| Author |
Message |
    
Justa4banger
| | Posted on Wednesday, February 17, 2010 - 10:20 am: | 
|
Dyno operators do this to get an acurrate graph over the entire rpm range, and yes while i agree you wouldn't "race" at tat rpm, even moderate input still makes the bike go lean. Rolling on the throttle at that rpms (which you guys would do) still ran lean.
i also believe that the bike is happier with a bit more fuel. |
Jules
| | Posted on Wednesday, February 17, 2010 - 11:06 am: |
|
Just out of interest are we talking "power robbing" lean or a catastrophic impact on the longevity of the motor?
I know it'd only be a reasoned guess but it'd be interesting to know if this is something you feel is worth "worrying" about or just accepting it if you're not too bothered about making maximum HP
(Message edited by jules on February 17, 2010) |
Bob_thompson
| | Posted on Wednesday, February 17, 2010 - 11:14 am: |
|
You know guys that I am partial to my Buell so take this as only my observation.
If I was racing only I would be tremendously concerned with dyno numbers and ultimate H.P. especially in the 7000-11000 rpm range and would be using all the Buell race parts I could acquire. They had the ultimate success with 1125's and thats good enough proof for me, BUT..........
However I only do track days, maybe once a year, and have a small budget. For me, with my exhaust and a K&N, basically stock bike, this race ECM is the final solution to the best riding and performance throughout the rev. range I've ever had. It was well worth the money spent.
I'm not into "the numbers game" or I would be riding something different with better numbers. Now I'll just enjoy putting down some miles and enjoying my 1125R even more then before and that says a lot.
And thanks to everyone who did their best to bring us information with their hard work for us to ponder and decide for ourselves, good or bad. Bob |
Mountainstorm
| | Posted on Wednesday, February 17, 2010 - 11:37 am: |
|
Judging from the graphs above there is no "dangerously lean" condition occurring. Perhaps some tuning could optimize the ratio per each individual bike but overall it looks safe tome. But I'm not an expert...just an enthusiast.
Thanks again HDwrenchtx I feel more at ease putting some miles on before I hit the dyno. |
Jules
| | Posted on Wednesday, February 17, 2010 - 11:47 am: |
|
That's good to hear. I may have to wait for my birthday to get the Race ECU so for now the Barker and K&N will have to do.
I must say I really appreciate all of the info available on Badweb  - thanks to everyone who contributes |
Blake
| | Posted on Wednesday, February 17, 2010 - 03:26 pm: |
|
It is probably not wise to take Dynojet A/F ratios as absolute accurate values. I've seen them off calibration by a huge amount for various reasons. |
Blackflash
| | Posted on Wednesday, February 17, 2010 - 05:23 pm: |
|
Blakes right .The dyno jet uses a vaccum pump .Its a diaphram style thats run off a 120volt motor with offset cams .I took one apart the other day in dyno tests.If the diaphram is ripped slightly the vaccum pull will be low and be off.Plus the carbon ports in the manifold circut gets plugged too giving lower afr.Once we fixed it we then for giggles we switched from his 02 sensor currently used to a new one right out the package.Needless to say the two had very different readings on the pc.
(Message edited by blackflash on February 17, 2010) |
Hdwrenchtx
| | Posted on Wednesday, February 17, 2010 - 07:54 pm: |
|
i didnt get everything done today i wanted to so I'll wait to post more graphs.
hopefully tomorrow |
Blackflash
| | Posted on Wednesday, February 17, 2010 - 07:56 pm: |
|
thanks for your efforts Hdwrenchtx . |
Moosestang
| | Posted on Wednesday, February 17, 2010 - 07:57 pm: |
|
i didnt get everything done today i wanted to so I'll wait to post more graphs.
Tease! |
Hdwrenchtx
| | Posted on Thursday, February 18, 2010 - 12:51 am: |
|
If you don't like the topic don't read it
this was posted in response to a message that has since been deleted
(Message edited by Hdwrenchtx on February 18, 2010) |
Cravacor
| | Posted on Thursday, February 18, 2010 - 01:07 am: |
|
Good stuff HDwrenchtx, thanks for your efforts!  |
Moosestang
| | Posted on Thursday, February 18, 2010 - 10:43 am: |
|
And here I thought my Tease comment flew you off the handle. |
Justa4banger
| | Posted on Friday, February 19, 2010 - 08:03 am: |
|
It is probably not wise to take Dynojet A/F ratios as absolute accurate values. I've seen them off calibration by a huge amount for various reasons.
On 4 different dyno's, in 2 different states.. wow how does dynojet ever sell anything.... |
Mikezx9r
| | Posted on Friday, February 19, 2010 - 08:28 am: |
|
Can a Dynojet dyno not be used to tune something to get the optimal air/fuel ratio then? |
Reepicheep
| | Posted on Friday, February 19, 2010 - 10:16 am: |
|
I don't know, but one of the really good tuners I know said he wouldn't. He said anything less then a 4 gas analyzer was shooting in the dark. |
Slaughter
| | Posted on Friday, February 19, 2010 - 11:04 am: |
|
Having fiddled with tuning a few different machines with DDFI2 and DDFI3, I have a couple thoughts... MAINLY - We GOTTA remember that we're talking FUEL INJECTION. The A/F readings as are programmed into your map are dependent on THROTTLE POSITION and RPM. The typical WOT pulls are at only ONE throttle position.
You really need to take a single pull and A/F reading as an indication of how the engine performs at ONLY that ONE throttle position.
You need to think in terms of tuning EACH LINE of the table - each throttle position on the map. You can guess to some extent but GONE are the days where you can just bang out an WOT pull and get meaningful air/fuel data.
