After reviewing many posts on the forum concerning the heat issue with the 96 HD engine, I am contemplating one of the many suggested fixes that I have read here.

There is one fix that I was unable to locate here on the forum by doing a search: LC1 Wide Band O2 Sensor Upgrade for 2007 HD Engines. I read about this recommended fix on the nightrider.com web site.

I would like to know if any of the forum members have used this products and what their thoughts are.

I have a 07 Road Glide that is stock. What would I like to achieve: lower temperature and improve the throttle response.

I like that fact that no ECU upgrades or ECU programming is required with this product. Thatis what is steering me towards that product.

The price is for the product is: $199.99 for one LC1 module. They do recommend using two modules, so the cost would be $399.98.

The below passage is taken from their web site (http://www.nightrider.com/biketech/hd2007HD_wbo2_upgrade.htm)


Here is a first look at the electronic control module used for the Nightrider fix for the hot exhaust / hot engine temperatures found in the 2007 HD bikes. The size of the main electronics module is 3.5"Lx1.5"Wx0.9"D and is intended to mount under the fuel tank or the seat of the bike.

The upgrade will consist of the LC-1 electronic module, one WBO2 sensor, one blocking plate for the second OEM NBO2 sensor, programming instructions for the LC-1, and detailed installation instructions to connect the upgrade to your motorcycle.

No ECU upgrades or ECU programming required for HD/SE Stage 1 and Stage 2 upgraded engines. The upgrade is 100% compatible with any of the HD or SE ECU downloads, and is compatible with SE Race Tuner for highly modified bikes.


“Installing the LC1 Wide Band O2 sensor upgrade and setting it for a 13.5:1 or 13.0:1 air fuel ratio dramatically lowers engine heat and will reduce the instances that the engine goes into high heat/parade duty mode. Because we have seen stock 96CID engines go into high heat mode in 10 minutes of idling in the shade. This means that the OEM HD engines are "on the edge" when it comes to their ability to keep cool. We believe this marginal cooling ability is very critical for HD 110 CVO engines and HD 110CID engine upgrades due to known issues with scored/scuffed cylinder walls occurring. There is also a high probability that this situation is also occurring on the HD Stage 2 103 Big Bore upgrades.”


Heat Reduction
Dramatically reduces the exhaust and engine heat by 15-20%. Will reduce the EFI going into high heat mode.

Adjustable AFR
The Closed Loop fuel mixture is fully programmable to any desired AFR.

Compatibility
Works with all HD downloads and engine upgrades. Works with SE Race Tuner. Works with aftermarket tuning aids and does not require the use of O2 eliminators.

Robust Electronics
The LC1 WBO2 electronics have been extensively tested in the automotive world and are very weather resistant.

It Works
The LC1 lowers temperatures and improves throttle response as expected.

Accurately Monitor AFR
The LC1 will allow you to accurately monitor the AFR at any time. Because the fuel ratio is sensed close to the cylinder, it is more accurate than a "sniffer" used on a dyno.

 

I haven't used the product but I have thoughts on it. Does that count?

I don't see any way, if your ride has two sensors now, that you could possibly get by with only one of these units. The other cylinder will either be at the real 14.6:1 or it will be, if you put a dummy load on its sensor circuit, who-knows-where:1.

A couple hundred bux per unit? Thats pretty salty in my opinion.

I like the idea. Would like to know if it actually works in practical use. Let's consider a couple of things. Assume you're going to remain stock with the intake/exhaust plumbing. Assume the ECU programming will allow for ±5% fuel rates beyond the computed results based on what's been entered into its VE tables. (I have no idea what the actual correction range is, but it can't be infinite.) Okay, so +5% fuel past 14.6:1 would net 13.9:1. That's not so bad.

If you had freer-breathing peripherals the fuel addition demands might be well eaten up by the corrective range available.

Remember, all these units are really doing is feeding a "fake" 0.5 volts (indicating as if the stock sensors were in place at 14.6:1).

