I am looking at STOCK 2014 spark table from my street glide. It must have been made on a computer. Stock map also has decimal for example 31.03 38.13 Etc. The map shape viewed in compare is the same as the dyna map. The dyna map just has more time but its the same shape on 3D graph.

 

Heatwave- go back to post #5481; read it carefully and follow it closely.
I've been able to contnue using PV Log Tuner for spark table fine tuning employing the procedure described by Dynaulv in that post.

I could repeat the steps, but that would just be copying what he already suggested.
I and others have used it since the DJ update confounded the relationship between Log Tuner and the WinPV s/w.
If you notice in Notepad, when you open a .pvv file, and search for the Item name = "VE line you'll see the (Map based/Front Cyl and (Map based/Rear Cyl lines.
[Simply eliminate the "Map based/" term in both lines and save the .pvv file to run through Log Tuner.]

Note in the updated version of WPV when you open a tune in the Airflow VE sections, you see the same reference.
I think it was intended that the .pvv file structure, when updated to relate to the 2014 ECM structure, adding the "Map based" terms to WPV would work;
but, obviously it hasn't; thus the work around suggested by Dynaulv; which gives us continued access to Log Tuner while DJ fixes it.

It works perfectly. Good luck.

 

Thanks, I'll give it a try when I get back from my business travels.

 

Heatwave- I forgot to list the page... easier to find that way.
https://www.hdforums.com/forum/elect...admin-549.html
Good luck.

 

One can do the exact same thing with PV. Highlight the area to smooth and use the smooth function. It will also change to 2 decimal places. A graph will look nice and smooth. The problem with smoothing is that it will raise some cells that one might not want raised. So, this whole idea of using a generic program to smooth a table is flawed. Now it may work if someone is smoothing a very conservative table that has plenty of room for the increases. But for someone that just finished working his timing table, smoothing via generic software, isn't a good idea. If one does, they need to go back and look and see if any cells increased beyond where the engine pinged. Or start from square one and start logging for knock events all over again. This is why I like to find the ping threshold, and work from that point.

Wasn't directed at you...just piggybacking on your post.

 

I disagree, at least somewhat. The Smoothing algorithyn works by taking the highest value and the lowest value in a selected region and making the transitions from one cell to the next as even as possible. Therefore no value will be higher than the highest cell. But certainly some cells within the region will be increased to achieve a smaller transition value to the next cell.

The Knock sensor. can be activated not just because of the absolute value but also by the magnitude of the change in value from one cell to the next. I have found that evening out the transitions will generally achieve a much smoother throttle response.

That being said, it a good practice to use the log tuner to see if the new map moved any spark cells upwards that pushed it into a knock region. There's no "magic button" that makes a perfect spark table however smoothing can be a good tool, particularly if you start with a solid table.

For my purposes the "Smoothed" table in the map I referenced several pages back, resulted in outstanding performance once it was copied into my existing map and flashed to my bike. It created almost zero knock events.

 

would it be a bad idea to run this (spark table only) on a lighter softail?

 

Go try that in PV and come back and post your findings. It WILL raise some cells. I'm done, you have it all figured out. Ride safe.

 

Every bike is different. Two identical builds have the possibility of stacking up different and yielding different results. Now lets add to the equation differing gas blends accross the country. Now we'll add the weight differences of the bike. Next we'll add the conditions the timing table was tuned in. Not to mention the competency of the original tuner. You can run any timing table you feel like running. It's your bike and you have the right to do with it as you see fit. You'd be smarter and safer to use the map you received from DJ or FM than to unknowingly run some off the wall map you got off a forum.

 

To further the discussion a bit. One does NOT wish to run as much advance as possible. Why would you?

Just like with too little timing, one can have too much. The IDEAL timing would be timing that fits the MBT (maximum brake torque) for any given engine at a certain load and rpm. One simply can NOT find MBT while road tuning. PERIOD. WHile road tuning... how can you even begin to tell what timing made the maximum amount of power?

So, for road tuning... I agree 1,000,000% with stailjim61... run the timing tables from the canned map and adjust simply for ping. There is NO computer simulation nor program that can dial in one of our bikes to make MBT. One should investigate how OEMs make timing tables for real. I have slightly. It's all about pressure transducers installed in the heads.... of which we do NOT have at any of our disposal, even Steve Cole, Nor Jamie Long!!!!

Some dyno guys DO dyno a bike to get close on the MBT. This takes a Superflow dyno or a Dynojet 250i with the additional torque arm set up... and... to make one's life a tad simpler, a PC3 as the 'timing tool". A PC3 would be used with a bike that has a map installed using a flash tuner like TTS, PV, SEPST and then throw it on the wheel and for each and every cell that matters... adjust the timing live with the PC3 and do a tug... over and over again.... using like .5 degree increments.

This is done by very few tuners as it is extremely time consuming! Most base maps from TTS and PV are decent approximations. Simply increasing timing until it pings is NOT the best for power, nor is it the best for the bike. What 'tuning' really is all about is trying to get the most power out of an engine... all the while obtaining the best possible 'street manners'. Running things to the ragged edge of things... with no possible benefits is simply silly, IMHO.

My personal dyno does NOT have a torque arm. That costs $1000s more as an add-on. I may get one at some future date, tho.

And... as far as smoothing to a gnat's ***? That doesn't really do much either. Most times, we will want to acheive maximum power and the tuner will see each cell IS a tad different, because we don't have the ability to 'smooth' for each KPA, we go in increments of 10 points. An engine can and does want different timing at say 50 MAP at 3500 rpms than it does at 59 MAP.... all of which is in the 50 MAP cell. Let alone what the engine may want or need at 64 MAP. Smoothing eliminates these obvious changes in what the engine needs and.... wants.

So... there really are different arguments here... not just one 'correct' path. I am just giving what I have learned over the years from BEFORE I had an actual dyno and could play more often. Most top tier dyno guys will state that smoothing the timing tables is a waste of time. I am now-a-days in that camp, also. Giving an engine what it needs/wants is more important that having an advance curve that is carried out to 100ths of a degree.

A couple years ago, I saw the actual Delphi program to 'tune' a Delphi ECM with. Did any of you guys realize there are actually timing tables for each and every gear? Well, there is. ANd what we GET is some kind of best guess approximation of all of that, condensed into a single table, instead of six. Sooooooooo.............

I am really going to side with stailjim61 on this.