| Author | Message | ||
     Craigster |
Blake, let me answer your questions directly then. "Is cruising steadily at 25 mph in 2nd gear loaded or unloaded?" It would be relatively unloaded, but of course that depends on map, which will vary based on road slope, elevation and loaded weight. One single pulse width programmed to squirt based on TP and rpm would not seem to cover all conditions now would it? Unless of course you have other means of measurement and adjustment. "And in either case the O2 sensor is more accurate than anything else in ascertaining mixture requirements." So why hasn't anyone built an EFI system that uses ONLY O2? No need for an IAT or CHT reading....no map or Maf....just O2 since it is 'more accurate' than anything else. "Also, why could not the EFI determine relative engine load from simply noting rate of change of engine speed and/or throttle position?" It can, to some extent, based on rpm and TP, BUT assume you're in an environment that sits at 105kpa ambient.....WOT (100 -105 kpa) could occur at as little as 20% throttle at low rpm. That may not happen until 75% throttle at close to peak rpm. It's still a compromise. Climb a mountain at any throttle position above cruise and as the pressure drops, if you're not in the band for reading the O2, you just keep getting richer and richer. Speed density can compensate without having to observe O2. "Simpler? In some ways, yes," (Agreed!!!) "in others no." (Agreed again) "Better? Seems so." (Again, my Cyclone runs on Alpha-N...so I never said better or worse....depends on application...so it seems we agree once again...maybe) "Ask Triumph and BMW how simple it is to devise a reliable and smooth EFI for a sporting bike that will meets the more rigorous emissions requirements without a catalytic converter. Who else has done that besides Buell?" Good point. However I have not had to bring the GSX-R 1000 back for three code updates to the ECM just to get it to run acceptably and have decent drivability. Don't think there were many X1 owners who could say the same. "Why do you need an airflow sensor when intake airflow is 100% governed by throttle position and engine speed?" Because mountain rides are not the only thing that affects air flow and pressure. Daily pressure spikes mean 50% throttle in 3 rd gear at 7:00am does not equal the same air flow as 12:00 noon. "Why do I give a damn what the manifold pressure is? The ECM can determine engine load without it. That was my point. ECM no need manifold pressure to determine engine loading." Because it's a better measure of engine loading. Very simple. Sure Alpha-N works, but if it's so much better, why doesn't GM use it on all their cars? Fewer parts right? Should mean more profitability. Must be better, right? Either that or they know they need to have a car that runs for 200,000 miles with out having to bring it in for a TPS rest every 3000 miles (for $50). It also needs to work on a SMALL run of 110,000 Firebirds, 175,000 Camaros, 150,000 Roadmasters and Caprices...with out the vehicles needing a Race ECM to run properly. "But if I did want to answer your question, you would first need to specify WHEN wrt cam position you want the manifold pressure to be 97kpa. Intake manifold pressure is not constant, it is highly transient. As I am completely unfamiliar with such systems, I ask silly questions like that, where others more familiar might know that a certain time or averaging method is implied. I don't though." Not a question, but I'll answer anyway....It's actually fairly constant at any given rpm and throttle position, unless you're talking individual runners or in this case, a V-twin. In that case you could time it...that works (Check out the HD-Delphi system) or you could average it (rough, but acceptable) or you could use a small restrictor orifice and/or plenum chamber to buffer the signal. All of the above have been employed on lumpy V-twins. "At the same engine speed and constant throttle position, maybe, probably pretty darn close. I don't know. What is your point?" My point is that you said: "Not sure there is such a thing as unloaded operation, just relative differences in rate of change in engine speed." & "Also, why could not the EFI determine relative engine load from simply noting rate of change of engine speed and/or throttle position? " & "Why do you need an airflow sensor when intake airflow is 100% governed by throttle position and engine speed?" So if what you said is true then a Buell wouldn't even need an O2 now would it? Since as you say "Air flow is 100% governed by throttle position and engine speed." Think about it. How many times has dyno measurement and repeatability come up on this board? If all of what you say is true then there is no need to barometric pressure, and humidity and temperature. Just check the exhaust gas.....as long as it is at its optimum than it will never make more power