ADVrider

Go Back   ADVrider > Bikes > GSpot > Parallel Universe
User Name
Password
Register Inmates Photos Site Rules Search Today's Posts Mark Forums Read

Reply
 
Thread Tools Search this Thread Display Modes
Old 05-20-2013, 06:52 AM   #316
ebrabaek OP
Beastly Adventurer
 
Joined: Jan 2010
Location: Grand Valley, Colorado
Oddometer: 4,673
Quote:
Originally Posted by terryckdbf View Post
Good Morning EB

While it is true the "cells" of the fuel map populate instantly, the bike still needs time to settle down. There are many other things going on, not the least of which is adaptive values. Instantly to us is not instantly to the motor. The Autotune will always lag behind the motor as the Lambda sensor needs to first read the exhaust and then the PC V provides the corrections, not in the same combustion cycle. Even Dynojet states the Autotune takes time to learn the settings and achieve its target air/fuel, adding a base map decreases this time frame. We cannot forget the BMSK is providing the base information and doing so without the O2 signal, its #1 input, and the PC V is altering that base. Basically a moving target. It is not as simple as programming 13.2, riding for 20 miles, and having a great running bike.

SOP and Roger have provided some solutions if you are inclined. Like I said before, you have a system performing the way you want with the SAS included and you are happy. I still believe it is because it was programmed to perform that way with the SAS included. Disconnect the SAS and you can throw that program out the window, it will not run right. Program with the SAS disconnected and it will run well in my opinion.

Stay at it EB.

Terry
I will get to the bottom of this, if it is the last thing I do...... , So I'd like to throw this back at you fine fellows, who has been helping.... As we have had many different opinions here, and have kept it in a great civil manner, don't for a moment think I do not value your advices. Please do not take any offense, as I have taken none. I will persevere, somehow.... So you guys also hang in there. It is not about me..... But for the entire world of riders, who is watching this unfold. So next step is to make a few phone calls one today to Dynojet, to see what they think about this, and on Tuesday, as my tuner opens up, what he thinks. I am interested, as to why my tuner did not inquire about the SAS or should we call it PAIR system, as he is on board, that it should be disconnected in general. What is again strange though, as you mentions that it takes a while..... With both runs starting at zero trims...... with SAS disengaged....it ran like crap.....the whole time...... As soon as I re engaged it.... like a flick of a switch...... it ran great.... That fast.....no re learn. Only thing I can think of is that with the SAS disengaged, the zero map ( lean BMS-K) is not rich enough to make good power, and I should try the -505..... but wasn't it the other way around.... with SAS on, bike runs richer, as the SAS is falsely leaning the mix, and with such with SAS off it should reverse, and enrichen it...... ????
Must understand this before going any further.
__________________


Erling
ebrabaek is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 05-20-2013, 10:05 AM   #317
ebrabaek OP
Beastly Adventurer
 
Joined: Jan 2010
Location: Grand Valley, Colorado
Oddometer: 4,673
Another note is right before I did the test run with the SAS disconnected, I gassed up with 91 octane. The mileage was 150 since last fillup. The trip computer stated 45 mpg, as most of that was freeway riding coming home from our last ride, as in the video's enclosed. Did the math....after adding 3.38 gallon, I got 44.37 miles per gallon.
__________________


Erling
ebrabaek is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 05-20-2013, 10:45 AM   #318
ebrabaek OP
Beastly Adventurer
 
Joined: Jan 2010
Location: Grand Valley, Colorado
Oddometer: 4,673
Ok, so talked with DJ just now, and while they could not provide a 100% answer, as of to why It runs worse with the PAIR ( SAS) disabled, they offered some potential culprits. In order for the AT to work, it would have to read a 11.5-16 AFR. Anything outside that, and AT will not read/adjust. So perhaps even the trim tables for SAS disabled did not denote an extreme outside AFR ( outside 11.5-16) it perhaps could be the results of running a zero base map ( ie relying on the BMS-K stock map) There were only one 25% I think with SAS disabled, but again, if the AFR is outside the op. spec's, AT simply will not adjust. I suppose it is plausible that the Zero base map with SAS disabled, now pushed the AT out of it's comfort zone......?????? DJ thinks so, or at the very least a catalyst. They recommended not to use the -505 map, nor the Original Dyno derived map , as it was done with the SAS active, but the -002 map, as the -505 is developed with EU fuels, and the US running the -505 map, ends up running richer than they should. The -002 is US with slip on with db killer, I believe.....
__________________


Erling

ebrabaek screwed with this post 05-20-2013 at 11:51 AM Reason: digits...
ebrabaek is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 05-20-2013, 11:08 AM   #319
SOP Dirt-Rider
Studly Adventurer
 
