OK so continuing on from my last thread ( http://ducatimonsterforum.org/index.php?topic=38834.0 (http://ducatimonsterforum.org/index.php?topic=38834.0) ) I was able to sync my bike but still getting slight vibration in the foot pegs. All throughout my ordeals in the last 6 months I have been getting crazy readings from my CO analyzer, 3% difference between headers. I'd get 3% on the vertical head and 6% on the horizontal. I have consistently thought it was due to an air leak.
Just for shits and giggles I decided to perform another test, switch the injectors. What happens? The values switch, 6% on the vertical head and 3% on the horizontal.
I know now it is impossible for me to sync air flows and CO measurements. For now the bike performs best if I sync the airflow's to higher RPM's. I looked at the price for new OEM injectors $619 each. WOW!! I guess I'll have to find a place to get em cleaned.
One more thing, I did a compression test just to be sure there wasn't a leak and both cylinders were at 150 psi.
Is the continuing vibration due to a CO that cant be matched due to the injectors? Is this hurting my engine? When I get em cleaned how much of a difference will it make when I can finally sync air flows and CO?
send them to rc engeniering in souther california, they'll charge you $35 to clean and calibrate them.
after that put them back on and with the air bleeders all closed sync t/b.
after that adjust co for both cyl, if bike is stock don't go above 3%, also record hc readings, if you have more than 800 you should be worried.
Or you could try running Shell Techron, an excellent fuel injection cleaner. Do not use more than the instructions tell you.
devimau, that's a good price but I got a guy @ Factory Pro Tuning who is not 10 mins from me who'll clean and calibrate em for me for another $20. The bike has Termis, open airbox and a DP chip. I have the VDST so I am able to change the trimmer if need be. About the HC reading, I only have a Gunston gastester so It wont record those readings but its is a great point, I'll just bring it over to Factory Pro Tuning for them to check on their gas tester.
Howie, good idea man, I'll try that 1st and see how it goes.
I think the Techron you want is made by Chevron, I've bought it as
Techron II Concentrate (i think the label has changed somewhat).
It's good stuff.
Quote from: seevtsaab on June 04, 2010, 04:52:50 AM
I think the Techron you want is made by Chevron, I've bought it as
Techron II Concentrate (i think the label has changed somewhat).
It's good stuff.
Doh!(smacking self upside head) it is indeed Chevron.
3% to 6% is nothing unusual. just wind one air bleed out 1/2 turn, the other in 1/2 turn and they'll probably be spot on. 4.5 - 5% on each cylinder will be good.
Thanks for the answer Brad, this is a valuable one. [thumbsup] Ill give er a go and report back to the masses.
Quote from: brad black on June 05, 2010, 12:47:04 AM
3% to 6% is nothing unusual. just wind one air bleed out 1/2 turn, the other in 1/2 turn and they'll probably be spot on. 4.5 - 5% on each cylinder will be good.
Quote from: brad black on June 05, 2010, 12:47:04 AM
3% to 6% is nothing unusual. just wind one air bleed out 1/2 turn, the other in 1/2 turn and they'll probably be spot on. 4.5 - 5% on each cylinder will be good.
that in australia might be ok but here in california with the crappy fuel we have that level of co% will make the bike run lazy, develop lots of carbon deposits and probably wash the cyl leading to cyl scoring after a couple of years.
you mean the detergents in the fuel? Theres more strict guidlines in the fuel for Cali than there is for other parts of the united states isnt there?
Quote from: devimau on June 05, 2010, 03:03:40 PM
that in australia might be ok but here in california with the crappy fuel we have that level of co% will make the bike run lazy, develop lots of carbon deposits and probably wash the cyl leading to cyl scoring after a couple of years.
I'm familiar with Brads credentials.
What are yours if you don't mind me asking?
10 years of ducati certified, 2 years of bologna factory certified, worked for ducati dealers for the past 10 years, desmocedicci certified, racing ducatis for the past 3 years, I just opened my own shop, if you need more ask you friend Mr meyers about mauro deviasso, he knows me very well.
what about you?
