no shouting match man.. just a few of these guys that know what they're doing trying to help you out. I agree with the statements above about letting the software and the smart-tune process do it's thing instead of manually finessing VE tables.

 

I have the latest software and help files and I couldn't find where it says you should do this for Smart Tuning, only when doing dyno runs and tuning. Whereabouts have you seen it? I'd be quite happy to be proven wrong, wouldn't be the first time .[/quote]
When I had my Fat Boy, I would sometimes disable knock controll in the basic set up, load the MAP with smart tune. When I looked a the downloaded map, I would see some instances of knock. Some were near 5. I would also do some smart tune runs with knock retard Enabled. when I would download and look at those maps, I would not see ANY instances of knock.
I was not super clear before, but yes, the new help menu says to Make sure that Knock Control is Enables for track runs. And i see where it says for dino to enable knock control to spot knock retart activity, and disable to tune for max power.
SOOO> my thinking is if it says to enable or disable, then I dont think it auto disables when smart tuning.

 

His AFR table most likely is in open loop in this section and thus the ECM won't start changing things back. For me, I don't touch my VEs and if needed, I richen the target AFR or increase timing to eliminate decal pop. To each his own.

 

Perhaps with the latest version that was free to down load there is no "knock control" option to turn on or off. I just can't find anything that would allow me to do that. Unless I am blind in both eyes.

 

Increasing the value in the VE tables in the 0 (zero) percent throttle position column above 1750 RPM's is an area that won't effect anything except deceleration. Oh and for the record, increasing the values in the VE table is NOT throwing fuel away, it's actually adding fuel. And I have been tuning bikes on the dyno for a lot of years and have used this method for a long time.

 

PEG20 is incorrect in that he feels an ECM with 'self' adjust'. It does NOT do so enough to cover an exhaust change, but with no dyno nor experience keeps stating this.

I, myself, from the things I have actually seen in action, this is not the case at all.

I strongly beg to differ on this.

 

Good point, I should also point out that the ECM will make NO adjustments to the VE tables in the areas of the MAP that are in open loop. I leave the Zero % TP column in Open loop.

 

Well, sorta. This is just what Adaptive Fuel does though, it provides an extra (hidden) layer of tuning on top of the VE tables, both for closed and open loop.

So, yes, the VE tables aren't adjusted but the effect is the same.

 

Except that lots of people, including American Iron Magazine, do do this and it does work - kinda.

Sure, the tune aint great after, but then its not that great to start with on stock engines.

AIM did a series of articles where they swapped out air cleaners and pipes and dynoed the bike as they went. They showed that with zero ECU modification that the bike maintained a good-enough tune (i.e. it didn't drift off into the seriously lean as a carb bike would have) and very close to the max power of stage-1 was achieved.

Of course, it will run hot and you may well get some low speed surging but it wouldn't blow up either, any more than a stock bike with similar AFRs will.

 

I'm glad that someone is backing me up. There are plenty of people out there who manage to survive without a tuner having changed pipes. And plenty more who can see an effect from (eg) xieds which wouldn't work until the ecm can be made to adapt so far from its expected operating range.

I agree that there is a limit on how far you can push it. And that /some/ mods will be too much, but there are enough people with measurable results to show that this is far from true on many pipe changes

Having said that, I would always recommend going a smart-tune to bring your ve tables inline with your setup and "recenter" the ecm to avoid getting too close to the limits. And I think wurk would agree with me on this

But my point here is that the ve tables should be set to reflect the hardware and the afr table to get the richness you require. The ve table is not meant to be "played" with