| Author | Message | ||
     Zac4mac |
After 1000 miles, my AFV went from 100/100 to 100/105. In the last 100 or so miles, it's gone back to 100/100. 5000 ft and basic commuting lately. Today's my Friday, so hoping for a trip into the hills tomorrow. Leather suit and virgin rubber... sounds kinky. Z | ||
| Jpfive |
My AFV's are 100 at sea level, and they were the same at 5000 feet - the bike running well in both instances. We are hung up on the idea of them being linked to altitude because that is how our XB's worked. I am convinced that the only correction for altitude change comes from the barostat. How that is done in closed loop has had me scratching my head, but I think I have figured it out - and based on something one of the anonys posted. He said that the barostat pulled a value from a separate table (not air/fuel mapping) and applied that as a constant to correct for altitude changes - or at least that is how I understood him. I think that the AFV/LFV corrects for other differences between bikes. The fuel maps are calculated for a nominal bike, one for each cylinder. However, no two bikes are exactly alike. Fuel pressures vary, injector outputs vary (even front to rear), air cleaners become progressively more restrictive as they lose efficiency, exhaust systems get modified and/or replaced, and quality of fuel varies from place to place. I think that these things are corrected for during closed loop operation, through modification of the LFV constant, and that the barostat constant is applied as well for variations in altitude. I am happy to qualify this conclusion as my own deduction - not confirmed by anyone from Buell. But, it also comes from experience with previous bikes with EFI systems that incorporated barostats as fuel modifiers, including one with no closed loop operation (no O2 sensors) and one with. Most pertinent conclusion from this line of thinking...? If your bike is not correcting properly to changes in elevation, look to the baro sensor, not the LFV's. I think that a defective barostat would not necessarily throw a code - other than if it gave no signal whatsoever, or gave one completely out of range. Hey, I'm open to challenge here - sorta thinking out loud. But something is screwy about the LFV's as they have been reported here. Any other theories? Jack | ||
| Cutty72 |
IDK. My baro was upside down. Fixed it now. went from 94/100 to 99.5/100. | ||
| Steeleagle |
Jack: Your note seemed to echo what was making the engineer voice in me go "Huh?" With all the sensors and inputs/outputs controlled by the ECM it didn't really make sense to me that in order to re-map the fuel (or get it close enough to allow the bike to run symptom-free) one had to "trick" it by WOT operations, etc. or even long term running. Seems like the confuser would make the necessary corrections on the fly to the outputs and keep things running right, or at least well enough not to cause the symptoms. HOWEVER! For those that have experienced a cure from doing what they did, I'm not about to knock success, but the little engineer voice needs an explanation to make it sink in logically. Whatever it takes, I sure hope something is found to make it right, and I'm committed to find it. I'm not sure what my AFVs were 300 miles ago (AKA at delivery). I haven't noticed any change re; low-end drive-ability since I first rode it. Like I said in a prior post, I'm a newbie and blew it off initially as rookie inexperience. Now with some miles in, I hope it ain't me, but am still open to the possibility. I'm a tenacious troubleshooter, and when this situation gets resolved I hope to know what caused it, why, how and what was done to fix it. I'm inclined to think bogus sensor, but would be fine with something silly, as long as it made my bike run better! ...and my baro sensor is installed properly. No data available on whether it's talking with the ECM or not. | ||
| Josh_ |
I found the underlying problem for my throttle issues. The linkage between the throttle bodies had no lube whatsoever and was seriously bound. The butterflies would stick at odd positions and jump around, and I wasn't getting WOT (not that I knew until we opened it up). I got it fixed at California Superbike School by Will-the-head-mechanic who just laughed the whole time he looked at it and was ... very uncomplimentary of American engineering. He also though the rubber and plastic parts in the intake would need replacing every few years. Guess we'll see. If I get ambitious later I'll document how to check and fix it. Its not that bad and takes maybe 15min - the hard part is getting the are box base back on the throttle bodies. | ||
| Jpfive |
Ahem...Austrian engineering..  | ||
| Ccryder |
Hmm, which problems did it cure?: * Surging? * 51-53mph, 3rd gear "stall"? * Wheelie monster? * Blackies on exit? * Loose nut behind the bars?  Most have found that the one hose that sticks into the airbox base will bind up the linkage if it is not protruding at least 5/8" into the air box. Experience will show that replacing the air box base is best done with the rubber gasket installed on the air box base. After slipping the snorkel in up front, you can work the air box base down and get the gasket to seal around the throttle bodies. At the same time getting the breather line thru the base and having the filter (at the back of the base) slip into it's square "hole". Time2Work Neil S. | ||
| Josh_ |