SOP Dirt-Rider's Avatar
 
Joined: Aug 2012
Location: Port Orchard, WA
Oddometer: 666
Quote:
Originally Posted by ebrabaek View Post
Ok, so talked with DJ just now, and while they could not provide a 100% answer, as of to why It runs worse with the PAIR ( SAS) disabled, they offered some potential culprits. In order for the AT to work, it would have to read a 11.5-16 AFR. Anything outside that, and AT will not read/adjust. So perhaps even the trim tables for SAS disabled did not denote an extreme outside AFR ( outside 11.5-16) it perhaps could be the results of running a zero base map ( ie relying on the BMS-K stock map) There were only one 25% I think with SAS disabled, but again, if the AFR is outside the op. spec's, AT simply will not adjust. I suppose it is plausible that the Zero base map with SAS disabled, now pushed the AT out of it's comfort zone......?????? DJ thinks so, or at the very least a catalyst. They recommended not to use the -505 map, nor the Original Dyno derived map , as it was done with the SAS active, but the -202 map, as the -505 is developed with EU fuels, and the US running the -505 map, ends up running richer than they should. The -202 is US with slip on with db killer, I believe.....
-202 eh? Gonna have to look at what I'm running. Sounds like you are getting there.
SOP Dirt-Rider is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 05-20-2013, 11:16 AM   #320
ebrabaek OP
Beastly Adventurer
 
Joined: Jan 2010
Location: Grand Valley, Colorado
Oddometer: 4,673
Quote:
Originally Posted by SOP Dirt-Rider View Post
-202 eh? Gonna have to look at what I'm running. Sounds like you are getting there.
I hope Chet...... I found it interesting regarding the -505 map, with the EU fuel, that it would run rich in the US if you used that map....because of the difference in fuel quality. He did not elaborate, but I did find it strange that they did not offer a -505US, as they have all the dyno work done with their 800ST, I think it was here in the US..... He said that the -002 is obviously not perfect either, but he'd feel more comfortable going that way, and let the AT populate the trims, and accepting the trims to getting a good base map. He also noted that one should NOT force change any AT trim settings. You should let AT only , change the trim tables. Gotta do a few Carbon fiber header shields today...... So after a talk with my tuner tomorrow, I am certain, that a new path will be taken..... Cheers
__________________


Erling

ebrabaek screwed with this post 05-20-2013 at 11:51 AM
ebrabaek is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 05-20-2013, 02:10 PM   #321
roger 04 rt
Beastly Adventurer
 
roger 04 rt's Avatar
 
Joined: Nov 2011
Location: Massachusetts
Oddometer: 2,154
Quote:
Originally Posted by ebrabaek View Post
Another note is right before I did the test run with the SAS disconnected, I gassed up with 91 octane. The mileage was 150 since last fillup. The trip computer stated 45 mpg, as most of that was freeway riding coming home from our last ride, as in the video's enclosed. Did the math....after adding 3.38 gallon, I got 44.37 miles per gallon.
Thanks for adding these data points and continuing your efforts. I trust your calculation of gas mileage and do not question it. I also do not doubt your reading of the bike's trip computer.

I also believe that the BMSK and other computation resources on your bike are doing a good job of keeping track of miles traveled.

The thing that I see no way to explain is how the BMSK knows about the fuel you have added. I don't mean to be flip, but the first explanation that comes to mind is that your PCV isn't adding much fuel. Let's see if we can together figure out what is happening. Is there anything in any PCV documentation to suggest that the PCV has a way to inform the BMSK about the added fuel? (DJ didn't mention this when I contacted them.)

RB
roger 04 rt is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 05-20-2013, 02:14 PM   #322
roger 04 rt
Beastly Adventurer
 
roger 04 rt's Avatar
 
Joined: Nov 2011
Location: Massachusetts
Oddometer: 2,154
This from the bmwmoa site:


Quote:
My sons and I rode the following bikes from Abbeville, SC to the top of the Dragon's tail and back this past Saturday. The total mileage was 378miles.

1 R1200R 2007 Stock, K&N air filter

2 R1200R 2007 Akrapovic slip on, K&N air filter, Power commander tuned by KWS

3 R1200R 2008 Complete Ztechnik exhaust, K&N air filter

Bikes #1 and #3 were showing identical mileage per the bike computers, which was approximately 52 mpg for the entire trip. Bike #2 showed 65mpg per the computer. We keep track of fuel consumption for each bike. My theory was that the mileage was about the same despite the discrepancy on the bike computers. At the end of the day, the fuel consumption was virtually identical. I think that the power commander has altered the calculated mpg on bike #2. The mileage as calculated based on fuel consumption, was correct for bikes #1 and #3. The good news is that even with greater hp at the rear wheel(109hp), bike #2 is still achieving the same fuel economy as the others.
roger 04 rt is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 05-20-2013, 04:46 PM   #323
ebrabaek OP
Beastly Adventurer
 
Joined: Jan 2010
Location: Grand Valley, Colorado
Oddometer: 4,673
Quote:
Originally Posted by roger 04 rt View Post
Thanks for adding these data points and continuing your efforts. I trust your calculation of gas mileage and do not question it. I also do not doubt your reading of the bike's trip computer.

I also believe that the BMSK and other computation resources on your bike are doing a good job of keeping track of miles traveled.

The thing that I see no way to explain is how the BMSK knows about the fuel you have added. I don't mean to be flip, but the first explanation that comes to mind is that your PCV isn't adding much fuel. Let's see if we can together figure out what is happening. Is there anything in any PCV documentation to suggest that the PCV has a way to inform the BMSK about the added fuel? (DJ didn't mention this when I contacted them.)

