Tunedit - Tuneboy

[luhbo]

So what's the better deal here, Tune Boy or PCIII? Or what are the advantages and disadvantages on each.?

Well for my Sporti is available a "tunned to fit" PCIII but what about Tune boy>?

Any helpfull infos?

Thanks

67755[/snapback]

 

 

Tuneboy and TuneEdit is a well approved and higly recommended software for Aprilia, Triumph and also Benelli ecus. You find all the features of it in detail on http://www.Tuneboy.com.au

 

Tuneboy is now available also for weber/marelli ecus, especially the WM15, albeit still in a beta version.

 

As described there you can read and use PCIII maps with TuneEdit. Additionally you can edit the spark advance and all the other maps the WM hosts.

 

TuneEdit is pure software, no additional hardware, no additional plugs or connectors, no lost space, usability of all official Guzzi/Weber updates.

 

Cannot say wether this or this is better or not. Probably a PC is a product that once the world was waiting for, talking about times when changes to the mapping could only be done via changing an eprom. Only very few people could afford to buy and use a prommer and the right software for it.

 

But times have changed, technology develops. Nowadays ECUs are reflashable, it means you can upload the map into your computer, analyze and change it, and then you download it again into the ECU.

 

These are the features that at least I was looking for.

 

 

Hubert

[luhbo]

I just hate the whole power commander concept. As I understand it, and feel free to put me right if I am mistaken, all the PC contains is a delay on timer and a delay off timer. To lean the mixture, the PC delays the pulse from the ECU getting to the injector (delay on). To richen the mixture it delays the off edge from the ecu getting to the injector (delay off).

 

This is all very well, but for the raw ECU pulses, the "on" transitions are all aligned, i.e. if you drew the pulses on each line of a piece of paper, the start of the pulses would all be aligned with the left margin. Put a PC in there and the pulse timings are moved about by the trim delays.

 

Also, what about the propagation delay of the PC, which can only react to events from the ECU. It can't be that insignificant.

 

Furthermore, you are putting in another point of failure.

 

I would dearly love to know how the PC ignition module is supposed to work. Given that it only REACTS to the ECU signal, it only has the prospect of retarding the ignition by delaying the pulse. Ignition is an edge triggered timing phenomenon so if the pulse is late from the ECU, how the F**K can the PC module correct it if it needs advancing??? Unless those good people at Dynojet fit your PC ignition module with a flux capacitor, enabling the pulse to travel back in time to before the moment the ECU issued it.

 

Just remember that the defenders of the PC III are usually those guys who sell them and pay their mortgages by them. Oh, and people who bought them with the sweat of their brow. Psychologists call that the "post purchase response" people say the shit's good because they don't want to admit they were sold a gimmick.

67757[/snapback]

 

I once thought the same way, but it can be done in a much easier way also. What if they one cycle watch what the ecu does and then one cycle later perform their own program? They let the ecu run, spy it, assign the output to nil and instead send their own signals. It works quite well I think.

 

What I don't like is its obvious oldfashioned concept. It lacks completely any bit of 'hack'. Like some engineers act: if the fender breaks, make it heavier! That's not everybody's style.

 

There is only one way of "tuning" that is even more funny: some of our greatest german heros/experts like e.g. Dynotech, they first open the sealed housing, unsolder the eeprom, install a cheap socket, put in another eeprom and finally try to get the housing tight again. Believe it or not!

 

Hubert

[Guest Nogbad]

I once thought the same way, but it can be done in a much easier way also. What if they one cycle watch what the ecu does and then one cycle later perform their own program? They let the ecu run, spy it, assign the output to nil and instead send their own signals. It works quite well I think.

 

Hubert

67760[/snapback]

 

That's introducing a propagation delay equivalent to one revolution of the crankshaft! Perhaps the method might be made to work at steady speed, but under rapid acceleration it would completely screw the ignition timing. A bit like having an elastic timing belt.

 

When accelerating the ignition would be retarded because the crank would come round faster than the module expected from its last intelligence information and on deceleration it would ping and knock like f*ck because of the opposite problem. After all, the PC would be getting a derivative of crank position only once per rev from the ECU spark signals.

