Power Vision Information Thread
Ultimate HDF Member
Joined: Apr 2008
Posts: 5,384
Likes: 12
From: Out on Deranged
I have a tune from fuel moto, which I have been data logging and when I go to recalculate the ve tables it says that no changes will be made. Does this mean the ve tables are already spot on? My combo is a little differnt than what the tune was made for or am I missing somthing. The tune is for a 107 with 555 cams, I have a 106 with tman 625 cams every thing else is close to the same. The tune is just as it was sent to me no changes, It runs good no popping, pinging or missing. It just feels a little rich on the top end or like its not getting enough air? What should be my next step?
Any ideas?
Any ideas?
VE tables front and rear,
afr fuel table stoich or lamda
front and rear spark tables
each with empty check boxes to thier left? If so I made that mistake once and I just needed to check the boxes I wanted log tuner to apply changes to. Since I have now revised my map twice I checked all 5 boxes and created a new tune! You save it to your comp, opev pv, open the new map you saved and send it to your PV unit.Once it is loaded in pv software load compare file of the map you made yours from, you should see yellow caution icons in the chanels you logged. Flash your ecm with the new map and try it.
The underlined info was not stated in the online instructions @ either power vision or fuel moto's web sites, at least not clearly to me. The new software is supposed to make all this much simpler to use.....soon as I am told! Hope this helps.
Cruiser
Joined: Jul 2009
Posts: 213
Likes: 3
I'm just guessing here , but if you repeat the procedure with log tuner, just before the box that says no changes will be made, was there a window that brought up which channels to apply:
VE tables front and rear,
afr fuel table stoich or lamda
front and rear spark tables
each with empty check boxes to thier left? If so I made that mistake once and I just needed to check the boxes I wanted log tuner to apply changes to. Since I have now revised my map twice I checked all 5 boxes and created a new tune! You save it to your comp, opev pv, open the new map you saved and send it to your PV unit.Once it is loaded in pv software load compare file of the map you made yours from, you should see yellow caution icons in the chanels you logged. Flash your ecm with the new map and try it.
The underlined info was not stated in the online instructions @ either power vision or fuel moto's web sites, at least not clearly to me. The new software is supposed to make all this much simpler to use.....soon as I am told! Hope this helps.
VE tables front and rear,
afr fuel table stoich or lamda
front and rear spark tables
each with empty check boxes to thier left? If so I made that mistake once and I just needed to check the boxes I wanted log tuner to apply changes to. Since I have now revised my map twice I checked all 5 boxes and created a new tune! You save it to your comp, opev pv, open the new map you saved and send it to your PV unit.Once it is loaded in pv software load compare file of the map you made yours from, you should see yellow caution icons in the chanels you logged. Flash your ecm with the new map and try it.
The underlined info was not stated in the online instructions @ either power vision or fuel moto's web sites, at least not clearly to me. The new software is supposed to make all this much simpler to use.....soon as I am told! Hope this helps.
Road Master
Joined: May 2009
Posts: 867
Likes: 17
From: Brentwood, TN
Novice here with info request. Running FuelMoto Stage 1 (A/C, 2-1-2 head pipe and Jackpot Pro Touring slip-on's) with PV and FM map on a 2011 Ultra Limited. Motor is otherwise stock. Its been pretty hot here in TN lately. I notice bike runs great for about first hour after starting but seems to get more sluggish as it gets hotter and run longer. Are there settings in the map I should pay special attention to related to higher heat readings that might be tweaked to remove the sluggish response. I've not tried to run a log during these times which I'm sure I need to do. Its almost like timing or AFR is off in this stage. I know several of the tables have head temp as one of the parameters. Runs great through warm-up and normal temp operation. Suggestions for areas to look into? Also had a thought that I may be getting something related to the head pipe & slip-on change that is changing with engine temp.
Thread Starter
|
Extreme HDF Member
Joined: Sep 2005
Posts: 11,615
Likes: 50
From: Baton Rouge, LA
Since you can adjust the AFR table as you wish once VE's are dialed in, I supposed there would be some "trial and error" that would apply as you try to find that ideal compromise of cooling, throttle response, and fuel economy in your tune. I've found that with my bike that running near stoich (14.68 AFR or 1.0 Lambda) results in little increase in engine temperatures and throttle response but a noticeable increase in mileage. Of course YMMV. Dennis, for example, has seen more of an ET increase by decreasing fuel than I have.
Road Master
Joined: Jun 2006
Posts: 871
Likes: 7
From: Manchester, NH
So, I'm datalogging today and noticed that at highway speeds in 6th @ 3000 rpm and above at 70/75, many times my MAP is in between 87 - 98 kpa. I look at my lambda values and have the following:
80 kpa = .981 (14.36)
85 kpa = .890 (13.02)
90 kpa = .869 (12.72)
100 kpa = .869
Hmmmm, I wonder if this is where my fuel economy is going out the window. What harm is there to increase the 85 - 100 values at 2500,3000,3500 rpms to .981 or .969? This seems to be a pretty narrow area that would not interfere with performance acceleration. Am I missing something important here?