because the barometric pressure has no effect right? Temp, who cares about temp? Has no effect right? All we need is TPS and RPM..........or was it O2 that you said is all we need. And Blake, Blake, Blake...I know you love to be more superior, but making up things I've said does not help your case. Example:"You offered that you need a MAP sensor or speed density system in order to determine engine load and that since Buell does not utilize one their EFI system was inferior and prone to fouling in some cases (you may not have stated exactly that, but it was implied based on the discussion prior) It is very easy to scroll up and read what I posted: - 'But Alpha-N alone will not cause plug fouling on start up. The Buell EFI IMHO is very slick.' I guess you're right I was implying plug fouling and inferiority...sure I can read that in there...uh, huh. sure...any English majors out there who can help interpret that for us? Let's look at the summary: Alpha -N means alpha numeric....Ahhhh! Uses throttle position, engine rpm as its primary inputs. Usually has Intake air temp and coolant, oil or cylinder head temp for warm up and failure detection for limp home mode. Many use O2 sensors to trim values for any of myriad of things that can cause an engine to require adjustment to the base map. Sounds complex....I called it 'simple'. Speed density Uses all of the above, plus adds another sensor for manifold pressure to determine engine load....since revving in neutral does not need the same fueling...seems pretty logical. I implied it was more complex...after all it has an added part at the bare minimum.....I must be wrong it is even 'simpler' than Alpha - N right? Since extra parts do that to a system. Mass Air: Uses all the same as alpha-n and in many cases speed density...so now we are talking 1 or two more parts...must be simpler still. I guess I stand corrected. Add more parts, get a simpler system. Must cost less too! I stand by my original statement, “Alpha –N is the simplest of EFI systems.” I also gave credit for the processor Buell chose for their VDO – EFI system the 87C is great choice. I think the Buell EFI is very innovative. I wish I could reprogram it to suit my needs. I do stand corrected: 28 interrupts and 4 software timers....guy over wall here had the pdf on the device. I was wrong. Sorry for any mis-representation. | ||
| Blake |
Craig, This is going downhill fast.  "And Blake, Blake, Blake...I know you love to be more superior, but making up things I've said does not help your case." Spatten stated that "TPS and RPM is not enough to deliniate the difference between no load and high load when the bike is not in gear. Therefore, too much friggin gas when the throttle is cracked with no load." implying that the Buell EFI was inadequate to prevent plug fouling, the core topic of discussion, and was actually causing plug fouling due to blipping of the throttle at startup when the engine is unloaded. You said in response that "I agree w/Spatten1 that it is "basic" EFI, and yes it can not differentiate loaded vs. unloaded operation." Sorry if I misread that. Sounded to me like you were agreeing with him.  If you want to talk tech that's fine, but please leave the snide little comments out of it. I really don't want to go there. I just enjoy talking tech. <sigh> | ||
| Craigster |
Yes it was snide. What I saw was a mis-quote and I never let that fly. I'm sorry and appologize if that was not your intent. I'd love to chat more but I have an early meeting tomorrow and need some rest, my surfing is done for the night. I needed to stay up and book some tickets/flights so surfing seemed like appropriate way to wait for down loads. 8^) I look forward to more discussion tomorrow afternoon. | ||
| Anonymous |
Craig, Since it has tach and speedo inputs and a timer, it certainly can tell whether it is loaded or not. Oh what the heck, go on believing that the Buell system is inferior and that we just lucked into the emissions numbers we did. An X1 does not have DDFI III, it had DDFI I. Excuse us for improving. I never said tht DDFI I was capable of what our latest system is. | ||
| Anonymous |
You are going to wet your pants when you see DDFI V... | ||
| Newxb9er  |
I almost wet my pants from just the simple act of riding on this beauty!! Thanks again!! I just love the simple fact that us "Buellers" are not all about speed, wheelies, stoppies, lots of fairings, and lots of bling. We are about a simple seeming, complex motorcycle, that gives us what we are seeking. I'm glad I didn't get the ZX10. I'm glad I have what I have, and I doubt I'll ever change. | ||
| Court |
