FlashTune ECU Flashing Interface

[cheong1106]

Originally Posted by Elwin

As for the question R1evolution had in his PM regarding the recommendations for tuning:
1. Build linear proportional throttle for A mode and set bike to stat in A.
2. Tune for AFR, not for power curve. target AFR in the square 0-15% throttle up to 6000RPM - 13. Anywhere else - 12.7 to 12.8
3. Make sure the tuner actually heats up your engine well so the ols is hot, not just water.
4. When done with cylinders fix the ignition mapping there should be no dips above 7000rpm below 41 or raises above 43

Wow. That is really really rich. I am working with an Australian chap on 98 octane fuel maps. Running 13.1 to 12.9 and it hauls like a freight train. Still fine tuning some stuff before we share the maps.

Sent from my GT-N7105 using Motorcycle.com Free App

[Elwin]

[R1evolution]

Originally Posted by cheong1106

Wow. That is really really rich. I am working with an Australian chap on 98 octane fuel maps. Running 13.1 to 12.9 and it hauls like a freight train. Still fine tuning some stuff before we share the maps.

Sent from my GT-N7105 using Motorcycle.com Free App

wish we had 98 octane to run it on.... we need a 91 pump gas map. thats whats kinda hard to work with. hope it all works tho i would like to see what you have..

[Elwin]

US is AKI, EU IS RON
91=95
93=98

[R1evolution]

Originally Posted by Elwin

US is AKI, EU IS RON
91=95
93=98

Yea California gas is 91..

[Elwin]

Originally Posted by R1evolution

Yea California gas is 91..

do 3 runs. 42, 40, 38 figure out strongest points on the curve for each. adjust accordingly.

[Elwin]

fuel

[SySt]

Originally Posted by Elwin

fuel

Nice try. If only it were that simple.

Let me change my question a little bit. If a person is tuning their engine on a dyno, why would they tune for an AFR rather than power output? We don't need to get into the supposed effects of running lean causing the engine to "burn up". Rest assured, if you're running that lean you aren't going to be making best power so that's a moot point for this argument anyways.

[marider]

Elwin - nice pic input Here's detailed one:



I set target AFR in Autotune unit to 13, 13.1, 13.2 and after 2 days testing have first trims done. What I've read Dynojet says that for the best compromise of fuel mileage and throttle response, is to set the cruise range to 13.7-14.0 /I had 13.6 and 13.4 @ 3500-6250rpm area with 2-20% throttle but changed it to 13.2, remember - too lean is not good for the engine/. Anyway riding in 2C temp. is not a pleasure and it's not possible to whack the throttle fully open - I need to spin R1 on a roller few times

[Elwin]

There is a different approach tuning fuel ratio based on one wideband sensor for combined exhaust, or doing it for the individual cylinders with 4 wideband sensors in each collector pipe.

When one sensor is used then you need to have some headroom for the case where one cylinder is running to lean and another too rich. The difference can be extremely high. So setting 13 may be cyl 1 is at 11 and cyl 4 is at 15. - so your tuner will think it is great, but bike will not make reasonable power.



Now when you cn adjust all 4 cylinders separately, then you can be much more precise, let's say +0.2 so you get 12.6 to 13.0 with average of 12.8 because all 4 are balanced - so power will be great.

Sure fuel consumption and CO is a price to pay but this is not a touring bike anyway

Sure if you want to make a touring bike out of it then set it leaner, I would not recommend going above 14.0

Originally Posted by marider

Elwin - nice pic input Here's detailed one:

I set target AFR in Autotune unit to 13, 13.1, 13.2 and after 2 days testing have first trims done. What I've read Dynojet says that for the best compromise of fuel mileage and throttle response, is to set the cruise range to 13.7-14.0 /I had 13.6 and 13.4 @ 3500-6250rpm area with 2-20% throttle but changed it to 13.2, remember - too lean is not good for the engine/. Anyway riding in 2C temp. is not a pleasure and it's not possible to whack the throttle fully open - I need to spin R1 on a roller few times

[laxwendrof]

Originally Posted by Elwin

There is a different approach tuning fuel ratio based on one wideband sensor for combined exhaust, or doing it for the individual cylinders with 4 wideband sensors in each collector pipe.

When one sensor is used then you need to have some headroom for the case where one cylinder is running to lean and another too rich. The difference can be extremely high. So setting 13 may be cyl 1 is at 11 and cyl 4 is at 15. - so your tuner will think it is great, but bike will not make reasonable power.



Now when you cn adjust all 4 cylinders separately, then you can be much more precise, let's say +0.2 so you get 12.6 to 13.0 with average of 12.8 because all 4 are balanced - so power will be great.

