New 20 ounce tumblers available now! Forum donation credit with purchase. https://www.wildguzzi.com/Products/products.htm#Tumbler
It's funny, the dealer thinks it has a MAF sensor..
Actually, I've never heard or seen a bike with a MAF sensor. MAP sensor, yes.
Well, I would have figured expensive bikes with MAF...Not.......... ........speed density works pretty good but in some ways a carburetor is more sophisticated because it delivers fuel in response to air flow more or less....
I must be missing something.MAP sensor allows a calculation of mass air flow, right?So a minor change in flow-say a more-or-less restrictive intake-along with O2 sensor data,should be handled by the ECU. No?
But the whole point of EFI is to lean out the mixture to reduce pollutants whenever possible and more so to do it at levels that are unapproachable safely with carburetors (especially in closed-loop operation) that additional leanness can be the proverbial straw that breaks the camel's back. So I'd be worried more at idle and steady throttle than a WOT.Generally speaking it would just lead to higher combustion chamber temperatures (which might already be pretty darn high during normal operation). Maybe the biggest immediate danger would be if it starts to cause pre-ignition. But in most cases I don't think anything is going to go boom right away.
Modern cars/trucks have three way catalytic convertors...For proper function it requires the fuel mixture to be close to 14.5 stoichometric except during full throttle or heavy loads when it's closer to 12.5....There's also something called "dithering" ,where the mixture varies from rich to lean to control the all the regulated emissions... It's the older 80-90's engines that could be run leaner during light load cruising for better fuel mileage. You know how Lannis says his 1990 ish small car gets such great fuel mileage, party because of the leaner burn capability... Obviously new bikes don't need to meet the same emissions standards as cars so it's a whole different story...
Having 2 identical bikes will make this an interesting experiment. When we ride together our engine temps have been nearly constantly in sync, over all sorts of conditions (intercoms and long rides make for interesting conversation).The difference in flow at a given pressure is going to be impossible to predict with simple math, so I am sure the map has a table based on experimentation. I do think there wouls have to be some distortion based on how much higher manifold pressure will be with an intake of lower restriction, both in instant throttle changes, and steady state.I'll post what I find on temps when I have data. The vendor for the intake I'll install tonight says this one needs no mods to fueling used in isolation, no pipes etc. I don't expect any performance difference, just more noise.
If we're being pedantic 14.7:1, but yes.And yes, the ECM can't actually hold that ratio, but moves back and forth across it attempting to average it as best as they can.But it's not the fuel system's fault if combustion is not always based around best mileage, that's the emissions standards interfering with ideal mileage situations.Those 80-90s fuel systems weren't better, they were just less regulated. And remember some standards are at odds with others, balancing conditions for NOx vs CO vs ideal mileage.Theose 80s-90s systems met lower standards, in vehicles that were often smaller and lighter, with lower crash test standards and a lack of a number of mandated safety systems in our current vehicles.Bottom line, it's not the fault of the technology nor does it make it any less sophisticated. It's a balancing of lots of requirements, many of which are at odds with each other.
The E10 that most of us use has a Stoichiometric of about 14.1 not the 14.7 of pure gasoline...
The varying A/F ratio is done by the ECM on purpose to help the three way catalyst do it's job.....
Good point, I hadn't actually thought about that, but it makes sense since the ethanol acts as an oxygenate and already leans it out more. Not what I was taught, but it was about 2 decades ago and I could have been taught wrong or not kept up with the changes, so I'll take your word for it.
Good point, I hadn't actually thought about that, but it makes sense since the ethanol acts as an oxygenate and already leans it out more.
Page created in 0.164 seconds with 24 queries.