Harley Davidson V-Rod Forum banner

41 - 60 of 117 Posts

·
Registered
Joined
·
4,264 Posts
Ron, Thanks for your opinion. How about if you give us a step by step on the install & tuning of the piggy back controller of your choice so we can all see that option ?
BTW James Ramsey is an independent tuning provider specializing in race / boosted applications for Harleys
One option is this. Power Commander V - PTi to handle beyond 100kpa and keep the Delphi.
http://www.powercommander.com/powercommander/products/powercommanderv/powercommander_v.aspx
Problem is , by the time you go through all the bs and costs, might as well go AlphaN and be done with it. Be it Tmax or DTT. The path of least resistance when it comes to calibrations, at the cost of losing knock detection of course.
Ron
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,943 Posts
Discussion Starter #42
Looked at the DynoJet stuff link you posted. My plan would be to take the bike to someone like Steve Morris in Michigan & have him do a tune on his eddy current dyno using my Tmax ECU. I'd get two maps, one all out race fuel & the other a street tune. Would it have anti knock - No, but would it be close enough for my purposes with either map & still be a reasonably safe tune ? IMO- yes
Can anyone walk us thru a tune with the Powercommander ?
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
4,264 Posts
Looked at the DynoJet stuff link you posted. My plan would be to take the bike to someone like Steve Morris in Michigan & have him do a tune on his eddy current dyno using my Tmax ECU. I'd get two maps, one all out race fuel & the other a street tune. Would it have anti knock - No, but would it be close enough for my purposes with either map & still be a reasonably safe tune ? IMO- yes
Can anyone walk us thru a tune with the Powercommander ?
Basically you set the voltage and pressure tables that are in play for the 3 bar sensor. Think of it as a switching table. There are calibration edits in the software for this. From there it's auto tune to the new requirements.
Here's a shitty annoying vid but it give the basic idea. Easy, not really as is with any new software the first time as are the end results, with any of them. I've not personally used it but it is interesting.
Ron
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
578 Posts
One option is this. Power Commander V - PTi to handle beyond 100kpa and keep the Delphi.
http://www.powercommander.com/powercommander/products/powercommanderv/powercommander_v.aspx
Problem is , by the time you go through all the bs and costs, might as well go AlphaN and be done with it. Be it Tmax or DTT. The path of least resistance when it comes to calibrations, at the cost of losing knock detection of course.
Ron
Warning: The Power Commander is a piggy back device (aka signal modifier). You will always be fighting the Delphi ECU in this scenario. Can it work? Sure. Is it reliable or predictable, not so much. I have dealt with piggyback devices on countless vehicle platforms over the years. I always end up depositing them into the recycle bin when a client brings one over.

What are they good for? When you are dealing with an OEM ECU that has not been "cracked" yet. That's about it....last resort.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
186 Posts
I think its GREAT to see this discussion. Alot of experience here. Most all making good points, from personal experience. Priceless!!!!! Thank you all
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
4,264 Posts
Warning: The Power Commander is a piggy back device (aka signal modifier). You will always be fighting the Delphi ECU in this scenario. Can it work? Sure. Is it reliable or predictable, not so much. I have dealt with piggyback devices on countless vehicle platforms over the years. I always end up depositing them into the recycle bin when a client brings one over.

What are they good for? When you are dealing with an OEM ECU that has not been "cracked" yet. That's about it....last resort.
Well, I must admit, I'm not a piggy back fan either. Just throwing the option out there.
Ron
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
4,264 Posts
What about using a Megasquirt or Racepak ?
Very expensive and serious overkill . However, I've used the Megasquirt Megalog viewer software in the past to view my tune data but that's the extent of it. I've lost it with a OS change and have no intentions of getting it again. While it's nice to view scatter plots and data graphs instead of Excel numbers, the data is still there, just more cumbersome. Some shit is just plain overkill for the task. The two mentioned fall into that category, in my opinion. In the end , we are faced with Delphi with external control for boost regions with less then stellar reliability of these units only to keep knock protection or the two most common AlphaN ECMs like Tmax or DTT. Basically one has to accept trade offs either way. It's too bad the AlphaN units can't adapt piezoelectric sensors into the package and get around the Delplhi ion sensing legal end of things. That would be the cat's ass in my view.

