VERY interesting PC-V map test! Long, but worth it.
#11
09-17-2010 | 11:52 PM
Road Master
Joined: Apr 2010
Posts: 862
Likes: 0
From: N Dak
I am going to try your timing on mine. 2008 Electra with 103, stage 1 cleaner, woods tw6-6 and a propipe. I moved to the 2-1 casue I thought it would do a lot better than the 2-2 stock set up with the y pipe. And I am happy to say that is does the trick. Little more back pressure. The Rush's with 2" baffles just wouldn't cut it. I have spoken with Jamie about timing and he said he sees the best results with my set up with no timing changes but also states that you can pretty much do what you want till the point of detonation. I guess you have proved this theory. I will throw soem #'s in there tomorrow and run it. I didn't want to get to nuts but I would love to smooth out the lower rpm's with these cams in there. Seems around 2300-2900 are kind of rough so to speak with the woods cams. I am no expert but I think it has to do with the overlap in the lower rpm's. Anyway, thanks for all the info and I will be doing the same as you, adding a little here and a little there to see what happens.
Mark
Mark
#12
09-18-2010 | 03:18 AM
Stellar HDF Member
Joined: Dec 2009
Posts: 2,035
Likes: 8
From: Western Canada
Thanks
Fellow members, HERE is the gent I wish to toss out an enormous ..................T-H-A-N-K...Y-O-U .....to!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
Like I mentioned, admittedly I hesitated on that move believing there to be some real uniqueness to each map. But like I said, the idea piqued my curiosity. I was correct in believing if I put it out there, there might just be that one Forum member with an idea. Simple, but wonderfully effective!
So far it does appear the primary issue was indeed the ignition tables.
For motorsgt8, I didn't resolve the ping issue yet, but as I mentioned, I will play with it because it seems to be just a tiny bit off optimal. It goes from Zero to Plus 3 in an instant. I may take an automotive approach of sorts. I may adjust it so that it "ramps" up to the Plus 3 instead of a "right now" hit. This may give the engine a chance to build more inertia and 'catch up' with the advance. Perhaps something like Plus 1, then Plus 2, finishing with the Plus 3 as the RPM increases along with the higher throttle percentages. Because, right now she's hitting an instant Plus 3 as early as 5% throttle and that appears to be where I'm getting that light ping, right during an initial twist from idle position. If not, I can always go back of course and try something different.
And, 'Watch Guy'? Seems 'TheWhitedogg' beat me to the correct answer. The AutoTune only addresses air/fuel mixtures to target AFR's that the user dictates. Doesn't do squat to the ignition tables.
Before I fiddle with the timing this weekend, we have a modest club ride on sunday and I'm going to run her the way she is to assess the heat issue. It seems she's running smoother and cooler now, but this ride will likely put me in better conditions to prove or disprove my initial impressions. I may even bring the laptop to fart around with it during the stops. I'll post anything worthy. For some weird reason, I now feel some sort of newfound freedom to go in there and screw with it any way I want. Using a common sense approach of course.
Like I mentioned, admittedly I hesitated on that move believing there to be some real uniqueness to each map. But like I said, the idea piqued my curiosity. I was correct in believing if I put it out there, there might just be that one Forum member with an idea. Simple, but wonderfully effective!
So far it does appear the primary issue was indeed the ignition tables.
For motorsgt8, I didn't resolve the ping issue yet, but as I mentioned, I will play with it because it seems to be just a tiny bit off optimal. It goes from Zero to Plus 3 in an instant. I may take an automotive approach of sorts. I may adjust it so that it "ramps" up to the Plus 3 instead of a "right now" hit. This may give the engine a chance to build more inertia and 'catch up' with the advance. Perhaps something like Plus 1, then Plus 2, finishing with the Plus 3 as the RPM increases along with the higher throttle percentages. Because, right now she's hitting an instant Plus 3 as early as 5% throttle and that appears to be where I'm getting that light ping, right during an initial twist from idle position. If not, I can always go back of course and try something different.
And, 'Watch Guy'? Seems 'TheWhitedogg' beat me to the correct answer. The AutoTune only addresses air/fuel mixtures to target AFR's that the user dictates. Doesn't do squat to the ignition tables.
