Print

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

[Buckeye_Tuning]

The 4-5 gas will tell the actual health of where the engine is running at, too.  There can be more to things than rich/lean. 

[INDEPENDENT_1]

You are correct, Factory Pro is the brand. 4 gas tuning looks at the combustion process differently than a Dynojet AFR dyno. I do not even see AFR when tuning. I look at 4 gasses. In a nutshell, I tune using combustion chemistry. In the combustion process, we are combining Hydrocarbons (raw fuel) with Oxygen from the atmosphere. The byproducts after the combustion process has occurred are Carbon Monoxide (partially burned gasoline and Oxygen) and Carbon Dioxide (completely burned Oxygen and fuel or Hydrocarbons). The idea to achieve an efficient and smooth running engine is to burn as much Oxygen and Hydrocarbons as possible on each stroke. With a 4 gas analyzer, I see the combustion process unfolding with more information than a conventional AFR dyno. I see how residual (left over after the combustion event) raw fuel is coming out, how much partially burned fuel is coming out, how much completely burned fuel is coming out and how much Oxygen is being left unburned. This combination of information allows me to dial the bike combustion process in for excellent throttle response, good fuel economy and instant power and takes any guess work out. It tells me where the fuel and timing are and where they need to go to be most efficient. I can see exactly whats happening and what power is left on the table. In a perfect world, the EPA's world, the only thing coming out of your exhaust after the combustion process has occurred would be Carbon Dioxide and water. This is the term referred to as stoichiometric you've probably heard. When an engine, more particularly an air cooled engine is tuned to this state, especially here in the midwest where temperatures can soar, engines can tend to run hot due to the lean condition and throttle response and power can be less than stellar. Thats not always the case but it is a tendency and in the real world and more especially the world of performance, a stoich burn doesn't happen. Basically, I tune to give a smooth running and efficient running engine.

[Buckeye_Tuning]

I'm just going to throw this out, "I have a blue dongle". I feel better now.

 

[mayor]

I'm just going to throw this out, "I have a blue dongle". I feel better now.

I'm sure you can find a pill that can help with that. 

[INDEPENDENT_1]

I have a black dongle but I'm Scotch Irish... if you really needed to know.  

[INDEPENDENT_1]

Mayor, although I think I know what you meant when you say a predesired gas reading, that may be a little misleading to folks. I do not have a predesired gas reading per se. I tune for efficiency/best power, wherever that may be for a particular bike. Not all engines run best at a certain predetermined gas reading/AFR. Also, not sure what disadvantage 4 gas has?

[CowboyBagger]

You are correct, Factory Pro is the brand. 4 gas tuning looks at the combustion process differently than a Dynojet AFR dyno. I do not even see AFR when tuning. I look at 4 gasses. In a nutshell, I tune using combustion chemistry. In the combustion process, we are combining Hydrocarbons (raw fuel) with Oxygen from the atmosphere. The byproducts after the combustion process has occurred are Carbon Monoxide (partially burned gasoline and Oxygen) and Carbon Dioxide (completely burned Oxygen and fuel or Hydrocarbons). The idea to achieve an efficient and smooth running engine is to burn as much Oxygen and Hydrocarbons as possible on each stroke. With a 4 gas analyzer, I see the combustion process unfolding with more information than a conventional AFR dyno. I see how residual (left over after the combustion event) raw fuel is coming out, how much partially burned fuel is coming out, how much completely burned fuel is coming out and how much Oxygen is being left unburned. This combination of information allows me to dial the bike combustion process in for excellent throttle response, good fuel economy and instant power and takes any guess work out. It tells me where the fuel and timing are and where they need to go to be most efficient. I can see exactly whats happening and what power is left on the table. In a perfect world, the EPA's world, the only thing coming out of your exhaust after the combustion process has occurred would be Carbon Dioxide and water. This is the term referred to as stoichiometric you've probably heard. When an engine, more particularly an air cooled engine is tuned to this state, especially here in the midwest where temperatures can soar, engines can tend to run hot due to the lean condition and throttle response and power can be less than stellar. Thats not always the case but it is a tendency and in the real world and more especially the world of performance, a stoich burn doesn't happen. Basically, I tune to give a smooth running and efficient running engine.

I appreciate the information.  It sounds like your system supplies you with more information than the normal dyno jet system.  

Cowboy

I also read your blog on your web site.  It sounds like that if time is taken and it is used correctly, the end result should be a more precise tune.

[mayor]

Mayor, although I think I know what you meant when you say a predesired gas reading, that may be a little misleading to folks. I do not have a predesired gas reading per se. I tune for efficiency/best power, wherever that may be for a particular bike. Not all engines run best at a certain predetermined gas reading/AFR. Also, not sure what disadvantage 4 gas has?

yea, I didn't mean that you are looking for a target like folks doing afr tuning, only looking for ranges you want you gases to fall into to confirm the quality of the combustion process. 

