-
WOULD YOU LIKE TO BE ABLE TO POST? REGISTER FOR COG MEMBERSHIP
All registration must be done through the club's main webpage: To register / join COG, click here
For instructions to convert to full membership, click here
-
Can't post after logging to the forum for the first time... Try Again - If you can't post in the forum, sign out of both the membership site and the forum and log in again. Make sure your COG membership is active and your browser allow cookies. If you still can't post, contact the COG IT guy at IT@Concours.org.
Secondary Butterfly Maps Revealed
- Thread starter Fred H.
- Start date
There has been much speculation in the past about when and at what percentages the secondary butterflies open. We now have the actual mapping from inside the ECU and can see exactly how they are programmed. And not only that, we can also get them reprogrammed. Its taken me nearly two years to get this data, and it never would have been possible without help from Don Guhl at Guhl Motors.
I've also posted some video files on Utube in another thread that show how they operate when riding as well as how they are used for the engine warm up to increase idle speed. So for the first time we can now actually see the action of the butterflies at various speeds, rpms, and gears.
The data points in the map for the RPM ranges between 3K-5K rpm is where the most improvement can be gained, and you can see by the percentages how restrictive they are in the lower RPM ranges. This is why you get noticable improvement in low end torque and throttle response when they are removed. For example, at 3K RPM in 3rd gear when you twist the throttle from full closed to full open, the secondary plates only change from 3% to 25%. So they really only allow you 1/4 of full throttle opening, and even less if you only partially open the throttle. If you twist the throttle to 50% open at 3K rpm in 3rd gear, you only get 6% on the secondaries! This is why the bike is not only slow to respond in lower gears, but also lacks low end torque.
I've also posted some video files on Utube in another thread that show how they operate when riding as well as how they are used for the engine warm up to increase idle speed. So for the first time we can now actually see the action of the butterflies at various speeds, rpms, and gears.
The data points in the map for the RPM ranges between 3K-5K rpm is where the most improvement can be gained, and you can see by the percentages how restrictive they are in the lower RPM ranges. This is why you get noticable improvement in low end torque and throttle response when they are removed. For example, at 3K RPM in 3rd gear when you twist the throttle from full closed to full open, the secondary plates only change from 3% to 25%. So they really only allow you 1/4 of full throttle opening, and even less if you only partially open the throttle. If you twist the throttle to 50% open at 3K rpm in 3rd gear, you only get 6% on the secondaries! This is why the bike is not only slow to respond in lower gears, but also lacks low end torque.
wyland said:
I don't have any issues with vibrations on my bike. I think that may be more of a function of having the engine mounting bolts all properly torqued and a good throttle body sync than anything. I really didn't pay much attention to the vibration levels before and after my reflash, but I can't say I've noticed anything different.
Here is a link to the thread with the videos in it that show the butterfly positions when riding.
http://forum.cog-online.org/index.php/topic,28568.0.html
And here are direct links to the videos on youtube:
Gauge Explaination
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Vfx2zYhLguM
Warm Up cycle
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3kcF2VE1A4E
Normal (Guhl Reflash) Mode going through the gears
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=z5GBtbFJOJY
Eco Mode going through the gears
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xhlw1Elsp6k
4th gear roll ons
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=c3HpmrXR3PY
5th gear roll ons
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=jIpxiA2XH0M
Traction Control engaged
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=tDAYtvOtS-Q
http://forum.cog-online.org/index.php/topic,28568.0.html
And here are direct links to the videos on youtube:
Gauge Explaination
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Vfx2zYhLguM
Warm Up cycle
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3kcF2VE1A4E
Normal (Guhl Reflash) Mode going through the gears
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=z5GBtbFJOJY
Eco Mode going through the gears
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xhlw1Elsp6k
4th gear roll ons
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=c3HpmrXR3PY
5th gear roll ons
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=jIpxiA2XH0M
Traction Control engaged
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=tDAYtvOtS-Q
brookst333
Big Wheel
Wow, after reading the maps I'm tempted to just remove the flys.
When I installed my PC V in December, there was not a map included for a 2011 Connie with flys removed.
