My head hurts, lol, when yall are speaking of closed loop isn't brought on by temp and tp i am auto tech so i have pcv thinks it great but changed my map because of poor fuel miles leaned in low to mid low rpm now fuel mile. And power much greater, i under stand how pcv handles closed and open loop because it takes place of o2s. Have not read much on anyother programs?

 

I took a look at the AutoTune feature and looks like the equivilant to ECM closed loop operation except uses Wide Band O2 sensors. I was previously under the assumption that AutoTune was some kind of magic tuner that desided what AFR you should be at for optimum power. But it looks like all this feature does is make sure your getting the AFR your asking for? My ECM does this stock for 280 dollars less with the exception of those marginal Open Loop areas. And for those open loop areas such as WOT and Decel I calibrated of my VE's in these regions during V-tune for that MAP/RPM and that should ensure that I am getting what I am asking for at WOT. I just won't be able to check with out a Dyno Sniffer....

...Well learned a little about PCV today, better than what I was 'supposed' to be doing. @Work

 

You can hear many different things from everybody on this forum. Call Jamie at fuelmoto. He will be honest and sell you only what you need. I Had a PCIII it worked great. When I did my motor build, Jamie didn't have a map that was close enough. So I had to pay to get a dyno. Upgrade to PCV with auto-tune or TTS Master Tune. TTS was what I picked. Able to tune my self and keep making changes as needed. It will always be able to tune my bike and never be outdated.

 

I went with a SERT for a couple of simple reasons...

1. I didn't want a third party "box" to be a single point of failure. I have several riding buds that have PCIII, etc, only to have some of them fail. They didn't know you could the PCIII out and re-hook to the ECM, so they had to get a tow.

2. I got my SERT at a greatly discounted rate, free install and free dyno. I know not everyone will get a deal like this, but it was a no brainer for me.

 

This doesn't sound simple to me by comparison. With the PCV-AT you simply specify the target AFR's you want and ride. It does the rest, so what am I missing here?

With TTS and SEST you're still limited by the narrow-band sensors, which restrict your AFR and operational range (RPM and TP). Unless I'm missing something you can't auto-tune anything (closed-loop) with these programs above about 50% TP. Am I wrong?

The PCV-AT auto-tunes the entire RPM/TP range.

 

With your stock ECM in closed loop it auto adjusts your AFR's while you ride, but with TTS you calibrate your entire MAP before you set your AFR's. This calibration makes sure that when you ask for 'x' fuel ratio you get 'x' fuel ratio, what ever that ratio is.

TTS doesn't use TP for AFR's instead it uses MAP, as TP/RPM doesn't account very well for different load conditions, such as 2 up or hill climbing ect. For TTS, the portion of the base calibration files that is out of Closed loop is 20 & 80, 90, 100 (I beleive with out looking at it) This doesn't mean I haven't tuned for it, at those MAP positions I have calibrated my Volumetric Efficiencies such that I should get what I am asking for, I am just not able to validate that with my sensors. If I wanted to I could dyno and sniff it then adjust my VE's to correct for any small variation that may exist.

 

I don't know of any tuner that will auto-tune as you suggest. For example, for WOT performance you use the AFR's that historically provide the best power, which is 12.8-13.2:1. Fuel Moto has found that 13.0 is best for HD's and this is the figure used in the Target AFR tables of his maps, as well as what I'm using in mine. Could I get .1 more HP using 12.9 or 13.1? Maybe, but to me it isn't worth a dyno tune to find out.

Tuning the cruise range is up to what the rider wants to accomplish, optimum cooling or best gas mileage. I've explained how I get both by using a map switch, so I won't belabor that again here--but I am using 14.5:1 in the cruise range for AT mode.

If you want that last .1 HP out of a build you may want to do a dyno tune even with AT, and I've never said that AT eliminated dyno tunes for all applications, just the vast majority of them. Since it auto-tunes throughout the RPM and TP range and makes available AFR's from about 11-16:1 (or thereabouts), you can specify any usable target AFR you want. Nobody is going to use <12.5 or > 14.7 in any tune. With TTS/SEST you are limited to approx. 14.2-15.1:1 in their limited closed-loop range.

I wouldn't call anything about 50% TP to be "marginal." When you tune for performance you are tuning for WOT, and the stock O2 sensors simply can't do it. Sure, you can plug in an AFR for the cruise range and this is very useful, but it still won't cover the entire RPM/TP range or anywhere near it.

