Print

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

[Highwaystar]

I agree twolane. but 100% over an entire year was my point with "0" failures reported to the dealer over a much longer time period. According to Bosch published tech, failure is immediately evident with symptoms of poor performance.  TTS Mastertune's Steve Cole has a very strong opinion concerning PC-V . Others who have injected comments against PC-V wide band did not appear to own PC-V or any other WB system but are associates who follow a philosophy. I still think Steve Cole is the most qualified person to comment on this subject and is a very respected businessman. That said, no printed evidence has been posted to date that proves PC-V is problematic, inaccurate, or incompatible with Bosch wideband sensors or there is any kind of gross sensor failure due to poor engineering including improper sensor location...on the other hand much printed information has been posted in support of PC-V self tune wideband and other self adjust wide band systems.        

[HD Street Performance]

Interesting discussion
My twist
I bought a DTT WEGOIId in 07 and have been disgusted with it since the inception. I will be going back to the stock ECU because it works well and with the help of TTS and a good tuner can meet my needs without the addition of any third party device in this serial data bus motorcycle. Complex already why add to the "potential" problems. As far as the wide band device I don't really care or feel passionately either way because once the VEs are set the closed loop can actually be turned off in either the stock setup, Tmax, DTT, or maybe even the PC. Right out of the exhaust port is a tough environment for any electronic device with those temperatures and the stock switching sensors are not free from issues either.
I strongly like the TTS device and software based on experience and have no opinion about the PC except I would not buy it for the reasons I stated. If anyone would have issues (bias against) with TTS it would be me because I tried to sell the product and was sacked by the distributer, but I continue to use and promote them based on the successes.
As far as canned maps, I would not use one and feel the whole concept of selling a tuning device as "ready to go" based on a recipe of parts is flawed.

[Twolanerider]

I agree twolane. but 100% over an entire year was my point with "0" failures reported to the dealer over a much longer time period. According to Bosch published tech, failure is immediately evident with symptoms of poor performance.  TTS Mastertune's Steve Cole has a very strong opinion concerning PC-V . Others who have injected comments against PC-V wide band did not appear to own PC-V or any other WB system but are associates who follow a philosophy. I still think Steve Cole is the most qualified person to comment on this subject and is a very respected businessman. That said, no printed evidence has been posted to date that proves PC-V is problematic, inaccurate, or incompatible with Bosch wideband sensors or there is any kind of gross sensor failure due to poor engineering including improper sensor location...on the other hand much printed information has been posted in support of PC-V self tune wideband and other self adjust wide band systems.        

Insofar as that goes I'd agree on all fronts.  Here locally I'm the buddy with the bike lift, tools, minimal skill and beer in the garage.  So I see the different systems enough to have the familiarity necessary only to know there's a lot I don't know.

I'm also one of those guys without a religious conviction toward systems, models or brands.  Just want something that works.  I do have conviction toward fair analysis though.  And against the obfuscation and tangents that would hide it.

That's why this thread has been good and bad.  The main thrust is interesting, informative and potentially money saving (if it allows one to avoid a mistake).  It just isn't helped (for our purposes) with sidebars to Cadillac applications or assertions that things as short term as eBay feedback ratings somehow reflect in-service analyses or performance analyses of emissions/ignition/exhaust components.

Having said all that I gladly step back aside.  Will enjoy those that actually know what the hell they're talking about stay on point and continue to do so.  After all, I'll need an ignition control system for the Road King project sometime this year.

[HD Street Performance]

Those Cadillac sensors are the Bosch same as used in VW, Tmax and PC but different numbers are just plug variances so that is relevant IMO. Still I don't care about the sensor life I replaced one bad one on mine after only 10k miles. It was tuned at that point so I toggled it to open loop and it is OK now. Still going back to stock ECU.

[Highwaystar]

The ebay info has nothing to do with the real facts and I agree with two lane. That was my personal assessment. I also agree that in many cases simplicity is desirable. In my case well designed complexity and hopefully reliability will work due to the blower needs. I can't close my mind to technology advancements.