I don't want the bike to run lean during steady throttle ordinary cruising.
Might overheat the catalytic converter also?
Brooks
When I installed my PC V in December, there was not a map included for a 2011 Connie with flys removed.
I don't want the bike to run lean during steady throttle ordinary cruising.
Might overheat the catalytic converter also?
Brooks
brookst333 said:
If you remove the secondary butterflies on a 2011 it will have an impact on the traction control. The traction control will still work, but it won't work as smoothly as before. This is one of the reasons a reflash of the ECU is a better way to go. You also don't risk breaking off the screws in the shaft or damaging the shaft so it won't turn, (which causes an FI error). And when you internally change the maps for the butterflies, the ECU automatically corrects the fueling.
brookst333
Big Wheel
Hey Fred. I've been invited on a ride to Muenster this Sunday by Vince Wells. He's heads the local chapter of the Motorcycle Sport Tourer Assoc.
We're leaving from Precinct Line and Davis Blvd at 08:30 this Sunday.
I'm riding my Connie.
If you have the time to join us, would be fun to meet ya...
Brooks
We're leaving from Precinct Line and Davis Blvd at 08:30 this Sunday.
I'm riding my Connie.
If you have the time to join us, would be fun to meet ya...
Brooks
trailer_parks
Tricycle
I'll probably get a Guhl's tune on my bike after reading this. It might be prudent to wait until after I move out of San Antonio, though, since I whacked open the throttle at 4000 rpm in first gear and spun the tire pretty hard yesterday. I don't need more low end torque... yet.
People don't realize how slick the roads are here.
People don't realize how slick the roads are here.
I can't tell you how many burned pistons I have replaced on Aircraft , cars and motorcycle engines because of leaned out engines.Yes, you get more power but all cylinders do not run the same so one might run leaner than the rest, I think I will trust the factory settings. Just think one injector gets a little something in to plug it up a little and that cylinder goes over temp. You've removed the safety richness and that's my 2 cents worth. The butterflies, I took mine out and could not see any improvement, but them back in and saw no difference. Don't see the big deal on this.
wayne_jenkins_CT said:
The ECU runs all the injectors in parallel. They all get the same amount of gas and pressure. If they don't, they out of sync and need to be calibrated.
The video show the A/F ratio during the various example runs, and it stays in pretty much a perfect range, with little variance. No problems there.
No brainer for me, and I can tell the difference from before I took the flies out of my ZX14 from after. Its obvious. No reason the C14 would be different, other than a) ECU (which reflash "fixes"), and b) variable intake cam timing (which partially neuters the Concours 14).
I'm running a custom map in my piggy which has the accelerator fuel pump enabled.
At the last National, some saw my flames on deceleration. She was running rich. Taking the flies out leaned it out slightly, but not enough to get rid of the richness. So I had to retune the pump in the piggy to back it off a little. Fewer flames. But still plenty of A/F ratio to protect the engine. All this, after full exhaust, velocity stacks, plug change, Pipercross filter, and the custom map (which replaced Brock Davidson's track map). Still rich. Still safe.
wayne_jenkins_CT said:
This is a valid point, and Don and I discussed the dangers involved with leaning out the mixture for max power, and I feel we came up with a good plan that eliminates any danger of going too lean. First of all, we took multiple samplings from my auto-tuner over multiple days, and I also used gear adjusted maps, which made a map for each gear. I then averaged all the fuel trims from the individual gear maps which reduced the amount of changes that the overall map was making and eliminated any erroneous data. Don then applied a fudge factor (around +3%) on top of the averaged map to further richen it up, just to keep everything in a safe zone.
You can look at the target A/F table that was used to develop the map with (last tab on the spreadsheet below), and I think you'll see it's very conservative. The final map we developed for use was actually much more conservative in removing fuel than any of the various Power Commander maps that I've seen from FuelMoto and others.
The downside of this, is that we probably left a little power on the table, and the map could easily be further optimized to get more power out of the bike, but Don and I both felt it was more important to make a map that was reliable and would never run the risk of making the bike run too lean or cause any damage. I feel confident that we have done just that, and I've done some testing with my auto-tuner after I had the reflash to confirm it, and the bike is still running just slightly rich, which was how we intended it.