Ron
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
578 Posts
Very expensive and serious overkill . However, I've used the Megasquirt Megalog viewer software in the past to view my tune data but that's the extent of it. I've lost it with a OS change and have no intentions of getting it again. While it's nice to view scatter plots and data graphs instead of Excel numbers, the data is still there, just more cumbersome. Some shit is just plain overkill for the task. The two mentioned fall into that category, in my opinion. In the end , we are faced with Delphi with external control for boost regions with less then stellar reliability of these units only to keep knock protection or the two most common AlphaN ECMs like Tmax or DTT. Basically one has to accept trade offs either way. It's too bad the AlphaN units can't adapt piezoelectric sensors into the package and get around the Delplhi ion sensing legal end of things. That would be the cat's ass in my view.

Ron
I think the real reason they don't go that route is due to a lack of technical knowledge and/or cost. Even the acoustic knock sensor systems require a fairly high level of knowledge and engineering to work correctly. Back in the "old" days they had cal engineers that ONLY designed and tweaked the knock sensing systems in development. I imagine it's a plug and play item now in dev unless they release a new engine again.

I HATE the acoustic systems by the way. Very easy to create "phantom knock" situations. I would kill to have ion sensing on my DSM track car....
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
4,264 Posts
I think the real reason they don't go that route is due to a lack of technical knowledge and/or cost. Even the acoustic knock sensor systems require a fairly high level of knowledge and engineering to work correctly. Back in the "old" days they had cal engineers that ONLY designed and tweaked the knock sensing systems in development. I imagine it's a plug and play item now in dev unless they release a new engine again.

I HATE the acoustic systems by the way. Very easy to create "phantom knock" situations. I would kill to have ion sensing on my DSM track car....
Maybe but both can have ghost events that have you chasing around as you know. What I find odd is the new M8 crap HD is peddling now has gone away from ion sensing to Piezoelectric bolt on for each head. Wonder what the story is with that other then Bosch bought out SPX who was the original software writer for the HD brand tuners?
Ron
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
578 Posts
Maybe but both can have ghost events that have you chasing around as you know. What I find odd is the new M8 crap HD is peddling now has gone away from ion sensing to Piezoelectric bolt on for each head. Wonder what the story is with that other then Bosch bought out SPX who was the original software writer for the HD brand tuners?
Ron

Indeed I read that as well that HD went with the "old school" sensors for the M8 as they claimed they worked better.

I prefer ion sensing as I don't have stupid events like "Ooops the downpipe is hitting the frame under acceleration and I wasted 3 days tuning out knock that was false". Not saying that happened to ME, it was a friend...ok, it was me :). In other words, I hate using acoustic detection methods for knock systems....too much noise (and why they are so hard to design as the filtering code/circuitry gets complicated quick).


As for SPX...wasn't aware that they had a hand in the old tuners (I know the original coder, he sold out years ago I thought). The ion-sensing system is a Delphi invention/design that we have. I imagine they ran into either a filtering issue during dev OR found it cheaper to not pay the Delphi licensing and go with "good enough". Probably the later in lieu of their financial issues.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
4,264 Posts
Indeed I read that as well that HD went with the "old school" sensors for the M8 as they claimed they worked better.

I prefer ion sensing as I don't have stupid events like "Ooops the downpipe is hitting the frame under acceleration and I wasted 3 days tuning out knock that was false". Not saying that happened to ME, it was a friend...ok, it was me :). In other words, I hate using acoustic detection methods for knock systems....too much noise (and why they are so hard to design as the filtering code/circuitry gets complicated quick).