[Steve Cole]

I see that some seem to make things up as they go here. Highwaystar how about you read what I typed and not make up stories! I could care less what someone's Ebay rating is. What I do care about is that people understand that the advertising on Broadband sensor by the aftermarket is BS. I've given you the links to BOSCH NOT FuelMoto. The sensor is made by Bosch and you have to follow what they say if you want it to work properly, can you get that into your head or is that too much? This is not a quality issue from BOSCH!

http://www.bosch.com.au/content/language1/downloads/Oxgen_Sensor__Cat_WEB.pdf page D8

D 8 | Oxygen Sensor Type Code LSU 4.2
Bosch Automotive Aftermarket 2009 | 2010
Oxygen Sensor Type Code LSU 4.2
“Broadband” Sensor

The name of the sensor is very clear so why do you continue to argue it, it's Bosch's name for the sensor used by the aftermarket!

Important Note: It is common practice for these sensors to
be used in conjunction with various aftermarket air/fuel
ratio measurement devices, not of Bosch design or
manufacture. It should be noted that these sensors are more
susceptible to damage from thermal shock than the older
“Thimble” design sensors, this is mainly due to their much
higher operational temperatures. As detailed below, the
heater management strategy used for the LSU 4 sensor is
quite complex and generally vehicle specific. Whilst these
sensors are “Universal” in their measurement capabilities,
they are not designed to be “Universal” in their installation
position. Installation position is critical to prevent moisture
settling into the sensor element during shut down; hence
the sensor should never be allowed to become inverted
during storage. Therefore when using these sensors for
temporary air/fuel ratio measurements, i.e. chassis/engine
dynamometer testing, the operator should take care to
protect the sensor from moisture ingress and physical
damage that may create the potential of thermal shock to
the sensor element resulting in premature sensor failure.

This is from the first page of the document again page D8 of the same limk I've given.

Now if you read the internet, go to the racing industry and again in this very thread you see people posting about the sensor failures, sorry if you do not want to believe it but they are real and I've pointed it out as well. The sensor failures in the aftermarket are very high and this is why Bosch went to the trouble to spell it out in there newer documentation. Why is it that the same sensor can be used in the OEM automotive industry without failure issues for 100,000 miles? You want to close your eye's and bury your head in the sand that's fine but it does not change the facts. The aftermarket is NOT using the sensor properly and that is the problem.

This is not about any one product its about using the sensor properly to get the expected results from it so let's not change it into something it isn't. You talk about using technology advancements and that's great but let's use it properly. The sensor technology is NOT new it's been around for over 10 years so why is it in that time the OEM's are having no issues and the aftermarket continues to keep having failures? If as you call it our "third grade engineers" are smart enough to know better what's that make all the others?

[HOGMIKE]

I see that some seem to make things up as they go here. Highwaystar how about you read what I typed and not make up stories! I could care less what someone's Ebay rating is. What I do care about is that people understand that the advertising on Broadband sensor by the aftermarket is BS. I've given you the links to BOSCH NOT FuelMoto. The sensor is made by Bosch and you have to follow what they say if you want it to work properly, can you get that into your head or is that too much? This is not a quality issue from BOSCH!

http://www.bosch.com.au/content/language1/downloads/Oxgen_Sensor__Cat_WEB.pdf page D8

D 8 | Oxygen Sensor Type Code LSU 4.2
Bosch Automotive Aftermarket 2009 | 2010
Oxygen Sensor Type Code LSU 4.2
“Broadband” Sensor

The name of the sensor is very clear so why do you continue to argue it, it's Bosch's name for the sensor used by the aftermarket!

Important Note: It is common practice for these sensors to
be used in conjunction with various aftermarket air/fuel
ratio measurement devices, not of Bosch design or
manufacture. It should be noted that these sensors are more
susceptible to damage from thermal shock than the older
“Thimble” design sensors, this is mainly due to their much
higher operational temperatures. As detailed below, the
heater management strategy used for the LSU 4 sensor is
quite complex and generally vehicle specific. Whilst these
sensors are “Universal” in their measurement capabilities,
they are not designed to be “Universal” in their installation
position. Installation position is critical to prevent moisture
settling into the sensor element during shut down; hence
the sensor should never be allowed to become inverted
during storage. Therefore when using these sensors for
temporary air/fuel ratio measurements, i.e. chassis/engine
dynamometer testing, the operator should take care to
protect the sensor from moisture ingress and physical
damage that may create the potential of thermal shock to
the sensor element resulting in premature sensor failure.