Quote from: devimau on June 05, 2010, 03:19:30 PM
10 years of ducati certified, 2 years of bologna factory certified, worked for ducati dealers for the past 10 years, desmocedicci certified, racing ducatis for the past 3 years, I just opened my own shop, if you need more ask you friend Mr meyers about mauro deviasso, he knows me very well.
what about you?
I just hang around and observe and learn.
I wasn't disparaging you. I simply asked a question.
...and for the record I believe the fuel we get in the states is absolute garbage and causes lots of problems.
Explain this though. Why would that % of co wash walls on ethanol fuel but not good fuel?
the richer you run the more you'll wash the oiled cyl walls and the more you'll score them, it doesn't matter what gas you use.
I'm just saying that I came across several ducs with scoring problems due to a rich fuel mixture, also with so much carbon on the valve seats that it'd have no compression due to a valve seat leak, I'm not discrediting anybody, this is my own belive only and nothing else and since this is an open forum I feel like I want to share my experience with some people who might appreciate it.
while setting up my 1098 for racing I installed a nemesis ecu and a lambda reader with the self tuning option, then we ran it @ the dyno for several tries playing with the fuel options, long story short on 91 octane the bike made the best power when co levels were between 2.5 to 3 %.
Also every decent tuner knows that the leaner the mixture (without making it so lean that the engine will bogg out or detonate or create another problems) the sharper and quicker the throttle response is.
In 2 stroke engine tuning that's even more pronunciated, I remember racing 125's go karts (parilla engines) and closing the top end jet (yes, they are adjustables) a bit to pass guys on the straights and then open it back up in the infield so the engine won't seize, then this same guys with built engines didn't understand how a stock engine will blow by them on the straights.
probably the 91 oct fuel with ethanol will leave way more residue than a different fuel and also is very dry, even more than a normal fuel, If you uncreat any ducs nowadays they come with a bit of 98 fuel from Italy leftover, when you touch that fuel it'll leave a grease residue in your hand while the one from our pumps will dry up on your hand and leave a white residue on it, crazy stuff shh?
As you know Bruce is a huge advocate of low octane fuel in stock compression engines.
Is it possible that the engines you saw with the scoring and carbon were using premium fuel?
@ least 80% were, but the higher the octane the more resistance to detonate and the quicker it'll burn, would that be the opposite?
Quote from: devimau on June 05, 2010, 04:24:10 PM
I'm not certain for the 100% of them but @ least 80% were, the higher the octane the quicker it'll burn, should be the opposite, shouldn't it?
AFAIK the higher the octane the slower it burns.
That's the way high octane controls detonation by slowing the burn. My understanding is that high octane fuel in a low compression motor does nothing but create carbon, cause poor overall performance, and empty the riders pocket.
That's why I was asking. Perhaps the burn is so slow that some goes unburned and causes the cylinder washing you saw.
talking with vp people while back to choose the fuel for our race bike we came to the same conclusions: the higher the octane the less will detonate (you can compress it more, it won't start an explosion due to compression) but the front flame of the fuel when ignited will be @ an higher rate, that's why we didn't want higher octane on ours, we wanted low octane oxygenated.
in other words, you can compress it more but the explosion will be quicker and more violent.
what's AFAIK?
We should stop jacking the OP's thread. ;D
Jack away ;D, this is good info...
Quote from: devimau on June 05, 2010, 04:40:35 PM
talking with vp people while back to choose the fuel for our race bike we came to the same conclusions: the higher the octane the less will detonate (you can compress it more, it won't start an explosion due to compression) but the front flame of the fuel when ignited will be @ an higher rate, that's why we didn't want higher octane on ours, we wanted low octane oxygenated.
in other words, you can compress it more but the explosion will be quicker and more violent.
what's AFAIK?
Quote from: 2 Wheel Wanderer on June 05, 2010, 04:56:13 PM
Jack away ;D, this is good info...
OK ;)
AFAIK=As far as I know...
So they claim oxygenated fuel is less susceptible to detonation?
And what is the oxygenating agent? Not ethanol I hope.