If you want a real tune of TTS or SEST you'll either have to find a good canned map for an exact bike, which is almost impossible unless you use only certain HD parts, or do a dyno tune. I just don't see any other way around it. Projections are guesswork, IMO, and is like taking a PCV with a zeroed map and saying "Hmm, I think I'll put a 20 here and a 15 there and see how it runs," not having any idea where you are.

Lot's of "should" and "won't be able to check" questions here. Sure, the PCV-AT costs more than TTS or SEST, but I still think you need a dyno tune with these latter two if you want to eliminate the guesswork, and with that you are over the cost of the PCV-AT ($600). Furthermore, everytime you make a change you'll need another dyno tune.

On a side note, most don't really need AT. A PCV with a Fuel Moto map will be very close to ideal for only $300. When you make upgrades you'll need another map, of course, but FM has a large library from dyno tunes they perform in their shop. IMO for most people this is sufficient, and I used a PCIII and PCV for >2 years with excellent results. The key was having a good starting point (base map).

Work can wait. Easy for me to say being (mostly) retired, right?

I feel that the PCV-AT is being ignored or covered very lightly on many of these tuner threads, mostly because it is new and most people don't understand how it works. When you look at the feature list I think it's the best controller on the market whether cost is a factor or not.

 

When you use "MAP" with caps I'm not sure if you are referring to the map or the MAP (Manifold-Atmospheric Pressure) sensor. If the latter, the PCV uses the MAP sensor, too. With AT you don't need it, but you do with the basic PCV.

I still don't see how you do an initial calibration of your map outside closed-loop mode? How do you know where to start, and if you use a starting point how do you know where to go from there?

Okay, but with MAP (sensor) you're getting useful ambient info, not the AFR you're running. It will compensate for different riding conditions, but you still need to know where your AFR's are, so how do you do it? There's nothing in the stock system that will provide feedback on AFR's in open-loop, even the MAP sensor which only reports useful info like atmospheric and manifold pressure. I must be missing something here, so what is it?

Okay, so you need a dyno tune to get it right. I still don't see how you can even get close not having any feedback in open-loop mode, which is half the TP range including WOT. My PCV base maps all show wide corrections over the stock ECM fuel tables to bring AFR's to an ideal level, and using these ECM defaults is not a good starting point, IMO.

 

ICLICK you are very well imformed. The only thing I have to add to your post above is that the TTS can start with a calibration file that is way out in the sunset. As you do your Vtune runs it will adjust your VE tables. Every time you load a new map you are that much closer to spot on in the cruise range. No projections in this area what so ever.

 

I don't know of one either, the AutoTune name made me think it did something like this.

We can do the same by adjsuting our Closed Loop Bias, just not recommended to go below 14.2 as the sensors won't last as long and the data gets sketchy with the narrowband used for close loop operation. If I want richer I need to go out of Closed loop. At that point I loose much of the ECM's 'autotune' features and rely on the Volumetic Efficiency tuning I performed to ensure that the correct AFR is applied.
[/Quote]

With TTS IF I want to remain in closed loop I need to use the closed loop bias tables, which rely on the O2 sensors capabilities to make any adjustments that might be required. TTS allows me to specify my AFR's outside of closed loop beyond what the sensors are capable of acurately reading and becasue I V-Tuned I can be sure, but not verifiable (unless I dino) that I am getting the AFT I asked for. I just can't check it.

TTS doesn't use TP. I'm not specifically tuning for performance either, or I would be at the Dyno shop. I am tuning my bike to run GREAT with my new pipes and AC, eventually cams. If I wanted EXCELLENT I would need to dyno. Hmmm... AFR's and VE's are different. My AFR's are fine at WOT just as yours are, you need to check them so your system can make adjustments, I check them in advance using V-Tune to calibrate then set my AFR's afterwards. The difference is you can continue to check them in real tiem while I need to rely on the work I did with my V-Tune, cause my narrowband can't check them at that AFR I chose (or that came with my map).

I disagree, a generic map and V-tune will be fine for a vast many owners. especially if they just use AC and Exhaust. The amount of tuning required for such small changes is limited. If you have a bit more to your build it would be advantagous to have it dyno'd anyway with either system...

I disagree again, if you have a build that's no where close to the base calibrations you have a good case for a dyno, but again if I'm building that bike I still buy the TTS and just have it dyno tuned.


It would be nice to see a growing number of MAP's available for the TTS System.


Thats cool, I like mine too!