Dynojet tuning of PC III

[Murray]

Why don't a tuned Guzzi motors make much hp. Basically the motor design is over 40 years old it started out as a 700cc that made 35ish hp. It now makes 90 and is 1100cc basically the factory has pretty well taken the motor as far as it can go without turning it into a nailbomb. The current bikes don't even match the hp of the V11's/1100sport due to emissions. There is simply not much hp in exhausts and intake for the Guzzi's and you need to spend serious money to get modest gains out of the motor.

 

Extra 2hp would help the roads round here tend to be open and flowing rather than tight and twisty and once you get much past 130-140kph with the old five speed box you need to be running between 5-8000rpm especailly when playing with others. A little further on and the modest hp output of the motor starts to really struggle to push the bike through the air to the piont you are running between 7-8000rpm.

 

The best thing you can do for you riding is a couple of advanced cornering courses and get the suspension sprung and setup for you. Having the suspension sorted is worht 10-15hp at least IMO on the road and is a dam sight cheaper than trying to extract it out of the motor.

[Alex-Corsa]

Consider:

 

- At 27K miles, I still haven't spent my first dollar on any kind of service.  I take that back.  I paid PA Speedo for a tach repair.  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 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?  

 

If your bike is running O.K you just have to enjoy it.

Personaly I just want to be able to monitor my bike any time, I want to see how;s going on.Say it diagnose software or whatever but that's also a part of the procedure for just knowing what's going on.

At the other hand there is some certain amount of usefull experience goin on in threads like this , but I don't need to go deep , I just enjoy the ride, sometimes is just so simple.

[dlaing]

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

71228[/snapback]

Oh, I see how it is.

You are just here to mock us(me). <_>

That's okay.

I'll get the pinging out of my well tuned(I swear) bike soon enough...

40MPG a little later...

80SOAHP (Seat Of Ass Horse Power) later still... maybe some saddle soahp will do the trick

 

I'll bet I have spent twice as much as ratchet and still have less of a bike.

Lets see, 11,000 plus about 1000 in parts and service at Sonny Angel Motorcycle, plus 2xxx for Ohlins forks, plus 60 for shock spring, plus 2xx for tuneboy, plus 3xx for pciii, plus 220 for dyno, plus 850 for QuatD, plus 200 for convertibars, plus 200 for Corbin, plus 80 for new battery, plus 1xx for battery charger, plus 70 for a bike jack, plus 60 for napoleons, plus some crash repairs, oil, gaskets, chemicals, beer, and 3000 for the DSL to connect to this !$%$#^#!#$ Forum.

Todd is right, I need to get out and ride more, but not as much as Al does

[Guest ratchethack]

Oh, I see how it is.

You are just here to mock us(me).

That's okay.

I'll get the pinging out of my well tuned(I swear) bike soon enough...

40MPG a little later...

80SOAHP (Seat Of Ass Horse Power) later still...

Well, I hadn't thought so much about mocking as really trying to understand why I need a new religion, but now that you mention it....Without the use of a Tuneboy, I haven't changed my "borrowed" map from Todd once, for the most part I'm "ping free", and I seem to be getting better mileage. But I reckon the biggest advantage I've still got over you to this point is that I haven't had to subject myself to those insufferable ECU threads...

 

Just kiddin', Dave!

[dlaing]

Oh, so the truth is out!

you bought a power commander.

Now we know, you are a zealot of sorts.

But not so much as to go walking into the tuning link abyss blind folded.

Now I feel a little better.

I wonder if Todd will let me borrow a dynometer.

I swear I won't keep the dynometer for as long as Ratchet has borrowed that map.

[luhbo]

...

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.

.....

71173[/snapback]

 

That's not really true, if not just wrong. First, WOT is not more but WOT, throttle fully open. Load instead is a result of the effectiveness of delivery at a certain RPM (if I translate it correct).

 

In other words: the output depends on how much input you have, and this input, the amount of burnt Air/Fuel mixture, is not necessarily proportional to the opening angle of the duct blades.

 

Second, you're rather seldom on a straight, unobstructed line. The rest of the time the bike is accelerating (to focus only on the interesting part), and best accelerating on the road IMHO can be achieved only with the proper throttle opening, unless you are on the track and rev it only between 6000 and the limiter.

 

Pictures that show WOT curves from 1500 to 8500 RPM with underlaying AFR curve are more or less senseless.

 

Hubert

[BrianG]

You guys really gotta quit smoking that stuff!

 

The bottom line to the PC III tuning effort was to get something like decent gas milage, by losing the over rich section, and to get rid of the flat spot in the WOT accelleration mode.

[Alex-Corsa]

You guys really gotta quit smoking that stuff!

 

Oh yes

The bottom line to the PC III tuning effort was to get something like decent gas milage, by losing the over rich section, and to get rid of the flat spot in the WOT accelleration mode.

 

I think so too, life is simple. <_>

[Alex-Corsa]

But not so much as to go walking into the tuning link abyss blind folded.

Now I feel a little better.

Well the truth is if you know what you're looking for,then you're goin to get there (more or less- depending how blind you are )

[BrianG]

Well the truth is if you know what you're looking for,then you're goin to get there (more or less- depending how blind you are    )

71348[/snapback]

 

 

Truer words were never........... whaaaaaaaat???

