Wildguzzi.com
General Category => General Discussion => Topic started by: Jerryd on March 23, 2016, 02:57:45 PM
-
The '08 Norge I just picked up had an O2 Optimzer with it but the switch settings were quite a bit different then what GuzziTech says? Does anyone have one on an early Norge that has worked properly and could share the settings? I have switches 1,2,& 6 up (on), all the rest off.
Thanks
Jerry
-
Take it off immediately and throw it to the shithouse.
-
I got one from Guzzitech for my '07 Norge (basically the same bike as yours). Over the course of a 600 mile ride the Optimizer caused the bike to run so rich it fouled the O2 sensors and the bike went into limp home mode. As Pete says, throw the damn thing in the trash. That's what I did.
Peter Y.
-
I can speak from experience - I had one on my 2008 Norge.
The Optimizer, used by itself, is way more of a problem than a help. While I don't have the antagonism of the two Petes towards it, you won't get much benefit and you'll end up either ignoring it or constantly fussing.
While there's some well-noted difference of opinion of the appropriate techniques and relative merit (and difficulty) of specific approaches, you will be far better served by either focusing on the current hardware and modifying the ECM programming (Guzzidiag methods) or going whole hog on the hardware approach using a PV-V and AutoTune with a wideband O2 sensor.
The O2 optimizer is a brains-free device that simply modifies the information the O2 sensor sends to the ECM, tricking it into a broad-based bias to richen the mix, regardless of load, speed, throttle position, or any other factor.
-
Very interesting responses! If you go back through the archives, the O2 was touted very highly. It appears that it was considered a better "FatDuc"? I don't know how long this has been on the bike, but there are no signs of over richness or fouling, and the bike runs strong.
I've had 2 Norges before this. One was DanR's Norge which with loaded up with everything, Power Commander, PCV, O2 Optimizer, and who knows what. Before that I had a stock 2007 Norge and the only thing that was ever done to it was a reflash by Pete at the Malibu Rally in 2008. It ran like a top! Pulled strong, wasn't jerky, no popping on deceleration, etc. That was an 8,000 mi trip followed by several 4-5K trips. My CalVin also runs perfect and has no extra stuff. All stock. I'm kinda inclined to remove this O2 Optimizer once I figure out how its hooked up!
-
The problem will all the "add-on" devices is that all the modern Guzzi's, Breva, Griso, Norge, Calvin, 8V etc are closed loop systems. So, unless you are able to change the programming ECU, you will be sending only partial signals to the Computer that will take action but not see any result.. make sure you have the latest update to the ECU from your dealer.. Then run the stock bike! ALSO... Interesting Factoid... Many bikes some with extra slack in the throttle cable.. It creates the illusion of a dead spot in the power band... Make sure you get RID of the slack... Then just be careful how you roll on .....
-
Very interesting responses! If you go back through the archives, the O2 was touted very highly. It appears that it was considered a better "FatDuc"? I don't know how long this has been on the bike, but there are no signs of over richness or fouling, and the bike runs strong.
I've had 2 Norges before this. One was DanR's Norge which with loaded up with everything, Power Commander, PCV, O2 Optimizer, and who knows what. Before that I had a stock 2007 Norge and the only thing that was ever done to it was a reflash by Pete at the Malibu Rally in 2008. It ran like a top! Pulled strong, wasn't jerky, no popping on deceleration, etc. That was an 8,000 mi trip followed by several 4-5K trips. My CalVin also runs perfect and has no extra stuff. All stock. I'm kinda inclined to remove this O2 Optimizer once I figure out how its hooked up!
The O2 Optimizer is exactly like a FatDuc - though a bit better design. If used alone, it is a straight bias device. If used with a PC-V, it is dialed in a bit differently, and it handles part of the curve with the PC-V taking on the rest. Did it provide some advantage over the ECM as delivered on 2V Norges? Yes, or we all would not have bought one. Did it end up not being a fully effective solution over time? Also yes, particularly when used alone (like a FatDuc) without the PC-V.
As to the comment about closed loop systems, not entirely true. Subject to correction by the experts, but I believe all fuel injected Moto Guzzis that have O2 sensor(s) have narrow-band devices that only provide full feedback during higher rpm operation; below about 4000 rpm, the fuel injection is entirely map driven with no feedback loop. This means there is both closed loop and open loop operation.
A wideband O2 sensor combined with reprogramming of the ECU (either alone or in combination with a PC-V and Autotune) can allow dynamic map adjustments throughout the rpm range. Is this 'necessary'? That's an owner-operator decision.
I'm hoping to add a Stelvio (8v, probably 2013 or newer) to the stable soon. While I've messed around with a lot on my older Norge, the new bike is likely to be handled with only mapping adjustment rather than added hardware.
-
Loved reply#1, spoken like a true Aussie, just so damn succinct it reminds me of my late Father.
-
ITSec, you're arse about. The narrowband operates in sub 4000 range and the high rpm is map only (open loop).
Jerryd, I'm with the two Pete's. Chuck the gizmo in the bin.
-
Tried the Fatduc on my Ducati some years ago.
Throw it away immediately - if not sooner.
