Victory Motorcycle Forum banner

1 - 20 of 31 Posts

·
Super Moderator
Joined
·
5,063 Posts
Discussion Starter #1
Can I remove my current narrow band 02 sensors and replace them with wide-band 02's and use one gauge? I think it would be a good addition to be able to monitor my air/fuel in real world conditions with a dash mounted air/fuel gauge. I don't want to drill and weld in a bung for the 02 that comes in the kits because I already have bungs in place from the factory.

Can this be done? I know I can remove one and install the kit 02 but that would monitor one cylinder.
 

·
Premium Member
Joined
·
430 Posts
Don't take this the wrong way but, WHY? I DO understand why, but it's not an airplane or race bike. I've spend a large portion of my life monitoring gauges so I don't crash and die, I don't want to do it on my bike.
If you want to do it the right way, your gonna have to weld a bung into the crossover.

I'm a KISS guy...
Keep
It
Simple
Stupid

I've never used a Dyno on this bike and probably never will. I read the plugs and use a "sniffer" to tell me the fuel/air. That's close enough. I will err on the side of rich and call it good. I could care less about fuel mileage, all I care about is fun mileage.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
2,411 Posts
Can I remove my current narrow band 02 sensors and replace them with wide-band 02's and use one gauge? I think it would be a good addition to be able to monitor my air/fuel in real world conditions with a dash mounted air/fuel gauge. I don't want to drill and weld in a bung for the 02 that comes in the kits because I already have bungs in place from the factory.

Can this be done? I know I can remove one and install the kit 02 but that would monitor one cylinder.
These guys have a dual channel unit it's a little down the page.
Daytona Twin Tec LLC - WEGO III Wide-Band Air/Fuel Ratio Tuning Aids

It's butt ugly and hardly a thing of beauty but I have a single channel unit from them and it works great and has been reliable.
I only stick on for tuning though. Maybe someone else makes one in a more visually pleasing package? Or perhaps it could be mounted in such a way as to obscure everything but the displays behind some lexan or something?
Good luck in your search!
 

·
Super Moderator
Joined
·
5,063 Posts
Discussion Starter #4
Don't take this the wrong way but, WHY? I DO understand why, but it's not an airplane or race bike. I've spend a large portion of my life monitoring gauges so I don't crash and die, I don't want to do it on my bike.
If you want to do it the right way, your gonna have to weld a bung into the crossover.

I'm a KISS guy...
Keep
It
Simple
Stupid

I've never used a Dyno on this bike and probably never will. I read the plugs and use a "sniffer" to tell me the fuel/air. That's close enough. I will err on the side of rich and call it good. I could care less about fuel mileage, all I care about is fun mileage.
Because:

1. It's not hurting anything.

2. These kind of things fascinate me.

3. KISS applies it's a read only.

4. I'm never satisfied with "call it good" because you don't know if it is until you find out.

5. You do it for a living then by all means don't do it on your bike, has absolutely nothing to do with my bike.

6. People spew info they read somewhere else I want first hand info.

7. I want to.
 

·
Premium Member
Joined
·
123 Posts
Yes you can. There are several options as well. If you just want to monitor AFR, you can get an Innovate 3891 dual WB with single gauge. There are other companies as well, but I have no experience with them. I run dual Innovate WB on my Ford Lightning.

On my XC I run autotune module with the Dynojet POD-300. The POD-300 displays throttle position, rpm and dual AFR; you can data log as well.

I'm like you, want to know what is going on with the bike at all times.

I attached a quick shot of the POD on the bike right after start up, so idle had not settled yet after warm up cycle.
 

Attachments

  • Like
Reactions: vindex1963

·
Super Moderator
Joined
·
5,063 Posts
Discussion Starter #6
Yes you can. There are several options as well. If you just want to monitor AFR, you can get an Innovate 3891 dual WB with single gauge. There are other companies as well, but I have no experience with them. I run dual Innovate WB on my Ford Lightning.

