ESE's works engine tuner

[TZ350]

Your setup "works" but the graph bears no visual relationship to what the engine is actually seeing.

What are you saying, the shape is different or that there is a consistant offset. Please elaborate on what you mean by "bears no visual relationship". Any more info would be a help.

My understanding is there are three essential things.

Base Advance tells the Ignitec how far before TDC the timing trigger pulse is.

Correction tells the Igni how much lead or lag to give a particular cylinder in degrees.

The ignition curve tells the Igni the firing point in relation to TDC (plus/minus any correction) and it fires one revolution after the trigger signal.

And on the surface, its all additive/subtractive arithmatic, nothing fancy from the users point of view.

as soon as you apply a correction what you read, on screen isnt what you get.

I don't understand what you mean. Are you talking about an offset or a change in the curve shape itself?

I would like to get to grips with what your trying to tell me. So please, lets start with the basics.

Is it.
Base Advance plus Correction, ie 30 + -15 = 15 deg Real Base Advance
(which means I could drop the -15 correction and use a 15 deg base advance like you suggest)

or

Base Advance minus Correction, ie 30 - -15 = 45 deg Real Base Advance (and may have been what I was aiming for).

It was a while ago when we set this bike up (and our first) so not to sure about the details now. But its possible that we needed more base advance (like 44 deg) than the Ignitec program allowed for and that we used the correction value to extend the base advance.

I could have machined something off the rotor heal or shifted the trigger coil but at the time this was the most practical. After Taupo I will have another look at it to see if it can be tided up, but any software/hardware setup changes require a runup on the Dyno and that will have to wait until I have more time.

[TZ350]

If this works on your bike, use it I recon, but its not a goer for mine.




I have put some real dyno time into my ignition trying different curve options including ones like the top picture and this straightish one is what works for me, and I know this because the dyno tells me so.

I am fairly confident that the curve shown is the one that works best with my engine. (Speedpros is very similar, others less so).

I know that 15 on the screen may not be 15 in reality but the offset error will be consistantly the same all the way through the curve and so I am expecting the shape of the curve we see to be the shape of the curve the engine sees.

As far as I can see, Base Advance and Correction add up to a consistant offset, not a change in curve shape, but the Ignitec manual is a bit vauge about some things so anything is possible. If the shape of the curve we see in my pic is not the curve shape the engine sees I would be very interested to know more about why.

[bucketracer]

The procedure is to pick a known advance and mark this on the stator/rotor.Then change the base advance to get the lines coinciding.

The way you describe it, its pretty much how we do it, maybe you missed the original post complete with pictures, link below.

I got the job of setting up NedKellys IgniTech programmable Ignition.

[F5 Dave]

PS it would be interesting to see your power curve from x/y origin. It looks super fat displayed with 7.5k as the start point, I've only just clicked onto that. Hey my 100 doesn't start to produce power till 9k so I'm not dissing or anything, just interested.

[TZ350]

The Dynojet graphs the range thats recorded, if the Sampling was started at 5k and finished at 12 the graph would cover that range. My bike starts to get into its stride at 8 and signs off at 12 or so, so sampling from 7 ish covers the range of practical interest.

PS it would be interesting to see your power curve from x/y origin. It looks super fat displayed with 7.5k as the start point, I've only just clicked onto that.

As the bike idles at 3k or so, sampling from the origin (0 rpm) would be an interesting feat indead.

There must be graphs some where on this thread with dyno runs from the Vetec inlet experiments that start much lower than 7k. The Vetec cleaned up the carburation and made the area between 3 and 7 useable, you made comment about how little power there was.

And I found changes in the ignition curve did not improve it. My great hope is that I can make a practical working ATAC system like Wobbly discribes and extend the lower end of the power spread down to 7 or even 6k ish.

My 4k power spread is 1/3 of the total rpm range and I suspect a flat 4k rpm power spread will still be a flat 4k whatever the range the graph printout covers.

[F5 Dave]

I'm running with much older DJ sw, so used to seeing whole graph, even if starts higher in the range & lets face it I'm used to the 50's curve & 10thou is considered midrange.

[TZ350]

lets face it I'm used to the 50's curve & 10thou is considered midrange.

10k is still midrange for a 4k power spread that starts at 8.

Here is a Vtec graph that starts at 4 ish. In fact the engine with the Vtec fitted could drive from 3.



Blue line, Vtec inlet showing a smother graph between 4 and 7. With the Vtec cleaning up the carburation the area between 4 to 7 became useable but I was disappointed I could never lift the power here whatever I tried including ignition curve changes.

