Power Vision Information Thread
#8172
02-25-2016, 07:00 PM
Spazz- congrats on getting your first tuning run completed. the auto tune added up to 19% more fuel and an average of 3% increase across all tuned VEs. I think scale was the way to go- but I've never had to mess with that so not sure- I would strongly advise calling FM or DJ and talk to them about the scaling results and best way to proceed. If you call DJ ask for Roy. he is a sharp guy with the PV and TT. But you are on the road to a good tune- be sure to "export learned" and save it into a tune slot, then load that new tune file to the ECM and you'll be running with the new changes. from there you can run AT again and further tune it as needed. more than likely it is only going to take 2 or three tuning sessions at most. I had mine done in 2 tune sessions.
#8173
02-25-2016, 07:09 PM
#8174
02-25-2016, 07:11 PM
But first order of business is to run TT-AT a few times and get the VE's dialed in correctly. using the current AFR ratio table for that is fine.
#8175
02-25-2016, 07:22 PM
It made a volumetric efficiency change to one or more cells of 19%. Afr's are not 1:1. 19% raw fuel is allot to dump. Maybe I'm simply not following your logic. Personally, I wouldn't have scaled. But I can't see how many cells maxed out or which cells in the map maxed out. Being the first tuning run I would have capped it and see what happened over the next couple of runs. Either way, if his CI only went up 8 and that gave him enough headroom to not max out then it still works.
#8176
02-25-2016, 07:24 PM
your lambda values are the AFR ratio table. just use the one given to you in your TT-enabled tune file. As you learn more about tuning you can make changes to the AFR ratio table as needed to lean or richen things up.
But first order of business is to run TT-AT a few times and get the VE's dialed in correctly. using the current AFR ratio table for that is fine.
But first order of business is to run TT-AT a few times and get the VE's dialed in correctly. using the current AFR ratio table for that is fine.
Last edited by usaf8ret; 02-25-2016 at 07:28 PM.
#8177
02-25-2016, 07:31 PM
It made a volumetric efficiency change to one or more cells of 19%. Afr's are not 1:1. 19% raw fuel is allot to dump. Maybe I'm simply not following your logic. Personally, I wouldn't have scaled. But I can't see how many cells maxed out or which cells in the map maxed out. Being the first tuning run I would have capped it and see what happened over the next couple of runs. Either way, if his CI only went up 8 and that gave him enough headroom to not max out then it still works.
#8178
02-25-2016, 07:39 PM
19% richer in fuel or a 19% increase in modeled airflow through the engine?
#8179
02-25-2016, 07:55 PM
Increasing the VE table values will make the engine richer, and vice-versa. A lower VE value will lean the engine.
Although some HD bikes, like mine, have VE table load expressed in Throttle Position - which I find very confusing and not overly conducive to good tuning.
#8180
02-25-2016, 08:03 PM
[QUOTE=LA_Dog;14880978] To put it very simply, the Main VE table is fueling at different engine loads vs. rpms. The VE table kpa is the measurement of air pressure to help determine the load on the engine or Manifold Absolute Pressure (MAP)
What? Are you sure the Main VE table isn't a number that reflects airflow through the engine?
What? Are you sure the Main VE table isn't a number that reflects airflow through the engine?