-
ITSec, you're arse about. The narrowband operates in sub 4000 range and the high rpm is map only (open loop)........
I've been trying to understand what closed and open loop meant.
So in layman English does this mean that below 4000 the fueling called for by map is adjusted by the output from the O2 sensor to ensure that it is properly burnt?
Above 4000 any signal from the O2 sensor is ignored?
So, all the Optimiser/FatDuc actually does is con the ECU into delivering more fuel - presumably by making the engine "look" cooler than it really is while following whatever map is loaded?
Thanks in advance
-
Almost. If by 'Properly burnt' you mean as close to stoichiometric as possible, then yes. With Euro 3 & 4 coming into play (target emissions), it's actually a bit on the leaner side of stoichiometric. The O2 fooler modifies the lambda signal to make it look 'lean', so the ECU adds fuel.
There's at least one device that modifies the temperature sensor signal to fool the ECU into richening the mixture, but they don't work for long as the ECU will still trim the AFR towards stoichiometric.
-
So the question was, why did people buy these in the past?
I think lack of knowledge. Kept that way by the ones who could sell stuff.
Keep in mind that a full PVM setup still has to foul the lambda input to get things a bit working. Anyway, the whole PCV thing is a ecu fouler.
So does a custom map solve all things? It can make one very happy. But it depends on who does it. Lots of dyno operators will only change the main fuel map. But people are happy, they just paid money and then better be happy to justify it.
Over time we found out a lot about the working of the marelli ecu. We have defined more tables in it then any commercial software has.
Guzzidiag was started with educational intent. We now give you the tools, knowledge doesn't come free, you have to spend time to learn.
-
Almost. If by 'Properly burnt' you mean as close to stoichiometric as possible, then yes. With Euro 3 & 4 coming into play (target emissions), it's actually a bit on the leaner side of stoichiometric. The O2 fooler modifies the lambda signal to make it look 'lean', so the ECU adds fuel.
There's at least one device that modifies the temperature sensor signal to fool the ECU into richening the mixture, but they don't work for long as the ECU will still trim the AFR towards stoichiometric.
Cheers Beetle
Stoichiometric is what I meant but I couldn't spell it!!!
Thanks for the clarification
Tris
-
An engine burns cleanest at an Air/Fuel ratio of 14.7:1 (This is called the stoichiometric ratio). This is not smoothest, most powerful or coolest, but it has the least emissions. A narrow band sensor helps the ECU maintain that exact ratio. It has a very steep (and “narrow”!) signal curve, so it's almost like a switch, just telling the ECU if the mixture is too rich or too lean. The ECU responds to this by constantly making adjustments, many times per second. So basically it’s always cycling slightly rich / slighty lean vs. the target AFR.
This digital like switch functionality is perfect for the job it's supposed to do, but it's not designed to accurately measure *how much* lean or rich the mixture is. That means it is not suitable as a signal source for an O2 fooler device. Trying to optimise an AFR to anything other than “stoich” with an O2 fooler is a bit of a hit and miss affair.
The other down side to a narrow band sensor is the response time. It cannot send signals quickly enough to deal with extreme conditions. That's why at higher rpm and wide open throttle the ECU switches to open loop and just ignores the sensor. It then runs according to a predefined fuel table (fuel vs. throttle position/rpm), and this is rich enough to avoid any engine damage in those extreme conditions. Most of the time an engine is operated below 5,000rpm and low to mid throttle, and that’s where the narrow band sensor works. If you switch off the sensor signal in the ECU Map, the motor will run according to that predefined table ALL the time. But don’t forget, that table was made to work with help from the sensor, so the manufacturer may not have put a lot of effort in to making it perfect on a stand alone level!
A wideband sensor works very differently to a narrow band, and they are not plug and play interchangeable. It has a shallower (and “wider”!) signal curve, so it’s good at measuring exact AFR levels. Wideband sensors are used to help make new maps that can have fuelling set to exactly where you want it be. That is the best way to do it as you are addressing the "problem” at its source and not trying to solve it with a crutch like an O2 fooler. If you don’t want to do it yourself, you can ask somebody who already did if you can use their map.
A PCV with Autotune takes the signal from a wideband sensor and uses it to dynamically adjust fuelling. After a while it has pretty much learned what fuelling is required at different throttle / rpm positions and it becomes less dynamic. This is another way of adjusting your fueling and it offers some quite sophisticated possibilities. But at the end of the day it is another device working *on top* of your factory map. And it’s not cheap (although probably not as expensive as doing the whole mapping and logging work yourself!!).
An O2 fooler in combination with the PCV would only be used if the sensor signal has not been deactivated in the ECU (reflashed). These days it is possible to do that deactivation yourself for free, so this combination of hardware is the craziest way to go!
So, horses for courses really. :grin:
-
Roughly translated that means you'd be better off scarifying your penis with a blunt chainsaw than sticking one of these useless and dangerous pieces of dross on your motorbike.
Pete
-
So, Pete.. you don't care for it, then? :smiley: <scratching head>
-
I tried everything available back when I first got my Vintage without success. Nothing worked as well as the stock map...until I installed the updated map and an O2 Optimizer. Now my bike runs really well, though it did reduce the gas mileage by 3 mpg. Now these mods went on at about the same time, so the Optimizer may have nothing to do with it...but it runs so damn well, I am not inclined to change a thing.