[dlaing]

That's not really true, if not just wrong.

71284[/snapback]

Mercy!

There, I said it..

I am the loser, based on shear numbers of opinions, even if I am right

If anyone else wants to take up the fight to defend the importance of tuning at WOT, you are on your own.

I GIVE UP.

Hey, I'll bet you can all save 5% on your dyno tuning bills by not tuning for WOT!

Who cares if your true A:F ratio at WOT is 16:1!?!

Brian only gained 7.7 HP at ~4200RPMs, and he probably spends less than 0.00002% of the time there, so it is pretty close to useless.

EDIT But Brian did say, "and to get rid of the flat spot in the WOT accelleration mode. bier.gif"

Sorry, I started debating again, after saying Mercy.

I'll just shut up now, and find something better to do, like dinner.

[BrianG]

Mercy!

There, I said it..   

I am the loser, based on shear numbers of opinions, even if I am right 

If anyone else wants to take up the fight to defend the importance of tuning at WOT, you are on your own.

I GIVE UP.

 

71391[/snapback]

 

Fortunately, I think your village called, too!

 

Actually, after the dyno run of early Dec to adjust WOT fueling, to fix my boy-racer issues, I intend to use my LM-1 / LM-3 wide band O2 sensor and engine data logger to make some passes at common cruise speeds (actually defined as Throttle Position Sensor values) to see where those A/F ratios fall. The PC III map displays the "fueling value" matrix as function of TPS position vs RPM.

 

From my aviation experience I understand that I want to see 12.5-12.8:1 at WOT because that's where "best power" is to be had. I will want to see 14.0-14.5 ("best range" A/F ratio) at cruise throttle settings. So, I'm going to build my own matrix with data points at the 30mph, 60mph, and 80 mph steady state TPS positions. These points will correlate with the cruise A/F ratio, and I'll blend the numbers from each those data points, toward the WOT fueling numbers where I'll leave the dyno-determined best power fueling numbers I now have from this dyno session.

 

I hate it when he's right................ especially when he knows it!

[dlaing]

Sounds like a plan!

My tentative goal is more conservative.

I want to keep everything somewhere around 12.8 to 13.9.

I think going outside those bounds may not be good for our air cooled engine.

But Derek has certainly taught me not to treat O2 numbers as an accurate representation of true A:F.

Driveability is the final criteria.

My stainless steel Bung plugs will arrive before New Years Eve!

I'll have to grind them down, and have them welded on.

And then back to shopping for a WBO2 controller and sensor...

[moto]

I would say there are a few shops where this is likely to be common practice. AF1, Wheelsmith/Factory, Evoluzione and World Class Tuning come to mind. If you have a shop in mind, just ask them if they tune other than 100% throttle. Ask them to see the before and after runs for a bike that had all throttle positions tuned. Ignore the "air fuel ratio" trace and review the differences in the HP and torque curves.I'm in Redwood City, CA 94063.

 

Regards,

 

Derek

 

71140[/snapback]

The bottom line to the PC III tuning effort was to get something like decent gas milage, by losing the over rich section, and to get rid of the flat spot in the WOT accelleration mode.

Can you post the graphs that show the part throttle improvements?

 

Regards,

 

Derek

 

[luhbo]

    Oh yes

I think so too, life is simple. <_>

71347[/snapback]

 

Life can be simple, and to have fun with it it should be kept so, indeed!

 

Let me trow in just two other questions:

 

- why do engineers at BMW, VW, Mercedes or if you want GM, Rover, Guzzi, Weber-Marelli, Bosch and so on, why do they not just buy a cheap dyno, a cheap Tunelink and related stuff? Why do they not just make a quick WOT run and then after that enjoy their easy life with all that much money they get for having fun the whole half day?

 

- what do you think is the reason for inventions like those most of the Jap bikes now have implemented in their exhaust systems? I'm talking of these exhaust-throttle systems, however they call them. It's basically the same, a throttle flap or blade, controlled by the ECU.

 

If WOT would be the only important thing, then why not WOExhaust as well?

 

Max power probably will be found somewhere at WOT, but surely not over the whole RPM range we use our bikes at.

 

I really cannot imagine that tuning the entire range of Max. Load points to Max. Power can be achieved with a quick dyno run for 150 to 300 USD. Alone the price is ridiculous. These prices can be found in the ECU thread and are not of my origine. How long will it take to mount the bike on the dyno and to unmount it when ready? Are there any costs while the dyno stands still, letting the engine cool down?

 

The max.load points probably vary from some 20% throttle at low RPMs to WOT at higher RPMs. If you have found and tuned them you should of course smoothen out the rest of the map above and below this string of max.load points as well.

 

That's basically how I think mapping and tuning should be done, regardless what tools you use, O2 probe or EGA, dyno or break, TuneEdit or PCIII.

 

This is work, probably hours of work. What do think this should cost? 150 or 300 USD? More? Maybe much more? You have the saying "You'll get what you pay for!"

 

And those who yet don't have enough could mind about things like spark advance, ECUs in acceleration mode while sweeping on the dyno, ECUs in normal mode when more or less static on the road and so forth.

 

I mean, have fun with your bike and stuff, but don't loose track. To supply a USB interface and software for everyone is not neccesarily the solution for all your problems with your toys.

 

Hubert