As for SPX...wasn't aware that they had a hand in the old tuners (I know the original coder, he sold out years ago I thought). The ion-sensing system is a Delphi invention/design that we have. I imagine they ran into either a filtering issue during dev OR found it cheaper to not pay the Delphi licensing and go with "good enough". Probably the later in lieu of their financial issues.
Yes , Steve Cole wrote the original EFI calibrations software, who is now Mr. TTS. I think the hardware end was SPX. I could be wrong, however on the SPX part. M8 are Bosch.
Ron
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
578 Posts
I think the hardware end was SPX. I could be wrong, however on the SPX part. M8 are Bosch.
Ron
I did a quick Google and had a "Ah ha" moment.

From Alex Bozmoski (Chief Engineer at MoCo for the M8):

"The ignition system gained individual knock sensors on each cylinder to dynamically fine-tune the spark timing to deliver optimum power while also reducing the heat produced by the engine. According to Bozmoski, the switch from ion-sensing knock sensors to cylinder-mounted ones dramatically increases the range of individual cylinder spark control the ECU has over the firing of the twin plugs, allowing as much ignition advance as possible. “So, you’re not creating heat by retarding the spark to keep yourself away from knock,” explains Bozmoski."


Just edited my response...

We have individual knock sensing per cylinder as well, I just looked at the pids and saw the "ion-q cyl 1" and "ion-q cyl 2" voltage values. In other words we can do the same!

And we even have knock retard function per cylinder (which makes sense as we do have individual spark advance by cylinder control as well).

So, I stand corrected and erected :).

I think it was a money saving thing.
 

Attachments

·
Registered
Joined
·
578 Posts
Yes , Steve Cole wrote the original EFI calibrations software, who is now Mr. TTS. I think the hardware end was SPX. I could be wrong, however on the SPX part. M8 are Bosch.
Ron
You might be right on the hardware, I was thinking of the PowerVision unit (whole other story and designer who stays in the shadows).
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
578 Posts
More thoughts....

Reading the quote I posted twice I think the issue is with the twin plug setup on the M8. This part of the quote makes me think that the ion-sensing system we use is only capable of one plug per feedback circuit "the switch from ion-sensing knock sensors to cylinder-mounted ones dramatically increases the range of individual cylinder spark control the ECU has over the firing of the twin plugs" <--Key words being "twin plugs".

I have never worked on an engine with multiple plugs per head so that is likely the impetus for their switch (and I still think cost played into it as I imagine a quad channel ion-sensing system COULD have been designed/utilized....but I digress).

Cool topic!
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
4,264 Posts
More thoughts....

Reading the quote I posted twice I think the issue is with the twin plug setup on the M8. This part of the quote makes me think that the ion-sensing system we use is only capable of one plug per feedback circuit "the switch from ion-sensing knock sensors to cylinder-mounted ones dramatically increases the range of individual cylinder spark control the ECU has over the firing of the twin plugs" <--Key words being "twin plugs".

I have never worked on an engine with multiple plugs per head so that is likely the impetus for their switch (and I still think cost played into it as I imagine a quad channel ion-sensing system COULD have been designed/utilized....but I digress).

Cool topic!
Twin plugs was likely the reason for the piezoelectric and that would make sense. I've often wondered why the Revolution only came with single spark plug per cyl. Delphi and ion sensing might have been the reason. Hell, even the small Honda had dual plugs in some engines. Code and extra complications from a second plug. Having second plug will actually make the engine more detonation resistant as well but like you say they can pick up mechanical sounds not related to actual knock which is the down side of them. The other guy, well, you don't want him and Mr. TTS in the same room. I've seen first hand it can get ugly real fast. :chainsaw:
Ron
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
578 Posts
Twin plugs was likely the reason for the piezoelectric and that would make sense. I've often wondered why the Revolution only came with single spark plug per cyl. Delphi and ion sensing might have been the reason. Hell, even the small Honda had dual plugs in some engines. Code and extra complications from a second plug. Having second plug will actually make the engine more detonation resistant as well but like you say they can pick up mechanical sounds not related to actual knock which is the down side of them. The other guy, well, you don't want him and Mr. TTS in the same room. I've seen first hand it can get ugly real fast. :chainsaw:
Ron
I think you (and others) are going to really enjoy what I will be posting in the next month or two. The Delphi ECM has been greatly ignored (especially with modern tools such as DynoJet's TargetTune system....my days of spreadsheets for VE corrections are over).