You really do have to work through the whole range of throttle/RPM before conclusions can be made.
Careful also in getting a dyno operator who is NOT used to tuning a fuel injection system. MOST folks paying for dyno runs are only interested in seeing their torque/HP curves and those can be gotten by a simple single-load, single-throttle pull. As a result, this is how many dyno dudes tend to do things.
You can't know what you really need to know across the RPM range without ALSO running the different throttle posisions = and that's what'll make a GOOD map kinda pricey. Start thinking of a HP/Torque and Air/Fuel chart for each throttle position. You CAN short cut it with an experienced dyno operator.
(Good discussion though) |
Bob_thompson
| | Posted on Friday, February 19, 2010 - 12:17 pm: |
|
I totally agree Slaughter and will also add that I believe that when doing pulls at different ranges(rpm) you should also keep the rpm steady for at least a short time to allow the air flow in that range to settle down for constant readings. Many hours can be spent doing that and constant conditions, as temperature, cooling, etc. are somewhat hard to maintain. As well as an enormous expense. Without going to those and for average use for us mostly street riders just maybe a plug and play like Dris's, EBR's & that O**ther guys and SOTP testing will suffice. For wealthy professional racers we know what they should do if possible with sponsors money!
I feel for those few who have had bad experiences and sympathize and maybe a stock setup is best for them or maybe even another brand bike. Your choice. Its a free country. |
Reepicheep
| | Posted on Friday, February 19, 2010 - 01:23 pm: |
|
Found it!
http://www.badweatherbikers.com/buell/messages/384 2/106985.html
From that post...
quote:Third, I'd like to consider what the goal of tuning
is in the first place. Is it to get a particular "A/F ratio"? It's more
likely that we would like the engine to make horsepower and be efficient
(i.e. get good mileage). Looking at oxygen content has limited use when
trying to achieve these ends. However, don't get me wrong, oxygen
measurements are actually good for something. Once you have tuned for max
power by adding and subtracting fuel, the oxygen numbers can help you to
detect an ignition timing or stagger issue. If you go straight to a
particular oxygen content, you completely ignore these factors. Even once
you've corrected these, the oxygen content can still vary substantially. So
it can help to point you in the right direction, but isn't the final arbiter
of anything. CO on the other hand can, once a proper value has been
established through bracketing, be used throughout as a target to set the
mixture strength close to optimum for power and mileage. CO is also not the
final arbiter of anything, but it tells you much, much more about whether an
engines map is in the ballpark than O2. You can hit an oxygen target right
off the bat while the engine has the completely wrong amount of fuel and/or
wrong timing, whereas with CO, fuel will be close, guaranteed. As an
example, there are spots on two Aprilia Futura dyno charts I have, where the
O2 content is 0.2%. One has a CO of 12.6% (this is drowning rich!) and the
other has a CO of 3.2% (perfect at this particular throttle position/rpm
combination). I'm sure you can draw your own conclusions from this example.
I think Derek later jumped on here and had some other *great* posts chocked full of really good info... I'll try and scare them up later, or maybe he will jump in... |
Easyrider
| | Posted on Friday, February 19, 2010 - 01:37 pm: |
|
Slaughter, You mean every cell, on every, RPM on every TPS range... (-: |
Justa4banger
| | Posted on Friday, February 19, 2010 - 03:02 pm: |
|
I feel for those few who have had bad experiences and sympathize and maybe a stock setup is best for them or maybe even another brand bike. Your choice. Its a free country.
"Those few" in which you mean ME....correct? cause i mean i'm the only one so far that has gotten lower than expected figures...on more than 1 dyno.
So because i got results that were lower than expected, you are suggesting that i should go with another brand bike? i mean obviously i don't want the bike stock.
Wow......... Really?
Thanks for the support Bob |
Edmbueller
| | Posted on Friday, February 19, 2010 - 03:30 pm: |
|
F'n ENOUGH ALREADY guys,
This used to be THE place to com for all things Buell, the ONLY forum I belong to that didn't have all the typical internet Bullsh*t.
Not so anymore. The 1125 has brought so many new people to the Buell family, unfortunately many seem to be douchebags.
People can't even come here and ask a simple question without the first 3 responses being smart ass comments. |
Jonesz0003
| | Posted on Friday, February 19, 2010 - 03:55 pm: |
|
edmbueller i know what you mean thats why i try not to ask questions on here unless i really need to know something |
Reepicheep
| | Posted on Friday, February 19, 2010 - 04:30 pm: |
|
If you wade through the attitudes, there is a pretty cool and educational thread buried in here.
It is more productive to add facts then complain about people not adding facts.
I was off looking for ways to take a $30 carbon monoxide detector and see if I can hack it up to try and get my KDX-200 jetted right. It's possible, don't know how practical. There is a semiconductor that needs to run at 400 degrees C but that will give a linear voltage proportional to CO content. Sounds as least as promising as hacking up oxygen sensors.
On the other hand, 4 gas analyzers aren't *that* expensive. And my local Kawasaki dealer can probably jet my KDX-200 with *their* 4 gas analyzer for $60 in labor.
Its fun to think about though . |
Blake
| | Posted on Friday, February 19, 2010 - 04:47 pm: |
|
On 4 different dyno's, in 2 different states.. wow how does dynojet ever sell anything...."
Dynojet sells equipment and software that primarily measure torque and power. Good tuners understand that it is a tool to help tune an engine. The values provided by the dynojet are used to compare relative changes in power, torque and yes the reported A/F ratio to help optimize the engine's performance. That's it. |
Justa4banger
| | Posted on Saturday, February 27, 2010 - 07:31 am: |
|
ANy update? |
|
