meter really sikes(edit should be spikes) on the throttle transitions, but I guess you could learn to read the steady states and average out the ups and downs. (sorry there is probably some proper jargon for that)

The price is reasonable! Thanks Carl!

So where do we get a thread adapter so we don't have to weld on the 18 x 1.5 mm sensor adapter?

I am pretty sure Cliff said the Bosch sensor did not fit our fittings, but my brain is foggy from cough syrup

Come to think of it, maybe those lines are easy to read but not at the moment