-
Very interesting thread! Other then Pete's very simple response, there are debates here over how the system actually works and what the O2 Optimizer does! I think the Theory of Relativity was discussed somewhere before I started glaze over :rolleyes:
So, here's my simple question(s). How do I remove this thing and go back to stock, and who close to Florida can do an up to date effective reflash of my 2V Norge?
Thanks
Jerry
-
Roughly translated that means you'd be better off scarifying your penis with a blunt chainsaw than sticking one of these useless and dangerous pieces of dross on your motorbike.
Pete
Ah heck, and there I was trying so hard not to use the words "penis" and "chainsaw" in my post!! :grin:
-
Very interesting thread! Other then Pete's very simple response, there are debates here over how the system actually works and what the O2 Optimizer does! I think the Theory of Relativity was discussed somewhere before I started glaze over :rolleyes:
So, here's my simple question(s). How do I remove this thing and go back to stock, and who close to Florida can do an up to date effective reflash of my 2V Norge?
Thanks
Jerry
It should just be connected (inserted) inline between your o2 sensor cables and the ecu. So just unplug it and reconnect the two cables without the optimizer. You should disconnect your battery for a while to delete the "learned" settings. Not sure how long. Maybe 10 minutes?? It may run different for a while until the ECU gets used to the revised signal.
-
Thank John, that sounds simple. I was getting worried that somehow a chainsaw was involved.......scar y :shocked:
-
When I put a new can on my Breva back in 2010 it would pop on decal which got on my nerves. I bought a o2 optimizer from Todd, plugged it in and it solved 90% of the popping! Milage dropped, but only by 1-2mpg, and I didn't notice any other side effects.
However, I decided after a year, that based on talks with my wrench at RoseFarm, and my own experience that the bike works better with the db killer in. With the db killer in, it doesn't need the o2 optimizer, so I pulled it off. The throttle is a bit smother on and off without the o2 opt, and the bike runs very well. The only down side for me is the Mistral can with db killer in is dam near as quite as stock, even after replacing the crossover, which contained a catalytic converter! But it seems to have a bit more grunt with the db in, so thats the way I go.
Anyone want to buy my o2 sensor, it works as advertised, I'll let it go cheap.
-
My Norge which is in question here has a Mistral with the DB insert. However, it does pop on deceleration. But it does pull strong with no noticeable hesitation or flat spots.
My original post was asking what the dip switch settings should because the bike came from the PO with significantly different settings then what Todd gave me? Then after this thread grew, my understanding is that it is not a good thing to have on the bike, does not offer any significant improvements, and should be removed?
-
Roughly translated that means you'd be better off scarifying your penis with a blunt chainsaw than sticking one of these useless and dangerous pieces of dross on your motorbike.
I guess the question is, which causes more engine damage and repair costs. A worn flat tappet, or an over rich O2 modifier?
I suspect the O2 modifier took more dollars to fix.
-
ITSec, you're arse about. The narrowband operates in sub 4000 range and the high rpm is map only (open loop).
Jerryd, I'm with the two Pete's. Chuck the gizmo in the bin.
As I said, subject to correction! :wink:
The point I was making is that there is a limitation to the narrow band sensor design, as Xlratr described more fully later on.
-
I bought one. Thought it worked great. Read Pete's comments on it and immediately pulled it off. Funny, I never noticed a difference when it was gone. Just goes to show how easy it is to think something has changed for the better, when it hasn't
-
Jerryd, it's not hard to flash the map using GuzziDiag. All you need are the cables.
If you like, I'll modify the latest factory 2V Norge map to stop the popping for you.
-
Has a 2V Norge in this week. It had the full kahuna on it, PCV/AT, optimiser, reflashed ECU (10% more fuel at the bottom, two degrees more advance in the same area and four more above, no delta correction so crude as buggery.) poor thing was as rich as a stupidly rich thing, it stank and the pipe, back of bike and number plate looked like something off a coal burning tramp steamer or garbage scow. On the trip across from Adelaide it was consuming over 5.5 litres per hundred BUT IT WAS SMOOTH AND DOESNT POP ON THE OVER-RUN!
Bleargh.
Pete
-
Jerry, i will look at the dipswitch settings, they are sti stock. I suspect they are very close if not the same for 1200. Ill post them tomorrow
-
Pete do you think you could reduce consumption to less than 5.5 l/100 k, without it being lean enough to ping ? That's what mine was doing and used to average out to 5.0-5.3 l/100km @ 100km/hr. I had it looked at in Melbourne and the guy stopped the pinging, but now uses around 5.6 l/100k as he said it would.
-
Jerry, i will look at the dipswitch settings, they are sti stock. I suspect they are very close if not the same for 1200. Ill post them tomorrow
Thank you!
-
Get a decent open loop map in it and it will neither detonate or slurp fuel.
-
Oh, ok thank you. I'll find where I can achieve that an get it done. Thanks.