I can think of a few disadvantages I think that 4 gas has, but you will need to validate that this is true or not:

1. slower to collect data since more data is sampled. 
2. the end result is open loop tune only
3. the Delphi tables are no longer matched up to the original intended purposes.  Meaning that the afr table is no longer tied to the ve tables, since both can be adjusted to reach the desired sampled gas result. 

Those may not be disadvantages to all.  I like closed loop operation, so if it's open loop only then I consider that a disadvantage for me. 

[INDEPENDENT_1]

Ok,
1. I have not used an AFR dyno so I don't know about how fast they are but the goal is to make the engine perform smoothly, efficiently and at its best potential. All 4 gasses are read simultaneously when sampling each cell so if an AFR dyno operator is sampling every cell, I can't see a difference in time but I could be wrong. I do not consider open loop to be a disadvantage because an O2 sensor is designed to work within a specific range. That range may not be where the engine is making its best power, where the engine is operating most efficiently or where the engine is running smoothest, even though most of the time, the O2 sensors are being used at partial throttle positions. As a matter of fact, partial throttle positions is where a 4 gas tune gets their biggest compliments from people who experience them and is often times where I pick up extra torque from a bike that was previously tuned on a dyno not using 4 gas. So if a speedy tune is the goal, maybe a closed loop tune is better in that regard but for tuning for best combustion, I don't see an O2 sensor ever being better than a 4 exhaust gas analyzer.

2. 02 sensors (closed loop) override the information I have collected from my 4 gas sampling and O2 sensors are simply not capable of reading the combustion process in the thorough manor that a 4 gas analyzer is, so, IMO I would not want an O2 sensor thinking it knows how to better make the the engine happy than a 4 gas analyzer that sees 4 times more information than the O2 sensor and the 4 gas is gathering data to enable the engine to perform its best on a scientific level, not a target AFR. Nor do I want an O2 sensor deteriorating my tune because it starts to collect data that is either wrong or data that may be wrong due to the design of the exhaust or placement of the O2 sensor.

3. I do not tune to AFR so whether the tables match up is irrelevant. The VE's override the AFR or Lambda table anyway, right? Only to be overridden again by the O2 sensor in a closed loop system, right? I could be wrong about that but, whatever the case, if the engine performs smoother, has batter mannerisms, power on tap and good fuel economy, I don't see what a table matching up has to do with the the end result of the way the engine behaves.

Another thing about AFR tuning, a target/predetermined AFR can be achieved in more than one way. That AFR can be achieved by adding more fuel and retarding timing or removing more fuel and advancing timing and all points between. If the target AFR is X, or 13.2:1 for example, and is achieved by either of the above examples, which AFR is right? The one with with the advanced timing or the retard timing or somewhere in between? I hope the answer is not the most retarded.  

[miker]

 

[mayor]

you did good James.     that's very well thought out, and very logical.  There's probably very little of that that I wouldn't agree with....but I still prefer closed loop because it does allow the ecm to adjust for changing conditions.  One test that I would think would be neat to see on the 4gas dyno tuning would be for you to tune a bike in Oklahoma and have that same bike verified with 4 gas in Maine.  I would be curious on the repeatability between the two areas since everything is open loop. 

The example of the afr reading being subject to timing is a good one, but I would be curious on how much of swing it takes in timing to greatly affect the afr readings.  I know you don't have a afr tuning background so it would be tough for you to test this, but I would be interested in seeing how much variable in timing that it would take to make +/- .3 afr using the same ve range in a cruise condition (say 2800 rpm at 60 kPa). I may try to test this myself on an open loop scenario at some point, just our of curiosity. 

[INDEPENDENT_1]

Thanks, Mike, I don't think you could disagree. How can anyone possibly intelligently disagree with science?   Let me say this as well, combustion chemistry/science is science whether it be in Oklahoma, Maine or Mars where i hear they have green dongles but from pictures I've seen, they have no dongles at all. Science is science and chemistry is chemistry. It is what it is, if it wasn't, it wouldn't be!  