Sure fuel consumption and CO is a price to pay but this is not a touring bike anyway

Sure if you want to make a touring bike out of it then set it leaner, I would not recommend going above 14.0

HI Elwin,
Yes, you have right is much better to work on 4 cylinders separatelly. In my opinion your approach for 4 cyl. is the best for certain engine however is not optimal as the generic map. This map can be used but you must measure general AFR per 4 cylinders as trend from few engine units. Will be nice to know that all rn22 have let's say cylider#1 too rich or lean.

At this moment because we do not know how this trend looks we focus on the generic map from the one lambda sensor and AT unit. We control two parameters ave.AFR and power delivery(as you said aver.afr is not correct as the main parameter).

Elwin what is the power difference between 4cyl vs aveAFR? Is any gain for the top end power?

[Elwin]

Originally Posted by laxwendrof

HI Elwin,
In my opinion your approach for 4 cyl. is the best for certain engine however is not optimal as the generic map.

Wrong.

[laxwendrof]

Originally Posted by Elwin

Wrong.

Is wrong you said but what ? In your opinion is better to transfer your 4 cylinders map to my engine as generic fuelling instead of doing ave.AFR AT, yes?

[SySt]

Originally Posted by Elwin

There is a different approach tuning fuel ratio based on one wideband sensor for combined exhaust, or doing it for the individual cylinders with 4 wideband sensors in each collector pipe.

When one sensor is used then you need to have some headroom for the case where one cylinder is running to lean and another too rich. The difference can be extremely high. So setting 13 may be cyl 1 is at 11 and cyl 4 is at 15. - so your tuner will think it is great, but bike will not make reasonable power.



Now when you cn adjust all 4 cylinders separately, then you can be much more precise, let's say +0.2 so you get 12.6 to 13.0 with average of 12.8 because all 4 are balanced - so power will be great.

Sure fuel consumption and CO is a price to pay but this is not a touring bike anyway

Sure if you want to make a touring bike out of it then set it leaner, I would not recommend going above 14.0

Tuning to an AFR using a single wideband sensor sampling the average is a reasonable move to make to ensure you're within the ball park with your fuel map. A setup for data logging all 4 cylinders simultaneously is quite expensive and is therefore less reasonable, especially when you consider the fact that it still will not be optimal. You'd be better off having a proper dyno tune done and it would cost you less. Get it through your head, there is not a direct correlation between power output and AFR, just a general trend. Meaning 12.0:1 is probably too rich for max output and 14.0:1 is too lean for max output for instance. What is optimal is somewhere in that range which is a relatively large range.

That AFR vs RPM graph you posted is a good example of how different each cylinder might be running. Tuning the average AFR to say 13.0:1 would put all of the cylinders within the ball park I mentioned above. This is one reason why 13.0:1 is such a suggested tuning figure. But, like I have said, tuning to an AFR is just a practical means of getting a decent tune when you don't have access to a dyno, or don't trust the dyno operators. If you went to a dyno and had those cylinders tuned individually for max power there wouldn't be any question about how good your fuel tuning is.

[n4speed]

Elwin, it seems you only come here to fuel discussion !! i still diden't saw any graphic off your tunning, how much power did you get.. nothing to back up your claims and afirmations..

I really would like to see your's "numbers" !! and i'm not asking for your map or anything else..

I can also post comon sense information or do some more techinical information and post it. I'm here to learn and share information for the 09-12 R1.

but that's me...

[Elwin]

Originally Posted by n4speed

Elwin, it seems you only come here to fuel discussion !! i still diden't saw any graphic off your tunning, how much power did you get.. nothing to back up your claims and afirmations..

I really would like to see your's "numbers" !! and i'm not asking for your map or anything else..

I can also post comon sense information or do some more techinical information and post it. I'm here to learn and share information for the 09-12 R1.

but that's me...

[quick kurt]

I understand the thinking behind a seperate fuelmap for each cyl, but each bike would need to be tuned individually with a header and equipment to measure the a/f of each cyl. Each cyl of every bike will be different, using a cyl dependent map from one bike and using on another is asking for problems. Elwin you are correct that seperate cyl mapping is best,its been used in MotoGp for years. But others are correct in the fact that a "base map" for seperate cyl fueling could not be used as a "general map" for ALL bikes, one cyl thats rich on one bike could be lean on another. If cyl #1 was rich (on the bike the map was based) and cyl #1 was leaned out during tuning, and then the "base map" was used on a bike that had an already lean cyl #1 and was leaned out even further ,it would fry that cyl quickly.

[quick kurt]

It would be interesting to see if there are any "trends" in a/f ratios from a few R1's tested on each cyl (lean or rich on a certain cyl). Would also be interesting to see if getting the fuel injectors cleaned and balanced, would correct any differences that were seen during testing.

[Tad158]

Yep, also the difference between a 09-11 and a 12+...

[Elwin]