didn't really get much discussion on this topic before, but I still am looking to see if anyone really knows what the ethanol settings in the AFR table really do.
Since the later versions of the software use lambda tables for AFR, and these do not change when you click on either of the two ethanol settings (although the AFR setting does change), we think that the setting really doesn't do anything but provide information.

Has anyone run their bike on a dyno and compared the results on AFR with the various ethanol settings to see if they in fact make a difference?

 

Why do you think it doesn't do anything? It changes the desired AFR to a lower, richer, value. This is why there is no Closed Loop bias table in the lambda maps, at least not the ones I have. You make this adjustment by selecting the appropriate fuel type. Notice when you select a different fuel type and it lowers the AFR the values stay in closed loop mode indicated by the numbers being in bold.

 

All it is doing is showing the conversion of the lambda values to what the afr setting's would need to be for the different fuels. Even though the afr value changes depending on the fuel, the lambda values remain the same. A Lambda value on .981 means the ecm is looking for a raw o2 voltage of 785mv regardless of fuel.

 

Actually the CLB table is still there, its just been hidden.

The functionality is now provided by being able to set the AFRs for closed loop directly in the AFR table, rather than having a separate visible CLB table. But it works in the same way of applying an increased bias to the O2 sensors as you richen the values in the AFR table for cells designated as closed loop.

 

No. There are no "hidden" clb's. These are lambda calibrations. Lambda 1 is stoich for any fuel.

 

Err, yes there is. Sorry to contradict you but how else do you think that the AFRs set for closed loop get applied to the injectors?

 

By feedback from multiple sensors, one of them being voltage from the o2 sensors. There are no need for clb tables in lambda calibrations. A lambda value of.991 is looking for an o2 voltage of 758, regardless of fuel. If you have a fuel with a stoich of 14.68, an afr of 14.55 will produce this voltage. Now you switch to a fuel with a stoich of 14.3 an afr of 14.17 will be needed. The lambda value will still be .991. Lambda values and o2 sensor voltages remain the same regardless of the fuel. Afr values of different fuels will need to be different to output the same voltage.

 

OK. Well that makes no sense.

Good luck.

Out of here.

 

This is the part I am really trying to understand. So if you change the ethanol setting to say the 10% setting, but continue to run normal gas with no ethanol and a stoich value of 14.6 say, but now the closed loop AFR shows 14.3 in bold (because of selecting the 10% setting), do you in fact now target a richer closed loop AFR? If so, and I want to run a bit richer but remain in closed loop, it seem I could select that 10% setting and give the AFRs a little bump to the rich, but not lose the benefits of closed loop.

 

kelsonhoff and I have been debating this for months. Some people insist that, by saving the table in 10% Ethanol setting, you're enrichening the AFR targets, and therefore getting the benefit of closed loop, with richer targets. He and I seem to agree with Lonewolf176. We don't think it's changing anything. However, the best way to prove that is to run a bike on a dyno twice, once flashed with the gas setting, and the second time with the ethanol setting. Make sure it's in open loop, and read the AFR from the wideband O2 sensors on the dyno. Has anyone done this? I think it's the only way to convince people on either side of this issue what is really happening.