The Vtec combined with the ATAC could be the answer here.

[speedpro]

I'm running with much older DJ sw, so used to seeing whole graph, even if starts higher in the range & lets face it I'm used to the 50's curve & 10thou is considered midrange.

and a 300rpm powerband is good

[Buckets4Me]

and a 300rpm powerband is good

for the clutch supplier

[husaberg]

The Dynojet graphs the range thats recorded, if the Sampling was started at 5k and finished at 12 the graph would cover that range. My bike starts to get into its stride at 8 and signs off at 12 or so, so sampling from 7 ish covers the range of practical interest.



As the bike idles at 3k or so, sampling from the origin (0 rpm) would be an interesting feat indead.

There must be graphs some where on this thread with dyno runs from the Vetec inlet experiments that start much lower than 7k. The Vetec cleaned up the carburation and made the area between 3 and 7 useable, you made comment about how little power there was.

And I found changes in the ignition curve did not improve it. My great hope is that I can make a practical working ATAC system like Wobbly discribes and extend the lower end of the power spread down to 7 or even 6k ish.

My 4k power spread is 1/3 of the total rpm range and I suspect a flat 4k rpm power spread will still be a flat 4k whatever the range the graph printout covers.

Devils advocate here. Please no one take offense as its not intended a slight on anyone
posted as I am a little bored.
I do have to say. That for all the sexyness of the dynographs (of a lot of the bikes I have seen here.)
Shouldn't most of the final testing of concepts be done at the track?
I am just asking because I guess thats where most of the racing is still done these days?

I don't often see the stories of how much the lap times are improved by many of the mods or additional HP gains?

[bucketracer]

... the final testing of concepts be done at the track? I am just asking because I guess thats where most of the racing is still done these days?

No, not Dyno Racing, never has been .....

... the final testing of concepts be done at the track? I don't often see the stories of how much the lap times are improved by many of the mods or additional HP gains?

I think TeeZee has been pointing out for sometime now that more outright HP has not been much help at Mt Wellington and that he thinks ease of riding and developing power spread with drive out of the corners is where its at for him there, horses for courses so to speak.

I guess when he gets things working to his satisfaction he will let us know how they went for him. In the mean time if you see any ideas that interest you, you are welcome to see what you can make of them for yourself. I am sure TeeZee would be delighted.

[Gigglebutton]

Devils advocate here. Please no one take offense as its not intended a slight on anyone
posted as I am a little bored.
I do have to say. That for all the sexyness of the dynographs (of a lot of the bikes I have seen here.)
Shouldn't most of the final testing of concepts be done at the track?
I am just asking because I guess thats where most of the racing is still done these days?

I don't often see the stories of how much the lap times are improved by many of the mods or additional HP gains?

TZ tuned my RG50 on the ESE dyno. I had tuned it on the track and thought it was well tuned, as did any one else that rode it. I had the timing and jeting well out. A couple of hours later we gained 1.3 hp and .7ft-lbs of torque all through the curve.
So much easier to ride now and my lap times have dropped. Im not getting any quicker, but with Robs expertise in reading the dyno graghs, the bike is.

[F5 Dave]

10k is still midrange for a 4k power spread that starts at 8.

Here is a Vtec graph that starts at 4 ish. In fact the engine with the Vtec fitted could drive from 3.



Blue line, Vtec inlet showing a smother graph between 4 and 7. With the Vtec cleaning up the carburation the area between 4 to 7 became useable but I was disappointed I could never lift the power here whatever I tried including ignition curve changes.

The Vtec combined with the ATAC could be the answer here.

ahh, that looks a little more like what I'd expect to see. But it pulls up nicely from down low so that looks good & probably a whole lot easier to ride than my creations to date.

[TZ350]

Comparison of Speedpros 30hp (green) bike and TeeZees 28+ hp. Both have much the same flat ignition curve.

[husaberg]

.... I cannot explain either what else it could be (I hardly expect Honda experimented with a water-cooled motor control unit) but then I can't see any sense in cooling that pipe injection water either; its container was built into the gas tank where the water will never pick up any heat.
And I know for a fact that the pipe injection system was total-loss. Honda (and Aprilia six years before them) already had a problem with the cooling effect not wearing off quickly enough once you got into the power band; the problem would have been far worse with double-walled light-alloy headers.

I found this snippet of information whilst looking for Rs125 specs.
It would appear to have come from Shigeru Hattori NSR500 project leader. I am now more confused than ever about how it worked.