Ran my first autotune with the beta version yesterday. Thanks to Jamie at FuelMoto for sending me the beta and instructions. I had a pretty close map from Jamie already. Like the way it performed but had a slight decel popping I couldn't get rid of. Anyway I took that map and applied a 30 minute autotune run to it and flashed it to give it a try. I figured I would run it for a little while and pick out the problems I could detect, then autotune again until I got it where I wanted it. Well after the first 30 minute run and flash, I rode all afternoon and tried to find fault and just couldn't find anything I wanted to change. No more decel popping. Seemed to start a little easier when it was hot, mileage was still over 45 and the low end torque was even better than it was. I am not a racer and don't use a lot of high rpms but I love having better low end and this gave it to me. I may be finished for a while until I make another change. Thanks again to Jamie and FM.

 

Probably not unless your open-loop area is not calibrated well or you plan on doing upgrades that would require a change in that range. I already had the AT-100 from my PCV days, and it will work with the PV as long as it isn't an older two-module unit. AFAIK all the single-module AT units work fine.

You can't tune the open-loop area with the NB sensors. As for getting a perfect tune in two runs, I think that would be doable provided you take long rides and make sure you hit all ranges multiple times. PV Tune defaults at a high minimum hit count, 80 IIRC, and when you're trying to tune WOT you pass through the various hit points very quickly. Jamie recommended using 4th or 5th gear to do the WOT runs to slow the acceleration and thus allow more hits per run, but that's difficult since you'd be going very fast by the time you approached the redline. This might be okay if you live in Nevada or Montana, but there aren't suitable places around here to do multiple runs >100 mph and be safe doing it. Instead, I used 3rd gear and lowered the minimum hit count. I'm using 50 now, but have used lower for these runs.

You can't tune the entire operating range with the NB sensors. To do it you'll need the AT-100, and whether it's a good investment for you is the question. I already had it and decided to keep it for this purpose. I'm glad I did, as I like to tweak. If you're an incorrigible tweaker and have $300 (or whatever it costs now), I say go for it.

Be also advised that with the WB sensors you can't run closed-loop once your tune is done, that is unless you install both WB and NB sensors in your pipes. I've been running open-loop for the 18 months I've owned the PV and find that it keeps AFR's very close, within ±2% most of the time. For example, if it vacillates between .98-1.02 in open-loop or .99-1.01 in closed-loop, will you be able to feel any difference at all in performance or gas mileage? I think not. Remember that the MAP, ET, and IAT sensors work to keep the ECM informed on temperatures and barometric pressure, and I've found that it works very well. You can monitor AFR's (in Lambda) on your PV display, which I keep an eye on while riding.

I foresee one day when DJ will offer a special module that will allow using the WB sensors with the ECM for full closed-loop operation. I can't say for sure and don't know when this might happen, but I do think it is on the horizon. Will they sell the module without the WB sensors for those of us who already have them? I don't know, but would hope so. Remember, this can be done, as the EMS tuner does this now. The only drawback to the EMS is that you can't interface with the tuner at all, and what you get is what you get with no options.

 

You're looking at the tune that is in the ECM, so not to sound evasive it is somewhere between bad and good. You can't tell by looking at the tables if it is optimal for your bike. It's important to get a mental grip on the relationship between the tables, especially AFR and VE. Coming from working with PCs for four years before getting the PV it took me quite a while to wrap my head around the AFR-VE relationship. I attempted to clarify it at posts #1954 and 2575.

You can capture a table to your clipboard, assuming your Mac can translate that feature. Once captured you can paste it to a message here either with an attachment or by linking it to a server where you have it stored.

Your AFR table looks normal enough, and if tuned properly it will provide the AFRs specified. Based on what I see there you are running open-loop, which is fine, and you have no choice if you have only the WB sensors installed.

 

You can't tune outside the closed-loop area (the range that is readable by the stock O2 sensors), that is unless you've also purchased the AT-100 kit. You also can't look at a VE table and tell if it is correct for any given application, so the values don't mean much by themselves. Is this tune for your current hardware configuration? Where did it originate?

Smoothing might be in order, but you normally can't make that judgement by looking at the values alone. I can't read the values from that map, or at least most of them, but I don't see anything that looks grossly out of line in any area of the tune where you would normally ride. You can email it to me if you like and I'll take a closer look at it.

 

Hesitation isn't something I would expect from a Fuel Moto tune nor any tune that is anything but way off. For example, my bike has had a Stage 1 and a cam upgrade and when I install my stock tune the bike runs fine with no hesitation, yet that tune isn't even close to optimal.

Well, you can't find hesitation by looking at any table, IMO. That is unless you do something idiotic (like I did once) by applying no fuel to one area of the tune by accident. That'll cause hesitation every time.

Anyway, if you install the FM tune and do some datalog runs you could likely locate the cause. Have you done that yet? You say it is between 1800-2800, which is a pretty broad range, so does it hesitate any time the bike is in this range or just sporadically? How much throttle are you applying when this happens?

If you want to diagnose this, do a datalog run and send your original FM tune and the log files to one of us. You'll have to use email outside this forum since they don't allow attachments other than image files.

 

You are quite right..I have been a mechanic for almost 30yrs now, and yes.. some of the manufactures are going to wide band O/2... and they cost alot more than narrow band sensors.. some even over 200-300 each compared to under or around 100.00...we also use the wideband in our race car to tune them too... Len

 

Hi Delta, I think there was a glitch in the beta software on the spark tuning because Dan sent me a new version on Wednesday(1164) saying this should fix it. I have not tried to use the spark tuning yet because I'm still trying to get my ve's right.

 

Thanks for that update.

 

Double post sorry

 

Be also advised that with the WB sensors you can't run closed-loop once your tune is done, that is unless you install both WB and NB sensors in your pipes. I've been running open-loop for the 18 months I've owned the PV and find that it keeps AFR's very close, within ±2% most of the time. For example, if it vacillates between .98-1.02 in open-loop or .99-1.01 in closed-loop, will you be able to feel any difference at all in performance or gas mileage? I think not. Remember that the MAP, ET, and IAT sensors work to keep the ECM informed on temperatures and barometric pressure, and I've found that it works very well. You can monitor AFR's (in Lambda) on your PV display, which I keep an eye on while riding.

I thought you only used the wide band kit to get your open loop VEs set then remove it and run the oems sensors for your closed loop areas. Im I missing somthing?
Thanks...