Separate names with a comma.
Discussion in 'Parallel Universe' started by ebrabaek, Feb 8, 2013.
Cheers tried this, will see if it helps a bit.
So after have been riding a lot more with the PC-5/AT combo, I feel that I am now more in tune with the practical app of the system, yet don't feel that I know more of the inner working. That is in part due to the fact that DJ is unwilling to provide good info, or they simply choose not to share it. Either way, I am basing this of my experience, regarding what I see, and the bike behaves, and with less scientific data to back it up, as I do not own a GS-911. I know.. I know... I really should. Yeppers, there are many things I should do, or have.... Like the next CF rear rack for the OSSO tank, but that is another chapter to be written. That said, I will admit to NOT being 100% happy, and satisfied with the PC-5/AT combo. First, as it has been discussed in this thread, the PC-5/AT ( hence forth referred to as the DJ combo) I can't help thinking the BMSK, and the DJ are some how wrestling amongst them self.... should I refer them to the DEM, and GOP......
You see, at just about every acceleration from stop the mpg counter is in the low teens, and as I shift through 3'rd, in the 30's, and then to stabilize after reaching cruise. This is something that have been noted since the install, and is predominantly higher inside the first 10 miles. It matters not what I do with the DJ, as this is a computed function of the BMSK, and whatever maps I load, it has no effect. That was not the case prior to DJ install. It leads me to think that the BMSK is not liking its environment during acceleration much, and for that reason splashes a lot more fuel into the injectors. Only thing that can instigate this, is the removal of the stock O2 sensor, as all the other DJ stuff is down stream, and with regard to that, the BMSK is clueless.
I have started to see a split in indicated mpg, and actual calculated mpg. The split started around 600 miles after install, and was miniscule at the get go, but after 500-600'ish miles since install, saw a few mpg diff.... and now it has stabilized to a computed mpg of 60....... and a calculated mpg of 53.... a difference of 7 mpg. That number is fairly accurate, and predictable. This bothers me, as with our idiots in the white house, congress, and senate we cannot be united, and efficiant by NOT working together. I think Lincoln once said: " a house divided, cannot stand" and I am a firm believer of that same principle applies here. With the BMSK, and DJ constantly arguing, the results will never be optimal, but always a compromise. Sorta funny, in a way, but reality I think.
There are several functions that DJ omitted from this APP. Water temp input, Timing control, to name a few, and that shows a lag of support, and sloppy enter into service on the behalf of DJ. I offer an example of the opposite. I am a beta tester for Rekluse Clutch, in their APP for the BMW F800GS EXP product, and working with them.....seeing their great interest in bringing the best, safest, and most durable product in to service, prior to launch, have been, and is very ensuring. Unfortunately it had brought some delays along, but as not to rush anything, and only bring a half full plate to the table, Rekluse have stuck it out, and are now very close with a full plate of goodies. DJ...... Not so much. In stead of working out the short comings of the 8GS APP, nothing has been done. In fact denial of such, is on the menu, when I have contacted them in such regard.
All the above sounds a bit harsh...... I know, but it is base on my first hand experience with the DJ system, for a good long while now. That said...... I think it still is the best solution for a better fueled 8GS with exhaust mods done. I would be a bit careful with the DJ install if you are still using the stock header with the CAT, as my pipe exit has a little more soot on the inside, and I would imagine that soot will accumulate inside the CAT with greater frequency. I think as the SAS have been discussed here as well, part of the confusion regarding weather it should be on, or off, adds to the ....ehhhhhh.... confusion... as by DJ own writing they specify it should be disconnected, yet they offer nothing.... No instructions whatsoever in the matter, leading me to think they did NOT do this when they tested the system on their test mule. Only reason I left my SAS engaged, is that the bike ran like crap with it disengaged.... Confusing..... yes, you bet, but I will NOT argue with success, and the expense of theory.
I revised my fueling tables, in trying to experiment a little with the workings, and reverted back to a Full Zero map. ( literally all zero's)
I wanted to identify weather or not the added fuel right of idle had an impact on the off idle hop, and after now a few hundred miles, I am happy to say, that it does NOT. I have no off idle hop, and very well behaved fueling off idle, with the DJ not adding anything below 2% throttle. That leads me to say that the DJ has no effect on this, but it is a function of the BMSK shutting off the injectors at Throttle closing, and when re opened, the CAT momentarily offers a spike of pressure build up, until the flow control is mitigated...... This is my theory, but is substantiated with pm's, that I have gotten with fellow riders, installing a full system, but NOT a DJ install, as they have reported good off idle behavior.
Then trying to indulge upon the fuel efficiency, I changed the target AFR from 13.2 to 14 below 5000 rpm, and 80% throttle. The bike has no change in perceived power..... MPG split has yet to be determined.
Then finally, after a few hundred miles, this is the following fuel add/subtract table that the DJ offers.....
A much more well behaved table with only a few rouge additions along the way, which I suspect is due to the SAS messing up the Sniffer.
I will ride this a bit like this, and report back. But make no mistake..... When, and if a better alternative comes along, that works by either re flashing the BMSK, or working with it, I will jump on that in a heart beat.
