Hey guys, what's happ?

I recently purchased the PC 3 USb Power Commander and was wondering a few things. Before we even get going and this turns all sour real fast....
I understand that messing with individual settings can hurt the bike real fast and I'M NOT doing any of that, but merely using canned maps for now until I can someday maybe get it Dynoed!

The last post I posted was about using the 9V.battery and I got all kinds of **** from people who didn't even read the original post correctly in the first place! Lets not try to get this all out of proportion!!

I like looking (comparing) maps but not really sure what it all means..
I mean,,, I have a basic understanding but would like someone with EXPERIENCE maybe explain the difference in these two maps a little..

The one named Dads Harley was the one I was using and ran two tank fulls of gas with it and it really felt real nice! I only got about 33 MPG with it though.

The second map named (From Jamie) is a map Jamie sent me and said it should be really nice with my setup. I just uploaded it today to the PC3 and going to run two tank fulls with it and see how it goes.

I'm really not to concerned (within reason of course) about fuel economy more than I am about the bike running cooler so the O'l ladys legs don't burn up any more! hahah

So whats the diff in these two maps guys?
Which should run cooler? Which looks better to you? Any ideas?
This might be a good lesson for a lot of us guys who really don't know how to read and interpert the numbers!

Thanks guys
Pete

 

Map 1 would run cooler but may be too rich. Some of the map point settings seem to be too rich considering your setup. Map 2 seems to be more realistic for a stage 1.

 

Map 1 meaning Dads Harley correct?
And fuel ecomony for both? Less MPG for map1 I assume right?

 

That's it!
I thought more would chime in on this! LOL
Oh well thats cool...

 

Yes, the richer (more fuel) map #1 should get less fuel mileage. I had a stage one with the "canned" download from power commander and it was similar to Jamie's map from Fuel Moto. On your #1 map, the value of 41 at 10% throttle at 2000 rpm, is very rich which would explain poor fuel mileage. Too much fuel will just foul your plugs, cause coking in the combustion chamber and actually make less horsepower.

 

Mongo,

But when using that map I wasn't getting any popping or anything when
decelerating. It should also run cooler than Jamies map right?

 

It would run slightly cooler. Would probably be a good idea to check the plugs after running a tank of fuel just to see if they're sooting up. You can get rid of the popping by changing the value at 0% throttle from 1500 rpm on up starting at 15 at 1500 rpm, 18 at 1750 rpm and 20 for the higher rpms. The only time you encounter those rpms at 0% throttle is under deceleration. The lean mixture under deceleration is what's causing the popping. Those settings will fix that.

 

Mongo.

I said I WAS NOT getting any popping whatsoever. That's why I thought it might be a good map to use especially since I'm looking for a cooler running engine so the wifes legs wouldn't keep getting so hot.
I'm running Jamies map now for a tank full and will check the gas milage but I think I may go back to the original map due to the richness of it.
Whatcya think?

Pete

 

You can see the difference in the maps at 0% throttle. Map number 1 has higher settings at 0% than Jamies map which is why it didn't pop. In the long run, running too rich (too much fuel) leads to excessive carbon build up internally. On the Power Commanders, you'll note all of the map points have a numerical adjustment, either positive or negative. That represents a percentage above the stock factory map in your bikes computer. For the most part, the factory map is fairly rich at the higher rpms and higher throttle openings. It's at the lower throttle openings (2% to 40%) where the factory settings are too lean which is where you see most of the upward positive numbers on both maps. Jamies map would cool things considerably while still keeping throttle response crisp (when you go too rich, there's actually so much fuel, it could actually cause response to fall off). The great thing about the PCiii usb is you can save Jamie's map, you can then tweak it (at 0% throttle opening to get rid of the pop) download it to the bike and give it a try knowing that you can download map 1 anytime you want to compare the difference. I had the PCiii usb on my 07 for 4 years and just recently went to the PCV with the autotune. I'd probably still be with the PCiii today if I still had my stock cams. I liked having the feedback of being able to actually see what my fuel mixture was with the wideband oxygen sensors. With your fuel mixture at or about 13.2 to 1 (13.2 parts of air to 1 part fuel) you make more power. 13.9 to 14.2 (higher means more air for the one part fuel which is leaner) gets better mileage but more heat. 12 to one is overkill, too much fuel, poor mileage and excessive carbon build up. At cruise throttle setting (around 20% throttle from 2000 rpm to 3000) running at 13.9 is ok, you'd want it richer at higher throttle openings. The factory settings are too lean (around 15 to 1) which is why you see the positive numbers, in some cases, fairly large increases. Jamie's map probably works well for both cruise and power other than the needed tweak for the popping. You can probably check the temps with the dipstick temp gauge and see that both maps do the job for cooling the bike down. If that's the case and you don't have pinging, there's no benefit to adding additional fuel.

 

Mongomark is doing a good job of explaining this, IMO, but I will add a few things:

The first map looks like a map downloaded from the PC site, as their maps tend to be on the rich side--too rich IMO. Fuel Moto typically tunes for 13.7-13.8 in the cruise range and 13.0 at 80% TP and above, and I wouldn't go any richer than this for normal riding. If I had to choose between the two I would run the Fuel Moto map, as the AFR's he's chosen should be fine for cooling, while mileage will be better than you'll likely achieve with the first map.

I personally like to run much leaner AFR's in the cruise range most of the time. Like Mongomark I have the PCV-AT, and have created a base map using cruise-range AFR's of 13.5:1 for the best cooling in hot-weather traffic, while setting Target AFR's to 14.5-14.6 in this range for normal riding which I use 99% of the time. With an oil cooler I can do this and only rarely need to switch to the richer map to cool it down. Note that I have not changed any value from 60% TP and higher, thus keeping the good roll-on performance when I need it. We may be OT for the OP's original question so I will stop with the map-switch discussion here unless someone has a specific question about it. This has been discussed to death in other threads anyway.

Regarding decel pop, I am not convinced that adding fuel to the 0% column as has been done on both of these maps is a fix. I've always run -10 from 3K on up in the 0% column, both with stock and 255 cams, and never had a popping problem. Since this is an area that will be used in decel only, I can't see dumping fuel there unless it is necessary. I would change those values to -10 and if you don't get decel popping just leave it there.

To the OP: You shouldn't be afraid to tweak the map values as long as you have a back-up. I would save the original map to your computer's hard-drive using a unique filename. I started with PCV-1a.pvm for the stock cams, PCV-2a.pvm for the 255's. When I made my first tweaks I saved it as PCV-2b, etc., keeping the running file always as PCV-2z.pvm. This is just one way of doing it, of course, but as long as you save the files (especially the original) and are able to revert to them later if needed you should be fine.