I keep seeing this over & over but maps are open loop, wideband o2 sensors are limited and slow to respond the way I understand it, and the power commander still looks like the best bang for your $. I dont think a true closed loop feedback system exists, but rather a limited closed loop. Do I have this right?

 

I am a firm believer in tts mastertune. Ive put them on 3 bikes and they run better than they did from the factory. The v-tune feature tunes the bike while driving.
I am not selling these tuners or work for tts. i just think they are the best on the market right now for 07 and newer bikes.

 

Can I set the A/F ratio with TTS mastertune? By chance, not that I care, but is it EPA approved? thanx

 

How are WB O2 sensors limited? They can read AFR's from 11-16:1, and in the case of the PCV-AT have a sampling rate of 50x/sec. The PCV Auto Tune and Thundermax are the only closed-loop auto-tune systems that I know of. Neither will auto-tune ignition timing but the PCV retains the stock ECU knock-sensing function as well as other sensors (MAP, etc.), but the T'Max has none and uses none of the stock sensors or at best limits their scope.

I have no experience with the T'Max, but I can attest that the PCV-AT works very well. You don't need a correct map to begin with, as you can create your own custom base map by developing the trim tables and then "accepting" those trims. Or, just start with any map and let AT tune on the fly. There's no need to accept trims at any time unless you are creating a base map for a singular purpose, like to utilize a map switch. With the PCV-AT you can create a rich base map and switch between it (open-loop) for better cooling and apply leaner target AFR's (closed-loop) for better gas mileage.

Call Fuel Moto for more info, as they sell both of these tuners and others.

 

iclick, is there any reason you couldn't configure it the other way, Open-loop for your mileage map and close loop it for performance? Wondering if one way works better than the other?

 

First, the way I've set mine up isn't as a compromise between mileage and performance, but rather mileage and cooling. You can have both mileage and performance in one map by earmarking the cruise range for lean-running and let the target AFRs go progressively richer as you roll-on the throttle. Where the cooling comes in is making the cruise-range rich in the low-end, and that hurts mileage. My base map was created with rich AFRs in the cruise range (13.5:1), but I did not change them above 40% throttle position. That means it runs lean in the cruise range while running in closed-loop mode but transitions into rich territory up to 13:1 @ 80% throttle and above. I've change the Target AFRs in the cruise-range to 14.5-14.6 for better mileage. I did a long-winded write-up on this here where I went into detail on my concept of setting-up a map switch with Auto-Tune.

You could reverse the order as you suggested, but I would rather have the precision of auto-tuning active most of the time when I'm trying to get good mileage, yet be able to switch to the rich base map (open-loop) only when I need extra cooling, like in heavy summer traffic. When I'm running 13.5:1 with the base map (open-loop, no AT) I can't tell the difference in part-throttle performance or throttle response when I switch to closed-loop where I'm running 14.5-14.6 in the cruise range.

Now that I have access to CHT data while riding (head-temp gauge) I'll be doing some tests to see exactly how much difference there is between running 13.5 and 14.5 AFRs by flipping the map switch on a long ride.

 

This will be interesting to see. I think I follow what your saying. I'll read your write up. Plan on purchasing an AT from soon.

Thanks!

 

I reread my post and I'm surprised you followed it, 'cause my explanation was very lame. Here's the first paragraph again with some changes in bold. Hopefully it's clearer than before.

First, the way I've set mine up isn't as a compromise between mileage and performance, but rather mileage and cooling. You can have both mileage and performance in one map by earmarking the cruise range for lean-running and let the target AFRs go progressively richer as you roll-on the throttle. Where the cooling comes in is making the cruise-range rich in the low-end of the base map (open-loop), and that hurts mileage. My base map was created with rich AFRs in the cruise range (13.5:1), but I did not change them above 40% throttle position. That means it runs lean in the cruise range while in closed-loop but transitions into rich territory up to 13:1 @ 80% throttle and above. I've change the Target AFRs in the cruise-range to 14.5-14.6 for better mileage. I did a long-winded write-up on this here where I went into detail on my concept of setting-up a map switch with Auto-Tune.

 

I assumed is was the open loop since you told me in the following paragraph you wanted the gas mileage map to be running on the AT.


OK, I see you are changing the AFR's across the map so higher AFR's in the cruising range but lower AFR's at the higher throttle.

Thanks

 

Actually the target AFRs above 40% are the same as the original rich Fuel Moto map. I want to get good mileage while cruising but have no reduction in performance when I roll it on.

Go look at my write-up where I show both pairs of Target AFR tables, one to create the richer base map and the other for leaner AT that I run 99.9% of the time. Above 40% I used the same target AFR numbers that were in the original Fuel Moto map, as I wanted the roll-on performance to be optimal regardless of what mode I'm in. If I want good mileage I figure I need to behave myself and keep TP below 40%. That's not hard to do, as the bike doesn't need much throttle to accelerate rapidly enough for most situations, even passing. The SE255 cams help greatly in this regard.

The rich mode differs from the lean mode only at 40% TP and below, and the leanest AFRs only affect 5-15% TP. At 20-40% I've tapered it into the richer settings. Once you see the tables you'll see what I mean.