Issue - stalling at stops, rolling on throttle having no effect then suddenly having too much effect (about dumped me at Barber on Sunday several times), motor not doing what your right hand tells it. The linkage was seriously hung, it took excessive force to get the butterflies to start moving, and they would do it by "jumping" to the new point. They would then stay there before (under steady throttle pressure) jumping to the new point. They would stick before WOT and not achieve WOT. The linkage has plastic grommets? that slide over the pins from the throttle body piece. There was no lube whatsoever on the front or rear and both were very tight and "sticky" until some silkolene lube was applied (some red stuff) JP, I was not going to argue with the guy that could get me back on the track  I will point out that he had to fix my rental ZX6R twice on Saturday, once when the heelguard lost a bolt slipped down and locked the rear brake on, and once for some "known" performance issue when the bikes won't rev past 10k (power band is 9k-13.5k). I showed him my sticking front forks and we tried the loosen-pinch-and-axle bolts trick. His comment was "bent is bent" doh! | ||
| Bigdog_tim |
<sigh> We really need a manual. I have heard rumors that it is coming in July. 7.5 months without a manual. This is bad. My update: my dealer says BMC is working on a new flash that will fix the surging problems. In the short term, BMC has told my dealer that other than the "annoyance" of the surge, no damage will happen to the bike. I believe this is a lean condition and a bad map. That being said - I love this bike a ton. I will be patient - and help whenever I can to make this bike what it needs to be (both for me - and other Buellers). Of course, being hands on - I need a manual. I hate having to rely on the dealer loop to make decisions on how I want to proceed. </sigh> | ||
| Cataract2 |
Well, Big. If that is true that BMC told them that then at least we can be assured that they know about it and are working on it. Let's hope there is a fix for it that will sort this stuff out. | ||
| Steeleagle |
Re; Manual: My dealer says the same thing. Delivery promised in July. I'm a hands on guy, too. Makes me wonder: What are the dealers working from? Re; New flash with mapping to correct surging: My bike goes to the dealer on Friday to have them check my current flash rev, so I'll press them for info. If a subsequent flash is being promised, it sure would be nice to know when that's gonna be available. Seems like if Buell is monitoring this blog and has stuff in the works, they could post something so we could stop wondering and breath a sigh of relief instead of passing on info from other sources. Curious: What leads you to think it's a lean condition? Previous posters comparing AFVs seem to be happier when the numbers are in the 90s, while mine is surging like crazy and my AFVs seem to be locked at 105. Have you done other diagnostics I could do to compare notes? I did a quick look on the web last night to see if the HD troubleshooting breadboard was available anywhere so I could monitor sensor voltages, etc. and struck out. | ||
| Hayabusa |
Does anyone have issues when they engine brake and let the RPM's get under 3K? I get some real nice pops in 2-6 gear when I roll out of the throttle and let the RPM's get under 3k...if I get to 2700 RPM's without down shifting of engaging the clutch the bike will stall. However, in first gear I can take it down to idle before it stalls. I have the reflash and I have noticed much smoother acceleration and less surging at cruising speeds. My fuel economy has also improved. I can correct for the stalling problem by down shifting or using the clutch but when you are hitting a corner hard it is much better to use a little engine braking then taping the binders. I think that Buell is moving in the right direction with the reflash...unfortunately the reflash has caused some of its own problems. This is the problem with high performance bikes...the more performance you get the more problems you run into. I am sure that there will be a couple more reflashes before Buell gets the FI all squared away. I just hope that they continue to work on the map! | ||
| Bigdog_tim |
Eagle - the surging in any gear between 3-4K and the popping when decellerating through that same RPM range. I have never had an EFI bike run lean before - but have had some bad jeting that was too lean and experienced the same sort of symptoms. I just equate surge on accel and popping on decel as a symptom of too lean. | ||
| Thurstonbuell |
I agree , my KZ1000 ran lean after putting a weisco piston kit and K&N filter pod's on her , all the same symptoms , had to jet her as well , but I never had an EFI bike do this (Message edited by Thurstonbuell on June 04, 2008) | ||
| Chevycummins |
My bike has a slight pop under decel also. Sounds like mine is through the exhaust though. | ||
| Cutty72 |
just disconnected the solinoid and took off the top inner airbox cover. we'll see if this makes any difference | ||
| Mustangturbo |
Has anyone checked to see if these re-maps are hurting the performance any?? I wonder if they are possibly reducing some of the low end or the midrange... Or maybe the overall power output. I really hope that Eric gets it right soon. I love this bike, and I would be crushed to find out that its been down on power because of a reflash... | ||
| Fresnobuell |
Mustang, I had the same thought myself. It sure would be NICE if someone that has access to a dyno could get pre and post flash dynos. We could put the reduced HP issue to rest. The other reason I am hesitant to take the plunge is the change in the fan function. My guess is that the fans run less, but unless I have missed something (and I hope i have), Buell is reluctant to give out SPECIFIC information on what this reflash does. It think that is pure BS. | ||
