No. I am simply looking at the data.

 

That is my understanding of TT. You have to have a bike tuned and then you install TT to help hold that tune. Hundreds of thousands of bikes are out there with a tune, and are holding that tune for many miles with out spending the extra money for the TT. Is the TT really needed? Bike is already tuned. Hundreds of thousands of bikes running around having their tunes maintained with the O2 that already came on the bike. Some are even tuned with Vision. At one time they said that is that was needed. Now they have came up with something else to sell you. And marketing and selling they are doing.


I'm sure some shops think it's great. I can sell you a tuner, and a tune. Just like before. Now with this new TT. Before the bike goes out the door. I now can upsell you something else that I will get labor for install and money from the mark up of the product. Sounds like they manufactured a false need for the product they are now going to sell you. ........and they will call it Target Tune. Even though it is not meant to tune your bike. The only thing it address's is the fuel side during steady state cruise during closed loop operation. It does nothing in the open loop operations. Your bike is not in closed loop 100% of the time with TT. The same rules apply as when it was handled with NB's. Acceleration table is still going to kick it out of closed loop. Deceleration table will do the same. Same with PE mode. How does TT feed back for the WOT/ high rpm area with PE mode on? All goes back to the VE tables that were tuned correctly in the beginning.

 

Thanks for the post. Btw, Darryl Thatcher says hi!

 

Andy, it appears from your screenshot this vehicle spent most of it time either at full throttle or off throttle. Like racing, right?
Maybe offer the same graph for a typical Harley ridden on the street?
I believe the picture would be a lot different than a CRX racing around cones for best time.
Bob

 

My point is to stop the mis-information that is being passed out. I think Bosch Broad Band sensors are fine when used correctly and by someone who understands the limits. In the case of a HD Twin Cam you have to look at it like two one cylinder engines with a common crankshaft and common intake manifold. With the stock NB sensor it can respond and see real changes in the entire closed loop range cycle by cycle, a WB cannot. No getting around the simple facts. Now if your bike uses a 4 pin DLC connector you have a J1850 system and the stock HD code only allows data to be put out ~ 2 times per second, so you miss seeing everything else that is really going on in the data. Remember the DLC communications was NOT designed to provide real time tuning information. While it does give helpful information, it runs way to slow to show the real picture even at idle, let alone at higher RPM's. If your bike is the later 6 pin DLC connector then your data rate goes up to ~ 12 times per second with stock HD code. Much better but still not near enough for higher RPM's. So there is an art, for lack of better words, to getting the job done. One of the tricks the dyno operators use is to slow the engine down by holding it in a steady state condition. This allows for the data coming out of the ECM and sensors to be a truer average of what is going on. Mind you its not perfect but much better.

As far as using a stock HD delphi ECM and using WB sensors the ECM is slowly making adjustments but it does NOT remember any of them! That is a key point, it makes an adjustment based on the current condition the engine is operating in. So let's take the typical bike rider who starts out from a stop sign. You let the clutch out and give it throttle to accelerate the engine up in RPM then let off throttle and shift. You repeat the process in each gear until you reach whatever speed you are looking for. So the ECM is adjusting in real time but the data coming out will not show it and you have a WB sensor not capable of giving the ECM what it needs cycle by cycle. So the engine is at 1000 RPM when you let the clutch out and the ECM is making an adjustment based on the information coming from a WB in this case. Let say the setting in the ECM is off 10%, so it issues a 10% correction but you now start to accelerate the engine and the WB tells the ECM its now 20% off, so the ECM makes a 20% correction and the previous 10% correction is gone forever. So now the engine continues up in RPM and this process happens over and over again until you reach the engine RPM you want and you pull the clutch in and shift. Engine RPM drops and the process starts all over again. Nothing is ever learned by the ECM so it starts over and over again the entire time the engine is running!

The reason for even having this development code in the ECM in the first place was to help create a new tune on a dyno where the engine would be held in a steady state condition and the VE values could be properly adjusted by the calibrator. Test, adjust and move on. Once the VE tables are properly calibrated the ECM is now running the show and the closed loop feed back system is turned on to allow feed back for trimming over the life of the engine. The NB system operates differently than the development code does in the ECM. It adjust real time, cycle by cycle and then stores the adjustments for anytime the engine returns to that operating condition. The memorized values are allowed to be slowly adjusted over time.

This is the heart of a Closed Loop system and they have worked this way for years in both the car and motorcycle world so it's nothing new or trick that HD has done. The fact that some are trying to misuse the development code and telling people it does things it clearly is not capable of is NOT coming from HD/Delphi.

 

The results I have seen with this isn't real exciting. Comparing a CL in the cruise area calibration to a OL tune. I saw no difference in engine or oil temp. Fuel mileage dropped about 10 from 43. Plugs were not as clean.


Did it ride and perform better in the cruise area? Was it more responsive? Could I even tell a difference? No. How could I quantify any felt change at steady state? Is the HD bathtub style head sophisticated enough to know the difference between 14.3 and 14 or 13.8? How much more fuel is that actually equate to. Is the math there to support if that amount is going to have an affect on power output or heat absorption? How much of an affect?


Lets look at what happens when you roll on pass on the highway. As soon as you open throttle. You loose vacuum and MAP goes up. We are now operating in a different area of the AFR table, VE table, spark table....... and that area of the table can be set up the same in both of the test calibration. Regardless of how the steady state cruise area is.


If 13.8 is a better starting point to transition to 13.2 with throttle opening. Your acceleration tables needs some work.

 

Like I mentioned in bold if the TT using WB sensors can't be used to incorporate learned values then it does nothing or even worse it just messes things up by confusing the ECM.

It seems to me that a lot of folks don't understand or realize that the NB sensors are perfectly fine for determining accurate VEs throughout the whole map while running a tuning session (I use basic auto tune with my Power Vision).
Once the VEs are memorized and written that part of the tune is set, you could throw away the 02 sensors and your bike will run just as good off of the VEs

 

A Sporty runs horrible in closed loop on the NB closed loop settings. DJ fixed that on the WB cals.

 

Now, someone is starting to understand that you are only using the NB sensor to arrive at the proper VE value. Place the ECM in a range the NB is deadly accurate and adjust the VE values to get the target mixture, now the system is calibrated. Notice I did NOT say tuned, but calibrated. Once you have that, you can set the ECM to run back in Open loop in the high load areas and you will have a good tune done. Then, the weather, and fuel must remain exactly the same forever and the combustion process must be exactly as it was the day you tested. Could it be better, sure but you would need a dyno and several other pieces of equipment to be sure that the accuracy is any better.

 

Hrdtail78 thanks for an honest reply. I was thinking more of a comparison like setting the Lambda at .977 or .981 with both the nb and wb. Do you think the bike would respond differently under normal riding conditions other than it taking a micro second longer to constantly adjust the aff?