[chuck]

I finally fitted a PCV on my bike, wasn't much of an issue to do it myself. Just kind of followed along with their install video on YouTube. Taking some of the fairings off for the first time was kind of a pain though (even with my non-F version).

I really never actually had a huge problem with the bike as far as the throttle goes, to the point that I thought maybe Suzuki perhaps fixed the issue or they were less stringent on the mapping for bikes sold in my area.

But it was a huge difference. The bike felt completely "tamed" and I was much more confident with it going around corners at speed and in the lower gears, etc. And this is with the map provided by Dynojet on their website. The bike just felt safer to ride, and maintaining a constant speed was much easier.

I was going to take it in and have it on the dyno and tuned for my bike specifically but I don't know if it's even worth the money at this point since the bike feels very good with the provided map. If anyone is on the fence about it I highly recommend it. I paid $300 for mine but I've seen it on sale for $270 or so in some places (Motomummy).

Does anyone have any experience before/after with the map provided by Dynojet vs having it "dialed in" on a dyno?

[edit] One other thing, I noticed the engine braking on downshifts was also much less pronounced with the PCV, which is something I like, as it could sometimes be a bit too strong with the stock fueling.

 

[dqban]

I had a similar experience. I was actually able to dramatically smooth the throttle further by tinkering with the fuel map a little. Specifically in the low rpm range and parking lot speeds. When i bought the bike I had to ride those speeds with the clutch partially engaged to have enough control. I currently can ride in first and second without any need to keep the clutch partially engaged between 8 to 15 mph. I can now control those speeds completely with the throttle.

 

[LEAVEITSTOCK]

I had a similar experience. I was actually able to dramatically smooth the throttle further by tinkering with the fuel map a little. Specifically in the low rpm range and parking lot speeds. When i bought the bike I had to ride those speeds with the clutch partially engaged to have enough control. I currently can ride in first and second without any need to keep the clutch partially engaged between 8 to 15 mph. I can now control those speeds completely with the throttle.[/QUOT

thats the first thing i herd here that makes sence....i just realized i do the same thing and never gave it a second thought ..just considered it riding....its good to know

 

[nicka]

You may be able to just get an 02 eliminator without the need for the PCV to stop the bike going into closed loop and chugging along, it works for me but I run the PCV anyway but that may even get removed soon with just the eliminator

 

[dqban]

There was an article about our bike in a European mag comparing before and after on a dyno with stock set up, then with just an o2 eliminator and finally eliminator+pcv with custom tune. All charts were in the article and the dyno run with just the o2 eliminator produced the worst results.

 

[nicka]

There was an article about our bike in a European mag comparing before and after on a dyno with stock set up, then with just an o2 eliminator and finally eliminator+pcv with custom tune. All charts were in the article and the dyno run with just the o2 eliminator produced the worst results.

That's interesting, from my understanding the 02 is only used during constant throttle (closed loop) so it shouldn't have any effect on a dyno under acceleration

 

[17105]

I had a similar experience. I was actually able to dramatically smooth the throttle further by tinkering with the fuel map a little. Specifically in the low rpm range and parking lot speeds. When i bought the bike I had to ride those speeds with the clutch partially engaged to have enough control. I currently can ride in first and second without any need to keep the clutch partially engaged between 8 to 15 mph. I can now control those speeds completely with the throttle.

Can you please share what RPM and Throttle % you're adding fuel (I assume you're adding..?) and how many blocks, please? I want to see if your findings correlate with mine.

 

[chuck]

I guess I'll be taking it in to the dyno here pretty soon then. I don't think I really have any great Dyno wizards in my area but playing with offsets shouldn't be rocket science I guess. I'll report my results and dyno sheet when I get them. I mainly care about getting perfect A/F ratios across the band and to hopefully make that HP curve as linear as possible.

Can you please share what RPM and Throttle % you're adding fuel (I assume you're adding..?) and how many blocks, please? I want to see if your findings correlate with mine.

I'm interested in this as well... might be worth it to fiddle with it some more after I get it tuned. I'll post my tune once I come back with the bike.

 

[dqban]

The main places i added fuel was in the 0 throttle and 2 percent throttle between 750 to 1750 rpm (maybe 2000 rpm)
Since the cells work by averaging the cells next to it i tried to make sure that the transition between cells was as smooth as possible.....meaning i didn't go from a value of 3 to 10 from cell to cell. I also tried to keep the transition between cells going horizontally was smooth. (In my mind, the cell transition from 0% throttle to 2% may be more important) I then drove around with my pcv and windows tablet in a gated community at low speeds and started adding fuel in cells where the rpms seemed to need.

For full disclosure....i am not a professional tuner. I specifically bought the pcv so i could learn to do this and the above has been the results of my experimentation.



Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

[17105]

The main places i added fuel was in the 0 throttle and 2 percent throttle between 750 to 1750 rpm (maybe 2000 rpm)
Since the cells work by averaging the cells next to it i tried to make sure that the transition between cells was as smooth as possible.....meaning i didn't go from a value of 3 to 10 from cell to cell. I also tried to keep the transition between cells going horizontally was smooth. (In my mind, the cell transition from 0% throttle to 2% may be more important) I then drove around with my pcv and windows tablet in a gated community at low speeds and started adding fuel in cells where the rpms seemed to need.

For full disclosure....i am not a professional tuner. I specifically bought the pcv so i could learn to do this and the above has been the results of my experimentation.

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Thanks. We're essentially on the same page, but would you mind either posting your map or screenshotting the values in question, please?

 

[dqban]

Thanks. We're essentially on the same page, but would you mind either posting your map or screenshotting the values in question, please?