On my XC I run autotune module with the Dynojet POD-300. The POD-300 displays throttle position, rpm and dual AFR; you can data log as well.

I'm like you, want to know what is going on with the bike at all times.

I attached a quick shot of the POD on the bike right after start up, so idle had not settled yet after warm up cycle.
That's cool but I don't have a Power Commander.
 

·
Premium Member
Joined
·
123 Posts
Roger on the PC. With the VFC, just the wide bands would be money as it would allow you to tune each pot to get the best average (between the two WB) in the target AFR in a given range.

As you know the VFC can be adjusted much like a carb's fueling circuits through riding feel and reading plugs. Many carb guys have added WB to their tuning tools as well.
 

·
Super Moderator
Joined
·
5,063 Posts
Discussion Starter #8
Ordered this tonight from Amazon.

Click.




.
 

·
Premium Member
Joined
·
123 Posts
Good system, have two of them on the truck.
 

·
Super Moderator
Joined
·
5,063 Posts
Discussion Starter #10
Good system, have two of them on the truck.
The plan is to install the wide band in the back cylinder because it's the one we always read about getting hot and I can't tune per cylinder anyway what I do to one affect both.

That's the logic anyway.
 

·
Premium Member
Joined
·
123 Posts
Roger and you can always move it between the front and rear.
 

·
Premium Member
Joined
·
123 Posts
Roger and you can always move it between the front and rear.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
445 Posts
The plan is to install the wide band in the back cylinder because it's the one we always read about getting hot and I can't tune per cylinder anyway what I do to one affect both.

That's the logic anyway.
Guys, this is the sort of logic I find educational so I'll ask a few questions.

All things being equal why are our engines mapped front and back with different fuel +/-? Is it that all things aren't equal?

If it is for heat purposes, why isn't the rear map always richer in all cells on a map?

From my understanding, four cylinder sports bikes mostly have tunes done with one map for all, so again why do we split front and rear?

That said, if all things on our bikes are equal and we are putting more fuel into the rear to cool it down, doesn't that create an imbalance in performance and mechanical smoothness?

Imagine our 106 is mounted across the frame like a Moto Guzzi, intake and exhausts are mirrored wouldn't both pots be mapped identical?

Thus is we did as Vindex and AFR'd the rear, why can't that just be copied to the front with no issues?

Thanks all.
 

·
Super Moderator
Joined
·
5,063 Posts
Discussion Starter #14
Guys, this is the sort of logic I find educational so I'll ask a few questions.

All things being equal why are our engines mapped front and back with different fuel +/-? Is it that all things aren't equal?

If it is for heat purposes, why isn't the rear map always richer in all cells on a map?

From my understanding, four cylinder sports bikes mostly have tunes done with one map for all, so again why do we split front and rear?

That said, if all things on our bikes are equal and we are putting more fuel into the rear to cool it down, doesn't that create an imbalance in performance and mechanical smoothness?

Imagine our 106 is mounted across the frame like a Moto Guzzi, intake and exhausts are mirrored wouldn't both pots be mapped identical?

Thus is we did as Vindex and AFR'd the rear, why can't that just be copied to the front with no issues?

Thanks all.
With a power commander you can tune per cylinder with the VFC you can't that's why it doesn't matter if I monitor both cylinders because my changes affect both. One of the best Vic guys out there said the VFCIII is an excellent tool for my set up.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
2,411 Posts
Guys, this is the sort of logic I find educational so I'll ask a few questions.

All things being equal why are our engines mapped front and back with different fuel +/-? Is it that all things aren't equal?

If it is for heat purposes, why isn't the rear map always richer in all cells on a map?

From my understanding, four cylinder sports bikes mostly have tunes done with one map for all, so again why do we split front and rear?

That said, if all things on our bikes are equal and we are putting more fuel into the rear to cool it down, doesn't that create an imbalance in performance and mechanical smoothness?