One more question guys, so final air flow doesn't really matter if you've already done a TB sync, as long as you get the same CO from each header, each cylinder is making equal power and all should be smooth. This sound right?
Quote from: 2 Wheel Wanderer on June 05, 2010, 05:05:32 PM
One more question guys, so final air flow doesn't really matter if you've already done a TB sync, as long as you get the same CO from each header, each cylinder is making equal power and all should be smooth. This sound right?
When you say final air flow are you asking throttle position?
The burn rate of a fuel is a measurement of the time required for complete combustion of the air/fuel mixture. The notion that octane ratings affect the burn rate of fuel is about 180-degrees from reality; burn rate is a function of several variables, and the two are completely independent, although there is generally a correlation between octane ratings and burn rates.
To give you a good example of this, we contacted Jim Wurth from Sunoco Race Fuels. He explains, "A perfect example is Sunoco Maximal, which is our fastest burning fuel, and coincidentally one of Sunoco's highest octane fuels at 116 (R+M) / 2. A lot of Pro Stock teams rely on Maximal for those sub-seven second runs. When they are turning 9,000 rpm or more, the fuel has to burn pretty quickly to achieve complete combustion".
from here http://www.nsxprime.com/FAQ/Miscellaneous/FuelAdditives.htm (http://www.nsxprime.com/FAQ/Miscellaneous/FuelAdditives.htm)
Quote from: devimau on June 05, 2010, 05:15:46 PM
The burn rate of a fuel is a measurement of the time required for complete combustion of the air/fuel mixture. The notion that octane ratings affect the burn rate of fuel is about 180-degrees from reality; burn rate is a function of several variables, and the two are completely independent, although there is generally a correlation between octane ratings and burn rates.
To give you a good example of this, we contacted Jim Wurth from Sunoco Race Fuels. He explains, "A perfect example is Sunoco Maximal, which is our fastest burning fuel, and coincidentally one of Sunoco's highest octane fuels at 116 (R+M) / 2. A lot of Pro Stock teams rely on Maximal for those sub-seven second runs. When they are turning 9,000 rpm or more, the fuel has to burn pretty quickly to achieve complete combustion".
from here http://www.nsxprime.com/FAQ/Miscellaneous/FuelAdditives.htm (http://www.nsxprime.com/FAQ/Miscellaneous/FuelAdditives.htm)
Let's leave race fuels out of it, because none of us are using it on the street. I don't use it in my stock motor 996 track bike either.
What is the relative burn rate of pump fuels? Is it related to octane, and do the higher octanes burn in a more controlled manner or 'slower' and do low octane fuels give that violent explosion or 'faster'.
I believe that is the case.
Quote from: ducpainter on June 05, 2010, 05:10:29 PM
When you say final air flow are you asking throttle position?
After you've done the sync and locked down right side TB screw and set your base degrees setting (2.7 for my bike). So after I have done this is when I start adjusting the air bleeds. When I adjust them to match the CO and put on say a carbtune the air flows go off. From what Brad is sayin it doesn't matter as long as the CO is set the same.
I guess I'm over thinking this. For some reason I have it in my head that air flow and CO from each cylinder have to match all the way around.
I'm not sure which is more important.
Quote from: ducpainter on June 05, 2010, 05:26:13 PM
Let's leave race fuels out of it, because none of us are using it on the street. I don't use it in my stock motor 996 track bike either.
What is the relative burn rate of pump fuels? Is it related to octane, and do the higher octanes burn in a more controlled manner or 'slower' and do low octane fuels give that violent explosion or 'faster'.
I believe that is the case.
Zakley! Highly oxygenated race fuels are another species and have little in common with our alcohol laced fuel.
Devimau, you are correct that octane is resistance to burn, not burn rate, particularly with race fuel, but since legal pump gas meets government standards burn rate between grades is fairly standard. 4.5 - 6% CO on pump gas is just fine. If you run premium E10 unnecessarily you will develop carbon, and because it doesn't like to vaporize you might have some cylinder washing in extreme cases. Premium that is not E10? Mostly wasting money.