I dont mind at all but give me a day or 2....Im in the middle of my night shift stretch of days at work so have been sleeping all day and am at work at night.....I'm kind of a zombie during these stretches.

bare in mind that my fuel table is very much a work in progress and I'm sure it can do with some refinement

I am finding that the transition between cells is nearly as important as the actual amount of fuel when trying to tune for a smooth throttle.

 

[17105]

I dont mind at all but give me a day or 2....Im in the middle of my night shift stretch of days at work so have been sleeping all day and am at work at night.....I'm kind of a zombie during these stretches.

bare in mind that my fuel table is very much a work in progress and I'm sure it can do with some refinement

I am finding that the transition between cells is nearly as important as the actual amount of fuel when trying to tune for a smooth throttle.

Thanks man. I agree withe the transition statement too. The problem is that you don't know what steps the ECU is taking, so the only smooth transition you can do is in your AFR table and not the fuel map itself, with any confidence.

 

[17105]

I just rode my bike with the PCV map built for the UK Superbike Magazine review by the head of Dynojet UK, and it's absolutely brilliant. Forget 80% right, this is 95% for my money. Good enough that I'm putting my USB cable away and just riding this thing now. Will post another thread about it shortly.

 

[chuck]

I just rode my bike with the PCV map built for the UK Superbike Magazine review by the head of Dynojet UK, and it's absolutely brilliant. Forget 80% right, this is 95% for my money. Good enough that I'm putting my USB cable away and just riding this thing now. Will post another thread about it shortly.

That's how I felt with this current map. Is it the same one you're using? If not, mind linking it or is it easy enough to find?

 

[17105]

That's how I felt with this current map. Is it the same one you're using? If not, mind linking it or is it easy enough to find?

It's in THIS THREAD if you want to read more info.

It was made for THIS REVIEW.

Here's a direct link to THE MAP.

 

[chuck]

It's in THIS THREAD if you want to read more info.

It was made for THIS REVIEW.

Here's a direct link to THE MAP.

Thank you for THAT REPLY.

Haha, but genuinely thanks... I will give it a good read. By the way, do you consider your Auto-Tune a worthwhile investment having had it for a while now? The tuner here wants $250 USD for a single tune and I was considering just getting the AT for the same money.

 

[17105]

Thank you for THAT REPLY.

Haha, but genuinely thanks... I will give it a good read. By the way, do you consider your Auto-Tune a worthwhile investment having had it for a while now? The tuner here wants $250 USD for a single tune and I was considering just getting the AT for the same money.

If you're unlikely to change your bike setup, then a dyno tune (with a reputable tuner) will probably be the best way to go. If you've got a stock bike now but are contemplating buying an exhaust system later (and maybe modding the airbox, changing air filter type, etc.) then an autotune could be a useful addition as the idea is that you wouldn't have to pay for a retune every time to change the breathing characteristics of the engine which would require a corresponding fuelling change.

Keep in mind that the autotune won't work with the stock exhaust unless you get the 18mm O2 sensor bung welded into the stock pipe (the use of 12-18mm adaptors is not recommended by powercommander). This is why I ended up ordering the M4 system at the same time as the autotune in the end, as I couldn't be bothered pulling the stock system apart to have the bung installed and then putting it all back together only to be replaced later.

I also went this way because the prices I was quoted here in Perth were crazy (in my opinion) and there are not many powercommander authorised tuning centres around. The ones I found had mixed reviews in the local community. When I lived back in Melbourne back in 2007, I got a dyno tune on a brand new GSX1400 by a centre that was highly recommended, and I was very happy with the results.

 

[dekker]

It's in THIS THREAD if you want to read more info.

It was made for THIS REVIEW.

Here's a direct link to THE MAP.

That map is the one that came with my PCV ordered May 2016 direct from Dynojet UK. It's number was M20-047-001. I say "was" because it is no longer up on the UK site. My bike is a very early one, May 2015 with the original ECU and the map works very well for me.
However the map up on the site now is M20-047-501 this map is no use whatsoever for me, it gives less mid-range and increases fuel consumption by 10mpg (imperial) even with moderate riding.
I would welcome views from anyone using the "501" map.
Apologies to those who might have already read this rant of mine in a previous post, consider it a BUMP.

 

[dqban]

Thank you for THAT REPLY.

Haha, but genuinely thanks... I will give it a good read. By the way, do you consider your Auto-Tune a worthwhile investment having had it for a while now? The tuner here wants $250 USD for a single tune and I was considering just getting the AT for the same money.

the other advantage of the auto tune is it can make adjustments on the fly.....I would imagine this to be very beneficial when it comes to changes in environment/temperature. From what I've read once you have base map you are happy with (for your current setup) set your max enrichment to about 3-5% and max inleanment to about 3% (read a few times that too much enleanment may cause the bike to run crappy). You dont have to save any of the new trim table created when you ride as it will just be tuning up or down based on the percentages youve set.

 

[dqban]

That map is the one that came with my PCV ordered May 2016 direct from Dynojet UK. It's number was M20-047-001. I say "was" because it is no longer up on the UK site. My bike is a very early one, May 2015 with the original ECU and the map works very well for me.
However the map up on the site now is M20-047-501 this map is no use whatsoever for me, it gives less mid-range and increases fuel consumption by 10mpg (imperial) even with moderate riding.
I would welcome views from anyone using the "501" map.
Apologies to those who might have already read this rant of mine in a previous post, consider it a BUMP.

I have tried all the maps from the UK site....still have them saved.....none of them worked for a USA bike with my configuration (Arrow headers, yoshi alpha can).....bike was supper snatchy with one them (cant remember which)....none were right for my bike.

I only run 91-93 octane fuel (using AKI)