Dynojet tuning of PC III

[moto]

It's been a long time since I stopped in there, but are you by any chance the shop on El Camino Real south of Woodside Road in RWC?

No, I'm on Rolison Rd. between 2nd and 5th Aves.

 

Regards,

 

Derek

 

[moto]

No one will EVER recognize 2hp...

"Ever" seems a bit strong. What if the 2 hp make the difference between passing or being passed on the straight? What if you only have 20 or less HP to begin with (raise that number in proporion to experience)?

No.

Can you clarify what you meant is "NOT the strong point of the PCIII" then?

My only point was that depending on temperature, humidity and altitude there will be different dyno/power results, even with the same bike. Every dyno/location are different, as I'm sure you'd agree. We're saying the same thing.

I'm not sure we're saying the same thing. If the ECU's temp and pressure compensations are correct, the engine temp is constant, and SAE (or other) correction factors are used, the numbers produced on the dyno should repeat. I agree that it's tough to get them to repeat from location to location, especially from DynoJet to DynoJet or between unlike brands. I have, however found my dyno's readings to be within 1% or better compared to Wheelsmith/Factory's.

 

Regards,

 

Derek

 

[dlaing]

No one will EVER recognize 2hp... and you will NEVER "cruise" at WOT, can't be done... moot point.

I could recognize that the Quat-D's lost top end cost me top speed.

Following you back from the prescott rally a few years ago, I pulled over to zip up my tank bank. I got stuck behind several big rigs and could not pass for a while. When it came time to pass, I was WOT, and cruising, if you could call it that at between 100 and 110 Veglia MPH for about 15 minutes.

If I had had another 2HP, I would know the difference in that situation. Not by the seat of the pants, but by knowing what the top speed should be.

It was a bitch to keep up with you guys, and that is what pushed me to trade in the Quat-D for Mistrals and MAYBE ten more HP, so that I could get MAYBE 10 more MPH (Not to suggest that that is the proportional relationship between HP and top speed)

 

If your point is correct mapping at all throttle settings, then it's quite a redundant comment as well... who doesn't.

71159[/snapback]

Yes, at all throttle settings including WOT.

You appeared to be one who doesn't care about correct mapping at WOT.

Sure the importance of WOT power is overblown by old school dyno operators, who just wanted to sell product, with minimal tuning for maximum gains on the chart. But that does not mean WOT power is undesirable or unimportant.

 

Dyno pulls at WOT/100% are done to mainly show power outputs, not necessarily A/F info as one will not spend much time there. Is it critical... of course, which is why Tuning Link/the PCIII map there.

71159[/snapback]

I dyno tuned my bike using Tuning Link, including pulls at WOT, because I wanted to optimize the A/F, because it is critical, of course.

Showing power outputs was secondary.

Statements like the following, rather than being correct, seem to come from a rebellion against old school of marketing that the only that matters is maximized WOT power on the dyno chart.

"Every peak power "pull", as shown, is at 100% throttle... which is NOT the strong point of the PCIII."

Peak power optimization is a strong point of the PCIII, just not its strongest.

 

"PEAK POWER MEANS VERY LITTLE IN THE REAL WORLD PAST BRAGGING RIGHTS."

I still think peak power at every RPM means alot.

I would agree that peak power at one particular RPM means very little.

 

"I can assure you, you spend less then 2% of the life of your bike so far, at 100%.

The entire rest of the map is 98% more critical, agreed."

I disagree with the proportional representation.

WOT optimization is very important because it is where the engine works hardest and it is the greatest limiter to how fast the bike is in a straight, unobstructed line.

 

 

Quit the debate now Dave... get out and ride.

71159[/snapback]

Only if you beg for mercy

 

My only point was that depending on temperature, humidity and altitude there will be different dyno/power results, even with the same bike. Every dyno/location are different, as I'm sure you'd agree. We're saying the same thing.

71159[/snapback]

Sounds like we have one more thing to agree upon.

[dlaing]

If the ECU's temp and pressure compensations are correct, the engine temp is constant, and  SAE (or other) correction factors are used, the numbers produced on the dyno should repeat. I agree that it's tough to get them to repeat from location to location, especially from DynoJet to DynoJet or between unlike brands. I have, however found my dyno's readings to be within 1% or better compared to Wheelsmith/Factory's.