Imagine our 106 is mounted across the frame like a Moto Guzzi, intake and exhausts are mirrored wouldn't both pots be mapped identical?

Thus is we did as Vindex and AFR'd the rear, why can't that just be copied to the front with no issues?

Thanks all.
V twins are a little different than inline 4 cylinders.
The reason the rear runs hotter is it makes more hp than the front does.
The front cylinder accelerates the air in the air box during it's intake cycle. About the time the air gets traveling at max velocity the front cylinders intake valve slams shut leaving the air no where to go. Air is heavy and has a lot of inertia especially when it is traveling at speeds approaching the speed of sound as it can in the intake of an engine. It is also compressible and able to store energy much like a spring. With a properly designed intake tract and air box the rear cylinder benefits through intake tuning from the front cylinder doing the work of accelerating the air. There are only 50 degrees of separation between the two cylinders so the air is still bouncing around in the intake tract looking for a place to go when the rear intake valve opens. At certain rpm's the placed it will go will be into the rear cylinder. Rather than have to wait for the air to get up to speed to fill the cylinder, the rear cylinder, at certain rpm's is blessed with energized air looking to go somewhere when it's intake valve first clears the seat.
That's huge.

On the exhaust stroke which also has only 50 degrees of separation, the rear cylinder benefits from the front cylinders exhaust pulse exiting the pipe shortly before it's exhaust valve opens which provides additional scavenging for the rear cylinder. Instead the exhaust having to force it's way down the pipe it is sucked out. There is also less exhaust left in the cylinder to dilute the next charge of fuel. Life is good.

There are too many degrees of separation for the front cylinder to benefit in the same way as the rear does.

That is why it is best to tune them separately and not just clone the front to the back or back to the front on a Vtwin.
 

·
Premium Member
Joined
·
123 Posts
I have attached my mapping of the two cylinders. I target the same afr for both front and rear but the fueling requirements to get there are slightly different.

Part of the reason we tune both cylinders is the fact that you can tune both which will max efficiency and power. In many applications out side of vtwins you cannot tune individual cylnders without a stand alone fuel controller.

Going back to my Lightning the number 8 cylinder is (rear drivers side) the leanest and runs the hottest. It is the last injector on the rail and the last to get coolant flow (hottest water). So the rule is that you monitor the driver side bank with the WB O2 swnsor if running only one. Since in the older Ford EEC you cannot control fuel on the individual cylinder or even a single bank (side set of cylinders), one make fueling demands of the historically leanest bank to make sure that the leanest average is with in range. Other tricks are to flow the injectors and place the highest one in the 8 hole.

Now I learned an expensive lesson. Was monitoring a single WB drivers side, fuel preasure gauge and was running a race. Well bank one (passenger) went lean and I did not know and hurt the head. If I was running dual WB on the truck at the time I would of seen it and lifted.

Now there is a big difference when you have 8 cylinders that each will have slightly different requirements and 20 plus pounds of boost; things can go wrong quick. In our simple n/a vtwin there is much more room for margin of error and monitoring both banks is not a requirement.

With that said look at the upper end of my attached fuel maps WOT. You will see that the rear cylinder requires about 5% more fuel to achieve the same 13.3 afr. If I just tuned off a single WB in the front cylinder my rear afr would be about 14.0. If I tuned of the rear to target 13.3 then the front would be 12.7. So if it was me then I would set the VFC off one cylinder readings of the WB and then move the WB to the other to monitor to make sure that both cylinders are in the target area.
 

Attachments

  • Like
Reactions: MC Hammer

·
Super Moderator
Joined
·
5,063 Posts
Discussion Starter #17
I have attached my mapping of the two cylinders. I target the same afr for both front and rear but the fueling requirements to get there are slightly different.

Part of the reason we tune both cylinders is the fact that you can tune both which will max efficiency and power. In many applications out side of vtwins you cannot tune individual cylnders without a stand alone fuel controller.

