misacat - pc3 question

[botus]

I found this post from mistacat – not sure if aimed at me...


I have fitted PC3`s to jap bikes as it suited their basic injection systems and PC5`s to R1200`s with and without autotune but never found them very stable.
When you say that you can edit the 0 to 100% throttle to perfection, I agree you can alter the injection pulse width in each of the cells but they very quickly go out of spec.
Perhaps I am monitoring the AFR too closely as my diagnostic equipment is very sensitive.
What diagnostics are you using to map your AFR, ?



Under tools page 5 shows set up of TPS
https://dynojet.co.uk/media/attachment/file/p/c/pciiiusb_user_guide.pdf

agree pc3 is rudimentary, but it gives a change I can’t do to the bm map. Re my af .... although now have a 911 wifi (haven’t bothered to work out how it works) I do my tuning the old fashioned way... go for a ride, tweak and see if its better

 

[botus]

sorry got title wrong…

after this site refreshes cookies it locks up and plays up for 3 days, just done it 3 times trying to post above

 

[Mistacat]

Your link does not provide any more information than I already have on file.
As previously stated the PC3 was good on very basic injection systems, but with modern options that work with the ecu I would not entertain using one on a 1200gs.

As you say you are tuning by ear and guesswork then the PC3 will probably suit you.
As a representative for Power Commander said to me at a trade show when asked a question, his reply was " just set it up rich, the customer will not know" !!!!!!!!!!!
Having spent many years trying to tune the engines that I was racing, by ear and guesswork, I wish the affordable diagnostic equipment that is available now ,was available then.

 

[botus]

are you suggesting a pc5 (without extras - like ignition module) does anything different???

you can easily detect on a BMW if its rich.... how they come, they sound tiny, run harsh and like its going to break.... rich and they are smooth as silk (like you put engine oil in the sump) but a bit flat
what's doing my head in is the low speed stuff when if you have the fuelling remotely close to each other it runs terribly. bang in a ludicrous offset and the magic happens...

which is all rather odd.... like they set it up right then threw fuel away on just one cyl to get the emissions

 

[botus]

FYI.... I couldn't get this later map and the PC3 to work well...

I had a booster plug and threw that on (with a zero map in the pc3) and it was horrid....

now trying with a booster plug (which I imagine is fooling the CAT sensors to accept a richer mix) and with CAT sensors on and I'm now remapping the PC3 its light years on from how BM gave it back after they checked it out reflashed and cleared the adaptions


I guess it would be interesting to get your take on the fuel trims after this....

 

[botus]

I'm round the corner from PDQ, he says any powercommander gear is so old hat and the manufacturers are so busy trying to stop you having fun.... very little works these days

the Italian gear Rapid bike were at his place for 5 days trying to show how great their stuff was.... in the end he told them to go away and no he won't be holding a franchise for it

 

[Mistacat]

are you suggesting a pc5 (without extras - like ignition module) does anything different???

you can easily detect on a BMW if its rich.... how they come, they sound tiny, run harsh and like its going to break.... rich and they are smooth as silk (like you put engine oil in the sump) but a bit flat
what's doing my head in is the low speed stuff when if you have the fuelling remotely close to each other it runs terribly. bang in a ludicrous offset and the magic happens...

which is all rather odd.... like they set it up right then threw fuel away on just one cyl to get the emissions

No I am not suggesting the PC5 is any different , Tried a PC5 and PC5 with Autotune and the lambda sensors disconnected found it very unstable having to adjust the maps every day whilst touring.

 

[Mistacat]

FYI.... I couldn't get this later map and the PC3 to work well...

I had a booster plug and threw that on (with a zero map in the pc3) and it was horrid....

now trying with a booster plug (which I imagine is fooling the CAT sensors to accept a richer mix) and with CAT sensors on and I'm now remapping the PC3 its light years on from how BM gave it back after they checked it out reflashed and cleared the adaptions


I guess it would be interesting to get your take on the fuel trims after this....

The Booster plug is just a resistor that makes the inlet air temperature appear colder than it is so the ecu enriches the mixture for a short time until the ecu has corrected it in closed loop. then after a while it will be corrected in open loop due to long term fuel trims. ( this is assuming that the lambda sensors are connected)

 

[Mistacat]

I agree that the power commanders are "old hat". but useful on basic injection systems, but not intelligent self learning systems such as on the 1200GS.
You say very little works these days. The AF-XIED`s do work and work in harmony with the system just manipulate it.
If you can download Logworks 3 then PM me your email address and I will send you some files showing the AFR on my TC GS , you can view the files in graph form or virtual instruments ( build your own dashboard) using logworks 3.

 

[botus]

No I am not suggesting the PC5 is any different , Tried a PC5 and PC5 with Autotune and the lambda sensors disconnected found it very unstable having to adjust the maps every day whilst touring.

this is what PDQ had with the rapid bike evo

He was telling me that EU regs mean they must try and prevent you playing..... The bike that wouldn't play ball over 5 days of proving on a dyno was a ZZR1400
I went home and thought about how to screw over a remap company and came up with the idea it would be very cheap and very easy to have an ecu full of multiple maps.

