Post the spark tables that you say knock. That will tell the story. Comparing anything to the OEM tables is like pissing in the wind and trying to see the wet spot. Like I said before...the OEM tables are NOT a comparison. But you continue to use them as a basis of comparison. I guess the real question is did the engine ping, as bad as you say it does now, before you started making changes? I'm sure if was pinging this bad, in stock out of the box form, you would have heard it.....correct? You're at what, 750 feet? Obviously higher compression. Obviously lower timing tolerance than higher elevation cals. There's more to this than "I compared MY tables to the OEM tables". Or, "I compared My tables to the cal the vendor sent me". Geez, even 2 identical engines, from your same neighborhood, will stack up different and yield the same VE's. Find a tuner in ATX and have a peek at their timing tables. Better yet, just let them tune it for you and save yourself the aggravation of all this guessing and invalid comparisons. Bike might even run sweet when they're finished. This tuning business isn't for everyone. Some folks just don't "get it". Nothing to be ashamed about. Just let a pro fix you up and ride on.

 

I don't think you're reading your data logs correctly

 

I'm pretty certain I am. Why do you say that having not seen my logs?

 

I was looking at your deltas, you're pulling timing in a very wide area, when I pull timing for pings I do it in a very precise area, usually right before where the ping took place.

An Example would be my rear cylinder, the ecm will pull -5 degrees of timing at 58kpa 2800 rpm so that's the area that I hit (50kpa 2750rpm). I'll blend the surrounding areas by a few degrees just for a smooth transition.

Looking at your deltas you seem to be blanketing whole entire areas.

If you go back a few pages you can download the tune I'm working with, not to use (unless you want to) but to give you an idea on what I did with the timing.

Here's the current tune I'm using now https://www.dropbox.com/s/kkosgfpjbt...91514.pvt?dl=0
I still have some adjustments to make but it's just about finished.

 

Ah, I understand. So I have tried your method, a lot. I would retard at the exact trouble cell and blend slightly into the surrounding cells until I had a lot of retarded areas converging all over the table. And I was still having knocking, almost like none of the changes were having any effect. So I had a thought...since the PV retards the entire table 4 degrees when we do AT runs and it never knocks, why not try that....so I retarded the entire table on both cylinders by 2 degrees. Suddenly I got a lot less knocks, and here's the kicker...I had previously retarded the trouble areas as much as 4 degrees and still got knocks but retarding the WHOLE table by just 2 degrees almost got rid of ALL knocks.

However, I didn't like the idea of having to keep the entire table retarded, so I started slowly bringing timing back up to stock in all the areas that I knew were safe. And then had to retard a little more in the trouble areas and got to where it is now. I still have a few very light, mostly inaudible knocks, but I think I'm willing to live with it where it is. If they happen, the ECU will retard where necessary during that ride and usually prevent further events. The next ride it might not happen at all. Depends on all the variables.

But trust me, I'm very familiar with reading the logs.

 

Ah Jim, your not-so-subtle, patronizing responses always amuse me.

 

It seems like you're on right track.
I added about 3 degrees over stock and pulled back where needed, same idea as yours and I'm not to concerned with how far from stock the table ends up, it's more or less what the bike likes.

 

Thought I would post this since it contradicts alot of what some people have posted on here. Got this in an Email from Jamie Long at Fuel Moto...

"Hello, on 14-15 CANbus ECM the knock retard channel does not report individual knock events as with earlier bikes, it reports what the ECM is doing collectively with adaptive knock retard. We do not generally use AT for timing on these models, some knock activity is common and the 14-15 bikes are hyper sensitive to knock, so if you remove it you will end up with less than ideal performance. Unless you are getting large retard events I would not remove timing.

--
Thank you........Jamie Long"

This accounts for the slight drop in performance I felt after retarding some timing and misreading the log file. It doesn't report knocking on my 14, just what the adaptive knock retard is doing! (and the light comes on) No wonder everything I did made it worse. All timing back to original file from FuelMoto

 

Thought I would post this since it contradicts alot of what some people have posted on here.





Jamie has posted that IN this thread. and keep in mind this thread is a mix of all different years of bikes.

 

I think you forgot to include whatever you were trying to post.

Edit: Nevermind, I see what you did.