If you would like to look at the final map data and the target A/F tables, I have them posted here:
http://angelridevideos.com/PCV/2010%20Gear%20Spreadsheet%20Guhl1_4_avg.xls
You also can look at the progression in the development of this map by looking at the various previous maps made. I have all of them posted here:
http://www.angelridevideos.com/PCV/
Fred -
I have been conversing with the Dynotronics Tuning folks, who broke the ECU code on the C14 and on which Guhl bases their flash. He thinks the A/F ration should be as low as possible, 13 is too high. I see his point, its just tricky to get it just right.
A lot of the ZX14 guys are running A/F meters on their bikes, especially the ones with the PC5 and Autotune who frequently tweak the map. They don't all agree on what A/F ratio to run, just that it should be higher than 9.
As for one of the cylinders running different than the others, this is not how this engine was designed to operate. This means the TB(s) are out of sync, or there is an injector problem. We have a guy in the ZX14 world who has immersed himself in the injectors and TBs and he says as they come from the factory, locktited down, all four injectors pump the same amount fuel, and the TBs flow the same amount of air. There may be minor variations due to heating differences and ram air pressure vagaries, but not enough for the engine to be out of sync enough to be in danger.
Of course, if you take the TBs and/or injectors off the engine, its on you to get them synced back up.
Its really possible some of the folks with C14s which shake, rattle, and roll got engines where it was set wrong at the factory, or not properly locktited / wired up and went out adjustment during operation.
If you want to tune your C14 to optimal A/F without running into a lean danger zone, just run a PC5 and Autotune, and hang an A/F meter off it which is put on your dash. Make a decision what the minimum A/F ratio is, you are willing to accept. Run it up and down in each gear a few times. Drone on the highway a while. Ride around in a parking lot a while taking really slow countersteering turns, and then fire up the Autotune software and update your map. Run it some more, making sure the A/F meter is not going below your acceptable level. Repeat. You can get that puppy to the point is running just ever so slightly rich (so its still way safe) and watch your power climb quite a few percent.
How do you define "slightly rich", Fred ?
I have been conversing with the Dynotronics Tuning folks, who broke the ECU code on the C14 and on which Guhl bases their flash. He thinks the A/F ration should be as low as possible, 13 is too high. I see his point, its just tricky to get it just right.
A lot of the ZX14 guys are running A/F meters on their bikes, especially the ones with the PC5 and Autotune who frequently tweak the map. They don't all agree on what A/F ratio to run, just that it should be higher than 9.
As for one of the cylinders running different than the others, this is not how this engine was designed to operate. This means the TB(s) are out of sync, or there is an injector problem. We have a guy in the ZX14 world who has immersed himself in the injectors and TBs and he says as they come from the factory, locktited down, all four injectors pump the same amount fuel, and the TBs flow the same amount of air. There may be minor variations due to heating differences and ram air pressure vagaries, but not enough for the engine to be out of sync enough to be in danger.
Of course, if you take the TBs and/or injectors off the engine, its on you to get them synced back up.
Its really possible some of the folks with C14s which shake, rattle, and roll got engines where it was set wrong at the factory, or not properly locktited / wired up and went out adjustment during operation.
If you want to tune your C14 to optimal A/F without running into a lean danger zone, just run a PC5 and Autotune, and hang an A/F meter off it which is put on your dash. Make a decision what the minimum A/F ratio is, you are willing to accept. Run it up and down in each gear a few times. Drone on the highway a while. Ride around in a parking lot a while taking really slow countersteering turns, and then fire up the Autotune software and update your map. Run it some more, making sure the A/F meter is not going below your acceptable level. Repeat. You can get that puppy to the point is running just ever so slightly rich (so its still way safe) and watch your power climb quite a few percent.
How do you define "slightly rich", Fred ?