Start it one day on map 1, go to your dyno shop and get it remapped all good. but tomorrow the bike starts on map 4 and runs like a dog, dyno shop have a come back bodge around a bit quickly and adjust away from the optimum map 1 they spent a day on. Go for a ride at the weekend and it starts on map 6 (runs like a dog) etc.

if the bikes stock and adapts quickly or had own adaptions for each of say 6 manu maps a stock bike is always OK.... but a tuned one with 2 out of 6 bodged up is just an ongoing catastrophe

I was going to buy a zzr1400, took a demo out the bloke was saying its meeting current emission stds… we at Kawasaki don't just bodge on nasty maps like many manufacturers, we do it properly maybe fitting new cyl head or cams you won't find any nasties or glitches on a Kawasaki.... took it up the road and it was a disaster with glitches and gaps everywhere. I think some people's understanding of how it should run is just way off the mark

 

[botus]

odd experience after visiting a shell garage...

the K1300 manual said use 98 octane or higher or expect economy and performance hit. With BP or Esso Super unleaded the world never moved. But use Shell 99 Super unleaded and it did.

My hex head GS 1200 pulled and revved through the midrange like a lunatic and was fast and great fun....
Then BMW updated the engine map to the current version and it ruined the bike with a 1100 rpm wide dead spot at 4 to 5 k where it struggled to pull through, then revved out slower than the old map

Couldn't fix for 2 years.... new coils, did the valve clearances and BMW under a puma case investigated my complaint... would NOT put the better older map back on the bike, but after finding nothing wrong, re flashed the same map again and reset adaptions for free.

As I've said before as it rebuilt the adaptions (with the lambda sensors reconnected) instead of waiting a decade or so for the needle to go from 4000 to 5200 rpm and then pull OK, it now gets to 4500 OK then dies a lot less, but still offensive and picks up much better from 5100 and revs out much harder through 5500 to 7800 like it used to.

As per posts above, been playing and can't fix that (now 600 rpm wide) dead spot. Overall the bike seemed nicer with Esso 97 but no different in that flat spot and been running that last 5 tank full's. I suspect where the release notes for the later map said "improved sensitivity of knock sensors to resolve customer complaints of pinging" I think they meant ruined the bike retarding the ignition in the midrange.

On the old map the bike never rode or ran differently with super unleaded. And on 97 Esso its only fractionally different. I was even thinking of dropping back to 95.

Needed fuel and was near a cheap area when I realised being Shell I could try their 99 Super unleaded and see what happens. So put in 20 quids worth of 99 super unleaded to a near empty tank. Within half a mile could hear it sound and run differently. Within limits of where I was, its did seem livelier and to rev in the middle better. Even got air in third as I gave it a fist full at 5k which it hasn't done in years. Parked up at mates house. And made further tweaks to powercommander. On ride home it is better. Not right and not fixed but now more like a 300 RPM dead spot at the nasty vibe place its always had around 4600 rpm

In first and second it now pulls through without the chasm, but third or higher still shows its head. But got air further up the rev range quite a few times. Which gets to the point of the post. Did they intentionally set the later map moving the bike to 98 or above fuel?

Just checked rider manuals
2008 model year bikes (where they made the styling ugly but still had the same engine), it says 95 or 91 with reduced economy and performance.
2010 model year bikes (which I didn't realise) should run 98 or higher !!! in the manual its states these should be on Super unleaded. Using 98 or above, or 95 with slight drop in performance, or 91 with reduced economy and performance.

if the GS PC5 took that module (which it doesn't) it would be nice to tweak the ignition curve.

Hasn't anyone else noticed ? Can someone try this, when hot, put in third on a straight bit of road at 3000 rpm bang it on full throttle, it pulls hard to 4000 dies off lots (like you rolled back to 60% throttle) then when it gets to 5200 runs hard to the red line.... that's a fault that was never there on the old map.

 

[Mistacat]

When you accelerate hard in top gear from 3000 rpm the mixture goes rich as it should then it leans out before going rich again.
I showed a graph of this to Geoff at Hilltop looking for an explanation , he put it down to slow sensors . knowing the speed that the sensors work at I beg to differ.
My own feeling is that BMW have done this to stop the transmission & FD being overloaded . If the bike is ridden correctly and accelerated through the rev range there is no problem.
I run my TC at 13.8 to 1 AFR and it is never a problem if I use the gearbox.

 

[botus]

there is a problem, there a noticeable flat spot as you accelerate through the gears, its there at lower throttle application its just less obvious.

old map almost perfect, new map is a joke with a new nasty flat spot obvious from 50% throttle application onwards. what they admitted to change and would explain the drop is they messed with the ignition. which is why you cant fix with simplistic fuel mapping.

Its not a limiter in first or second which would give the drive line an easier life, its probably an emission or kock releated engine damage possibility they were aiming to reduce.

The old map did 25k miles 15k of that at operating temp being ragged to death... now at 32k the only thing suffering is my enjoyment of the bike, when the GS911 boys sort the tool I'm going to put another ECU I've got of the exact same type and go back to a proper map they didn't vandalise