| Author | Message | ||
     Ferocity02 |
Alright guys... due to some conflicting information on here and in the Buell tuning guide in ECMspy, I'm looking for some direction on the PROPER way to datalog and use VE analyzer. Now I know that VE analyzer is a limited tool, but it should give me a decent tune with all of the mods I have performed. I don't think the stock race ECM is cutting it anymore. Bike: 2005 Buell XB12Scg Mods: K&N filter, ported airbox, race ECM, Jardine slip-on Issues: Lots of popping in the popping zone, sluggish in the low RPM/WOT range, sluggish in the high RPM/WOT range Questions: 1) What options in ECMspy in the program options should be checked. "Use Megalog Format" should be checked, but what about "Use AFV for Gego calculation", "Use WOT for Gego calculation", or "Use OL-enrich for Gego calculation"? 2) Should the AFV be locked to 100? 3) With the new version of ECMspy, does anything in the log file need to be changed? If so, what? 4) When running VE analyzer, should it be done on "veBins1" or "veBins2". If I'm correct, "veBins2" is the rear cylinder and is the one that should be analyzed because that's where the O2 sensor is, correct? 5) In VE analyzer, the advanced settings show RPM and TPS limits, should I limit the analysis to only a certain area of the RPM/TPS table? Or in other words, is this method only accurate for a certain area of the table, and the non-accurate areas should be neglected? 6) Should the "CLT" in the advanced settings be changed? Default is 160. 7) The "Default AFR" table in VE analyzer is NOT the same as "afrBins1" or "afrBins2". The Default AFR table has a value of 12.5 at WOT, while afrBins1 and 2 have a value of 13.0. There are other subtle differences as well. Which one should be used in VE analyzer? 8) After running the analysis, the tuning guide says to copy the new table to the front cylinder, so the rear and front cylinder have the same exact VE tables. Shouldn't they be different? If I remember correctly, the rear cylinder runs warmer and thus needs MORE fuel. However, in the tuning guide, it says that the FRONT cylinder will AUTOMATICALLY receive more fuel. First question is which cylinder needs more fuel? Second question is does the ECM automatically give one cylinder more fuel than the other even though the VE tables are the same? Any help to any of these questions is much appreciated, thanks!!!} | ||
| Xl_cheese |
I'll tell you what I know. 1. I don't think any of them need to be checked. 2. Yes. 3. There are two schools of thought here. Analyze the rear map then copy it to the front and add 2 to the entire front map. I disagree. The timing is not the same for the front and rear. The other method it to run ve analyzer once on the rear map and then a second time on the front map. I still disagree with this. You are blindly applying rear cylinder data to the front. I believe if you want to do this correctly you need to add a bunghole to your front pipe for an o2 sensor. I'm planning to do this and have stopped doing datalogging. And will wait until I get the 2nd o2 sensor. 5. megalogviewer is not known to give good results until 3000+. So for the lower RPM's it's recommended to do it manually. I've gone rounds trying to improve the stock map, but have been unsucessful. The only thing I have gotten set well is the idle. It' idles really steady now. 6. Not sure. I never changed it. 7. Use the afrbins1 and 2. If you want to decrease popping then search around on these sites and you'll see what needs to be changed in the afrbins to fix it. 8. see number 4. (Message edited by xl_cheese on June 29, 2008) | ||
| Ferocity02 |
Thanks!!! Yeah, I'd like to install a wideband in the front and rear head pipes but that would cost mucho $$$. I think when I have more engine mods done that might be a good thing to do. As for question 3, with the new ECMspy, do any of the column titles need to be changed? Thanks again! | ||
| Mr2shim |
No. | ||
| Id073897 |
Some of the questions are covered by these threads: http://www.ukbeg.com/modules.php?name=Forums&file= viewtopic&t=24254 http://www.ukbeg.com/modules.php?name=Forums&file= viewtopic&t=23807 Regards, Gunter | ||
| Ferocity02 |
Thanks Gunter! So if I'm reading that first link correctly, if I'm tuning with the stock narrowband O2 sensor, I need to make my whole AFR table 14.7? Isn't that way too lean for WOT use? Seems to me like doing that is a bad idea. | ||
| Id073897 |
Sorry, but I can't tell you. Might be best if you ask the OP. Regards, Gunter |
