Print

Please login or register.
1 Hour 1 Day 1 Week 1 Month Forever
Login with username, password and session length

[BigLew]

Hey guys I have a 07SERK with rush slip ons. Should I buy a PC or a Race Tuner for the Harley shop to tune??

[RedDevil]

Hey guys I have a 07SERK with rush slip ons. Should I buy a PC or a Race Tuner for the Harley shop to tune??

Depends on what your tuner is more comfortable (read: experienced) with.  One, the SERT, totally rewrites over the factory programming of the ECM, the other, PCIII, "piggy backs" with the factory ECM; so if you remove the PCIII, your bike will be back to factory, or whatever the latest download you had in the ECM.  Both are good, there are plenty of people on the site that have used both.  I have the SERT because my tuner was more comfortable with that.  The SERT does have more capabilities/adjustability, then the PCIII, but is also more expensive.  Talk to your tuner and see what he/she is more comfortable with.

     

[SBB]

Try using the search function here on the site.
Rather than start another thread to answer the same question that's been asked 10,000 times use the search function and read the existing answers to this question. Not to be blunt but the info is already here at least a thousand times in other threads. The answers are the same no matter when the question is asked. Just trying to help!

 

 

[BigLew]

Try using the search function here on the site.
Rather than start another thread to answer the same question that's been asked 10,000 times use the search function and read the existing answers to this question. Not to be blunt but the info is already here at least a thousand times in other threads. The answers are the same no matter when the question is asked. Just trying to help!

 

 

Thanks, I guess what I heard is true!

[SBB]

Thanks, I guess what I heard is true!

Absolutely!

 

[springer-]

This question comes up a lot.  I thought I would give my take on it.

The SERT is a very feature full product.  It allows for many more finer adjustments in many areas. 

One advantage is the ability to change the ECM constants.  This is particularly important when a major upgrade is done to the engine.  For example, an engine build from a 103" to a 110" is going to require more fuel.  Both the SERT and PCIII can give it more fuel but there is a ceiling to what can be given.  This ceiling is determined by an engine constant.  If the stock ECM has a 103" engine constant, the PCIII can only vary the fuel a percentage from the 103" engine constant, this many not be enough to adequately tune the 110" build.  With the SERT the engine constant can be changed to 110" and this increases the entire adjustment range preventing it from maxing out like the PCIII could.

Another disadvantage with the PCIII is it is a "piggy back" device.  This adds additional electronics to have problems.  While it may be rare, the PCIII is not built with the same construction techniques (quality) as the stock ECM. In the event of a failure, many times simply removing the PCIII does not leave an adequately tuned ECM for running the engine.

The PCIII can be tuned with a dynojet using the tuning link software much more quickly than a SERT can be tuned.  While this is true it would also depend on your definition of "Tuned".  It has been my personal experience the tuning link software does not do an adequate job.  Even if the "tune" is then touched up by a tuner, the results can be less than expected gas mileage and not optimal performance.  We have a saying for this type of "tune", Fat, Retarded and Happy.  This doesn't mean you won't end up with a "Fat, Retarded and Happy" tune if you use the SERT but if you have a good tuner using the SERT, you are less likely to.

Not all SERT tunes are created equal.  Far too often the SERT is not understood and in the wrong hands will be no better than a canned map.  This is more often seen at dealerships, IMO.  A canned map and 3 dyno pulls does NOT make a SERT tune.

I may sound anti-PCIII but I am not really, I just have a preference for the SERT.  What I have experienced is we can out tune a PCIII every time.  It takes us longer with the SERT than the PCIII but the end results are always the same, better gas mileage, better performance and smoother running.  With the PCIII it feels like our hands are tied.

As always, check with your tuner and see what they prefer since you ultimately are relying on them and if they are not comfortable with the SERT, the PCIII will be a better choice.

[bisounours]

This question comes up a lot.  I thought I would give my take on it.

The SERT is a very feature full product.  It allows for many more finer adjustments in many areas. 

One advantage is the ability to change the ECM constants.  This is particularly important when a major upgrade is done to the engine.  For example, an engine build from a 103" to a 110" is going to require more fuel.  Both the SERT and PCIII can give it more fuel but there is a ceiling to what can be given.  This ceiling is determined by an engine constant.  If the stock ECM has a 103" engine constant, the PCIII can only vary the fuel a percentage from the 103" engine constant, this many not be enough to adequately tune the 110" build.  With the SERT the engine constant can be changed to 110" and this increases the entire adjustment range preventing it from maxing out like the PCIII could.

Another disadvantage with the PCIII is it is a "piggy back" device.  This adds additional electronics to have problems.  While it may be rare, the PCIII is not built with the same construction techniques (quality) as the stock ECM. In the event of a failure, many times simply removing the PCIII does not leave an adequately tuned ECM for running the engine.

The PCIII can be tuned with a dynojet using the tuning link software much more quickly than a SERT can be tuned.  While this is true it would also depend on your definition of "Tuned".  It has been my personal experience the tuning link software does not do an adequate job.  Even if the "tune" is then touched up by a tuner, the results can be less than expected gas mileage and not optimal performance.  We have a saying for this type of "tune", Fat, Retarded and Happy.  This doesn't mean you won't end up with a "Fat, Retarded and Happy" tune if you use the SERT but if you have a good tuner using the SERT, you are less likely to.

Not all SERT tunes are created equal.  Far too often the SERT is not understood and in the wrong hands will be no better than a canned map.  This is more often seen at dealerships, IMO.  A canned map and 3 dyno pulls does NOT make a SERT tune.

I may sound anti-PCIII but I am not really, I just have a preference for the SERT.  What I have experienced is we can out tune a PCIII every time.  It takes us longer with the SERT than the PCIII but the end results are always the same, better gas mileage, better performance and smoother running.  With the PCIII it feels like our hands are tied.