-
I think 5.5l per 100km is not unusual. It depends on your riding style and short vs long trips, but I don't think you'll get it a *lot* better than that. (Although maybe the 2v is different). You can fine tune some areas of the map and work on the temperature tables but at the end of the day a slightly more power oriented AFR has to use a bit more fuel than stoich. That's why it's called AFR.
Pete, I'm surprised the bike you mentioned was covered in soot at that level of fuel consumption. Of course maybe it was just ridiculously rich at idle? Hhmm.
-
Nah, the two valves are a lot more frugal, really. It's all down to the combustion chamber design and cam timing. Not so much that the 2V is particularly economical but the 4V is wasteful and thirsty.
Pete
-
OK. I have no experience with the 2v. But it does make less power, so that has to make some difference.
-
Not much to do with power. As Pete said, it's all about the head design and valve timing.
-
Not much to do with power. As Pete said, it's all about the head design and valve timing.
But that's what helps make more power. And more (used) power means more fuel.
-
No. That's a simplistic approach. More torque means more power. If the 8V produced torque based in the amount of fuel it used, it would be good for 140 HP.
-
No. That's a simplistic approach. More torque means more power. If the 8V produced torque based in the amount of fuel it used, it would be good for 140 HP.
No, torque plus rpm makes power. All things being equal, if you can get more air and fuel into the combustion chamber, in the right quantities, it will make more power. Nothing is for free.
-
No, torque plus rpm makes power.
Gosh. Really? I didn't know. I always thought it was unicorns. :bow:
-
No, torque plus rpm makes power. All things being equal, if you can get more air and fuel into the combustion chamber, in the right quantities, it will make more power. Nothing is for free.
Yes, but the issue is that the 8V, because of its side draught head design and long valve overlap has pretty ordinary volumetric efficiency. That's the the reason why open pipes and aftermarket air *Filters* are so manifestly unproductive. They simply encourage charge transition further reducing VE, especially at certain engine speeds and throttle openings. It's a lovely motor but in the grand scheme of things it isn't terribly efficient and that is the reason why more thought has to go into making it work well rather than simply following the old 'Open 'er up and pour in more fuel' philosophy.
Pete
-
Jerryd, it's not hard to flash the map using GuzziDiag. All you need are the cables.
If you like, I'll modify the latest factory 2V Norge map to stop the popping for you.
Beetle, I appreciate your generous offer. I've never used DuzziDiag and wouldn't know where to start. I'd hate to mess up what I already have.
Back in the day, and Pete would remember it, we had another portable reflash device that we used. Can't remember the name? Pete reflashed my old '07 Norge when he was here, and it never ran better. Strong, no popping, etc.
Jerry
-
Yes, but the issue is that the 8V, because of its side draught head design and long valve overlap has pretty ordinary volumetric efficiency. That's the the reason why open pipes and aftermarket air *Filters* are so manifestly unproductive. They simply encourage charge transition further reducing VE, especially at certain engine speeds and throttle openings. It's a lovely motor but in the grand scheme of things it isn't terribly efficient and that is the reason why more thought has to go into making it work well rather than simply following the old 'Open 'real up and pour in more fuel' philosophy.
Pete
Oh, I'm sure there are more efficient engines out there. I don't want to labor the point (and it's off topic anyway), but regardless of whether the VE of the 8v is good or not, one of the reasons it makes more power than the 2v will be that it can get more air and fuel to ignite at the right time. The laws of physics apply to this motor too. To make more power you need more energy. But I take your point that charge transition may result in worse fuel economy on top of that.
I won't be changing the valve timing on my 8v, and there's not too much I can do about VE, but I *can* make sure that there is the *right* amount of fuel in the chamber when the spark comes. And if the ratio to air is good, then the more the better (from a power point of view).
-
I believe over cooling has a big impact too. They have to dump a lot of cold oil around the exhaust ports to keep them from being damaged at higher power. And/or maybe to keep down the pollutants from too hot a combustion chamber. But that means it is over cooled under normal use.
On my commute to work, my Stelvio often gets less than 30MPG when the outdoor temp is below freezing. But it gets closer to 40MPG in the summer. Oxygenated fuel around here likely plays a part in that too, but the cold certainly has a big impact.
One day I am going to make a cover for the oil cooler for the winter rides.
-
OMG, one major contributor is the poorly designed stock temperature correction tables in the map.
-
Interesting thread. Most of my F.I. knowledge, which is only
basic, comes from looking for an answer to the R1150Rs
surging problem. If I remember it correctly the ECUs work
differently - I assume in an Apple/Microsoft sort of way, but
don't know for sure.
A lot of different approaches were tried on the 1150s but the
only one I saw that provided any documented evidence was
Roger04RT who did exhaustive research using a 911 and an
Innovative Motorsports LM1 programmable wideband sensor
setup to show exactly what the ECU was doing.
It's interesting that, for the BMW at least, attacking the
problem from the O2 sensor seems to be the way to go
as all other approaches get "adapted" out. The way to go
was to adjust the AFR point that the sensor was switching
at from 14.7 to around 13.8 and let the computer do it's
thing. Anything like an air temp fooler or high pressure fuel
pump ect was read by the computer as a fault that was
adapted out after a few tanks of fuel to return the AFR
to 14.7 - changing the AFR that the ECU was reading wasn't.