| Bigdog_tim |
Another short update: I can't duplicate the stumble/popping unless the bike is under load. I got the notion that maybe I could use the Technoresearch VSDTS to sniff what else might be happening. According to their website, their software works for the 1125R. But since I can't duplicate the symptoms unless the bike is under load - guess am stuck on trying to narrow this down a bit more. | ||
| Dartanjang |
Can someone confirm a new reflash in the making? Preferably with release date too, please  ? I am getting near first service and haven't done the reflash yet. Bike runs normal, i.e. stuttering and jerking between 2-4k when maintaining even speed. I am bit ambivalent to the existing update, some owners have reported improvement while others have gone from smooth to jerky. If there is a better reflash in the near future I might try to skip directly to that one, and plan my service accordingly. | ||
| 01xjbuell |
Ok, I don't post much here, mostly a lurker from over on Nestreetriders.com... I have been considering this ReFlash, BUT I have zero surging problems, zero stumbles, and I can roll off the throttle down to about 2200-2500 RPM without stalling and crank the throttle open and have the bike run smoothly to redline. At this point i have drilled the piece of metal at the Exhaust tip, removed outer airbox cover, removed plastic ring from the "tank" cover, and disconnected the solenoid from the throttle bodies. Also lubed the throttle bodies butterfly stems and I have seen and felt (could be my imagination) like the bike pulled alot stronger. Been 1000 miles bike runs cooler, stronger, and more consistantly. I have just over 3000 miles on her now, any input would be greatly appreciated. Thanks, Nick in MA | ||
| Xb9 |
)1xjbuell, if it runs good and you are happy with it, I wouldn't mess with it! Just curious, what's your build date and AFV's? | ||
| Ccryder |
Nick: If it ain't broke, don't try to fix it. The flash helped mine, especially in the 2-4k range. Besides the AAS induced throttle pull back mine runs GREAT! Neil S. | ||
| Steeleagle |
The fact that pre-/post re-flash results vary all over the place, I am becoming more and more skeptical it's solely a flash issue. Why else would a computer/ECM provide such a variety of results for (allegedly) the same inputs? IMO it can be lumped into 5 categories: 1) The ECM programming is faulty, (in which case all of us would notice surging...We don't!) 2) The ECM processor itself is faulty, meaning that the desired or intended outputs aren't provided from sound inputs and sound programming. 3) The input sensors provide bad data for the ECM to process. (Faulty sensors) 4) The programming and ECM processor are fine but the output actuators process the ECM outputs signals incorrectly. (Faulty actuators) 5) Any combination of the above...in which case Lord help us!! We'll never figure it out! I'm sure I'm thinking about this WAY too much!! My head hurts. | ||
| 01xjbuell |
How can I find out the AFV's and I can check out my build date when I get home from the FD today -Nick | ||
| Cutty72 |
Build date is stamped on the frame by the VIN. AFV's go into Diag mode and scoll through | ||
| 01xjbuell |
Ok, held both buttons, turned on to get into Diag... scrolled through Front 101.7 Rear 103.5 this is with the bike off (dont know if thats the right way to do it) and mine has NOV 07 build date, hope this helps -Nick | ||
| Fresnobuell |
5) Any combination of the above...in which case Lord help us!! We'll never figure it out! It is not our job to figure it out. Are you listening BMC? | ||
| Arillius13 |
I brought my bike in yesterday for the reflash and they still have it. I called not to long ago and was told that my bike pretty much will not excet the reflash. He then continued to tell me that Harley released a notice that there is a new reflash coming out to address some other issues that the recent one had and for the bikes that wouldnt take the recent reflash? Is there any truth behind this or is the dude just selling me some BS so I dont get mad that they cant reflash my bike? Can Anon verify this? ps. someone asked about pre/post flash dynos. I should have my bike dynod w/i about 2 weeks and I DO NOT have the new reflash, eventually Ill get it flashed but read above, it wont take it right now. I thinkk im going to try another dealership after I dyno it, cuz my bike runs like total crap. | ||
| Xb9 |
01xjbuell, that's interesting, thanks. Your AFV are indicating that the ECM adjusted richer than the baseline 100. And your's runs fine. Most of us with drivability problems (I believe) are seeing AFV's less than 100 on one or both cylinders, which means the ECM is getting data that it is too rich and adjusted leaner than the baseline 100. The problem is caused by a lean running condition that the ECM does not seem to properly adjust to. One theory I have is defective 02 sensor, or 02 sensor circuit problem since that's the main source for the ECM to adjust the AFV richer or leaner. ???? Lot's of question marks??? The bike seems fine in open loop (running off the maps) but runs poorly and lean closed loop (running off the O2 sensors) But you would think if this is the case it would throw a code. It should if you get consistently rich or consistently lean O2 readings , as the DDFI II ECM programing was set up. There could also be a problem with these parameters in the DDFI III configuration. Pure speculation. As lean as it is running steady state cruising in closed loop, it should be throwing a code, but it doesn't. (Message edited by xb9 on June 05, 2008) |