I like the idea, I really do. It's a shame it has to be so high-priced. I'd be tempted to just use a resistive voltage-dividing network like they also discuss at that site.

 

Kinda figured you'd smell this one out.

I agree with your ideas, but there's more to this that makes it less-than-ideal in my view. Correct me if I'm wrong, and it's easy to get some of this confused when you have no formal electronics background, but closed-loop for the Delphi EFI is from idle to about 50% TP, from what I've heard, and extends up to ~4700 rpm. Thus, anywhere in this range you're in closed-loop mode and locked into whatever A/F you dial in. If you put in 13.5:1 as the OP suggested, your mileage will suck in the cruise range, yet driveability and cooling will be good. If you move it up to 14.0:1 you may have a good compromise between the two, yet I'm not sure how it would impact driveability since you have no controls other than the blanket A/F you've dialed in. I know that leaning 20% TP, for example, too much (PCIII) causes a flat spot at roll-on, and I would imagine your part-throttle response would be pretty awful with the LC1 and lean programming for mileage. I'm not sure this isn't something I couldn't live with, but I would want to try it before buying, an untenable proposition I'm sure. This would also negate the dual-map capability I now have with the PCIII. Unless you rigged up a switch (open- and closed-loop), that feature would be rendered useless, and that proposition is risky for the reasons mentioned in earlier threads (fault codes, etc.). I like the ability to have a lean map and a rich one, switchable on the fly, for obvious reasons and wouldn't want to nix that.

One way to experiment with this might be to zero out the closed-loop range in the PCIII and re-install the O2 sensors. That would give you stoich and a very lean condition, but might give you some idea on how it would work. Didn't you do this? I don't recall the results if you did, or maybe you were just thinking about it. I would imagine the results would be weak throttle response and hot running, yet great gas mileage, in closed-loop mode and unchanged performance >50% TP.

To me the only advantage it has over the PCIII is that you retain closed-loop operation--but that too is a disadvantage, IMO, for the reasons given. With the PCIII you don't have closed-loop mode, but you can tailor your A/F much more critically. As I've said in other threads, if there was an easy and inexpensive way to determine the exact A/F in open-loop mode using the PCIII, I would be much happier--and maybe totally satisfied with it.

They should re-package it with a combo control module and two O2 sensors, IMO, and price it at maybe $300. That would make it a bit more attractive, but I still don't like the fact that closed-loop controls so much of the TP and RPM range. Again, I'd like for one of you enterprising guys to buy one, try it out, and give us a detailed report. [sm=icon_rock.gif]

Your idea of putting a resistor in-line with the stock narrow-band sensors makes more sense, especially considering the cost factor, once you determine the A/F you want. As you said you may be locked into something higher than might be considered ideal, though, although if 14.2 is that number I might be able to live with it. If it can be done I'd surely try it out, then re-program the PCIII for that (zeroed-out at 4700/50% and below). I'd like to know what A/F I'm running in the cruise range now since my heat is under control and mileage is quite good.

 

A few thoughts...

And once again, this really only pertains to stock ECU and stock engine peripherals, or maybe "Stage 1" stuff everywhere. The driveability of the bike really was pretty good from the factory. Sure, it was lean everywhere in closed-loop range (whatever that actually encompasses), but it really was useable as I recall. Just a bit warm and with a tendency to ping at times.

So these units, cost be damned, really would work well at something in the higher 13s:1. There would be a loss of economy, sure, but not too bad I'd imagine. There should be no discernable flat spots as you describe because it'll be richer than stock everywhere within closed loop.

My test was conclusively good, insofar as it really only pertained at the time to seeing whether a perceived injector flow mismatch (at least one dirty) would be handled well-enough by the closed loop function. I tried it again on Wednesday afternoon with inconclusive results. My bike is pretty much running like crap right now. It's vibrating terribly and I'm pretty sure of the two possibilities: beyond-spec crank runout or dirty (or otherwise out of kilter) fuel system. I firmly believe it's the latter. I really need to get me a new fuel filter (and the sealing fasteners required for the "bonnet" or whatever they call it).