As my understanding of FI is only basic, if anyone has experience
of both I'd like to learn more about why what works on one doesn't
on the other?
Maurie.
-
No. That's a simplistic approach. More torque means more power. If the 8V produced torque based in the amount of fuel it used, it would be good for 140 HP.
I get your point Mark , it is all about proportion .
Dusty
-
No, torque plus rpm makes power. All things being equal, if you can get more air and fuel into the combustion chamber, in the right quantities, it will make more power. Nothing is for free.
OK , Mark will call me pedantic , but the formula is HP = Torque X RPM over 5252 .
Dusty
-
Yes Dusty. As Pete mentioned, the VE of the 8V is a bit ordinary by way the head design and long valve overlap. I hesitate to mention it 'cos all the haters will hate on it even more. :rolleyes:
-
OK , Mark will call me pedantic
Pedant!
-
Yes Dusty. As Pete mentioned, the VE of the 8V is a bit ordinary by way the head design and long valve overlap. I hesitate to mention it 'cos all the haters will hate on it even more. :rolleyes:
Which is also one of the reasons I believe that the 'Target' AFR's you aim for are often a far cry from what are always touted as the theoretical ideal? It was one of the things I learnt early on when looking at lambda readings on a dyno and comparing them with plug readings. It was obvious that despite what the technology was telling me what was happening within the combustion chamber was far from *Ideal*. For those that doubt? If you accept that charge transition is going to contribute to lower VE also consider what the 'Missing' charge is going to do to the lambda readings in the exhaust pipe......
Pete
-
Pedant!
:laugh: :laugh: :laugh: :laugh: :laugh:
On a serious note , the last generation of V10 F1 engines circa 2000 were more fuel efficient than the earlier versions , despite being capable of 19,000 RPM bursts . So yeah , combustion chamber design plays a big role .
Dusty
-
It's interesting that, for the BMW at least, attacking the
problem from the O2 sensor seems to be the way to go
as all other approaches get "adapted" out. The way to go
was to adjust the AFR point that the sensor was switching
at from 14.7 to around 13.8 and let the computer do it's
thing. Anything like an air temp fooler or high pressure fuel
pump ect was read by the computer as a fault that was
adapted out after a few tanks of fuel to return the AFR
to 14.7 - changing the AFR that the ECU was reading wasn't.
You can't do that with the stock Guzzi sensor. Although I know nothing about BMW's (and don't care to), the narrowband signal from the sensor is (simplified) 'rich/stoic/lean'. The ECU trims 'more fuel' and 'less fuel' over a long steady throttle to the point where the signal is mostly 'stoic'.
The best way to do it is to add a wideband sensor with a simulated narrowband output. You program the wideband controller to set the 'rich/stoic/lean' points at the AFR of your choosing and the ECU will happily trim the AFR to goodness.
-
Which is also one of the reasons I believe that the 'Target' AFR's you aim for are often a far cry from what are always touted as the theoretical ideal? '
Yes. I'll say no more as all the 'experts' will set about to decry me.
-
still looking for it, but I'll find it!
-
All it takes is a bit of analytical and critical thinking. I can understand your reluctance to try and explain further though as stepping away from accepted orthodoxy is very effective troll-bait! :violent1:
Pete
-
Interesting thread. Most of my F.I. knowledge, which is only
basic, comes from looking for an answer to the R1150Rs
surging problem. If I remember it correctly the ECUs work
differently - I assume in an Apple/Microsoft sort of way, but
don't know for sure.
A lot of different approaches were tried on the 1150s but the
only one I saw that provided any documented evidence was
Roger04RT who did exhaustive research using a 911 and an
Innovative Motorsports LM1 programmable wideband sensor
setup to show exactly what the ECU was doing.
It's interesting that, for the BMW at least, attacking the
problem from the O2 sensor seems to be the way to go
as all other approaches get "adapted" out. The way to go
was to adjust the AFR point that the sensor was switching
at from 14.7 to around 13.8 and let the computer do it's
thing. Anything like an air temp fooler or high pressure fuel
pump ect was read by the computer as a fault that was
adapted out after a few tanks of fuel to return the AFR
to 14.7 - changing the AFR that the ECU was reading wasn't.
As my understanding of FI is only basic, if anyone has experience
of both I'd like to learn more about why what works on one doesn't
on the other?
Maurie.
I am running the AF-XIED 02 manipulator recommended by Roger04RT following his studies referred to above ( on my R1150R). Don't know if this one of the devices considered to worthless/harmful junk by the experts here, or not. I'd be interested to know. My experience has been that my bike does run better with the device, smoother and with strikingly stronger pull off the bottom. No bad side effects in the several thousand miles that I've bee using it.
-
All it takes is a bit of analytical and critical thinking. I can understand your reluctance to try and explain further though as stepping away from accepted orthodoxy is very effective troll-bait! :violent1:
Pete
Yes, but it sure is fun when you do all the "stupid" things the trolls decry as ridiculous aberrations of accepted practices and yet the machine you do these silly things to runs off and hides from their "properly" prepared slugs. Oh, so sweet!