This is from the first page of the document again page D8 of the same limk I've given.

Now if you read the internet, go to the racing industry and again in this very thread you see people posting about the sensor failures, sorry if you do not want to believe it but they are real and I've pointed it out as well. The sensor failures in the aftermarket are very high and this is why Bosch went to the trouble to spell it out in there newer documentation. Why is it that the same sensor can be used in the OEM automotive industry without failure issues for 100,000 miles? You want to close your eye's and bury your head in the sand that's fine but it does not change the facts. The aftermarket is NOT using the sensor properly and that is the problem.

This is not about any one product its about using the sensor properly to get the expected results from it so let's not change it into something it isn't. You talk about using technology advancements and that's great but let's use it properly. The sensor technology is NOT new it's been around for over 10 years so why is it in that time the OEM's are having no issues and the aftermarket continues to keep having failures? If as you call it our "third grade engineers" are smart enough to know better what's that make all the others?

Are these the same engineers that used to design gas pedals for Toyota??
JUST KIDDING!
I'm sure they know what they're doing, otherwise they would be unemployed, and the company would not exist, right?

Interesting discussion, but, way over MY head!
 

[Diamondback]

 

Ok, I get it, if the product is used in the wrong manner (or for it was not intended) then it is clear that it is not reliable.  That said, I have not heard of a single failure of the sensor (and I have ridden over 35,000 miles with them).  However, I have heard of several HD original sensors failing.  So a couple of questions:

1.   So is it true that in the HD configuration, there is a high failure rate of this Broadband sensor? I have not heard of a single failure but then the dozen or so bikes in south Texas running them is not a very large sample.  

2.   When the sensor is working properly does it perform the function it is intended?

 

[Twolanerider]

This is not about any one product its about using the sensor properly to get the expected results from it so let's not change it into something it isn't.

Which, to once again put the question back in a context applicable to the audience here (unless the sport is just to go back and forth with each other) in the more commonly expected aftermarket uses what works best and what works least?  Or is there any such answer resolvable by the casting of runes and other tools or inferences available to those that know?

Someone wrote earlier that, for example, application criteria in an OEM (Cadillac) site was relevant.  For our purposes it really seems not to be though.  Generally unchallenged (and documented here and extant) is that if sensor issues develop (especially in "universal" and aftermarket applications) it's a function of the use/position/handling more than it is the sensor itself.  So GM or other OEs will (presumably) know best where to place the sensor in their application for max life relative to the engine the sensor is downstream from.  Aftermarket header suppliers for our bikes can't be assumed to know the same for obvious reasons.

So....

Those of you with all the experience.  What do you see?  What works best?  What works least?  What pitfalls should be avoided?  What can be done in handling, installation or placement to best serve our ends?  Is there really no practical problem and all this is only discussing the statistical margins? 

I understand that fixated myopia on a question isolated to a few might be fun.  But there is a larger audience watching that really does define your debate as "uh, how's this chit best work for my bike?"

[Twolanerider]

Jim (HD-Dude), if you see this here's a question for you.  In practice on the street what is your experience with (separately) OE sensors and those installed as part of aftermarket packages? 

You at least used to suggest satisfaction with the Daytona package(s).  Any special quirks or higher than expected problems with their uses?  If so did it seem to matter to the sensors whose head pipes they were installed in?

[harleyguynv]

Diamondback, I believe they do function as intended. Like I stated in my first post I had mine checked on the dyno and they matched up nicely. Does this mean they are totally accurate? I am not sure and Steve says probably not. However, I am happy they matched up and the dyno operater was very surprised by this. I know that many, maybe even most tuners (many on this site) use a Dynojet Dyno and are they telling their customers that their tune is not accurate? I don't think so. Like you I know several people running the PCV/Autotuner with no failures yet. I am not promoting the use of the PCV, I just have one and like it. I have many friends with other tuning divices and that is the way it is.  I believe the best advise that is usually given is to go to a tuner and use the product that he is most comfortable with.

[Steve Cole]

I believe I said it earlier in this discussion but just in case I didn't I will say it now. This is a discussion about a Sensor and it's application not any one aftermarket manufacture. The sensor being discussed is a Broadband Bosch LSU 4.2. It comes in various configurations for OEM automobile applications. All that changes in the various part numbers is the sensor cover, length of the wires and the connector configuration. They all use the same internal parts and react the same.

