GSXS 1000 Forum banner

1 - 19 of 19 Posts

·
Registered
Joined
·
334 Posts
Discussion Starter #1
Hey guys. In the next week I'm installing an M4 system. I've already got a PCV and am adding the autotune module to take care of the tuning side of things (after blocking the PAIR circuit).

The one downside of the autotune (in my mind) when compared to a dyno tune is that I'm unlikely to ever get the higher RPM tune correct because I'll never get to ride the bike at WOT in a high gear whilst commuting (I'm also a but of a wuss, so that won't help things either - LOL). While it's obviously not a major issue not having the optimal tune in a rev range that I'll likely never use, I would like to start with something that's close to where it should be.

Is anyone here prepared to share a PCV map for an otherwise stock bike with and M4 full system installed, please?
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
974 Posts
IMO any one else's map or any other map may be more off than running on a zero map, honestly it takes just the first 1/2 an hour of riding for it to set the base map in your riding range and then it fine tunes from their , I have reset mine a couple of times back to zero when I changed the AFR.
What AFR table are you using?
Don't worry about it running lean, mine with a decat still runs rich almost all over the place and the auto tune is still leaning it out
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
719 Posts
I've heard and read a few comments about using the auto tune without the dyno being a little blind. By this I mean you have no idea if the numbers suggested by the software are resulting in higher horsepower without dyno feedback. Some people have reported that the map suggested by auto tune provided suboptimal suggestions when checked against the dyno

I am not an expert on this but it just seems to be the common suggestion. Power commander reccomends a dyno tune first too......but I'm sure they are going to endorse their own product
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
974 Posts
I haven't got the bits yet Nicka, so I'm not running anything. I'd be happy to hear your experiences beforehand, if possible. I'll probably go with the stock suggested AFR table, unless someone has a better idea. I note Kratos' post at http://www.gsxs1000.org/forum/gsxs-...ations/30553-dedicated-target-afr-thread.html


I'll post up my AFR table tonight or tomorow night for you too see what I have done but too be honest I have no idea what I'm doing ;)
I never could find the recommended AFR table for our bike as the download map has nothing attached to it for the table that I could find, I have come up with my own after googling and googling reading everything I could find and every answer is different so like some others I come up with one that has the fuel economy at cruise speed on our bike but power at higher revs and throttle openings.
I totally agree a dyno will give full performance as they can see the flat spots and will alter the AFR where required but for me one dyno session is the same cost as the auto tune and I plan to change the air filter later and alter the exhaust some more.
 
  • Like
Reactions: KiwiJaZ

·
Registered
Joined
·
974 Posts
Thanks Nicka. Out of curiosity, what's your current exhaust setup?


Stock exhaust with the cat cut in half, hollowed out then clamped back together so it's now in 2 pieces so I can work on removing the muffler box at a later date without removing the stock headers again.
The bike runs much cooler as it can now breath but it's only just louder.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
974 Posts
I've heard and read a few comments about using the auto tune without the dyno being a little blind. By this I mean you have no idea if the numbers suggested by the software are resulting in higher horsepower without dyno feedback. Some people have reported that the map suggested by auto tune provided suboptimal suggestions when checked against the dyno

I am not an expert on this but it just seems to be the common suggestion. Power commander reccomends a dyno tune first too......but I'm sure they are going to endorse their own product
Did you start a thread earlier to post the AFR tables as i cannot find it as i was going to upload mine their, unless i was dreaming
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
974 Posts
Here you go Rod as promised a picture of my AFR table, as i said i am still learning and what i am trying to achieve here is power up top and fuel economy during cruise which i guess is common, 100km/h is between 2-10% throttle at 4250-4500 RPM.
You can just set an AFR value the same throughout the table and i think then about 13.2, 13.3 is common but i like the feel of the power increasing and the front wheel power lifting at about 7000rpm.
I could probably lower my AFR values for more power and raise them in cruising for better fuel economy i am sure but for now it is working fine and the bikes running great, i have lost some fuel economy but i am yet to do a trip where i am not powering on often to get the fuel table set in the higher areas and like you i do not really ride that hard anyway and rarely even hit red line.

Also i have uploaded my current fuel map so you can see how much it is leaning the bike out in most areas, if you get a lot of backfiring on de-acceleration you will see where i have taken fuel out on 0 throttle where the fuel cut kicks back in which is when it backfired and it was an annoying sound with the muffler still on and this has almost completely eliminated it.

You could use this map as a base but like i said earlier the map will get itself to this point very quickly anyway and each ride depending on conditions will see the map changing the values slghtly constantly.

Good luck with it.
 

Attachments

  • Like
Reactions: KiwiJaZ

·
Registered
Joined
·
719 Posts
I would love to know how your fuel table compared to ones that were achieved from a Dyno.... i'm not implying there's anything wrong with yours I'm just curious how they compare.if they really are close enough i'm not kind of proves you don't need to go to a custom tuner.....

I will likely do the dyno mapping as soon as I get my new headers on.... Arrow with Yoshi carbon alpha end can and k&n filter......i was planning to upload to map share after


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
334 Posts
Discussion Starter #11
Thanks

Here you go Rod as promised a picture of my AFR table, as i said i am still learning and what i am trying to achieve here is power up top and fuel economy during cruise which i guess is common, 100km/h is between 2-10% throttle at 4250-4500 RPM.
You can just set an AFR value the same throughout the table and i think then about 13.2, 13.3 is common but i like the feel of the power increasing and the front wheel power lifting at about 7000rpm.
I could probably lower my AFR values for more power and raise them in cruising for better fuel economy i am sure but for now it is working fine and the bikes running great, i have lost some fuel economy but i am yet to do a trip where i am not powering on often to get the fuel table set in the higher areas and like you i do not really ride that hard anyway and rarely even hit red line.

