talonboy
Member
Keep in mind the bike is fly by wire. Just because the grip is at zero, does not mean the butterfly's are at zero. At idle, tps will vary between 0 and 5 on my bike.avc8130 said:
Let the tuning begin! 2-channel Auto Tune Installed
- Thread starter avc8130
- Start date
This stuff is so awesome and I don't have the first clue what you guys are talking about. Actually I do, but I don't have the time nor inclination to mess with it. All I know is that if AC figures this thing out with a flash I'll be ponying up for it - and some new headers - want the performance gain without the brain-damage of dealing with a PC.
Watching this thread closely...
Watching this thread closely...
Hey avc8130,
I played around with the autotune on my previous bike, a bandit 1250. I was very disappointed with it. For fun I just kept accepting values. And it made the mixture richer and leaner in 500rpm intervals. It started to oscillate.
I tried gear specific fueling as well and although the bandit has only 1 fuel map all maps in all gears ended up significantly different oscillating in different areas with different frequencies.
After a lot of research my best guess would be that the autotune system was to slow to respond on the bandit. And although the oxygen sensor sits a lot closer to the exhaust valves on the tenere, giving less of a delay. I would think that by the time the sensor registers the oxygen level and the autotune module translates it and sends it to the pcv the rpm and/or throttle position sensor has probably changed. Making the value read by the oxygen sensor worthless. This would be worse when you're tuning on the road. with constantly varying loads, rpms and throttle input.
I think it could work great on a dyno, where you could keep the rpm and tps constant and give the autotune time to sort itself out.
If you want try playing around with your bike just idling change the afr value and see how long it takes for the autotune to reach the new afr.
That's probably also the reason why manufacturers only use the closed loop system in lower rpms.
Also although theoretically a afr of 14.7 gives you perfect fueling. It would make your engine run way lean. There is this myth that engines from factory always run lean. But that's just not the case many engines run rich in the lower part of the rpm range and start running a bit lean in the upper part.
I ended up giving up with the autotune took the bike to a tuner. Paid the equivalent of a autotune system for a custom tune and the bike ran better than I could have ever accomplished with the autotune.
Still good fun messing around with it though. Hopefully this info helps you a bit.
I played around with the autotune on my previous bike, a bandit 1250. I was very disappointed with it. For fun I just kept accepting values. And it made the mixture richer and leaner in 500rpm intervals. It started to oscillate.
I tried gear specific fueling as well and although the bandit has only 1 fuel map all maps in all gears ended up significantly different oscillating in different areas with different frequencies.
After a lot of research my best guess would be that the autotune system was to slow to respond on the bandit. And although the oxygen sensor sits a lot closer to the exhaust valves on the tenere, giving less of a delay. I would think that by the time the sensor registers the oxygen level and the autotune module translates it and sends it to the pcv the rpm and/or throttle position sensor has probably changed. Making the value read by the oxygen sensor worthless. This would be worse when you're tuning on the road. with constantly varying loads, rpms and throttle input.
I think it could work great on a dyno, where you could keep the rpm and tps constant and give the autotune time to sort itself out.
If you want try playing around with your bike just idling change the afr value and see how long it takes for the autotune to reach the new afr.
That's probably also the reason why manufacturers only use the closed loop system in lower rpms.
Also although theoretically a afr of 14.7 gives you perfect fueling. It would make your engine run way lean. There is this myth that engines from factory always run lean. But that's just not the case many engines run rich in the lower part of the rpm range and start running a bit lean in the upper part.
I ended up giving up with the autotune took the bike to a tuner. Paid the equivalent of a autotune system for a custom tune and the bike ran better than I could have ever accomplished with the autotune.
Still good fun messing around with it though. Hopefully this info helps you a bit.
talonboy
Member
The ECM opens and closes the butterflies at idle trying to adjust idle speed. At different engine temps/altitudes you may see slightly different throttle positions.Karson said:
There are tables in the tune for decel comp. This changes how the bike decelerates. I don't really know what this is doing, but it may be telling the ECM how to close the butterflies when the grip is closed. Again, fly by wire.
If you are decelerating, and the ECM is holding the butterflies open at 2 or 5%, the PCV will see that rpm and throttle position, and try to autotune it. If the ECM is turning off the injectors under decel (the default setting), the bike will be very lean there.
I have been careful to set my decel tables to 100 and I have turned off the injector cutoff.talonboy said:
I've also paid a lot of attention to my riding habits. I just about NEVER decelerate down below ~3k rpm. By that point the clutch is in or the bike's in neutral.
I've
ac
I can get mine to "catch" and start surging on the slightest de-cel, the bike just "slows-into" the surge, I just downshift if I feel it coming on.avc8130 said:
It can actually be hard to get it to do it if you want to as well, and even when riding around town it very rarely does it on mine these days.
I was the first in the UK to get the Gen2 Flash and they reported the surge was still there on the dyno - not sure if that is the same as no load, but probably a very low load.
I assume with the Power commander you can easily just add that missing fuel at 2% throttle - I was also surprised it was that low, my guess would have been about 5%.