What we have seen first hand and what has been reported to us is that in an aftermarket configuration they will not last long durations. We have seen in our racing testing the sensor with aftermarket controller they will not last for a 4 hour endurance race. What has been reported to us by dyno operators and customers with various aftermarket units is failures of the sensor in less than 10,000 miles. The sensor tends to drift long before they fail completely. We have seen sensors appearing to be working fine that are indeed over 1 AFR ratio off. We have seen this drift in as little as 4 hours of use. From the dyno world the problem got bad enough that DJ came out with a calibration gas test kit for the dyno operators so they could test there sensors. This way when they began to drift the sensors would get replaced.

In an on bike configuration they tend to show the engine getting leaner more than they do getting richer as they fail. This causes the aftermarket unit to richen the fuel most of the time. This is just why I said to keep an eye on your mileage as that can help give an indication the sensor is starting to go south. Due to the application in the aftermarket Bosch saw fit to add an applications note into there later documentation to warn of the issues and what they feel is causing the issue.

You have two choices if you have a system that uses these. Take the sensors when new and get your bike calibrated then set the system to open loop operation and remove the sensors, or leave them in place and keep an eye on things and if they start changing switch the system to open loop at that time.

I do not know for sure what causes them to fail so quickly in a HD application but my opinion is from the excessive heat from there location in the pipes.

[sadunbar]

I believe I said it earlier in this discussion but just in case I didn't I will say it now. This is a discussion about a Sensor and it's application not any one aftermarket manufacture. The sensor being discussed is a Broadband Bosch LSU 4.2. It comes in various configurations for OEM automobile applications. All that changes in the various part numbers is the sensor cover, length of the wires and the connector configuration. They all use the same internal parts and react the same.

What we have seen first hand and what has been reported to us is that in an aftermarket configuration they will not last long durations. We have seen in our racing testing the sensor with aftermarket controller they will not last for a 4 hour endurance race. What has been reported to us by dyno operators and customers with various aftermarket units is failures of the sensor in less than 10,000 miles. The sensor tends to drift long before they fail completely. We have seen sensors appearing to be working fine that are indeed over 1 AFR ratio off. We have seen this drift in as little as 4 hours of use. From the dyno world the problem got bad enough that DJ came out with a calibration gas test kit for the dyno operators so they could test there sensors. This way when they began to drift the sensors would get replaced.

In an on bike configuration they tend to show the engine getting leaner more than they do getting richer as they fail. This causes the aftermarket unit to richen the fuel most of the time. This is just why I said to keep an eye on your mileage as that can help give an indication the sensor is starting to go south. Due to the application in the aftermarket Bosch saw fit to add an applications note into there later documentation to warn of the issues and what they feel is causing the issue.

You have two choices if you have a system that uses these. Take the sensors when new and get your bike calibrated then set the system to open loop operation and remove the sensors, or leave them in place and keep an eye on things and if they start changing switch the system to open loop at that time.

I do not know for sure what causes them to fail so quickly in a HD application but my opinion is from the excessive heat from there location in the pipes.

Very clearly stated, Steve...  But then, I understood your point long ago in the discussion....

Perhaps being misunderstood is the term failure.  In your definition of failure, deviation from an accurate reading is failure - which differs from catastrophic failure.  Failure to your explained defintion may not be detected for quite some time (hence monitoring mileage as an possible indicator).  Perhaps also misunderstood in the discussion is the differing application of the sensor in an automobile vs. a motorcycle.  Failure (to your definition) of the sensor in an automobile has less consequence then failure of the sensor in a motorcycle - due to the differing applications.  I admire your patience and persistence in this discussion, as I fear you those participants with opposing opinions are equally steadfast in their opinions.

[Diamondback]

 

[Highwaystar]

The coolaid has been passed around for all to drink. I will contact PC-V and get their view of sensor failure due to misapplication and inquire about their design shortcoming. It is insinuated by TTS that PC-V does not work, will fail within a short period of time and increased fuel consumption is inevitable. The remedy is disabling the sensors with open loop. Fair enough. If I do experience a failure or the fantastic tune I have deteriorates, I will be the first one in line to take a drink. I'll take cherry.