Foxster,
Thanks again for hangin' in here. I just looked at the software again. As an example, lets take one cell, say 1750 rpm MAP 20, the original has 78.5, The generated recording has 79.1 for this cell. If you hit update it loads 79.1 into the working table. At this time I have four windows open the original is top left, the smart tune generated is top right, the working table is bottom right. the bottom left is the last saved table. If you hit save it redraws the working table and changes the value to 79.0, which happens to be the value in the last saved table instead of 79.1. If you manually change that cell to 81, then hit save it saves it as 81 and changes the cell in the last saved table to 81. Then you hit the update again to put the recorded value back to 79.1 and save it again it goes back to 79.0 and also resets the 80 that was showing in the last saved table to 79.0. I think what is happening is that there are more than one last saved tables in the software and it is going back to the previous last saved table instead of the current last saved table. Hopes this make sense.
I know that the differences shown are rather small but if they were larger the results would be the same, this is a bug in their program. I wish Harley had a site where we could address the issues we find with this buggy, written by the lowest bidder, POS program.

 

All I can say.. if you do not trust the program when using Smarttune and how it populates the VE tables, then you need to get it tuned on a dyno.

You will find out, there is realy no support from the SE Tech team on the SE tuners, unlike TTS.

 

It's not a bug, it's a feature :-)
It just rounds the value up to the next 0.5. Behind the scenes, the values you see are converted to integer numbers between 0 and 255 which Delphi then use to do the math. This is why the max VE value is 127.5

 

Ok all the complaints aside. I have been looking at the graphs of several of the tables. AFR & VE, My VE looks pretty bumpy. Could someone post a good graph for both AFR & VE, one that was dyno'd or otherwise tweaked to the correct values for a tune that works good i.e. smooth, powerful and economical. A picture is supposed to worth 1K words, or in this case a couple hundred cells. It would be even better if they would post the whole tune file so we could compare where we are at to where it should be, even if it's not for the same bike & hardware. I have one from my son's bike but I don't think they really did a true dyno tune, because it looks like the values are just tweaked across a range of cells. i.e. the VE table is just increased by set amounts from the original. Not as if they were actually set during a smart tune recording. One thing that is for sure they couldn't have gotten good numbers for 90 & 100 KPA because we're at 5200 ft. elevation and you can't get numbers over 85 KPA. I know they didn't take it to Death Valley to do the dyno tune and I don't think they have a pressurized dyno chamber so these numbers had to have been swag'd.
This brings up another question, could the ECM have different information from what is on his VCI? That is could they tweak the ECM file directly without saving it to the VCI?

 

Pressurized dyno...come on...really?

 

[quote=mrfeeney;9913518]Pressurized dyno...come on...really?[/quote

I think you misunderstood my point. 100 KPA, actually 101.325 KPA is = to 1 standard atmosphere pressure at sea level or 29.9213 in. of mercury Since we are in Denver Colorado at 1 mile above sea level we never see the AP reach those levels. Look at the pics below, the original file may have been done at or near sea level. The comp pic shows how the numbers have been changed from orig, the only way to get numbers in the last three columns above 80 would be to run the test in a pressure chamber (not likely), or to swag 'em (Scientific Wild *** Guess). The overall uniformity of the differences suggests that they just manually added values to the original chart rather than generating the true VE's for those ranges with smart tune. Disregarding the last three columns my question was, if this is how the rest of the chart would be done by a "good tuner."
Also look at the comp afr table, again, it looks too uniform.

 

No way the ve tables would change that uniformly. The afr table yes, as that is tuners choice.

 

[quote=mechanicalman;9918473]No, actualy you missed my point. Of course they manually added them in, what else could you expect them to do? Yes your bike will be sucking in more oxygen and will require more fuel if your at sea level, but thats what closed loop is for, to lean or in your case probably richen the mixture according to the atmospheric condition you are riding in.

How good a job did your tuner do? As the old saying goes...the proof is in the pudding....same way you found out if your carb was jetted to lean when you ventured into the lowlands. But unlike the carb system that you learned to tune, your fuel injection system will sense that you are too lean and add fuel as long as its in closed loop, look at your afr original and current and I doubt you will see where they changed much if anything, keeping you in closed loop all through the normal cruising range.

Is the bike running good...and I hope it is, then you got what you paid for, and unless your drag racing in Phoenix or just chasing dyno numbers enjoy the ride.

 

[quote=mechanicalman;9918473]In post 1331 you show different maps than in this post. In post 1331 you talk about .1% change rounded up etc, however I can see 1000 Rpm 20 map a change of 8. You said "were up or down a couple of tenths of a %"
In this post it is obviously a manually entered change. Has anyone hit the 750 rpm and 100 map, yet it was increased by 20. as you said swag.

anyway what was the question?

 

besides it was the original map manually & uniformly increased, not a tuned map. some post have suggested that some tuners add 5% to a finished tune, just because, but up to 20?