I have two bikes in the shop at the moment that are going to be going under the knife in the next couple of months.....09 Muscle and a 2016 Road Glide Special. I just need to duplicate myself (and make it stop snowing here every damn day).
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
4,264 Posts
I think you (and others) are going to really enjoy what I will be posting in the next month or two. The Delphi ECM has been greatly ignored (especially with modern tools such as DynoJet's TargetTune system....my days of spreadsheets for VE corrections are over).

I have two bikes in the shop at the moment that are going to be going under the knife in the next couple of months.....09 Muscle and a 2016 Road Glide Special. I just need to duplicate myself (and make it stop snowing here every damn day).
Hmm. Actually in the middle of a Target Tune right now. Got some possible hardware issues with tps volts jumping when hooked up. Dynojet claims it's ok, I don't since I've done one before where it was rock solid. Unhooked , no jumping. Owner is sending unit for inspection. The couple runs that were done, it adjusts fast but I don't think the module should be run full time when tuning is done. It's just not water proof enough. Best to dial the ve in with it and switch back to NB, dial that area back in again on the clb tables and call it done. Best of both worlds then. Logs are run through MyTune software to get ve corrections. Interesting to see what you will be up to on your end.
Ron
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
578 Posts
Hmm. Actually in the middle of a Target Tune right now. Got some possible hardware issues with tps volts jumping when hooked up. Dynojet claims it's ok, I don't since I've done one before where it was rock solid. Unhooked , no jumping. Owner is sending unit for inspection. The couple runs that were done, it adjusts fast but I don't think the module should be run full time when tuning is done. It's just not water proof enough. Best to dial the ve in with it and switch back to NB, dial that area back in again on the clb tables and call it done. Best of both worlds then. Logs are run through MyTune software to get ve corrections. Interesting to see what you will be up to on your end.
Ron
Never seen that issue, then again I did have a PowerVision unit that I had to stick in the freezer to get it to come back to life (long story) so "Yeahhhhh" when it comes to DynoJet hardware durability.

I can say that I have personally installed 3 TT systems and have never removed one yet (and no water issues). I tend to mount them high up and under a seat/panel/etc to minimize any moisture exposure.

As for VE and target tune, I have had tremendous success with using a good base table, then 2-3 TT runs to get as much of the main load cells as desired and call it a day. I am waiting for the WBO's to take a dirt nap on my personal bike yet they keep on keeping on....It's an interesting conversation starter to show clients the real time WBO values and the desired AFR on the screen.

As for CLB and NB, like I said the WBOs keep on trucking for me (and I'm not worried about block learns as I pull logs once a month to check on drift/mechanical issues/etc). Fairly rock solid. I'm a big fan of the VE tuning runs as I can save time (and money) doing a few road tuning sessions as opposed to blocking off whole Saturday's at the local dyno cell (and pissing off walk in clients and hearing "that bearded guy is taking the whole place to himself....AGAIN"...good times).

Off my soap box...
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,943 Posts
Discussion Starter #60
Guys, How about a couple definitions from you experts for the rest of us ? CLB NB WBO TPS ( maybe define how the voltage is created & then how that is referenced in both the Delphi & piggyback systems) IAT ( same voltage references & possibly aftermarket replacement units ?) VE
Thanks
 
41 - 60 of 117 Posts
Top