Terry (fellow rule-bender) :evil:
-
Sorry Larry, like Mark I can't offer any input as I am not familiar with either the engine or the engine management system of the machine in question.
Pete
-
OK -- thx Pete. Appreciate the response.
-
Larry,
Yes, the AX-FieD was developed from Roger's data by
Nightrider and works with the standard narrowband sensor.
It's not as accurate as the Wideband but works well and is
less complicated allowing a plugnplay fitting for us ordinary
people.
The Bosch ECU runs differently to most others from what
Roger said.
Beetle,
Yes, that's the basis of what Roger found - the LM-1 is a
wideband programmable with a simulated analog output
for the ECU. He was quite exhaustive in his testing, trying
Lots of things and providing data and charts so you could
see what was happening.
The PCV and Dobeck stuff worked but were clumsy compared
To the standard maps ect which were pretty well worked out.
So the answer was to change the AFR point that the sensor
was reading, changing what the ECU saw as normal and leave
The rest alone.
Maurie.
-
Which is also one of the reasons I believe that the 'Target' AFR's you aim for are often a far cry from what are always touted as the theoretical ideal? It was one of the things I learnt early on when looking at lambda readings on a dyno and comparing them with plug readings. It was obvious that despite what the technology was telling me what was happening within the combustion chamber was far from *Ideal*. For those that doubt? If you accept that charge transition is going to contribute to lower VE also consider what the 'Missing' charge is going to do to the lambda readings in the exhaust pipe......
Pete
But is the 8v really so inefficient? I don't know because I haven't seen any numbers on VE, but here are a couple of things to ponder..
1) The Stelvio is equipped with 2 sensors that rely on exactly those AFR values to steer the fueling in standard trim. How could they work correctly if charge transission is mucking up the readings so much? And how would an 8v be able to comply with emmission standards?
2) I rode 1000km up through Austria and Germany last year together with with a friend on an BMW 1200GS. It was a mix of highway and back roads. My Stelvio is set up to run with an AFR of 13.4 in most conditions and the BMW is standard closed loop. (The Stelvio ran beautifully, and my friend was less than happy with the fueling on his GS, but that's a different story). The interesting thing was that I used exactly 9% more fuel than my friend. That is exactly the difference between an AFR of 13.4:1 and 14.7:1. That suggests to me that the AFR readings I use to set the bike up are quite accurate, and not too much can be lost to charge transition. Either that or the BMW is equally inefficient.
The fact that the Stelvio was less economical is not relevant because that is a consequence I chose to accept when I set the bike up like that. And the plugs look perfect.
So yes, in general I do believe in the value of AFR readings.
-
Larry,
Yes, the AX-FieD was developed from Roger's data by
Nightrider and works with the standard narrowband sensor.
It's not as accurate as the Wideband but works well and is
less complicated allowing a plugnplay fitting for us ordinary
people.
The Bosch ECU runs differently to most others from what
Roger said.
Beetle,
Yes, that's the basis of what Roger found - the LM-1 is a
wideband programmable with a simulated analog output
for the ECU. He was quite exhaustive in his testing, trying
Lots of things and providing data and charts so you could
see what was happening.
The PCV and Dobeck stuff worked but were clumsy compared
To the standard maps ect which were pretty well worked out.
So the answer was to change the AFR point that the sensor
was reading, changing what the ECU saw as normal and leave
The rest alone.
Maurie.
Cool.
-
Maurice, it may come
Beetle,
Yes, that's the basis of what Roger found - the LM-1 is a
wideband programmable with a simulated analog output
for the ECU. He was quite exhaustive in his testing, trying
Lots of things and providing data and charts so you could
see what was happening.
The PCV and Dobeck stuff worked but were clumsy compared
To the standard maps ect which were pretty well worked out.
So the answer was to change the AFR point that the sensor
was reading, changing what the ECU saw as normal and leave
The rest alone.
Maurie.
Thanks Maurie. I checked out the Nightrider site, but there are no technical details that I could find. IMO it's still boils down to an O2 fooler, albeit more sophisticated than the likes of the FatDuc et al. Well, at least the shiny website and self promotion blurb intimates as much. I still would advise caution, as the narrowband sensors have a quite slow response. Added with the crude 'more/less' trimming method, if one wasn't careful with the the settings, one could still over fuel.
The Bosch and Delphi ECU's may well have a more sophisticated way of trimming, and it may work well with them.
-
For the map experts
My Norge is a 2008 2V with 25k miles on it...had it since new.
It has exceptionally smooth acceleration, no hiccup or catch in the throttle response at all from start to wide open under all conditions, cold, warm, boiling hot and everything in between.. Never had any issues with any flat spots or stickiness in the throttle. Since day 1, it has always had a pleasing deceleration pop pop pop, and I've always kept the tuning totally stock, never loaded any maps of any sort except stock, and has been lovingly cared for by MPH for its whole life. I easily get about 44 mpg riding around here in Houston on day trips or even multi day trips out of state.
