Why is this a problem? If you injest natural or synthetic Vitamin C your body doesn't know the difference. The ECM's signal is simply changed, and the difference is what the bike sees as a result. If you have x amount of fuel being metered via a PC or x amount via SERT, the bike runs the same. Also, it doesn't "lie to the ECU" because the PC is downstream of the ECM and it doesn't even know the PC is attached.

Please explain this too. If you are metering fuel and ignition timing accurately from a good tune, whether it be with SEST or a PC, the source is irrelevant.

The OP has a pre-TBW bike and this is irrelevant to his decision. It is true the tach stops at 5100 on TBW bikes, and if you drag race or otherwise venture into that RPM territory frequently it might be a problem. Otherwise, I doubt if most
riders will find it a major inconvenience. I also doubt if most riders will care if you can only chose between the stock redline or 6250. Again, if you drag race you might want to pinpoint the redline more tightly, but most HD riders don't use their bikes in competition.

 

This simply isn't true. If you check with tuners who perform tunes on dozens of bikes they will tell you that the tune varies little from one bike to the next, given identical hardware. Keep in mind that every bike must meet EPA regs, and the tune is the same on every bike that leaves the HD factory. If there was a great amount of variance you would see many bikes flunk emissions tests, and there is zero tolerance to meet these regs.

I originally used a PCIII, then a PCV, later upgrading to Auto-Tune. Before adding AT I was running a map created by Fuel Moto on an '07 RK in WI, used on my '07 SG operated in LA. When I added AT I ran the bike long enough through all ranges and accepted the trims being written by AT. In the end the map written was almost identical to the original map, varying not more than 1% in any given cell, and changes were made to very few cells. This attests to the accuracy of the original canned map and the efficacy of using a map created in one bike to tune another.

What's not widely known is that the PC uses all the capacity of the ECM except the narrow-band O2 sensors, including the MAP and knock sensors. So, if you start with an accurate tune on another bike, it will work as well in another bike operated in a different area with different humidity, altitude, etc.

I challenge you to show evidence for this claim. It is a fact that if the tune is accurate, it won't matter if you are running SERT/TTS (S/T) or a PCV.

To me the clear advantage of the PCV over S/T is that there is only a small library of maps available for the latter, yet dealers like Fuel Moto have hundreds of canned maps from tunes on bikes like yours. You also can't use a map switch on S/T-equipped bikes to toggle between two maps on the fly. Create a map with leaner values in the cruise range for mileage and switch to richer tuning for those times when you need extra cooling. The PC has this feature, as well as many others (e.g., offsets for specific gears, speeds, manifold vacuum, or analog input).

Fuel Moto sells TTS, which like SERT/SEST was created by Steve Cole and is a very similar product. They also sell PC's, and I would advise anyone who is in the market for a tuner to call Jamie and listen to his no-BS advise.

Here we have yet more misconceptions. First, you can't demonstrate how S/T can provide a "higher-fidelity" tune than a PC. If the AFR and ignition timing is correct, you have an accurate tune regardless of which tuner is used.

Second, you say the PC "cripples the ECU from adapting," which is totally false. You have all the ECM features operable with a PC as you have with T/S, except you normally don't run the stock narrow-band O2 sensors with the basic PCV. If you want to run closed-loop you can add Auto-Tune for true autotune functionality throughout the RPM/TP range, not just from 0-60% TP as you have with T/S. The wide-band sensors don't limit you to either specific RPM/TP or AFR ranges like you are with the stock narrow-band sensors used with T/S.

The truth of the tuner question is that you can obtain an excellent tune with either a PC or T/S. My contention is that a PCV from Fuel Moto will eliminate the need for a dyno-tune on the vast majority of applications due to their proven map accuracy. With T/S you must have a dyno-tune, as the guesswork required in tuning in open-loop mode necessitates it.

 

We must get beyond the misconceptions that permeate this thread. With a PC you have all the features intrinsic to the bikes stock ECM, including the MAP, temperature, and knock sensors that are used to "adapt to changing conditions."

 

Putting the PCV in the same sentence as the FuelPak and XIED is highly inappropriate, as is the suggestion that it is an outdated design. This is untrue, especially when used with the Auto-Tune modules.

 

Off topic; Iclick, what's a stage 1-1/2? I've never heard of that. Iis that some kind of new High tech engine configuration?

 

Who said that a PCV could produce a better tune than TTS? That is as absurd as the claim is in reverse. You ask for evidence, but have been making grandiose claims on the superiority of TTS vs. PCV totally without data or other evidence. So let's see it.

Why wouldn't it provide a good tune? It uses the same sensors that are used in many automotive applications and the same part used in DynoJet's own dynomometers. The sensors sample 50X/sec. and adjust AFR's accordingly throughout the RPM/TP range, not just below 60% TP as is the case with TTS using the stock narrow-band sensors.

The PCV has always been $300 from Fuel Moto.

Evidence? Is a good tune what you would consider "getting it all" or is there some intangible we can't see?

Bullshit. The PCV is $300 and the Auto-Tune kit is $300. TTS costs at least $400 and will need a dyno-tune. With AT you don't for the vast majority if not all applications, and in that context it is cheaper than TTS.

Let's see some data for your claim that O2 sensors aren't accurate? If they aren't, do you think perhaps most or all vehicles that are equipped with them will not meet emissions regulations? Manufacturers must warrant emissions compliance for 80k miles, IIRC, and I haven't heard of any widespread compliance failures. Have you?

I've really held back saying this before, but I can't do it anymore. This is total BS. Where do you come up with this crap? Can you show any evidence for any of these claims you are making? How can TTS with or without the stock narrow-band O2 sensors provide a better tune that a PCV-AT with wide-band sensors? Please explain in detail.

Maybe this guy didn't know how to tune the previous tuners used. You can't take one testimonial, like "My friend's Ford broke so therefore Chevy is the better truck," and extrapolate it throughout a product line.

 

Correct

 

That's just a tongue-in-cheek reference to my bike's minimal performance upgrades. It is a TC96 with Stage 1 and cam upgrades. A true Stage II goes further with flat-top pistons and more displacement (103ci). So, Stage 1½ is in between.

 

How many PC owners have you heard of with "fried wires" resulting from a fault in the unit? I've heard of none. Anyway, could you explain how this could even happen given the voltages used in this solid-state device? Limped home? A very few PC's fail, but it is a statistically insignificant number in light of the number of PC's sold over the years. Fuel Moto claims they see <1% returned, and most of those test good.

"Got full of water"? Please explain this one. If you're suggesting PC's leak, I've never heard this claim. If you mean the connectors leaking, this can happen just like it can happen with a stock-ECM connection, as the connectors are the same. Most competent installers would use dielectric grease in making these connections anyway.

 

It's the ability of the ECU to adapt to varying conditions, like air temp, humidity, altitude, etc. It does this using three sensors: MAP, intake air temp, and front head temp. The only tuner I'm aware of that does not use the stock ECU's full adaptive features is the Thundermax, as it eliminates the stock ECU completely, but the PCx and SEST/TTS both do. It has been suggested falsely here that the PCx disables these functions, but it is just one of several misconceptions flailed around in this thread.