I was wandering if someone would mind sharing their target afr tables with me? I'm trying to create two maps. One for performance and one for fuel economy. All I have is the one on the power commander site and my bike runs ok but gets bad mileage. Plus I'm interested to see if other target afr's make the bike run better. I don't need your actual map, just the target afr table so the autotune can create a different map than I have. This is for my '09 iron. Thanks.

 

The target AFR usually comes with the base map you load up.. Generally speaking, I've found with the XR(that's what I have), that it likes to be in the high-13's...13.7:1 +/-. You don't need to create two different maps btw...If you're running part throttle, you're looking for economy. If you're WFO, the last thing on your mind is mileage.. Start your target AFR in the 13.4-5:1 in the 60-100% throttle cells, at say above 3krpm, and set the lower throttle positions at 13.7:1 to .9:1, and see how it likes it.
Having mapped hundreds of Japanese bikes, I'm used to 13.2:1 being pretty-much where they're running optimal. With my XR, I found that it likes to go significantly leaner, both at WFO, and part-throttle settings. It's pretty close to the standard 1200 Sportster, so you should at least have a good starting point with those AFR's. HD sets (at least this is what they say) the AFR in closed-loop in the low 14's range, and when it switches to open loop, by the time you're close to red-line, it could be as fat as 12:1. When I checked mine, it ran no fatter than 16:1 in closed loop, and above 6k I saw it squeek in a couple 11's. Pretty ridiculous.

 

Thanks fastkevin, that definitely helps a lot! I'll change around my target afr settings closer to the ones you suggest and let you know how the bike runs after about a week. I have an '07 R1 setup for the track and the guy who tuned it said the same as you about the japanese bikes running best at 13.2:1.

I have one more question for you (kind of long sorry).... The other day I wanted to see if the real time AFR's that show up in the PCV software when the bike is running were the same as what my target AFR's are set on. I connected my bike to my laptop and opened up the PCV software. I started the bike and let it warm up then revved it for about a minute. For some reason the real time AFR's were much leaner than what the target AFR's are. The real time AFR's went between 14.0:1 to 18.0:1. This is strange because my target AFR's for this map are from 13.0:1 to the leanest at 13:7.1.

Question: Why would the real time AFR's be way leaner than what the map's target AFR's are? Was it because the bike didn't have a load on it? I was also thinking that since I have a california model bike, maybe it has some sort of PAIR valve system like my honda and yamaha sportbikes had? I can't find anything on this site about it though, so maybe California harley's don't have something like this. Thanks for taking the time!

 

I only just got my bike back yesterday from the dyno, so i can`t help you yet.The target of 13,2 is in the ball park.