So my question is: Is there a different map that can keep the mpg, keep the existing smoothness in acceleration and yet get rid of the decel, or is it possible that any variation of the existing map will bring downsides to my mpg and smooth throttle response in exchange for eliminating the decel pop?
Thanks!
-
Getting rid of the popping on deceleration is very easy. The reason it occurs is because unlike most systems the Guzzi maps don't completely chop fuel on a negative throttle. This means that as the engine slows down on the over-run there will be points where the mixture won't burn every cycle. Instead the unburnt fuel and air mix is expelled into the exhaust pipe where, the next time the mixture does ignite in the combustion chamber and the hot exhaust gasses are expelled into the pipe through the opening exhaust valve, it ignites there creating the backfiring.
To get rid of it all that needs to be done is to chop the fuel completely at 4.8 TPS until, well, Mark I believe feeds it back in at 2,750 by which time the engine isn't pumping so hard that the mixture is incombustible. If no fuel is being delivered at these low TPS settings then there is nothing to burn in the pipe and consequently no 'Pop'!
Pete
-
Thanks Pete...a couple of follow up questions based on that.
What exactly is TPS? Throttle Position Sensor perhaps?
If the fuel is chopped to eliminate the popping, does that mean I would notice more engine braking when my throttle is closed?
Much appreciated!
-
"My Norge is a 2008 2V with 25k miles on it...had it since new.
It has exceptionally smooth acceleration, no hiccup or catch in the throttle response at all from start to wide open under all conditions, cold, warm, boiling hot and everything in between.. Never had any issues with any flat spots or stickiness in the throttle. Since day 1, it has always had a pleasing deceleration pop pop pop, and I've always kept the tuning totally stock, never loaded any maps of any sort except stock, and has been lovingly cared for by MPH for its whole life. I easily get about 44 mpg riding around here in Houston on day trips or even multi day trips out of state."
That's good to hear....I just bought the same thing and hope it runs like yours... :bow:
-
Thanks Pete...a couple of follow up questions based on that.
What exactly is TPS? Throttle Position Sensor perhaps?
If the fuel is chopped to eliminate the popping, does that mean I would notice more engine braking when my throttle is closed?
Much appreciated!
Yes, throttle position sensor and you may notice a slight increase in engine braking. I don't really notice it but you can feel the fuel come back in at 2,750.
Pete
-
Ok...thanks again Pete...I'll check to see if the good folks at MPH can make this tweak. :thumb: :thumb:
-
If you'd rather not cut the fuel and increase engine braking, adding extra fuel in 2500-3500 range at TPS values of 4.6-5.2 can accomplish the same anti-pop effect.
-
For the map experts
My Norge is a 2008 2V with 25k miles on it...had it since new.
....
I easily get about 44 mpg riding around here in Houston on day trips or even multi day trips out of state.
That's only slightly better than the "slurping" 2v Norge Pete tested with the o2 modifier, and about the same as my charge transition plagued Stelvio in good weather.
:grin:
Just kiddin' you folks down under! :thumb:
-
Ok...thanks again Pete...I'll check to see if the good folks at MPH can make this tweak. :thumb: :thumb:
Hey Paul,
Thanks for jumping in. As the one who started this thread, I'm looking for answers. Apparently I need to remove the O2 Optimizer and start over. Like you, my old '07 Norge ran perfectly after it was relashed at the Malibu MGNOC Rally., and had no add-on's . I 'd like to get back to that point again with the '08 Norge I just picked up.
I'm a rider not a tinkerer, and the stock performance of the bike was more then sufficient to meet my needs.
Please let me know what MPH says. I've bought 2 bikes there!
Thanks
Jerry
-
John, a fairly well whipped 1200 Sport 2V I enquired about, owned by a mate, returns very low fives and often dips into the fours. That is with a full load of gear for touring and a stupid loud pipe on but a custom map.
I'm not saying that AFR figures should be ignored. Simply that they are only one of a whole armoury of tools that can be used for tuning and diagnosis purposes and ALL the results need to be looked at holistically and scrutinised through a maleable lens. There are so many factors at work effecting how an engine breathes and its consequent performance that sheeting home behaviour to one simple formula is pointless.
Pete
-
Yep. Let's agree on that! :thumb:
I'm off to do some riding now. First great day of the year. The sky is blue and it's warm.
Have a great day everyone!
-
This is what you guys sound like to me :rolleyes:
https://www.facebook.com/1626076704335831/videos/1653873904889444/ (https://www.facebook.com/1626076704335831/videos/1653873904889444/)
-
differential doodle spring
:grin: :grin:
-
I check my capacitive duractance regularly. :azn:
-
This is what you guys sound like to me :rolleyes:
https://www.facebook.com/1626076704335831/videos/1653873904889444/ (https://www.facebook.com/1626076704335831/videos/1653873904889444/)
Brilliant!
-
Maurice, it may come
Thanks Maurie. I checked out the Nightrider site, but there are no technical details that I could find. IMO it's still boils down to an O2 fooler, albeit more sophisticated than the likes of the FatDuc et al. Well, at least the shiny website and self promotion blurb intimates as much. I still would advise caution, as the narrowband sensors have a quite slow response. Added with the crude 'more/less' trimming method, if one wasn't careful with the the settings, one could still over fuel.