Tack för rapporteringen! I'm not totally comfortable with my DJ+AT. The bike runs better than without it, but the mpg has taken a hit. Now winter is coming here, so I won't ride for some four-five months. We'll see what the future holds!
Very well written, thank you.
Ufda..... Tack saa mycket....
In my opinion i think the l / 100 km counter on my bike was always very optimistic about fuel and now with the PC5 it seems about right. I could never do more than 200 km's before hitting reserve and that has not changed.
Good that you keep track of what you did. I still have to move the bike to pc or other way around :).
I would imagine, that such a long cable would be quite costly..... . Yeppers.... We shall see where I end up.
The spiral staircase with the beamo is a challenge too
.... Ha ha .... yeppers.....
Very interesting thread and lots of insight and information. I've got a couple thoughts and will drop them inline with your narrative.
Some good input Roger. Your input is always valued. I Think your right, as I have come to the same conclusions through my trials. I will pm you in the next day or two, with questions regarding your AF-XIED. I think the best way to proceed is call for dyno time.......
There are a couple guys, including Mike at Beemer Boneyard, who are running the BMW-AF-XIED with modified exhausts. Their findings have been that they get best performance adding one click less fuel that stock exhausts (6 clicks increase instead of 7 or 8). The reason they speculate is that air reversion is already telling the BMSK that there isn't quite enough fuel so they don't need to add as much. Anyhow, you could try it and see what you think. You would get Closed Loop back--even with your very open exhaust it might work. The best part is it would take zero dyno time. RB
Personally I would prefer to run closed all the time, as it sort of does not above 2%, but with precision gone. I would need to put it on a dyno, to verify its performance numbers, as part of my equation would be performance. I know you don't share that thought Roger, and that is ok, but in my opinion as with DJ, which claims there is no need with the PC-5/AT combo, i disagree with them on that as well.
Let me gently take you to task for calling the DJ Autotune closed loop at any rpm. It does monitor and adjust fueling but that's only about a third of what the BMSK can do in closed loop. Autotune is a simpler measure and store function. For example, the BMSK doesn't need to measure every cell before it can improve the whole map. It does get better with time though. The BMSK designers made the software smart enough so that even if you never ride in an area of the map long enough to have quality data, it can make a good estimate. The other thing because the BMSK is executing a Limp Home fueling pattern on your bike, the measurements that Autotune records keep changing. It's hard to know what it does with the 10% uncertainty.
Well if you do try the dyno again I would love to see numbers in steady state torque at 2000, 2500, 3000, 3500, 4000. By steady state I'm thinking hold that rpm and see what the torque is as the dyno adds load, up to full throttle for each of those rpms. Could do one at WOT, 7500 rpm or max.
From my tests with my GS-911 on-road dyno function (and experience, the increase is pretty apparent) you get a better measure of torque at low rpms than the dynos ever show.
It might be that the BMSK is better at Closed looping. I won't argue that, but by definition as the DJ combo is using a Lampda sonde to measure the O2, and adjust the fuel metering, I'd say it qualifies as such..... Perhaps not as good as the BMSK.... Nevertheless...... closed loop. I am not aware of a way to increase torque on a dyno. As far as I know, the resistance if fixed, and personally I think it would be biased if you now include the operator in the equation, trying to hold 2500 rpm, as the resistive load increases. I will visit with the local Dyno guys, and get with you through pm, no later than Monday, as I have a full plate today, and tomorrow.
The operator sets RPM and the Dyno software and hardware create the resistance needed to keep it at that rpm. The operator holds the throttle at various degrees open (measured). This is how BMW works out the VE table and fueling required. It is the best way to use the dyno but is costly.
"The operator sets RPM and the Dyno software and hardware create the resistance needed to keep it at that rpm. The operator holds the throttle at various degrees open (measured). This is how BMW works out the VE table and fueling required. It is the best way to use the dyno but is costly.
That's also how a tuner who knows what he's doing, tunes a bike with a PCV,PV, or any tuning device, for that matter. The first thing you have to do is establish a VE table, and build from there. I think that leaving a PCV with Auto Tune in auto function, is counterproductive. Use the AT for what it's intended to do, establish a tuning table, and then turn it off, or simply use it as a AFR gauge(if you have a display unit). It's really not intended to be a "closed loop" device IMO. Merely a tuning tool, to get the tables set. The BMSK sounds like a tough nut to crack, and no matter what aftermarket tuner you use, you may always be chasing a moving target, as it tries to compensate for any changes that an external device puts in the mix? It's interesting stuff for sure. Look forward to using my GS911 and perhaps a WB monitor to see whats happening in there.
I'm glad to hear you say that, about proper dyno tuning. Makes sense. I agree with you also regarding Autotune. The AFR targets that DJ ships the unit with look too rich in most places in the cruising range and too lean at wide throttle angles. Autotune also seems to create a lot of cell to cell discontinuity. It's hard to understand a +30% cell next to a +5%.
The challenge trying to tune any BMSK is that as soon as you pull the O2 sensor it outputs a 10% variable AFR stream. By definition you can't get it closer than 5%. Given that most fueling changes are 6-8%, that 5% figure looks huge.
I am seeing the light at the end of the tunnel......... and it does not appear to be a freight train.....