I'm wide open for suggestions/opinions.
80 kpa = .981 (14.36)
85 kpa = .890 (13.02)
90 kpa = .869 (12.72)
100 kpa = .869
Hmmmm, I wonder if this is where my fuel economy is going out the window. What harm is there to increase the 85 - 100 values at 2500,3000,3500 rpms to .981 or .969? This seems to be a pretty narrow area that would not interfere with performance acceleration. Am I missing something important here?
I'm wide open for suggestions/opinions.
Cruiser
Joined: Nov 2011
Posts: 176
Likes: 0
From: Berkeley, CA
Hi, Delta-
When you get to higher throttle openings, "Acceleration Enrichment" comes into play. Others here know more than me about this entire process, but for pure tuning runs, I think it's best to turn off some of the enhanced features that the Delphi ECM utilizes. The tutorial by forum member JustDennis is a good summary. Don't know if this has been helpful or not...
When you get to higher throttle openings, "Acceleration Enrichment" comes into play. Others here know more than me about this entire process, but for pure tuning runs, I think it's best to turn off some of the enhanced features that the Delphi ECM utilizes. The tutorial by forum member JustDennis is a good summary. Don't know if this has been helpful or not...
Road Master
Joined: Jun 2006
Posts: 871
Likes: 7
From: Manchester, NH
I believe I have an understanding of that. I was in the mood to monitor what my tune was doing with the AFVs and CLIs. I was in a steady state, just cruising on the highway and noticed that when going up an incline, not a steep hill, the MAP values would increase to the aforementioned values. I think that the lambda seems on the rich side in these situations. I realize that highway fuel mileage takes a dump the faster you go, a barn door (the trike) is only so aerodynamic. The type of roads we have in New Hampshire are more often like this. The current AFR might explain the change in engine tone, more throaty, when encountering these elevation changes. Am I making any sense?
HD Forum Stories
The Best of Harley-Davidson for Lifelong Riders
7 Surprising Harley-Davidson Products that Are Not Motorcycles
Verdad Gallardo
8 Best Harley-Davidson Motorcycles Ever
Pouria Savadkouei
10 Worst Harley-Davidson Motorcycles Ever
Pouria Savadkouei
Killer Custom's Jail Break Is The Breakout That Refused to Blend In
Verdad Gallardo
Crazy Bunderbike Build Looks Amazing, But Is It Impossible to Ride?
Verdad Gallardo
Harley-Davidson Reveals Super Cool Cafe Racer Concept
Verdad Gallardo
Engraved Rebellion: Inside Bundnerbike's Glam Rock II
Verdad Gallardo
10 Motorcycles You Should Never Buy
Joe Kucinski
10 Things Harley-Davidson Needs to Fix in 2026
Verdad Gallardo
Road Captain
Joined: Jun 2006
Posts: 580
Likes: 0
From: Colorado
I hear what you're saying. Those MAP values seem high if just on a steady state cruise. I wouldn't think it would hurt to try a higher AFR in your cruise RPM, but I'd personally increment it up towards .981 and check for detonation along the way. Maybe split the difference and test.
Thread Starter
|
Extreme HDF Member
Joined: Sep 2005
Posts: 11,615
Likes: 50
From: Baton Rouge, LA
So, I'm datalogging today and noticed that at highway speeds in 6th @ 3000 rpm and above at 70/75, many times my MAP is in between 87 - 98 kpa. I look at my lambda values and have the following:
80 kpa = .981 (14.36)
85 kpa = .890 (13.02)
90 kpa = .869 (12.72)
100 kpa = .869
Hmmmm, I wonder if this is where my fuel economy is going out the window. What harm is there to increase the 85 - 100 values at 2500,3000,3500 rpms to .981 or .969? This seems to be a pretty narrow area that would not interfere with performance acceleration. Am I missing something important here?
I'm wide open for suggestions/opinions.
80 kpa = .981 (14.36)
85 kpa = .890 (13.02)
90 kpa = .869 (12.72)
100 kpa = .869
Hmmmm, I wonder if this is where my fuel economy is going out the window. What harm is there to increase the 85 - 100 values at 2500,3000,3500 rpms to .981 or .969? This seems to be a pretty narrow area that would not interfere with performance acceleration. Am I missing something important here?
I'm wide open for suggestions/opinions.
KPA ∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙ Current AFR (Lambda) -- Stock AFR
30-80 KPA: 14.5 (.99) -- 14.6
85 KPA: 14.0 (.95) -- 14.2
90 KPA: 13.5 (.92) -- 13.2
100 KPA: 13.0 (.89) -- 12.5
______________________________________
As you can see my current settings are fairly close to stock. I think they go so rich for stock at WOT to help protect the engine from owners who might run at that level for an inordinate period of time. I don't, so there's no need, and I even have PE AFR set to 13.0 across the board. I see no reason to go <13.0 (.89) anywhere in the operating range. Try the above and it should help keep you in a good-mileage area more without introducing any performance issues.
Last edited by iclick; Jul 1, 2012 at 12:56 PM.