RB
They did not, but I took your word, and after talking for 30 minutes with their rep, did not ask. Your explanation you got from them does makes sense to me as well. It could be that only little is added, and with the less throttle needed to move same weight, somehow confuses the BMS-K fuel calculations......not sure, but looking at the maps DJ publishes for their headers and open pipe, there are several upper 20%'ers......outside the AT ops. So I am not sure really what is going on here, but as you, I am certain that this can be sorted. And, If I dont like what I see after several tank fulls, I know how to make it run great, with the SAS.....Ha ha..... It is sort of funny.... in it's own little way.
__________________


Erling
ebrabaek is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 05-20-2013, 04:49 PM   #324
ebrabaek OP
Beastly Adventurer
 
Joined: Jan 2010
Location: Grand Valley, Colorado
Oddometer: 4,673
Quote:
Originally Posted by roger 04 rt View Post
This from the bmwmoa site:
I guess I am not alone. I will say this. Dynojet, could do a little better write up on this, to save us end users all the trouble of discovery, but again I feel comfortable, that this will get sorted, and perhaps this thread will yield even better results, that the great improvement I see right now, and others will learn from my/our discovery's......
__________________


Erling
ebrabaek is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 05-20-2013, 07:15 PM   #325
MTrider16
Ridin' in MT
 
MTrider16's Avatar
 
Joined: Oct 2006
Location: Eastern Montana
Oddometer: 1,614
Quote:
Originally Posted by ebrabaek View Post
I guess I am not alone. I will say this. Dynojet, could do a little better write up on this, to save us end users all the trouble of discovery, but again I feel comfortable, that this will get sorted, and perhaps this thread will yield even better results, that the great improvement I see right now, and others will learn from my/our discovery's......
I think I need to read more of this, it sounds interesting. To answer your comment about dynojet, considering the number of models of bikes out there, you have probably done more testing than they have on a BMWF800GS.

David
__________________
'13 VFR1200D, '13 XVS950, '09 F800GS, 07 CRF250X
Riding roads in Montana - Big Sky Country
www.mtrider16.smugmug.com
Mountains, Moose, and Miles: a Montanan's Alcan Highway Story
Continental Divide and More: the "No Dust" Tour of WY and MT
MTrider16 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 05-20-2013, 07:30 PM   #326
ebrabaek OP
Beastly Adventurer
 
Joined: Jan 2010
Location: Grand Valley, Colorado
Oddometer: 4,673
Quote:
Originally Posted by MTrider16 View Post
I think I need to read more of this, it sounds interesting. To answer your comment about dynojet, considering the number of models of bikes out there, you have probably done more testing than they have on a BMWF800GS.

David
LOL.... Perhaps you are right David..... The intriguing issue, is that the bike rips right no, and have been since the install. To you guys just joining us, the install was fantastic, but as was pointed out by Roger, the SAS ( PAIR system globally) should be disconnected, and thats where the fun began. Knowing that DJ recommends this them self, I have two diferent paths to choose from, but it is hard to deviate, as the bikes rip's. Stay tuned....
__________________


Erling
ebrabaek is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 05-20-2013, 08:26 PM   #327
jscottyk
Gnarly Adventurer
 
jscottyk's Avatar
 
Joined: Apr 2007
Location: Austin, Texas
Oddometer: 329
Quote:
Originally Posted by ebrabaek View Post
LOL... the SAS ( PAIR system globally) should be disconnected...
Well, I'm not certain that PAIR is the globally accepted term but for future search purposes (not nit picking purposes ) here are a couple acronym definitions...

SAS - Secondary Air System, aka Secondary Air Injection
PAIR - Pulsed Air Injection Reburn
jscottyk is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 05-21-2013, 12:18 AM   #328
Gaspare
Almost dirt rider
 
Gaspare's Avatar
 
Joined: Jan 2011
Location: Piacenza (IT)
Oddometer: 62
To whom having a good relationship with their pony and want to ask directly to... SLS = System Luft Sekundare
Gaspare is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 05-21-2013, 04:34 AM   #329
roger 04 rt
Beastly Adventurer
 
roger 04 rt's Avatar
 
Joined: Nov 2011
Location: Massachusetts
Oddometer: 2,154
Sounds like you're continuing to think this through. I'll be interested to here what your tuner says about SAS. RB
roger 04 rt is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 05-21-2013, 06:38 AM   #330
ebrabaek OP
Beastly Adventurer
 
Joined: Jan 2010
Location: Grand Valley, Colorado
Oddometer: 4,673
Quote:
Originally Posted by Gaspare View Post
To whom having a good relationship with their pony and want to ask directly to... SLS = System Luft Sekundare
Every one wants a pony......
__________________


Erling
ebrabaek is offline   Reply With Quote
Reply

Share

Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

.
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is On

Forum Jump


Times are GMT -7.   It's 03:42 AM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.5
Copyright ©2000 - 2014, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Copyright ADVrider 2011-2014