As always, check with your tuner and see what they prefer since you ultimately are relying on them and if they are not comfortable with the SERT, the PCIII will be a better choice.

You wrote : "The SERT is a very feature full product"

Do you think with all features of the SERT, it's more interresting to use the SERT without the O² sensors on '08 CUSE3 than with sensors ?
In other way, with the SERT and without the sensors, it'll be possible to adjust the fuel tables, AFR, (same the PC) but with all other features of the SERT ;
features not present with the PC :
• edit Engine Displacement setting (if you have changed bore or stroke);
• adjust Fuel Injector rate (if you have changed or modified injectors);
• set engine RPM limit;
• toggle the Knock Sensor ON/OFF;
• turn Temperature Management ON/OFF;
• enable/disable Active Exhaust Control;
• enable/disable Active Intake;
• enable/disable ACR (Active Compression Release).

What is your opinion ?

Jacques

[springer-]

Do you think with all features of the SERT, it's more interresting to use the SERT without the O² sensors on '08 CUSE3 than with sensors ?
In other way, with the SERT and without the sensors, it'll be possible to adjust the fuel tables, AFR, (same the PC) but with all other features of the SERT ;

I am not sure I understand your question.

I prefer to not use the O2 sensors.  In my opinion they keep the bike too lean.

[bisounours]

I am not sure I understand your question.

I prefer to not use the O2 sensors.  In my opinion they keep the bike too lean.

Thanks for your reply.
Sorry for my bad english but I understand your answer and it's clear. 

Jacques

[old wrench]

This question comes up a lot.  I thought I would give my take on it.




Not all SERT tunes are created equal.  Far too often the SERT is not understood and in the wrong hands will be no better than a canned map.  This is more often seen at dealerships, IMO.  A canned map and 3 dyno pulls does NOT make a SERT tune.

I may sound anti-PCIII but I am not really, I just have a preference for the SERT.  What I have experienced is we can out tune a PCIII every time.  It takes us longer with the SERT than the PCIII but the end results are always the same, better gas mileage, better performance and smoother running.  With the PCIII it feels like our hands are tied.

As always, check with your tuner and see what they prefer since you ultimately are relying on them and if they are not comfortable with the SERT, the PCIII will be a better choice.

Man springer that is so true about the dealers, they rarely even start to use the capabilities of the SERT, I sometimes wonder if its because of the EPA rules and regs. I put a O2 sensor on my 06 streetglide and use it just for tuning the SERT, I wish I had put on dual gauge on it and may soon, sure is handy to see where its running at speeds and load. It makes it easy to go back and change a few cells so you can keep it in the window.

I think they lean more towards the PCIII because its quick and easy.  Its hard to marry electronics components and keep them that way, a false signal to the ECM can cause problems sometimes.

[BIGDOG]

Interested in the air fuel gauge you show in the picture. Tell me more please.

[AXIL]

springer, you took the words right out of my mouth. i don't speak well in type (slow typer).  imhp the sert is better for the resons you discribed and more.  some dealers and independent shops lack the full knowlegde of the sert or pcIII but for those that do know how most still don't have the right dyno.  if you don't have tail pipe sniffers how can you calibrate the ecm to the "pump"?  just my two cents.

[ultrafxr]

I am not sure I understand your question.

I prefer to not use the O2 sensors.  In my opinion they keep the bike too lean.

But when in closed loop you can richen the mixture using the closed loop bias table.  Is there a problem doing that?

[springer-]

But when in closed loop you can richen the mixture using the closed loop bias table.  Is there a problem doing that?

It's not so much a problem as a preference.  It comes down to fundamental tuning principals, IMO.  The O2 sensors only care about one thing, AFR.  The CLB tables can be maxed out to get the O2 sensors to adjust for about 14.1-14.2 AFR.  We don't tune for AFR and feel the O2 sensors alter the desired results adversely.

I may have posted this here before but I will repost it.  It explains our tuning principals.

The way we tune is VERY different than 99% of the other tuners out there. This is a huge issue of debate and not one I am going to get into but I will tell you the differences. Most (probably 99%) tune with AFR. The ECM adjusts using O2 sensors that read AFR. Wide Band O2 uses AFR. Many dyno sheet critics look at the AFR on the bottom of the sheet. Aftermarket tuning devices use AFR, like the Daytona WEGO system. Most Dynos have AFR systems built in for Dyno tuning. At this point you should have a picture painted that the industry relies on AFR devices for tuning.

We don't use AFR for tuning.

If not AFR, what? We use combustion science and a 4 gas exhaust analyzer to tune the engine. When fuel is burned it is a chemical reaction. The chemical reaction gives off by products, these are the emission. CO, CO2, HC and O2 are all emission in the exhaust gasses. AFR only looks at the O2, the least important in the equation. Carbon Monoxide, CO is partially burned fuel. Carbon Dioxide, CO2 is fully burned fuel. Hydrocarbons, HC is raw unburned fuel. Oxygen, O2 is left over that isn't used in the combustion process. In a perfect world all the O2 is combined with all the HC during the combustion process, this doesn't happen. We use a high speed 4 gas analyzer to look at the exhaust gasses and then adjust for a proper burn. The gasses tell us how the timing is, if there is too much or to little fuel for the amount of oxygen available etc.

Using the 4 gas exhaust analyzer we tune the combustion process. When the combustion process is most efficient, the engine is making best power. We tune for Best power across the entire RPM and Load range. We tune for Best power at cruise as well, and shoot for the leaner side of the scale. This yields very good fuel economy, clean combustion and power on tap.

[porthole]

And ............ "we" is who and where?