Rev Ryder said:
Yes, what you are seeing on those tables is the amount of adjustments to the fuel that the PCV is making to try to get it to match the readings in the target air/fuel ratio table. Furthermore, at the time this map was made, my ECU had already been reflashed once with Don's first flash, so some fuel adjustments had already been applied to the ECU. So this map doesn't represent the actual total fuel map, it only shows the CHANGES that the auto-tuner was making to get it within the target air/fuel table.
Privateer said:
The Guhl reflash has absolutely nothing to do with anything at all that Dynotronics is doing or did. Guhl downloaded the first ECU I sent them about a year and a half ago and cracked the code on it then.
Privateer said:
You gotta me kidding me. 9 ???
Privateer said:
Stoichiometric air–fuel mixture is approximately 14.7 to 1
13.2 is what the CATs like to have to keep them in optimal burn range, and is on the slightly rich side and seems to be where the bike still makes good power.
Fred_Harmon_TX said:
Heh, not what Dynotronics says. This gets more interesting by the minute. What is the difference between what they do?
By the way, the ZX14 ECU was first downloaded in 2007 I think, by HealTech, trying to figure out how to get rid of the decel backfire without losing the gear indicator. They couldn't figure out how to do it, and gave up on it 2 years later. Guhl is the first I heard of to offer a reflashed ECU for the ZX14 engine.
Privateer said:
I have no idea what Dynotronics is telling you, but they are two totally different companies and none of the work that Don Guhl is doing is based on anything that Dynotronics is doing. I've been working with Don on this project for almost two years now. He and I developed this tune totally on our own, and the primary focus of it is to open the secondary butterflies. The adjustments to the fuel map are small potatoes compared to the butterfly map, and the fuel adjustments are pretty minor, it just tries to reduce some of the over richness that Kawasaki programmed in to bring it in closer to 13.2 to 13.4 range (~ .89 lamba). The big benifets of the Guhl reflash are from opening up the butterflies further and sooner. Go back to page one of this thread and watch the Utube videos I posted showing the butterfly opening rates.
Fred_Harmon_TX said:
I watched those videos intently, and they are what sold me on the idea of paying for a reflashed ECU.
Here is a direct cut and paste of the email I just got from Dynotronics.
Dynotronics does more than Guhl if all the Guhl does is minor A/F map tweaks and major secondary map changes as you say. Apparently they disagree as to the history of decoding the C14 ECU too, lol. As well as saying a 13:1 A/F is too rich, which I totally agree with based on dyno tuning my ZX14.
One more thing I'd like to mention. My wideband 02 sensor is installed upstream of the CAT's in the header, and my secondary air system is plugged. This means my 02 sensor is reading the unaltered output of the exhaust. Many tuners will simply insert an O2 sensor up the exhaust pipe AFTER the CAT's and this can skew their results, as will the secondary air supply system if it is not plugged.
Fred_Harmon_TX said:
Agree.
But I don't run stock exhausts on anything, though. LOL.
The O2 bung on my ZX14's Brock's CT-DUAL exhaust system is about a foot past the collector, going towards the back of the bike. Brock did that because if you have it in front of the collector, the resonance is too great for accurate readings. The O2 sensors we can get are too slow to function like that properly.
Its a trade off between getting a clean sample and functioning in a condition of resonant shock waves bouncing around so close to the exhaust ports. On an aftermarket exhaust with no CATs, it can be further back, away from the resonance.
Where is the bung on the Muzzy C14 exhaust system? I'll have to ask Rob if nobody knows.
It really doesn't matter to me who did what first and I don't care to get in a tuner war over who makes the best reflash. This is why I asked a few weeks back that Dynotronics have their own thread on here.
You'll have to make your own decision on which way you want to go. As I said earlier, we intentionally left the fueling on the rich side to protect the engine. Longevity was more important to us than getting every last possible HP out of the engine. Running it a bit rich helps keep it cooler, and also insures you won't have a problem if you get a bad load of gas or your fuel pump pressure is a little low or some other such event. Don and I both felt it was better to error on the side of too rich than too lean. We also decided not to mess with the ignition tables for fear of causing detonation that could reduce the engines lifespan. Same thing goes for the rev limiter. Our approach was to make the minimum amount of changes we could from stock, but still get a nice improvement in throttle response and low end torque, and that is exactly what we achieved.