The Bosch and Delphi ECU's may well have a more sophisticated way of trimming, and it may work well with them.
The actual thread with the test Data is to be found on
Adventure Rider, I can dig up the thread title tomorrow
if you'd like.
Anyway it's only a point of interest between the different
ECU's not meant to sidetrack anything.
Maurie.
-
This is what you guys sound like to me :rolleyes:
https://www.facebook.com/1626076704335831/videos/1653873904889444/ (https://www.facebook.com/1626076704335831/videos/1653873904889444/)
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xUflk0NAFeo
-
I check my capacitive duractance regularly. :azn:
As soon as I added a bolloid capacitive laminator to my Norge it got 60 mpg when fully loaded with fanametric hutzpah.
-
^ :thumb:
-
Ok here is what the one tuned from the factory for my B1100 is set at.
Switch 1,5,7,8 on. All others off.
-
Hey Paul,
I'm a rider not a tinkerer, and the stock performance of the bike was more then sufficient to meet my needs. Please let me know what MPH says. I've bought 2 bikes there!
Thanks
Jerry
Will do Jerry...just got it back with a few new farkles installed and the regular 6k maintenance, so will head back that way and see if Larry can adjust the TPS to the recommended setting and see what that does.
-
Will do Jerry...just got it back with a few new farkles installed and the regular 6k maintenance, so will head back that way and see if Larry can adjust the TPS to the recommended setting and see what that does.
It's not a physical or even electronic *Adjustment* that can be made with any of the stock diagnostic tooling. It requires the map to be downloaded, modified and reloaded using a program like Tunerpro for the mod and GD *Reader* and *Writer* for the download and upload. It's not the TPS that is adjusted. It is the fuel delivery at certain TPS values that is changed.
Pete
-
Oh! Ok...that clarifies it then, thanks again Pete. Some software and HW to purchase then if one desires to tweak the TPS.
Are there multiple versions of this software, I've seen a couple people selling on the forum, do they all sell a different version or are they all distributing the same MAP adjusting software/HW kit?
Thanks!
-
Oh! Ok...that clarifies it then, thanks again Pete. Some software and HW to purchase then if one desires to tweak the TPS.
Are there multiple versions of this software, I've seen a couple people selling on the forum, do they all sell a different version or are they all distributing the same MAP adjusting software/HW kit?
Thanks!
Do a search for Mark's, (Beetle.) Guzzidiag for beginners thread. It is comprehensive and has links to what you'll need to buy and download.
Pete
-
Roger that...Guzzi Mapping 101 class in session... :bike-037: :bike-037:
-
Remember, once you have 'Reader' and 'Writer' you can download and save your original map so if you end up screwing something up unintentionally you can simply flick the original map back in. There is no danger of you bricking your ECU and no need to risk damaging your loom by sticking in chopped in *Add Ons* like a PC.
Pete
-
To start, Happy Easter to everyone!
To get back to my original question about the O2 Optimizer. If the main concern is damage to the engine through indiscriminate over fueling, isn't that detectable early on before engine damage? Back in my day, you would see evidence by inspecting the plugs and tail pipe.
Is this assumption over simplistic?
-
Remember, once you have 'Reader' and 'Writer' you can download and save your original map so if you end up screwing something up unintentionally you can simply flick the original map back in. There is no danger of you bricking your ECU and no need to risk damaging your loom by sticking in chopped in *Add Ons* like a PC.
Pete
Just a guess but that statement right there probably takes away the hesitation of many considering loading a new map. There are horror stories about bricked phones, computers and such.
You can imagine folks wondering what happens if they do something wrong and now they can't get back in to load the original map.
For others: always save your original map not just on the PC but like in another place as well. All computers eventually fail, your map will go with it so store it on a couple of thumb drives, they are cheap and you can use the low capacity ones.
-
Just a guess but that statement right there probably takes away the hesitation of many considering loading a new map. There are horror stories about bricked phones, computers and such.
You can imagine folks wondering what happens if they do something wrong and now they can't get back in to load the original map.
For others: always save your original map not just on the PC but like in another place as well. All computers eventually fail, your map will go with it so store it on a couple of thumb drives, they are cheap and you can use the low capacity ones.
Some people fear everything modern. I have all maps guzzi ever made, so if anyone looses it, I have a backup. And more people. I only have to know what was in there to have the same back. And even if that is unknown, when I know the bike, I have the map.
But it was never needed until now. Little people go back to stock.
-
Some people fear everything modern. I have all maps guzzi ever made, so if anyone looses it, I have a backup. And more people. I only have to know what was in there to have the same back. And even if that is unknown, when I know the bike, I have the map.
But it was never needed until now. Little people go back to stock.
:thumb: :1:
-
Had a few minutes so I loaded up a couple of pics of the thirsty Norge.
(https://farm2.staticflickr.com/1595/25475451103_259f9bf6ff_o.jpg)
(https://farm2.staticflickr.com/1567/25473286884_e36be0f82b_o.jpg)
Yuck!
-
Good grief , looks line an old 650 Triumph exhaust running 240 main jets :shocked:
Dusty