>>>>go on believing that the Buell system is inferior That is an inaccurate statement. This reminds me of when Buell did a "corporate web site" and people at General Motors and Ford said "what's a web site". Kinda like when I attended the hush-hush off site meeting to sell Buell stuff on the internet (you could scheudle bike service, check dealer inventory and poll Buell parts stock around the world) and people quipped snidely "how can you sell anything over the computer?" Frankly, this is a valuable thread. The good folks at Buell, hard at work on a project, are busting a gut over how easily folks will buy into misinformation on the internet. Next they'll be saying that an underslung in tension shock is poor engineering....no, wait.....wait until Honda and Yamaha get all their "bikes of the future", you know...the ones that feature 10 year old Buell ideas, released. Poppy ••••.... Court | ||
| Craigster |
Anonymous, Where did I say it was “inferior”? I simply pointed out where it did not work well. Buells Alpha-N system had issues on X1s and S3s. Sorry if honesty is not respected. I suppose if I bow down and say, “ The Buell system is the best!” Then I’ll be in Buell’s good graces. Unfortunately I don’t work for Buell, I’m a customer. In fact I’m a past customer and potential future customer. That means you need to impress me with how the bike runs. Tech sheets and brochures are great. But meeting 2008 emissions doesn’t make me smile when I need to bring the bike back to the dealer for another $50 TPS reset. Do you honestly think customers are standing at the service desk saying, “Sure take the $50 bucks.” While riding pal Joey says, ”I can’t believe you have to have that reset by the dealer. Man I never do that with my Yamazuki.” Buell guy says, ”Well maybe you don’t, but my bike meets 2008 emissions.” Joey, “ Wow, my bike can’t do that….maybe I’ll go see if my dealer will do a $50 TPS reset for me.” I’ve praise the Buell EFI but perhaps you can not read that. All you see is that I don’t agree 100% that there were/are no issues with the system. If that’s the Buell culture I would not expect things to move quickly. I’d bet Erik does not want to be surrounded by ‘YES MEN’. My statement still stands, Alpha – N is the simplest form of EFI….If it was easier for me to build a MAF system or a Speed density I would have gone that route…but Alpha – N was easier. Please feel free to e-mail me off line. Perhaps you can enlighten me on things deep in the Buell EFI that the general public should not know. Again, I have praised the EFI for what it is. I even wish I could tap into the power of that system….the brain and firepower that’s in there, but the EPA won’t let happen. Imagine if Buell riders could say, oh yeah I built that monster motor with (throw in a bunch o’ hot rod parts here) and she runs great. Joey the Yamazuki guy says, “ so you got that HS42 carb on there?” Carb , Hell no that’s the stock computer, just a little tweaking’ is all.” Joey says’”Yeah! I can off set the enrichment trims from my dash in my Warrior 9Million.” Buell guy says,”Offsets? I’ve changed the VE and desired AFR tables, as well as warm up enrichment.” Joey would be dumbfounded. And based on what I’ve seen of the processor (three PWM out puts, event counter, timer etc.) I KNOW it’s possible. So No, not saying it’s inferior. Just not adjustable or owner friendly. I realize The EPA would poop if there was any official release of interface software and likewise someone at Buell might be fired if there was a ‘leak’ of info that resulted in nice stand alone GUI and dongle for talking to the ECM………but I can dream can’t I? | ||
| Dale |
I still say die electric silicone cures a lot of ills. On the TPS, Ox sensor, temp sensor, injector, and computer connections. | ||
| Steve_a |
Interesting discussion. I believe what Anon is trying to say is that with the multitude of sensors available, and with what can be determined by the 02 sensor and by crunching numbers on crank acceleration, etc, for instance, the Buell system is far from a simple Alpha-N. (BTW, it's not at all clear whether a simple speed-denisty system is superior to a simple alpha-N system. The first tends to give better mixture control at small throttle openings; the latter at large). But the proof of the pudding is in the eating, and the 2005 Buells have some of the best driveability of any injected motorcycles I've ridden -- which is amazing when considered with the emissions performance. The Street Rod, with its water-cooling, four-valves, and Delphi injection has noticeable lean spots off idle, for example, and can't compare to the smoothness of 2005 XB9 or XB12 throttle response. Buell injection has come a long way from the X1. And a reprogrammable race ECU (off-road use only, of course) backed up by good laptop software would be a welcome addition for those wanting to modify engines. | ||
| Whistle |