Makes me wonder if the slightly jerky off/on throttle transition would also be improved if the fuelling at that 2% range was better.
I assume it is still pretty poor with the OE headers, but somehow the Arrows just push it over the edge.
My thoughts are now heading towards a Power Commander without the AT stuff, just set it add the fuel at 2%, leave it running on the Yamaha O2 sensor with zero changes in the cruising range (as my ECU-U Flash is brilliant for both throttle response and fuel consumption) and get the upper range and large throttle openings (i.e. outside the closed loop area) setup on a dyno.
The purpose of this thread isn't really to try to help you tune your bike, but I can tell you this:Rasher said:
Adding fuel w/ a PCV and still leaving the o2 sensors hooked up 100% stock will not accomplish a darn thing. The bike will use the o2 sensors to pull that fuel right back out and target the original OEM 14.7:1 AFR.
ac
If I may...
What is your target for AFR and what is the advantage over the 14.7 that Yamaha targets?
Are you looking to be more rich overall, or (and I'm assuming this is the case) your targeting a different AFR for different scenarios of gear/throttle input/etc...?
Thanks - just trying to wrap my head around the end goal - and how it affects rideability.
What is your target for AFR and what is the advantage over the 14.7 that Yamaha targets?
Are you looking to be more rich overall, or (and I'm assuming this is the case) your targeting a different AFR for different scenarios of gear/throttle input/etc...?
Thanks - just trying to wrap my head around the end goal - and how it affects rideability.
You can see my target AFRs in the "Target AFR" table I posted earlier.creggur said:
Yamaha's cruise AFR is leaner than completely ideal. It is a compromise for emissions, fuel economy, performance and engine longevity.
My goal is to develop a flash solution that actually WORKS for the Arrow headers. As you can see from the "Trim" charts, the fueling is pretty darn close at WOT. I'm richening up the cruise range to the 13.6 that Dynojet suggests. The purpose of this is to make the bike run smoothly while cruising and still "pick up" when the throttle is brought on. You can see the bike is pretty lean coming out of the cruise range and coming onto the throttle. That is the area I FEEL the most improvement. The bike straight up rips coming onto the throttle out of turns.
ac
I will call my ECU-U guys when I get a chance and ask if they have any updates from ECU-U on this, my guess is they have just given up on it.avc8130 said:
I know this is not the only bike that has this issue as they told me it is quite common when fitting full systems on modern FI bikes.
Odd how the Dynojet O2 sensors read this area as being very weak and the Yamaha ones do not :question:
What makes you think the Yamaha o2 sensor doesn't read the area as "weak"?Rasher said:
The Yamaha sensor is most likely narrowband. It is just parked there looking for 14.7 and letting the computer adjust until it is happy.
ac
I really do not know a lot about how these maps work so excuse any ignorance.avc8130 said:
I assume if the Yamaha sensors detected this area as weak it would add fuel to sort out the fueling - unless there is an upper limit in the fuel tables that it has already hit.
Have you tried running your bike without the O2 sensors connected :question:
Mine is definitely a shade better with them disconnected - which would also suggest they are not picking up the weakness, as with no feedback from the sensors it is a little better.
I also have some O2 eliminators somewhere which I suspect may help as they were designed to richen up the bike, I did not use them in the end as Race Engineering told me they had tried them and with a stock ECU the bike does not like a stable reading and just "switches" to a default map thinking the sensors have failed.
As the ECU-U flash allows the bike to run with or without sensors (they claim if they are there it will use them and may get slightly better mpg) I could re-try fitting these and see what happens, only the more I think about it, especially with the problem you are having eliminating this issue, the more I come to the conclusion the ECU just will not provide any more fuel for this region regardless of what any sensors are telling it.
What I meant was have you tried your ECU Flash with no O2 sensors at all, this is where my ECU-U flash works best in that troublesome spot, I wondered if you may find the same, or be able to tune the surge out without any O2 sensors fitted.avc8130 said:
I assume you are adjusting the fueling only with the PC V right now.
Are you then planning on importing the PCV map into Flash Tune or adjusting the fueling via Flash Tune manually and re-flashing the ECU?
It is interesting that both cylinders are adjusting about the amount, even though with the stock FT maps Cylinder #2 is richer than Cylinder #1.....
Nice work!
-steve
Are you then planning on importing the PCV map into Flash Tune or adjusting the fueling via Flash Tune manually and re-flashing the ECU?
It is interesting that both cylinders are adjusting about the amount, even though with the stock FT maps Cylinder #2 is richer than Cylinder #1.....
Nice work!
-steve
Steve,stevepsd said:
Yes, solely with the AT as of now. I plan on taking that information and manually putting it into the ECU manually with some spreadsheets I've made (Flasht Tune can only import 1 map to both cylinders).
Then I will 0 the trim tables and start again and hope eventually I can get down to very small trims and I will call that a "success".
You really think the cylinders are adjusting the same amount? Considering a lot of guys put these PCV's on just so they can make changes of just a few percentage points, I think it is pretty significant that both cylinders are adjusting differently by more than a few percentage points.
ac