 

The only way to make it work would be to deliberately remap the ecu advanced so that the PC module could then retard it back to where it should be by delaying the pulse edges. If you are going to remap the ecu anyway, you might as well do it properly and bin the PC (mixture and ignition).

 

The PC is a bodge pure and simple.

[luhbo]

That's introducing a propagation delay equivalent to one revolution of the crankshaft! Perhaps the method might be made to work at steady speed, but under rapid acceleration it would completely screw the ignition timing. A bit like having an elastic timing belt.

 

When accelerating the ignition would be retarded because the crank would come round faster than the module expected from its last intelligence information and on deceleration it would ping and knock like f*ck because of the opposite problem. After all, the PC would be getting a derivative of crank position only once per rev from the ECU spark signals.

 

The only way to make it work would be to deliberately remap the ecu advanced so that the PC module could then retard it back to where it should be by delaying the pulse edges. If you are going to remap the ecu anyway, you might as well do it properly and bin the PC (mixture and ignition).

 

The PC is a bodge pure and simple.

67767[/snapback]

 

Well, developing a spark timing enhancement seems to be a pain in a##e, maybe that's one reason.

What's a bodge? A cheating device? If so, then I have heard that probably once it was one, but the ECU OEM's shall have done something against cheaters so the concept was changed. I think it was posted somewhere on the earlier pages of the ECU-thread.

If they have done something against cheaters, maybe it's just the use of eeproms. Don't get me wrong, shall read make cheating unnecessary!

 

Hubert

 

Ah, sorry, forgot something: if anyone's going to bin his WM15-PC, I could need one! Indeed the connectors and plugs can be used to build up new ECUs

[Guest Nogbad]

What's a bodge?

Hubert

67770[/snapback]

 

Sorry! Colloquial English!

 

A bodge is not the same as cheating. It means doing the job in a way that isn't the proper way.

 

Examples of bodges:

 

Using a nail instead of a split pin

Using a nail instead of a fuse

Stitching up your broken fairing using cable ties or garden wire

Putting a bit of bent aluminium on a roller instead if adjusting it.

Bending something instead of adjusting it properly.

 

If for example the stop tap in your house leaks, the proper way to fix it is to get the water company to turn their valve off so you can replace your washer. The bodge way is to put another tap after that one, so you can turn the water off after the leaky one. This is the way of the power commander. It's like the second tap.

[Cliff]

The power commander for the Suzuki TL1000 has spark adjustment and it takes the crank pulse signal also, in addtion to the backend signals. Presumably thats for the spark adjustment.

 

Even without the raw timing signals, its not that hard to make such adjustments with just the backend signals, so long as the ECU is producing consistant pulses

[big J]

I'm gonna have to dispute some of your points there Noggers.

The Power Commander is not a gimmick,it works extremely well,giving a measurable and discernable improvement in performance. For those of us on a budget and who can't afford to have the bike off the road for days doing dyno set-up,it's an extremely effective device.It may not have every bell and whistle going,but for me ,it's more than good enough.

I'm a right cynical bastard at the best of times, so when I'm pleased with a product Ill share my findings with others so that they may benefit too.

If it was a piece of shit,I'd be the first to say so,but it's not.

 

I find your hostility to the PC somewhat strange.Many bike mags have tested it and pronounced themselves satisfied,indeed many recommend it as an upgrade when fitting a new can.So why isn't it good enough for you?

 

Certainly,in an ideal world,we'd have ecu's that remap themselves to suit every variable instantaneously,but it's not an ideal world.

 

Finally,correct me if I'm wrong,but doesn't the ecu read the ignition signal 90deg before tdc then sends the input to the coil at the appropriate time. Therefore an ignition module would simply(!) change the time difference to suit preferred settings. No flux capacitor required(tho if Todd can rig one up.... )

[Guest Nogbad]

The power commander for the Suzuki TL1000 has spark adjustment and it takes the crank pulse signal also, in addtion to the backend signals. Presumably thats for the spark adjustment.