Tripper- Thanks for the advice but I've been to the Buell website numerous times, read all the info watched all the videos. Neat having Erik himself do the videos-not some hollywood sales-schmuck who is doesn't know anything about bikes... I'm just looking for more info than what is there on the website. Hopefully at some point I can just have a nice sit down chat with some of the guys at Buell and pick their brains...okay not entirely likely to happen, but I can always dream right?  I don't know near as much about fuel injection as I probably should as a mech engr who loves bikes and cars but Blake or Craig maybe you can answer this question... In general wouldn't a system that adapts for the temperature & pressure and humidty and all that BEFORE the combustion event work better than a system that adjusts AFTER the combustion event??? Getting stoich is never gonna happen exactly it's always a little over, a little under-it flip flops all around hovering right near stoich, and the point of the O2 is to help do that final little bit of adjustment, even though it is reading info about an event that happened in the past...where as sensors on the intake side are adjusting BEFORE the event to hopefully get a better burn...I think I'm starting to go in circles. Anyone got an answer? Court-As far as the frame transition goes I don't know really...I'm not one to talk since I'm not a motorcycle manufacturer...but I would *GUESS* that if you are going to release an entirely new platform a new engine comes with it... I would expect that at some point in the future Buell will have it's own clean sheet engine...and I very much look forward to seeing it...all the innovation and good engineering that goes into the bikes we have now is enough to make me pee my pants. I can't even fathom what Buell could acheive if they clean sheeted their own engine entirely.......God himself would part the clouds and say "On the 8,976,456th day Buell made and engine, and it was GOOD!" ha ha ha later, Nick | ||
| Jlnance  |
In general wouldn't a system that adapts for the temperature & pressure and humidty and all that BEFORE the combustion event work better than a system that adjusts AFTER the combustion event??? Wow! A question I can answer. Afterwards is better, much better actually. It allows unanticipated or poorly understood variations to be corrected for. | ||
| Reepicheep  |
The way controls systems are described, one is "open loop", where you do what you think you are supposed to do, and let the chips fall where they may. They are simple and often remarkably effective. The "closed loop" system incorporates feedback about the result of the actions, and uses this to adjust the behavior of the system being controlled. Closed loop is harder to engineer, but if done right can be remarkably adaptable. Personally? All these little jewels about the Buell EFI may make me able to understand why we can't reprogram them easily. They are a) doing things others have not thought of and that nobody wants broadcast and b) things that are darned complicated and not likely to be easily remappable . Maybe the TFI really is the best approach. Leave the ECM to basically do what it was designed to do, and just be able to richen broad ranges of RPM slightly. | ||
| Glitch  |
Maybe the TFI really is the best approach. Leave the ECM to basically do what it was designed to do, and just be able to richen broad ranges of RPM slightly. Yes, I've not seen a simpler solution. The PCIII seems to work OK also. But since they're not made any more leaves the TFI. I've also heard nightmare tales of trying to tune the PCIII on our bikes. The TFI (if you understand carb tuning is very simple to set up), once I have everything back together again, I'll be headed to the dyno, just to see how well tuned my SOP dyno is. | ||
| Dale |
If the O2 sensor adjusts the mixture so fast, then why a race ecm? | ||
| M1combat  |
The race ECM allows adjustment to a mixture that would be more powerful and less emissions friendly. | ||
| Ingemar |
What happened to DDFI IV? | ||
| Blake |
Holding up the initial troublesome introduction of Buell DDFI in 1999/2000 to argue that it is inferior, (yes Craig, though you did not actually use the word "inferior", it does accurately characterize your views on the issue) is disingenuous and akin to deriding current model Buells for the shock recalls of the tube frame models. There hasn't been a need to update any Buell ECM for more than four or five years. You do have a point about the required 1,000 mile TPS reset, though your characterization of it is a bit overdramatic and misleading. I would strongly refute the claim that more than one TPS reset is required, on account of it isn't, and in fact the one at 1,000 is most likely a precaution and rarely actually necessary. I don't know where you got the idea that multiple or periodic TPS resets are required; they are not. I'd also say that different bikes have different maintenance requirements. Some require drive chain maintenance, throttle synchronization, periodic valve adjustments, cam chain/belt maintenance, and cooling system maintenance. Current EFI Buell models have a one time TPS reset requirement at the 1,000 mile maintenance interval. That is it. As I understand it, this is to account for any possible wearing-in of the throttle mechanism that might tend to affect the accuracy of the TPS output. Craig, My take is that you are becoming emotional and combative. Please consider that the great thing about this kind of discussion is that right or wrong in our understanding of the issue at the outset, we all hopefully learn a lot or at least a little in the course of the discussion. I know I have!  