71171[/snapback]

But if an air-cooled bike, like the Guzzi V11, and a water-cooled bike with the most state of the art ECU and thermostat, are dyno'd at 80ºF and then at 30ºF, I would think the power readings for the water cooled bike MIGHT be accurate to 1% or better, but the air-cooled bike might read 85 corrected HP at 80ºF with an optimal engine temperature for producing power, while at 30ºF the engine may never reach the optimal temperature to reach the same corrected HP, and may only put out 80 corrected HP.

 

Oh, at you asked about STD.

I am not sure, but I think it implies standard HP as measured, without corrections for weather conditions.

STD is printed Brian's earlier Dyno Graphs.

[dlaing]

Oh, at you asked about STD.

I am not sure, but I think it implies standard HP as measured, without corrections for weather conditions.

STD is printed Brian's earlier Dyno Graphs.

71174[/snapback]

Sorry, I was wrong

# SAE (Society of Automotive Engineers), USA.
Power is corrected to reference conditions of 29.23 InHg (99 kPa) of dry air and 77 F (25°C). 
This SAE standard requires a correction for friction torque. Friction torque can be determined by measurements on special motoring dynamometers (which is only practical in research environments) or can be estimated. When estimates must be used, the SAE standard uses a default Mechanical Efficiency (ME) value of 85%. This is approximately correct at peak torque but not at other engine operating speeds.
Some dynamometer systems use the SAE correction factor for atmospheric conditions but do not take mechanical efficiency into consideration at all (i.e. they assume a ME of 100%).

# STD or STP
Another power correction standard determined by the SAE. This standard has been stable for a long time and is widely used in the performance industry.
Power is corrected to reference conditions of 29.92 InHg (103.3 kPa) of dry air and 60 F (15.5°C). Because the reference conditions include higher pressure and cooler air than the SAE standard, these corrected power numbers will always be about 4 % higher than the SAE power numbers.
Friction torque is handled in the same way as in the SAE standard. 

 

So, that may explain why Brian got more power on the earlier runs....so much for my temperature theory.

[dlaing]

Dlaing

 

just to clear one of your queries,

 

"the http://www.guzzitech.com/photos/GL-03LeMans-Dynorun.jpg 2003 (might have front balance pipe) over 70 with stucchi crossover, a little under 80HP"

 

it is indeed a bike with front crossover, its Guzzirider's Rosso Corsa.  We both had dyno runs at the same place and although he has a stucchi and at the time I had a standard xover (all other mods the same) the results were interesting, we got very similar results, about 70 for torque and a smidge under 80bhp at rear wheel. I have the dyno chart and can dig it out if anyone wants to see it.

 

As Guy mentioned we're going to pop over to the Hobbsport people again, me to get the PC111usb fine tuned as I now have a stucchi xover (bought after Guy beat me on every run on the drag strip) and for him to have fun..any excuse .

 

In the name of science  I'm also going to do a quick pods verses airbox run but funds will dictate when that will be. I appreciate some very knowledgable folk have already discussed the merits/pitfalls of pods but I want to see for myself.

 

Mal

71089[/snapback]

Let us know the results!

This could be interesting.

Many dyno outcomes seem to defy explaination.

Since you already have excellent mid-range, I wonder what the Stucchi will do for you??????

[dlaing]

another thought on optimizing for an extra 2HP.

The reason to do it is not only to go faster, but to be running at the "correct" mixture.

If you are 2HP short of maximized HP, you could be running very lean.

If you are at maximized HP, theoretically you cannot be running too lean....but there are probably exceptions to the theory.

[Pierre]

another thought on optimizing for an extra 2HP.

The reason to do it is not only to go faster, but to be running at the "correct" mixture.

If you are 2HP short of maximized HP, you could be running very lean.

If you are at maximized HP, theoretically you cannot be running too lean....but there are probably exceptions to the theory.

71178[/snapback]

 

David, I've been following this discussion with growing interest. Not because it's been enlightening regarding dyno tuning - though it has been - but rather because it looks almost ready to graduate to the SW list. A couple of "pansy" references ... an occasional "no patriot would take that position" asides and this thing should be ready for prime time. Let me know when you're gonna' bring it over. I await your gas guzzling, Cheney loving, Haliburton funding, HP obsessed arrival - ya' pansy.

[dlaing]

David, I've been following this discussion with growing interest.  Not because it's been enlightening regarding dyno tuning - though it has been - but rather because it looks almost ready to graduate to the SW list.  A couple of "pansy" references ... an occasional "no patriot would take that position" asides and this thing should be ready for prime time.  Let me know when you're gonna' bring it over.  I await your gas guzzling, Cheney loving, Haliburton funding, HP obsessed arrival - ya' pansy. 

