Northman Posted October 23, 2004 Share Posted October 23, 2004 Does anybody here know specifically which sensor the PCII uses to alter the fuel delivery with? I'm having a recurring baro sensor malfunction, and wondering it it's my baro, or if the mapping may be contributing to it. Only happens when WFO in 2nd, 3rd or 4th gears. Checked connections, all OK. I'm going to try another map (previous map I used with which I had no problems) to see if that remedies the situation. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Northman Posted October 23, 2004 Author Share Posted October 23, 2004 FWIW, I've always thought that the PCII uses the IAT to alter fuel. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
tomek Posted October 23, 2004 Share Posted October 23, 2004 It is been a while since I`ve dealt with PC 2,I do remember you can change 3 areas while building the map.BAR is one of them,TPS is the second,don`t remember the third. IF you change input from BAR sensor too far,outside of a exceptable,preset range computer will read it as a faulty errrr,,,, sensor,hence fuel light.If you try to change fuel too far,you simply can`t do it with PC2.That is way PC3 is much better idea.That device plays with injector timing. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Northman Posted October 23, 2004 Author Share Posted October 23, 2004 There are actually 4 tables. 1 - AAP - which is where all of the fuel mapping is 2 - TP - there are minor adjustments there, between 3K & 4500 3 - MP - adjustments @ 2% throttle only, all the way across 4 - Timing I do have some major fuel adjustments, with -27 & -28 @ 2Krpm, 60 & 80% throttle. At the higher rpm, I have +20 @ 9K I didn't have the light on with the previous map, which was the same down low, but only +15 at the higher rpm's. I'll try riding it with the old map tomorrow, and see what happens. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
EVLXX Posted October 24, 2004 Share Posted October 24, 2004 Well........ what did you find? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Northman Posted October 24, 2004 Author Share Posted October 24, 2004 It was my map. Downloaded the previous version yesterday, which was 5% leaner on the top end, with no FI light. I'll try adding 3 or 4% to see if that triggers the light. It's possible the light was triggered by my one cell in the top end that was +20. Seems funny considering I'm -28 in more than one cell in the bottom end. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
EVLXX Posted October 24, 2004 Share Posted October 24, 2004 How are you monitoring your air fuel ratios? And if your needing to go richer.... have you thought about upping the fuel pressure? I mean if you really needed a +20 at WOT. Oh corse that would change the whole spectum, but.... if that's what you need. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Northman Posted October 24, 2004 Author Share Posted October 24, 2004 I was monitoring my fuel/air on the dyno. I got the baseline run, then a written list from my engine builder of what to try. Step 1, step 2, etc. The fuel pressure is already increased to 50 from the factory 43, which brought the map very close from the start. A little rich on the bottom, and a little lean on the top. Perfect in the center. Raising the fuel pressure more would help the top end, but would make for even larger corrections in the low range. It's close now, so hopefully close enough. I'll find out next weekend. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
EVLXX Posted October 25, 2004 Share Posted October 25, 2004 Well your rich on the bottom and lean on the top was what I was guessing would happen.... just didn't know what you had already done. :grin: I just wish there was some way of altering the stock ECU programming... as I'm sure you do as well. Well in any event, I would love to see a copy of your next Dyno run. :grin: I'll be waiting......... impatiently! :grin: Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MiDNiTXX Posted October 26, 2004 Share Posted October 26, 2004 Not that it matters for you but adjusting the AAP table under 10% throttle will give screwy results. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
demon Posted October 26, 2004 Share Posted October 26, 2004 Bore out your throttle bodies and add another set of injectors. You know you want to do it. :grin: Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
XX4me Posted October 27, 2004 Share Posted October 27, 2004 Chris something I found on mine was if the changes between cells were too large it would screw with the A/F. Meaning having the values change from one cell to the next in the same TP setting, something like -20@4000rpm to +20@5000rpm. I know this doesn't address your issue just relaying info. Hey Eric what did you come up with on your bike? Any change to the A/F? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Northman Posted October 27, 2004 Author Share Posted October 27, 2004 Not that it matters for you but adjusting the AAP table under 10% throttle will give screwy results. How so? As for the throttle bodies, I want to get them enlarged, but 2mm over seems to be all I can get out of them. Wish I could get bigger ones :sad: Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
EVLXX Posted October 27, 2004 Share Posted October 27, 2004 As for the throttle bodies, I want to get them enlarged, but 2mm over seems to be all I can get out of them.Wish I could get bigger ones :sad: So you want to lose more bottom end torque.....? 2mm is huge in terms of flow. Just an observation..... I don't know all your number, so I couldn't really get into volumetric effeicency without knowing more. :???: :grin: Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Northman Posted October 27, 2004 Author Share Posted October 27, 2004 Some of the new liter bikes are coming with 46mm throttle bodies. Ours are only 40, IIRC. :sad: Trust me, I have enough torque :grin: The stock airbox may be the next restriction I'll have to go after. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Northman Posted October 28, 2004 Author Share Posted October 28, 2004 The bottom line is I need more airflow to support the power output of the engine. Sunday will probably be the most hp it will make, and I'll know better then if the engine is starving for air or not. That will make the decision on how soon to enlarge them. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
EVLXX Posted October 29, 2004 Share Posted October 29, 2004 Trust me, I have enough torque :grin: The stock airbox may be the next restriction I'll have to go after. Ya... I'm sure you have enough torque. :devilfinger: Speaking about that airbox thing..... I wonder how hard it would be to get your hands on a pressure guage able to messure mB's,(or whatever that was called in the SportRider article), so that you could find out on the road whether or not the air box is the restriction or is it all in the Throttlebodies. http://www.sportrider.com/tech/146_9910_ram/ :grin: Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Northman Posted October 30, 2004 Author Share Posted October 30, 2004 I could always run a vacuum gauge hooked to the airbox, which would also indicate when my filter needs to be cleaned. Problem is I don't really like the look of extra gauges. I know they're necessary a lot of the time, but I prefer the stealth look. I could try something temporary, however. Forrest, are you still running the stock throttle bodies? I know it doesn't make near as much difference on a force-fed engine, but wondering. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.