Also i have uploaded my current fuel map so you can see how much it is leaning the bike out in most areas, if you get a lot of backfiring on de-acceleration you will see where i have taken fuel out on 0 throttle where the fuel cut kicks back in which is when it backfired and it was an annoying sound with the muffler still on and this has almost completely eliminated it.

You could use this map as a base but like i said earlier the map will get itself to this point very quickly anyway and each ride depending on conditions will see the map changing the values slghtly constantly.

Good luck with it.
Thanks for that. My Autotune arrived yesterday, but I'm still waiting for my M4 system and Servo Eliminator. Once it's all here, I'll put it all together and start by running the stock PCV map and recommended AFR values, based on what I've read elsewhere. Once I've got a nice baseline, I'll look at tinkering with stuff and will incorporate your findings. Will let you know how I go.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
334 Posts
Discussion Starter #12
@nicka, I actually had a go at building my own AFR table purposely without looking at yours, to see how close the two would end up. I'm on my 3rd version now, and it looks pretty close to yours. The only difference so far is that I'm starting the leaning process before 3750 RPM, where you increase air to 13.6 and 13.8, I'm doing that at 2750 RPM. I'll play with both options and see what I can feel. I think with the 2 of us working on this, we can build a table that should work on all bikes that haven't had internal engine work.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
974 Posts
Cheers mate, the reasons for my leaning at that point is that's where cruising at between 80 and 120km in 6th for fuel economy touring and leaning it earlier I thought may make the throttle more snatchy in lower gears around town as that's what lean does which is something I don't want and am trying to cure so your results will be interesting.
I am also thinking about setting a 13 or lower thought the whole table and seeing how the bike responds power wise then when finished turning off the auto tune and using the map switch to select between power and an economy map, even though economy has a ****e load of power anyway :)
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
334 Posts
Discussion Starter #14
Cheers mate, the reasons for my leaning at that point is that's where cruising at between 80 and 120km in 6th for fuel economy touring and leaning it earlier I thought may make the throttle more snatchy in lower gears around town as that's what lean does which is something I don't want and am trying to cure so your results will be interesting.
I am also thinking about setting a 13 or lower thought the whole table and seeing how the bike responds power wise then when finished turning off the auto tune and using the map switch to select between power and an economy map, even though economy has a ****e load of power anyway :)
Leaning it out too early did indeed make things a little snatchy. I used sometihng closer to your values on my ride to work this morning, and I'm happy with the results. I reckon I can get a few more MPG by shaving things a little here and there. I'll let you know how it all goes.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
974 Posts
Leaning it out too early did indeed make things a little snatchy. I used sometihng closer to your values on my ride to work this morning, and I'm happy with the results. I reckon I can get a few more MPG by shaving things a little here and there. I'll let you know how it all goes.
Thats good to hear my assumptions were right and that saves me messing further with it as mine is running very good at the moment with its current tune.

Do you know if it is possible to set up the gear position within the PCV with our bike as that would be handy to enter a higher AFR in 6th gear for better economy.

Also how did you bike go with the decel popping with the exhaust change and the pair blocked off(do you get any), the final values i come up with in the 0% throttle work perfect and have completely eliminated them with no effect on the feel of the bike other than the fuel kicking back in at 2500 rpm that was so obvious before has also been almost eliminated as it comes on smoother now.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
334 Posts
Discussion Starter #17
Thats good to hear my assumptions were right and that saves me messing further with it as mine is running very good at the moment with its current tune.

Do you know if it is possible to set up the gear position within the PCV with our bike as that would be handy to enter a higher AFR in 6th gear for better economy.

Also how did you bike go with the decel popping with the exhaust change and the pair blocked off(do you get any), the final values i come up with in the 0% throttle work perfect and have completely eliminated them with no effect on the feel of the bike other than the fuel kicking back in at 2500 rpm that was so obvious before has also been almost eliminated as it comes on smoother now.
No idea about gear position, to be honest. I've not looked at that. I have no decel popping with my current tune (although I must admit, I don't mind a little). I tweaked my AFR table again today, and took figures all the way down to idle (1000RPM), and it's even smoother at the bottom now. I'm going to run a few tanks through as it is, then see what sort of mileage I'm getting. I reached out to PowerCommander and asked for their input, and I got a response from their senior product manager saying "I would shoot for 13.6 from 10-40% and 13.2 up to 100%. In the cruise range if fuel mileage is a concern you can go 14.0". I think I'm still a little on the rich side in places, so will be working toward the recommended values. For reference, the installation guide says pretty much the same thing (below);


  • If fuel mileage is a concern then you can alter the Target AFR values in the cruise range. Dynojet considers the cruise range to be around 5-20% throttle. Dynojet does not recommend making the bike any leaner than 14.7 in the Target AFR cells.
  • Dynojet has found that for the best compromise of fuel mileage and throttle response to set the cruise range to 13.7-14.0.
  • For all other ranges 12.8-13.4 seems to work best. For the best results it is recommended to bring the bike to an Authorized Tuning Center to have them verify the AFR values.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
719 Posts
I would love to see some afr tables....my auto tune is out for delivery as i type this....i intend to post my results once i have something worth a dam


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
 
1 - 19 of 19 Posts
Top