71200[/snapback]

For more fun you should go read the ECU thread.

Didn't Todd create the SW list?

I have to blame him for something worse than underglorifying WOT, creating a forum for glorifying WAR.

Sorry Todd, if I got out of line.

I am just a Patriot for WOT.

I'd love to replace my love for WOT with a love for peaceful knee draggin'

But I am a pansy assed, chicken stripped, neo-conservative rider.

but that does not mean I am not a patriot.

[dlaing]

Now I have done it!

The Admin is going to censor the thread.

Let me mend it:

[moto]

But if an air-cooled bike, like the Guzzi V11, and a water-cooled bike with the most state of the art ECU and thermostat, are dyno'd at 80ºF and then at 30ºF, I would think the power readings for the water cooled bike MIGHT be accurate to 1% or better,  but the air-cooled bike might read 85 corrected HP at 80ºF with an optimal engine temperature for producing power, while at 30ºF the engine may never reach the optimal temperature to reach the same corrected HP, and may only put out 80 corrected HP.

It will make it to operating temperature no problem if you use a brake dyno, if it is put through a proper warm up sequence, and the fans are controlled properly (left switched off proportionately more than at higher ambient temps).

I am not sure, but I think it implies standard HP as measured, without corrections for weather conditions.

STD is printed Brian's earlier Dyno Graphs.

Runs without correction are essentially useless, because they can't accurately be compared. It should also be noted that it's possible for a dyno operator to manipulate the numbers to make the results look better by leaving the correction off.

 

Regards,

 

Derek

 

[moto]

If you are at maximized HP, theoretically you cannot be running too lean....but there are probably exceptions to the theory.

For a given intersection of TP and rpm, I can't think of any.

 

Regards,

 

Derek

 

[Guest ratchethack]

You guys are killin' me. I was lookin' forward to a dyno tune at some point, but now I'm gonna hafta read a few libraries worth of thermodynamics theory - and then go find a dyno operator who agrees with everthing I've read...

[dlaing]

You guys are killin' me.  I was lookin' forward to a dyno tune at some point, but now I'm gonna hafta read a few libraries worth of thermodynamics theory - and then go find a dyno operator who agrees with everthing I've read...  

71214[/snapback]

I guess it is kinda like choosing a religion.

Santa, Mohammad, and Jesus all have something good to offer for believers.

But the important thing is not to over-analyze and just have faith.

Otherwise you'll be like me and spend eternity in limbo.

If you choose Tuning Link or Factory Pro, you'll get better results either way...all you need is faith and $$$$, results are proportionally related.

If I had more $$$$, without question, I would get the Mike Rich porting, hotter cam, Carrillo rods, lighter better pistons, engine balancing, and then head up to MotoLab and give them $2000 to tune almost every point on the map to the nearest HP.

I can only imagine what a sweet ride that would be.

I have little faith and less money, so I am going the DIY route....and I am getting closer to perfection.

Marching forward with Derek's and Todd's advice, and with a little help from the available PCIII maps on the internet, I march forth like a soldier in to war, wearing a crucifix, star of david, ahnk, Om, star and moon of Islam, etc.

Ratchet, I think TuneBoy has your DIY name written all over it.

[Guest ratchethack]

I guess it is kinda like choosing a religion.

Ratchet, I think TuneBoy has your DIY name written all over it.

Well, here's the deal. If I hafta pay somebody to go somewhere "by faith", I reckon there oughta be some clearly identifiable benefits.

 

You guys tease me with lots of enticing esoteric stuff - but the deeper I get into it, it seems I have a harder and harder time understanding how this could actually make my riding any better than it is.

 

Consider:

 

- At 27K miles, I still haven't spent my first dollar on any kind of service. Yeah, it's all been done to schedule. I take that back. I paid PA Speedo for a tach repair. But they gave me a new tach, so I reckon that doesn't qualify as service. Other than that, I'm still happily 100% self-sufficient WRT every aspect of maintenance, including doing my own tuning with just a manual, a few procedures, a few wrenches, a screwdriver or 2, a feeler guage, a DMM, $4 worth of vinyl tubing, and 2 fans for balancing the TBs. And of course, this Forum.

 

- It already (and still) makes more smooth, tractable, reliable power than I can use - oh yeah - and it's never failed to start right up, idles like a Champ, and gets great mileage.

 

So what else is there and why is it again that I need a new religion?