Before I fiddle with the timing this weekend, we have a modest club ride on sunday and I'm going to run her the way she is to assess the heat issue. It seems she's running smoother and cooler now, but this ride will likely put me in better conditions to prove or disprove my initial impressions. I may even bring the laptop to fart around with it during the stops. I'll post anything worthy. For some weird reason, I now feel some sort of newfound freedom to go in there and screw with it any way I want. Using a common sense approach of course.
#13
09-18-2010 | 07:04 AM
Seasoned HDF Member
Joined: Oct 2007
Posts: 55,909
Likes: 76,679
From: Western South Dakota
I am going to try your timing on mine. 2008 Electra with 103, stage 1 cleaner, woods tw6-6 and a propipe. I moved to the 2-1 casue I thought it would do a lot better than the 2-2 stock set up with the y pipe. And I am happy to say that is does the trick. Little more back pressure. The Rush's with 2" baffles just wouldn't cut it. I have spoken with Jamie about timing and he said he sees the best results with my set up with no timing changes but also states that you can pretty much do what you want till the point of detonation. I guess you have proved this theory. I will throw soem #'s in there tomorrow and run it. I didn't want to get to nuts but I would love to smooth out the lower rpm's with these cams in there. Seems around 2300-2900 are kind of rough so to speak with the woods cams. I am no expert but I think it has to do with the overlap in the lower rpm's. Anyway, thanks for all the info and I will be doing the same as you, adding a little here and a little there to see what happens.
Mark
Mark
That is where I ride for the most part is in the 2900 range, definitely get it up to 3000 and much more, on the interstate doing 80, 2 up, around town getting on it, etc.
So you say that the 6's run somewhat rough up to 2900, is what I think that I am hearing?
With that in mind what cam does not run rough up to 2900?
I may have to rethink what cam I want to put to put in....
#14
09-18-2010 | 08:30 AM
Advanced
Joined: Sep 2008
Posts: 90
Likes: 0
From: Chicago
#15
09-18-2010 | 09:18 AM
Road Master
Joined: Apr 2010
Posts: 862
Likes: 0
From: N Dak
Hmm interesting observation.. I have the TW6's but have not installed them as of yet...
That is where I ride for the most part is in the 2900 range, definitely get it up to 3000 and much more, on the interstate doing 80, 2 up, around town getting on it, etc.
So you say that the 6's run somewhat rough up to 2900, is what I think that I am hearing?
With that in mind what cam does not run rough up to 2900?
I may have to rethink what cam I want to put to put in....
That is where I ride for the most part is in the 2900 range, definitely get it up to 3000 and much more, on the interstate doing 80, 2 up, around town getting on it, etc.
So you say that the 6's run somewhat rough up to 2900, is what I think that I am hearing?
With that in mind what cam does not run rough up to 2900?
I may have to rethink what cam I want to put to put in....
#16
09-18-2010 | 09:39 AM
Seasoned HDF Member
Joined: Oct 2007
Posts: 55,909
Likes: 76,679
From: Western South Dakota
Yeah, I am aware of the the efficiency of a 2-1 and had it on my softail.
I just like the looks of the 2 pipes on the back of dressers though.
I had heard that the TW-6's come on a little bit later like at about 2800 or so, and some say that the 6's will work better with a bump in compression, and that can be done by going with a thinner head gasket so I'm told.
This is off Woods site; 20/40 42/18 240 240 .510.510 .189.178
I had initially thought about the HQ 525
This is off their site; Intake 18/40 238 .525" lift
Exhaust 51/19 250 .510" lift
The 525 seems to come on a little quicker...it appears to me.
However there does not seem to be as much support with the 525's
as there is the TW-6's at least with F/M anyway.
Most are happy with the outcome with the 6's and no head work though,or so it seems..
I have not heard much on the 525's but would like to...
I just like the looks of the 2 pipes on the back of dressers though.
I had heard that the TW-6's come on a little bit later like at about 2800 or so, and some say that the 6's will work better with a bump in compression, and that can be done by going with a thinner head gasket so I'm told.