Going back to my Lightning the number 8 cylinder is (rear drivers side) the leanest and runs the hottest. It is the last injector on the rail and the last to get coolant flow (hottest water). So the rule is that you monitor the driver side bank with the WB O2 swnsor if running only one. Since in the older Ford EEC you cannot control fuel on the individual cylinder or even a single bank (side set of cylinders), one make fueling demands of the historically leanest bank to make sure that the leanest average is with in range. Other tricks are to flow the injectors and place the highest one in the 8 hole.

Now I learned an expensive lesson. Was monitoring a single WB drivers side, fuel preasure gauge and was running a race. Well bank one (passenger) went lean and I did not know and hurt the head. If I was running dual WB on the truck at the time I would of seen it and lifted.

Now there is a big difference when you have 8 cylinders that each will have slightly different requirements and 20 plus pounds of boost; things can go wrong quick. In our simple n/a vtwin there is much more room for margin of error and monitoring both banks is not a requirement.

With that said look at the upper end of my attached fuel maps WOT. You will see that the rear cylinder requires about 5% more fuel to achieve the same 13.3 afr. If I just tuned off a single WB in the front cylinder my rear afr would be about 14.0. If I tuned of the rear to target 13.3 then the front would be 12.7. So if it was me then I would set the VFC off one cylinder readings of the WB and then move the WB to the other to monitor to make sure that both cylinders are in the target area.
So monitoring the rear (leaner) would be ideal? Remember touring bike very little if any WOT.
 

·
Premium Member
Joined
·
123 Posts
Vin,
I do not think that it matters if you choose front or rear to dial in the bike. I do not have enough data or experience to say that the rear is always the leanest. Pick one to dial in and then switch to the other to monitor. If both are in the target area (13.7-14.0 cruise), (13.1-13.5 WOT), (idle 12.3-12.7) and tip in fuel "pump shot" (12.2-12.7).

These are ball park numbers and some may disagree alightly with the above ranges. Sincw VFC is closer to tuning a carb you will have rpm windows that are outside the ideal range and you will only know this because of the WB as the butt would never know.

To expand on a couple of things, WB are tools, tuning front and rear are options, but many have gone uber fast without these or have vehicles that run great as well. Reading plugs, vacuum gauges, seat of the pants, mph trap speeds at the track are all methods that work.
 

·
Super Moderator
Joined
·
5,063 Posts
Discussion Starter #19
Vin,
I do not think that it matters if you choose front or rear to dial in the bike. I do not have enough data or experience to say that the rear is always the leanest. Pick one to dial in and then switch to the other to monitor. If both are in the target area (13.7-14.0 cruise), (13.1-13.5 WOT), (idle 12.3-12.7) and tip in fuel "pump shot" (12.2-12.7).

These are ball park numbers and some may disagree alightly with the above ranges. Sincw VFC is closer to tuning a carb you will have rpm windows that are outside the ideal range and you will only know this because of the WB as the butt would never know.

To expand on a couple of things, WB are tools, tuning front and rear are options, but many have gone uber fast without these or have vehicles that run great as well. Reading plugs, vacuum gauges, seat of the pants, mph trap speeds at the track are all methods that work.
Agreed I can do that I'll set it up on the back one for a while then switch to the front and see.

Where did you get the target areas?
 

·
Premium Member
Joined
·
123 Posts
Vin,
Test (not mine) have shown that rich best torque for an n/a engine is 12.6, lean best torque is around 13.7 at wot. I just went in the middle of the range. For part throttle i went for good mpg, but anything over 14.1 would gets some knock, so i backed off to 13.8-9. I could of pulled some timing out, but just tuned a bit rich. Even at 13.8 if i cruise at 65 I'll get about 43 mpg. As for idle, 12.5-13.0 is the norm, i run mine a bit richer for heat reduction and it helps with decel pop some.
 
  • Like
Reactions: vindex1963
1 - 20 of 31 Posts
Top