 

Even without the raw timing signals, its not that hard to make such adjustments with just the backend signals, so long as the ECU is producing consistant pulses

67797[/snapback]

 

 

I defer to your superior knowledge and experience, but I didn't see you as a PC man!

[Guest Nogbad]

Finally,correct me if I'm wrong,but doesn't the ecu read the ignition signal 90deg before tdc then sends the input to the coil at the appropriate time. Therefore an ignition module would simply(!) change the time difference to suit preferred settings. No flux capacitor required(tho if Todd can rig one up.... )

67799[/snapback]

 

Only if the PC module has access to the timing signal. Otherwise it would have to wait for the processed spark pulse from the ECU by which time it is a tad late.

 

I am against them because they are expensive and kind of not elegant. I am just totally prejudiced and a complete wind up merchant, so if you are sensible you will just ignore me!

[Cliff]

but I didn't see you as a PC man!

67804[/snapback]

 

I'm not a PC man but I don't deny it works to a degree. It's just down the list of recommendations I give.

The only hands on I've had with a PC was removing it from the Suzuki and putting MyECU on.

I've had more than a few people try MyECU after having tried a PC.

 

I prefer my units to go to those who will appreciate them. I'm actually quite happy for others to use the Tuneboy or PC. For most riders they are the best option as they don't require as much techincal expertise.

[Guest ratchethack]

For most riders they are the best option as they don't require as much techincal expertise.

Cliff, I applaud your uncommon freedom from prejudice. You have my utmost respect, Sir!

[Alex-Corsa]

Tuneboy and TuneEdit is a well approved and higly recommended software for Aprilia, Triumph and also Benelli ecus. You find all the features of it in detail on http://www.Tuneboy.com.au

 

Tuneboy is now available also for weber/marelli ecus, especially the WM15, albeit still in a beta version.

 

As described there you can read and use PCIII maps with TuneEdit. Additionally you can edit the spark advance and all the other maps the WM hosts.

 

TuneEdit is pure software, no additional hardware, no additional plugs or connectors, no lost space, usability of all official Guzzi/Weber updates.

 

But times have changed, technology develops. Nowadays ECUs are reflashable, it means you can upload the map into your computer, analyze and change it, and then you download it again into the ECU.

 

These are the features that at least I was looking for.

Hubert

67758[/snapback]

 

Thanks for all these infos, actually my Sport Corsa has Chip in the ECU unit, I don't know if this is possible (flashing the Unit- chip???) (even) if the maps are ready.It sounds great to just have to make ready maps on PC and put them to the unit , but if it is possible on my system.

Anyways the better is to ask the ones who made these.well I'll have these infos in mind and if more are contributed I'd be glad to know.

Alles bestens

[dlaing]

For most riders they are the best option as they don't require as much techincal expertise.

67808[/snapback]

Why does the My15M require more technical expertise than TuneBoy?

Obviously, My16 is available in kit form for people more talented than I, and the MY15M that Carl Allison loaned me requires more expertise, because it is an earlier version,and I don't know how to fabricate or obtain a PC Comms adapter, a little serial interface board, and a cable with a 25pin connector and a 5 pin header. I can probably cut the 2 PCB tracks and then solder on 2 wires. But I am too cheap to spend money getting this thing working, only to have to return it to Carl.

But I thought your current line of ECU's is pretty straight forward and includes the necessary accessories listed above???????

[Cliff]

Why does the My15M require more technical expertise than TuneBoy?

 

Well its getting easier ( and better ) all the time. With tuneboy you're starting with an ECU that you know runs the bike. With mine there's a little setting up before starting the bike. Its fairly trivial stuff though. I suppose its just as likely your first map download with tuneedit might not run.

 

If you want you can send the My15M ( and Optimiser ) over here and I'll fix and upgrade the unit. Just cover the postage. Put "Australian goods returned for repair." on the customs slip.

[dlaing]

Thanks Cliff, I may take you up on that.

I am reluctant to cut and solder anything I don't own.

And I have been slow about asking Carl if he has the cables etc.

I suppose I should private message Carl....or maybe he'll read this and start searching his boxes for cables and such