This is off Woods site; 20/40 42/18 240 240 .510.510 .189.178
I had initially thought about the HQ 525
This is off their site; Intake 18/40 238 .525" lift
Exhaust 51/19 250 .510" lift
The 525 seems to come on a little quicker...it appears to me.
However there does not seem to be as much support with the 525's
as there is the TW-6's at least with F/M anyway.
Most are happy with the outcome with the 6's and no head work though,or so it seems..
I have not heard much on the 525's but would like to...
#17
09-18-2010 | 09:46 AM
Road Master
Joined: Apr 2010
Posts: 862
Likes: 0
From: N Dak
I have to factory 103 so my comp is a little higher than the 96. I spoke with Bobby Woods and he said to get it up to about 10.2:1 or so. This might happen this winter, looks like its already here it snowed last night already. I am thinking I am going to bump up the comp with headwork and also get the springs changed out and new valves. I am thinking before this all goes down I am going to get a gearing change going and try to get the final drive above 3.00. Mr. Woods claims that will do better than head work and put the torque right where we want it. My 08 gearing is just terrible. I might as well have a 5 speed. I can probably count on one hand how many times I have been in 6th. I just refuse to run this motor at that low rpm. 2900 and up is where I want to cruise at. Just my 2 pennies...
#18
09-18-2010 | 09:52 AM
Seasoned HDF Member
Joined: Oct 2007
Posts: 55,909
Likes: 76,679
From: Western South Dakota
#20
09-21-2010 | 08:50 PM
Thread Starter
|
Road Captain
Joined: Mar 2009
Posts: 715
Likes: 1
Partial Update............
I did get a chance to go for a ride. Always a good thing. Presuming I saved it correctly (still need to go back and check), I knocked the timing back to "2" from the "3" in just the first row of cells to start with. Those being 5, 10, 20% at 1250 RPM. I still got a little bit of ping under those quick throttle movements and like another post I read here, it doesn't do it if I roll on it a little slower. Either I didn't save it correctly, or I need to knock some more 3's off the cells. It'll be trial-and-error as I go.
One REALLY nice thing I noticed was a dramatic increase in fuel mileage. Before this map change I might be able to eek out 160-170 miles from a tank if I babied it and if I pushed it into the low-fuel-light zone. I had hit the low fuel light on many occasions in 130 miles or less with the old map. Sunday I was in town, highway, and getting on it in between, definitely not babying it by any stretch. I pulled in the gas station with about 192 miles on the clock and I could only squeeze in 4.79 gallons (6 gal. tank). I'm talking about filling it to the very top. Fuel light obviously had not come on. Conservatively speaking I added a solid 40 miles to each tank of gas, possibly more.
I purposefully beat on it a bit to see how hot the motor would be compared to what I had been used to and still got decent mileage. After a little bit of traffic I did manage to get into the "hot mode" and shortly after she stalled in the parking lot. Though not good, it was 'only' once and by comparison it's a vast improvement. I'm headed in the right direction.
The only thing I'm tossing around is whether I need to concentrate the decrease in timing in the RPM cells or the Throttle Percentage cells. Based on riding it feels like it should be Percentage first, complimented by RPM. We'll see.
One REALLY nice thing I noticed was a dramatic increase in fuel mileage. Before this map change I might be able to eek out 160-170 miles from a tank if I babied it and if I pushed it into the low-fuel-light zone. I had hit the low fuel light on many occasions in 130 miles or less with the old map. Sunday I was in town, highway, and getting on it in between, definitely not babying it by any stretch. I pulled in the gas station with about 192 miles on the clock and I could only squeeze in 4.79 gallons (6 gal. tank). I'm talking about filling it to the very top. Fuel light obviously had not come on. Conservatively speaking I added a solid 40 miles to each tank of gas, possibly more.
I purposefully beat on it a bit to see how hot the motor would be compared to what I had been used to and still got decent mileage. After a little bit of traffic I did manage to get into the "hot mode" and shortly after she stalled in the parking lot. Though not good, it was 'only' once and by comparison it's a vast improvement. I'm headed in the right direction.
The only thing I'm tossing around is whether I need to concentrate the decrease in timing in the RPM cells or the Throttle Percentage cells. Based on riding it feels like it should be Percentage first, complimented by RPM. We'll see.