Techlusion fuel injection controler [Archive]

R_W_B

10-30-2013, 10:51 AM

has anyone had any experience running these on a vaquero? I have stock intake but cobra slip ons

No I haven't, I did run one on a Harley and it gave it a bit more pep and smoothed out the power ban. I liked it.

However I have a Nomad now with the same 1700cc engine (for the most part) as yours. I'm running Cobra Tri-Oval slip-ons with stock air (currently).

I chose to go with the PCV w/ ignition tuner since most folks said it offered more diversity in dealing with the EPA paranoid issues of the OEM 1700 ECU tuning. I tend to agree, especially if you know a good dyno man (all of um ain't).

Or if you start with the dynojet map download for your model, and experiment with certain rpms ranges at a time, and record (backup) your changes while the seat of your pants is fresh in your mind. It's not that easy to just experiment and get good results, many say downright foolish. But I did not deviate that much from the generic download, only in areas where I got noticeable results in power, stuttering or miss, decal popping and unwanted fuel smell.

If you don't dyno it with a qualified shop or at least get good results from map study and experimentation, then I'd say the TFI is as good a buy as any for your Vaquero.

However some have good results with the Cobra self (load) tuner. I don't have any experience with them, but many swear by um.

R_W_B

11-01-2013, 09:48 AM

RWB...could you expand a little on your comment unwanted fuel smell. I have that and have been searching for the culprit.

Yes be glad too, but it's not a simple thing to get right by seat of the pants (and smell) experimentation. To be real sure one has to have at the very least an exhaust gas analyzer or dyno. And even a good dyno shop needs to attack each rpm range from the bottom up, getting each range right before moving on to the next. That last sentence came straight from a good dyno shop tech.

I had neither and while I may someday still get a dyno (I know an excellent performance shop 45 mins ride from me) I managed to experiment a map that works for my (1) bike, in my (2) climate and (3) air density. Those last 3 items will change the map in any given scenario. And to some extent the climate and air density will change with seasons.

But in an attempt to stay uncomplicated, what I did was take the Generic download map from dynojet. It wasn't the exact same slip on mufflers but I used it as a base starting point. I then just studied the map cells (in the software), it's easy to spot that the fuel adding is not just a smooth progression through the percent of open throttle and rpm range. Rather the dynojet map reflects certain areas where the OEM ECU map did not produce desired performance results. Or in other words the OEM ECU was not consistent in one smooth deficient progression, but rather aimed more at it's quest for EPA compliance.

I rode the bike for several days with the dynojet map at different load and rpm and traffic scenarios. I made mental notes of when I noticed smell (what rpm etc) and also what rpm ranges seem to have more pull than others. At the end of these rides I would write down my mental notes. When it came time to change the map, (to keep from totally breaking the map) I only changed small ranges of cells at one time, and kept copies of the original map AND notes on WHICH cells I changed, so I could change them back if need be (and many times was). I rode the bike immediately before and after each change so I could keep a good mental of the results good or bad.

It can be tedious pulling in the garage, hooking up the laptop, backing up the current map, making changes based on the previous ride, recording what you just changed on pen notes or typing in a file, and then unhook everything and back out on the road to test the results. But if you change too many cells at one time, it can affect the next range you go after.
Sometimes you won't notice any results at all, until you've changed those few target cells several times, and then it may be a bad result and you will have to just back off back down close to where you started depending on your experience in the ride.

But the key here is not to change that many cells at a time so you can correct if you err. Remember without a dyno or exhaust analyzers, you are kinda like Columbus on the way to India while bumping into an unknown world. And even he had the stars to go by, you only have your nose and the seat of your pants.

Slowly over time I managed to get a map that ran better the original OEM mapping or the original dynojet download for my bike/model. The results were not real dramatic but were noticeable. Nor did I end up changing that many cells from the original dynojet, but some I did. The overall smoothness and throttle response of low rpm range is much better now than either OEM or the dynojet download.

Almost all my decel popping is gone with no rich burbling. The dynojet map did nothing for that at all. The bike feels like it pulls a tad stronger and smoother in the higher rpms than the OEM. But of course I'm fixing to pull my throttle body and intake manifold to cure a possible leak, so I will probably have to change a few cells all over again when I'm done with that.

I have the PCV that also has the ignition advance. I also changed only a few cells with that but I stayed pretty much with the dynojet map on ignition. In fact most of the fuel cells in my map are also the same as the dynojet download. I only changed a few problem areas. Keep in mind when you add fuel with say a 5 cell number, that means you are adding 5% more pulse width on the injector than the OEM setting. Or in other words you are pulsing the injector 105% of the OEM width. If you put a negative -5 then you are pulsing 95% of the OEM.

With the ignition it's a more direct ratio. If you put a 5 in a cell, it directly advances the ignition 5 more degrees BTDC. And of course a negative -5 directly retards the ignition 5 less degrees BTDC.

If you have any other question just ask. And I'd be the first to admit, this is far from an exact science and would have to agree with folks like Ray that say this type of map tuning (or even map sharing for same model bikes) is foolish. But then I've always been a bit willing to be experiment with things, it sometimes has been my downfall, others not so much.