And that is a major benefit of of this forum, is it not? All, I have a question... how quickly does the O2 sensor accurately report via voltage output a fluctuation in mixture one way or the other? For instance given a step input change in mixture, how long until the voltage output of the sensor stabilizes at an accurate value? | ||
| Glitch |
Current EFI Buell models have a one time TPS reset requirement at the 1,000 mile maintenance interval. And every 10,000 after that. Not long ago I had my fourth one done, but I don't think it needed it. I know what you're thinking "4 TPS resets in 18 months! WTF!"  I think it's done every 10,000 just to keep an eye on it. A "while you're at it" kind of thing. I read about the XB FI in Fuell last simmer and it talked about that, but I don't remember how often it read the O2. All I do know is how well my bike runs. If I was to ride it not knowing (or hearing the pump at start up) I wouldn't know one way or the other if it was fuel injected or not. Isn't that the true test of a good FI system? (Message edited by Glitch on February 03, 2005) | ||
| Sarodude |
Blake- I seem to recall that O2 sensor response time is on the order of .1 seconds. I dunno is this is across the board or if I was reading about some special hi-perf sensor or a wideband sensor or some strange marital aid - but take it for what it's wort... -Saro | ||
| M1combat |
"You do have a point about the required 1,000 mile TPS reset, though your characterization of it is a bit overdramatic and misleading. " Not to be combative but... He doesn't really have a point there either. I have 11K miles on my 12R and during the 1K service the tech said that it was still at zero and therefore didn't need to be done. I just performed my own 10K maintenance (w/o the fork rebuild so far, but I do have the crush washers I need and will be doing them in the coming month or so) and have no intention of reseting the TPS now either. | ||
| Reepicheep |
Glitch... I can speak with authority on the topic coming from argualby one of the best carb'd motorcycles ever built (the M2) to the 9sx... You *can* tell the XB's are fuel injected by just running them.... you don't have to putz with a enricher when it's cold, and you don't have to rejet when you tweak intakes and exhausts. But as far as drivability, you are dead on. My 9sx runs every bit as smoothly and responsively as my M2 ever did. | ||
| Blake |
Thank you for the correction. I was wrong. TPS reset is recommended at every 10K maintenance interval. That is a bit annoying. I agree, and Craig was correct on that point. I bet ya that that requirement won't last long though. Once Buell is convinced that the system is working well and stable, they'll likely back off on the TPS reset schedule. Me? I like my Cyclone's carburetor. ![: ]](http://www.badweatherbikers.com/buell/clipart/proud.gif) | ||
| Anonymous |
Ahh, Ingemar, you almost win...the question was supposed to be "Where IV art thou?" | ||
| Wyckedflesh  |
how quickly does the O2 sensor accurately report via voltage output IIRC it takes a reading once every .1 seconds as Saro mentioned and the ECM effects an adjustment once every .3 seconds or every third O2 sampling. I can't remember if that was an article in one of the motorcycle rags about the DDFI or if it was from the manual. I will however look around and see if I can find the original wording. | ||
| Paulinoz  |
Romeo, Romeo "Where IV art thou?" Romeo. I bet a slab this is a clue to the code name for the next model. My guess is Juliet, because no bike riding bloke is going to want to say " Just test rode Romeo and it was awsome". Now back to a very interesting topic. | ||
| Anonymous |
The future is so bright -- shades won't be enough. | ||
| Xbolt12 |
Just for the record (except the warranty record -I have never had the TPS reset. I do my own maintenance and my xb12r is still running great at 11,500 miles. I have also done mods, but not the Race ECM, so I don't see the point if the bike is running well. xbolt12 | ||
| Timbo  |
The future is so bright -- shades won't be enough. Wow. I can't wait!  | ||
| Blake |
Saro, Wycked, I'm not talking about the ECM polling rate, I'm wondering how quickly the actual voltage output of the sensor changes, not how quickly the ECM notices the change, although that is interesting too. I bet it is a heck of a lot quicker than once every 0.1 seconds on the new bikes. |