By the way, Don Guhl has also been working with Brock on tuning the ZX-10.
You'll have to make your own decision on which way you want to go. As I said earlier, we intentionally left the fueling on the rich side to protect the engine. Longevity was more important to us than getting every last possible HP out of the engine. Running it a bit rich helps keep it cooler, and also insures you won't have a problem if you get a bad load of gas or your fuel pump pressure is a little low or some other such event. Don and I both felt it was better to error on the side of too rich than too lean. We also decided not to mess with the ignition tables for fear of causing detonation that could reduce the engines lifespan. Same thing goes for the rev limiter. Our approach was to make the minimum amount of changes we could from stock, but still get a nice improvement in throttle response and low end torque, and that is exactly what we achieved.
By the way, Don Guhl has also been working with Brock on tuning the ZX-10.
stewarth
Scooter
Another point I'd like to add and why I went with Guhl, is Don is local and doing all the work locally with bikes/riders locally, which led to my confidence.
If you want Don to tweak your bike in any particular direction and provide a different map, then I am sure he can do that, since he's got total control of his flash. I'm not suggestion others don't, I simply don't know.
If you want Don to tweak your bike in any particular direction and provide a different map, then I am sure he can do that, since he's got total control of his flash. I'm not suggestion others don't, I simply don't know.
Keep your flys. Yes reflash. Yes does wonders for 08 & 09 also.
Rembrant
Crotch Rocket
nando said:
Well, considering the HP and TQ gains that Fuelmoto gained in tuning and dyno testing the C-14, it is pretty significant. It felt like a good improvement on my 08 C-14. I'd have to assume that even if the Guhl reflash doesn't provide the same power increases, it should still be "wonderous"...lol. From what I've been reading on here, it looks like the Guhl reflash maps are done with more day to day driveability than the Fuelmoto tuning of a few years ago.
I'm curious Fred...you mentioned that your SAI/emmissions are plugged off...you're referring to installing the blanking plates on the valve cover and removing that smog valve, etc, correct? Was this done so that you could get a cleaner A/F reading on the exhaust or simply to clean up the popping on decel, or....was there another performance purpose?
Also, I've read on here that some guys have installed velocity stacks on their tuned C-14's. I assume these are the ones offered by FactoryPro? Is it beneficial to install these with a Guhl reflash or with a Fuelmoto tuned PC5? Just curious.
Rembrant
Crotch Rocket
Stryker said:
Fred mentioned in this thread or another one, that he and Guhl compared stock ECU maps between 08/09 and a 2010/11 model, and they were indeed different.
Now, how much different they were he didn't say. One would assume that they're not significantly different...maybe they made some changes with regards to emissions specs or something, or made some minor adjustments to the power curve?
As far as I knew, the engines were unchanged for the 2010 model year....somebody can correct me if I'm wrong.
I capped off the secondary air system on my bike because I have O2 sensors installed in my exhaust, and I didn't want the injected air to mess up the readings from my sensors. I install a PCV with an O2 sensor feedback look as a way to test various map adjustments during the research phase of the Guhl reflash project.
The internal fuel tables on the 2008 and 2010 were slightly different. I don't have them readily available to compare right now, so I can't say how much different, but as I recall, it wasn't a lot.
The reflash achieves about the same as what the old Fuel Moto map run in a Power Commander with the butterflies removed, except that the throttle response is less abrupt at lower rpms.
The internal fuel tables on the 2008 and 2010 were slightly different. I don't have them readily available to compare right now, so I can't say how much different, but as I recall, it wasn't a lot.
The reflash achieves about the same as what the old Fuel Moto map run in a Power Commander with the butterflies removed, except that the throttle response is less abrupt at lower rpms.
Rembrant
Crotch Rocket
Fred_Harmon_TX said:
Did your block-off plates come with a plug for the airbox tube? If not, what did you do to plug it?
I installed a set on my ZRX last winter when re-jetting the carbs, and it was a bit of a pain finding something to plug that hole with.
Just curious. Thanks.