On Wednesday's test, the bike would not pull well at all with the sensors in service. I believe it's low fuel pressure (either dirty filter and/or holed line in tank) in general and still one of the injectors, for whatever reason, is not supplying the same amount of fuel as the other. I perceive the vibration is a result of mismatched power pulses. My mileage is as good as it's ever been though, and the plugs don't look too different, and that has me a little stumped. I know; take it to the dealer. I haven't got the funds for that just now, assuming I could be responsible for at least a portion of the shop time (dirty fuel system, while possibly coming under the "Exhaust gas emission warranty", is most likely an "it's on the customer" thing). I can handle a filter and some screws (maybe could get by with just the filter and another dose of injector cleaner, truth be told).

With higher-perf breathing stuff on the engine I believe it would be imperative to not set your PC for zeros everywhere like you suggested. I feel it would be better to be sending a little extra with the PC and have the ECU reign it in than to rely on the ECU to make up the extra it might need. In error I'd rather bounce off the floor than the ceiling, if you know what I mean.

Sorry for the tangential spin on the original thread.

 

"I like that fact that no ECU upgrades or ECU programming is required with this product..."

I registered on the site a few months ago when researching an EFI controller for my bike and looked at the installation instructions for this LC1 system. As I recall installation involved cutting and splicing into the stock H-D harness, which is why I summarily dismissed the system altogether. (No way am I hacking into my wiring harness while still under warranty.)
This may have changed since I last looked, but if it hasn't and ease of installation and security of the stock wiring system is one of your goals, I would look elsewhere. The PCIII and Fuel Pak will both do what you want for half the cost (or less) and all that's involved is pushing a few buttons to program in a EFI map. Certainly much easier than modifying a wiring harness...

 

If this unit simply maintains a single a/f ratio, and that what is posted above, forget it. And "thank you," I don't care to splice into the ECM.

This is, apparently,basically a watered-down, cheaperversion of the Terminal Velocity II.

 

Before I spent $400 on this solution, which is far from ideal, I'd spend $800 on a ThunderMax, and do it right. It will achieve your goals and adapt to any future mods.

 

I agree, I've only been on this site a short time but have been researching PC-III, T-Max etc for a few months endlessly. I have come to the conclusion the T-Max Auto-Tune though a bit pricey is the easiest most accurate foolproof way to go IF your going to make any significant real changes to your HD EFI system.

I can't wait until I can afford one for myself.

mps

 

Thanks for all the replies. I think I am going to rule the LC1 out. I do not want to splice into the wiring harness.
I am a little intimidated with the other units, when it comes to re-mapping the EFI system.

 

I certainly respect your decision.

These units are multi-purpose for a very wide range of applications. It's just one of their functions which is pretty cool and that we might be interested in for our rides. They have an output which is programmable to simulate a narrow-band O2 sensor and the output which would normally center on 14.7:1 AFR can be adjusted within a wide range of values. You can set it for 13.2:1 and while measuring that actual value in the exhaust gas it would emit a voltage signal as if it were 14.7:1, thus tricking the ECU (assuming that much fuel were within reach of the current capabilities of the ECU/fuelsystem). There is great value in this.

Sure, one might complain that it's only one AFR but that's what we already have in the Delphi system, and it's too lean.

The current manual is located at http://www.innovatemotorsports.com/s...C-1_Manual.pdf and the server says, of the file "Last-Modified: Fri, 16 Mar 2007 20:45:39 GMT". In the file the unit is described as having a number of stripped wire ends. This makes sense since the device has such a wide range of applications. Yes, it would seem that you'd have to splice into your harness. Or you could maybe get a pair of O2 "eliminators" from the likes of Dynojet, et al. and use the connectors for the LC-1 instead. Still need to find power and ground points but that's not too painful.

I actually wish I had money to throw at a pair of these units just to see how well they work. There are fantastic possibilities.

Note that this is basically what comes with the TMAX and DTT when you opt for the "autotune" package, excepting, perhaps, with those there is no adjustable "narrow-band-type" output (why would there be?).