HaHaHa. Excellent!
I do NOT think it would take away any need from pro tuning. The same guys that go to pro tuning would still go... there's a LOT more to it than getting VEs dialed in. But... I DO think this could help the members that will DIY their bikes, regardless. The idea has been floated AND worked upon to make the NB sensors in our bikes used for 80+ kpa and would eliminate the need for 'extending' VE tables.
Mike, no need for pretense. FiredOOd is cool Mod. Just need to watch what he says about that other crappy site.
I have found, on my very own, that when using calibrations that are AFR cals... extending the VEs into the 90-100 kpa ranges works well. Actually, It looked to me, during testing, the VEs came out around 5% too rich. This using a TTS AND a Twin Scan. But... I have also found the same to NOT be true when working with Lambda calibrations. Sometimes I find those to be lean. Not good. I would like to see DIY guys have the ability to check out this stuff and not rely on software alone. From my own understanding of things, this very well MAY be accomplished using the NB sensors.
I can NOT talk for Bob at all. But what I can do is lay out why I, me, would like to see a couple guys with Dynos do some tests. I surely will. The very FIRST idea we all would have to get past is the idea that the NB sensors can not read anything as rich as 13.5 AFR. Once some go out of their way and show that it IS (or is not) doable, and repeatable, the next thing would be to get into the software itself to use this.
A LOT of folks have stated that the NB can NOT reliably measure 13.5 AFRs. I disagree with those guys. Some have made good arguments on why they will NOT work, but some of those ideas have holes in them. For example, ... "The OEMs do not use them for fuel control, so we can't either." Know what? I agree with this statement 100%!!!!! I do not think we could. But.......
I am NOT proposing, and neither is Bob that we use these for fuel control at 13.5 AFR. Nope! Instead, all we would need is for a Steady state tuning run to show a single 13.5 AFR=13.5 AFR connection to things. These sensors may not be accurate in 13.5 as fuel control devices that warble fuel rich, lean, rich, lean 8-50 times a second... but what is to say those self same sensors wont read a bike that is held steady at a certain Map and RPM to gather data with? I think NOTHING says that.
Both the NB sensors we all use and the Wide Band sensors we all use are Bosch sensors. They actually work off of the exact same principles... a Nernst Cell, that measure the oxygen difference between fresh air and the air within the pipe. Same ultimate sensor. The real difference is the wide bands use an electromechanical 'pump'... this is nano tech stuff, to help insure fresh air to the cell and that makes WBs react faster outside of the 0-1 volts area the NBs work in. WBs are cut to work 0-5 volts because they CAN, using this 'pumping' technology. This allows an AFR swing of like 5-18 afr.
But... think on this a bit... if data was collected at a STEADY pace, giving TIME for the sensor to quiet down? A nernst cell is a nernst cell.
Next argument is that a NB sensor ONLY reads 0-1 volt. This is true. And a WB reads 0-5 volts, this is also true. Equally true is the fact that a WB is only used reading 1/100ths of a volt. All of the WB controllers I have seen read in 1/100ths of a volt. So.... a WB sensor uses 1300 'steps' to read voltages. So, there are 1300 'steps' between 5 afr and 18 afr, with me?
A narrow Band uses millivolts... that is 1/1000ths of a volt. So that sensor uses 1000 steps to read its voltages., these 'steps' are viable from .9 Lambda to 1.1 Lambda ( 13.2 AFR to 16.1 AFR) [Bosch Documentation] Way finer degree of accuracy in a NB sensor than a WB sensor. 1000 'steps in THREE AFRs, instead of 1300 steps in 13 AFRs. See the way ass finer degree of resolution?
And... the amazing thing is this... our bikes are equipped to read a millivolt of change in a NB O2 sensor! Anyone that has DIY or Pro tuned has seen O2 sensor traces from the data collected... it is in MILLIVOLTS!!!
I do NOT see a problem with reliably obtaining data at 13.5 AFR... and if one could find 13.5 AFR and input that into the tuning process, it's a no brainer that once that AFR has been met and recorded, one could alter that AFR differently without issue, to say 13.2... 12.8... etc.
So, hopefully some here on CVO will help determine whether a NB sensor can reliably read 13.5 AFR.
I propose doing this in an easy fashion on a bike, easy on the bike, also. Set up a bike that outputs 13.5 AFR at say 3000 rpms and 60 map. Use Wide Bands to do this. This will not beat on a bike like WOT would, it's just a test after all. Once the bike outputs like you/we wish, look at datamaster and see what millivolt reading is showing. Simple! It does NOT matter if we do this test at WOT or just above idle. The test is all about the accuracy of the sensors.
If one THEN alters the VEs by like 25% richer and sniffs it, see what the AFRs are in THAT one spot. Use the NB sensors and look at the voltages now. I am sure one would see well over a volt. like 1239 millivolts. With me?
Now... manually lower the VEs in that test spot until you get the NBs reading under 1000 again. Then manually lower ever so slightly until you MATCH the millivolt reading that the bike had at 13.5, BEFORE you messed with the VEs. Once that is done, take the wide bands and see how close you are to the ORIGINAL 13.5 AFR. It is MY bet... you will be darn close.