Also, again, I don't want an O2 sensor changing anything. Especially after I have broken things down on a scientific level far beyond what an O2 sensor can. The O2 sensor could only make the combustion process worse IMO and not better. 4 gas is not exactly new and I have never had a customer complain that their bike didnt run good from changing conditions/altitudes etc. I have however had customers need to have their bikes retuned because an O2 sensor has corrupted a tune or never gotten the tune in it's best state in the first place. Again, I have never used an AFR dyno to tune with with in respect to timing and how it alters AFR or gas readings, I can tell you that fuel,  is only half of the tune. Timing is the other half and plays a huge role in the AFR or combustion process and how thorough or efficiently the combustion event is propagating. I hope you do a test, you will see beyond the shadow of a doubt that the timing can greatly alter the combustion process and it becomes even a bigger player the higher the compression. When the compression is higher, the molecules of Oxygen and Hydrocarbons are closer together and the flame front travels from one molecule to the next much quicker so less timing is need to burn the same amount of fuel and Oxygen. Thats a whole other subject than the OP asked about but you can understand the importance of timing.
Another nice feature using 4 gas is that I can see how clean the combustion event is happening. I can get a better idea of how well or efficient a set of ported heads might be catalyzing the combustion process vs. a stock set of heads or even one set of stock heads vs. another set of stock heads but again, that's a whole other topic. Gotta go tune some bikes. I'll check back here later. Thanks for the debate but you still didn't answer my question about which AFR is best? The one with the more advanced timing or the one with the more retarded timing? I'll give you a chance to reply to that and then I'll tell you what I think the best answer is when I come back.  

[mayor]

sorry, didn't realize there was a quiz question in your last post.   

Another thing about AFR tuning, a target/predetermined AFR can be achieved in more than one way. That AFR can be achieved by adding more fuel and retarding timing or removing more fuel and advancing timing and all points between. If the target AFR is X, or 13.2:1 for example, and is achieved by either of the above examples, which AFR is right? The one with with the advanced timing or the retard timing or somewhere in between? I hope the answer is not the most retarded.  

I would hope no tuner who knows what they are doing would target 13.2 in a cruise scenario, so that is all power production range. The right combination of VE and timings changes to reach a specific targeted afr is the one that produces the most power based on the afr that you mentioned.  If it is producing the most power, it has to be the most efficient....and even if it wasn't the most efficient, not a big deal since it's producing the most power.  In most cases the afr based dyno tuner recognizes that there is a large variable that the afr can see and still produce the same max power, so the more important thing to consider in this case is what timing is the best timing to reach optimum output.

The example you gave is actually a bad example.  The better example is the cruise MAP ranges at cruise fuel conditions, which was the bone I was throwing you in my last post about afr change at a fixed ve when timing is changed.  The 4 gas shines in mid load ranges, since the afr based tuner usually has limited data to base their timing decisions on.  The wide open adjustments are easy with afr based tuning, it's the cruise timing that isn't.

[hrdtail78]

Doesn't 4 gas have to be read at steady state?  One of the disadvantages I see is.  You tune 80% and 100% at steady state.  IME Mapping my VE's at steady state and then doing roll ons give a different result.  Steady state is great for were the bike is cruising and normally is in a steady state condition, but with higher throttle openings.  It rarely see's steady state.  It's dynamic.

[mayor]

Thanks, Mike, I don't think you could disagree. How can anyone possibly intelligently disagree with science?  Let me say this as well, combustion chemistry/science is science whether it be in Oklahoma, Maine or Mars where i hear they have green dongles but from pictures I've seen, they have no dongles at all. Science is science and chemistry is chemistry. It is what it is, if it wasn't, it wouldn't be!     

 
OK, let's look at my question on whether the tune someone got in Oklahoma with 4 gas would relate the same to a 4 gas tune done in Maine.  At first blush one would have to agree that proper combustion should be proper combustion, regardless of where it is occurring...but let's look what you stated that the four gas is measuring:

4 gas tuning looks at the combustion process differently than a Dynojet AFR dyno. I do not even see AFR when tuning. I look at 4 gasses. In a nutshell, I tune using combustion chemistry. In the combustion process, we are combining Hydrocarbons (raw fuel) with Oxygen from the atmosphere. The byproducts after the combustion process has occurred are Carbon Monoxide (partially burned gasoline and Oxygen) and Carbon Dioxide (completely burned Oxygen and fuel or Hydrocarbons). The idea to achieve an efficient and smooth running engine is to burn as much Oxygen and Hydrocarbons as possible on each stroke. With a 4 gas analyzer, I see the combustion process unfolding with more information than a conventional AFR dyno.

here is my questions to you regarding the information above:

1. since the analysis is dependant on the air the bike is breathing, is the air quality the same in Oklahoma as in Maine?  if the bike was tuned based on 4 gas in either place would the same 4 gas analysis at say a smog ridden city like Los Angeles show that the bike was still in that perfect state of tune?  how about in Denver where the elevation is much different than either OK or ME? 

2. does the gas formulation or grade change the hydro carbons that the analysis reports?  meaning, if a person has their bike tuned in Oklahoma on the available gas there would their state of tune potentially diminish if they bought gas in Atlanta? what if they had their bike tuned on 93 octane in OK, and the only thing that was available in Atlanta was 91? 

3. what happens to the tune if ethanol was in the gasoline during the tune, but the rider uses a non-ethanol blend when they are traveling?  or vice a versa?