PC –V Excessive Trim Values?
Thread Starter
|
Tourer
Joined: Jun 2008
Posts: 336
Likes: 0
From: Oklahoma
PC –V Excessive Trim Values?
Just thought I woul check the Trim Values on my PCV today before a long ride tomorrow and I found some excessive trim values and I'm wondering what you guys think. Maybe they are not excessive?
Map originaly from FuelMoto only change is that auto tune has been running for awhile but I havnt accepted the trim values yet.
Map originaly from FuelMoto only change is that auto tune has been running for awhile but I havnt accepted the trim values yet.
Intermediate
Joined: Jan 2011
Posts: 29
Likes: 0
From: PA
Everyone rides differently. Accept the trims and just ride it like you always do. Just make sure and save your original map for future ref. Got mine from FuelMoto also. I accepted the trims about once a week. My trims looked about the same at the start using the AT. My mileage was a bit low but now after about 500 miles it runs great and mpg is about 42. Enjoy your ride.
Stellar HDF Member
Joined: Dec 2009
Posts: 2,035
Likes: 8
From: Western Canada
U may want to keep an eye on those trims.
Try re installing the original map and see if those trim values continue. If they do then you could try changing the AFR settings a little. It looks like your map may be set a little too lean and that's why trims are so high because the AT is compensating to try and match the AFR to the map setting. That is unless this is the first time you've checked the trims.
Stellar HDF Member
Joined: Mar 2008
Posts: 2,921
Likes: 33
From: Lewisberry PA
I would make sure I have the base map saved, then accept these values, they don't look too bad, there are limited areas where the AT is adjusting.
Another option you have is to not accept your trims and change the adjustment to 5% instead of 20%. That way you can accept smaller trims to see if there is an issue. I like to do this (ok used to do this) and save a monthly map.
Another option you have is to not accept your trims and change the adjustment to 5% instead of 20%. That way you can accept smaller trims to see if there is an issue. I like to do this (ok used to do this) and save a monthly map.
Road Warrior
Joined: Feb 2009
Posts: 1,274
Likes: 130
From: Now Western TN
I have adjusted my base map and put in higher AFR's in my cruising range and the AT is now adjusting, so I am seeing some trim values in the -20 up to -30 range.
So it depends on the original base map and what the AFR's are set too, and that will determine how large of an adjustment the trim values will try to make.
It could be you got a rich map from FM.
Trending Topics
Outstanding HDF Member
Joined: Aug 2010
Posts: 2,893
Likes: 103
From: Jacksonville NC
HD Forum Stories
The Best of Harley-Davidson for Lifelong Riders
7 Surprising Harley-Davidson Products that Are Not Motorcycles
Verdad Gallardo
8 Best Harley-Davidson Motorcycles Ever
Pouria Savadkouei
10 Worst Harley-Davidson Motorcycles Ever
Pouria Savadkouei
Killer Custom's Jail Break Is The Breakout That Refused to Blend In
Verdad Gallardo
Crazy Bunderbike Build Looks Amazing, But Is It Impossible to Ride?
Verdad Gallardo
Harley-Davidson Reveals Super Cool Cafe Racer Concept
Verdad Gallardo
Engraved Rebellion: Inside Bundnerbike's Glam Rock II
Verdad Gallardo
10 Motorcycles You Should Never Buy
Joe Kucinski
10 Things Harley-Davidson Needs to Fix in 2026
Verdad Gallardo
Elite HDF Member
Joined: Nov 2010
Posts: 3,846
Likes: 173
From: Simi Valley, CA
I've done so many trim runs on my bike that most folks would consider me nuts. I have hundreds of these saved on my computer.
In the tweaking of my base map(s) I would target trims of 2% or less throughout the entire map and would validate the map by back-to-back test runs (approx 20 miles minimum) with nothing more than my target 2% trim.
2% is a very optimistic target and probably much closer than necessary but that's what I shoot for anyway. You have to do a lot of hair splitting to get there. When developing the maps, 3% or 4% is probably a more realistic target to shoot for and then over time a few trims as high as 5 or 6% are not uncommon, but the majority of trims should be smaller - like 3% or less.
Any double-digit trims are strong candidates for tweaking the respective fuel table cell in my opinion.
And one other point, once I got my map where I wanted it, I zeroed out the AFR target for the 2% TP column. What that does is in effect takes the autotune out of the loop at that throttle position. The reason I did this is because the autotune does not work very effectively and cosistently at 2% throttle. You'll be chasing wildly swinging trims there forever if you don't.
In the tweaking of my base map(s) I would target trims of 2% or less throughout the entire map and would validate the map by back-to-back test runs (approx 20 miles minimum) with nothing more than my target 2% trim.
2% is a very optimistic target and probably much closer than necessary but that's what I shoot for anyway. You have to do a lot of hair splitting to get there. When developing the maps, 3% or 4% is probably a more realistic target to shoot for and then over time a few trims as high as 5 or 6% are not uncommon, but the majority of trims should be smaller - like 3% or less.
Any double-digit trims are strong candidates for tweaking the respective fuel table cell in my opinion.
And one other point, once I got my map where I wanted it, I zeroed out the AFR target for the 2% TP column. What that does is in effect takes the autotune out of the loop at that throttle position. The reason I did this is because the autotune does not work very effectively and cosistently at 2% throttle. You'll be chasing wildly swinging trims there forever if you don't.
Road Warrior
Joined: Feb 2009
Posts: 1,274
Likes: 130
From: Now Western TN
I've done so many trim runs on my bike that most folks would consider me nuts. I have hundreds of these saved on my computer.
In the tweaking of my base map(s) I would target trims of 2% or less throughout the entire map and would validate the map by back-to-back test runs (approx 20 miles minimum) with nothing more than my target 2% trim.
2% is a very optimistic target and probably much closer than necessary but that's what I shoot for anyway. You have to do a lot of hair splitting to get there. When developing the maps, 3% or 4% is probably a more realistic target to shoot for and then over time a few trims as high as 5 or 6% are not uncommon, but the majority of trims should be smaller - like 3% or less.
In the tweaking of my base map(s) I would target trims of 2% or less throughout the entire map and would validate the map by back-to-back test runs (approx 20 miles minimum) with nothing more than my target 2% trim.
2% is a very optimistic target and probably much closer than necessary but that's what I shoot for anyway. You have to do a lot of hair splitting to get there. When developing the maps, 3% or 4% is probably a more realistic target to shoot for and then over time a few trims as high as 5 or 6% are not uncommon, but the majority of trims should be smaller - like 3% or less.
I zeroed out the AFR target for the 2% TP column. What that does is in effect takes the autotune out of the loop at that throttle position. The reason I did this is because the autotune does not work very effectively and cosistently at 2% throttle. You'll be chasing wildly swinging trims there forever if you don't.