Quote from: 2 Wheel Wanderer on June 05, 2010, 06:23:30 PM
After you've done the sync and locked down right side TB screw and set your base degrees setting (2.7 for my bike). So after I have done this is when I start adjusting the air bleeds. When I adjust them to match the CO and put on say a carbtune the air flows go off. From what Brad is sayin it doesn't matter as long as the CO is set the same.
I guess I'm over thinking this. For some reason I have it in my head that air flow and CO from each cylinder have to match all the way around.
that's right, close them all the way to sync them, after that forget about sync and remove the syncronizer, hook up the gas analyzer and set your co's evently (.5% max difference) and also if everything is good the air bleeding screws should not be more than 1/2 apart from each other ( one @ 1 and the other @ 1.5 max lets say)
also the more you open them the less hc readings you'll have, the healthier the idle speed but becarefull with hanging idle issues, I personally like them between 1.5 and 2 turns out, 2,5 max.
howie, ducati recomends 2 to 2.5 co % on stock bikes and 3.5 to 4 co % MAX on units with high performance exhaust systems and air filters/ open lid mod.
IMMO richening up the trimming feature will have the same effect than putting a bigger pilot jet on a carburated bike, on efi units this trimming feature will be good up to 3500 rpm or 40% of throttle opening, after that is all up to the ecu's own mapping and you'll be distortioning the whole map with unburned fuel @ higher revs until the engine clears it up and that will make your bike run lazy and not sharp, that's a fact.
remember in the old days the whole secret on carbs was the relationship between main jet and needle shape, the pilot it's important but you don't want to mix the functions, and putting a bigger pilot was not the solution for a best running engine.
pump gas is tricky since the gas stations will cut it to have more to sell and actually you are not getting it as pure as you might think, all depends on what they use to cut it with, you can buy 91 octane and analyze it with 87 and if the level of alcohol in the 87 is greater (which is always the case) than the 91, you'll end up with a less octane gasoline that burns slower.
gas pump is not consistent, also I know people that'll add propane to bump up the octane and that causes the same effect, it accelerates the burn rate.
now, if you analyze this for a second typically to any engine the higher the compression the more revs it's capable of doing and @ higher revs the fuel has less time to burn so it'll make sense for those engines to have a gas type capable of avoid being ignited by compression forces and burn quickly, and I'm not talking about a race engine, I'm talking about an stock gsx'r 1000 @ 11k with 91 octane pump gas in the tank.
I know that there's a lot of contradicting info on the internet, some people say white and some people say black and I'm talking about chemical engineers.... is very confusing sometimes.
Guys thanks for the info and devimau I tried the CO at 5% and at 3.5% and it definitely ran better at 3.5%. At 5% I could tell that there was too much fuel being thrown into the chamber, the engine perked up at the lower CO level.
Sorry to thread jack 2WW.
I would like to invite you guys talking about fuel like to join the thread "which octane?". Or we could start a fuel thread like George's oil thread.
I'm from Oz and am finding that not all fuel tuning data transfers very well across continents. I'm guessing that differences in fuel composition in different parts of the world has a significant effect on this.
Brad Blacks experiences with tuning are in the Australian context with the fuel here. I have certainly noticed how much of a lower octane you guys in the US can run than we can down here (even with the octane rating conversion). I have noticed jetting differences beyond what I was expecting for similar engine modifications on the same model carbureted bikes.
I'm currently trying different brands and octane ratings for smoothness and clean running (particularly transitioning throttle and low throttle range). I dont have the dyno money available to test for outright power. I'll post my experiences in the "octane" thread.
I would like to explore this further.
Hey Mauro,
Don't forget the bikes with the O2 sensors.......you can't balance the cyclinders on those unless you go open loop....... you tried to on mine but you ended up make one cylinder about 7% & the other was less than 1%. As you can imagine, it ran terrible.......I wound the blades back in, changed the plugs & all was right with the world. Well, almost, there was the issue with the oil seal.....
Quote from: koko64 on June 09, 2010, 01:52:17 PM
Sorry to thread jack 2WW.
No worries I learned a lot in my past few threads about CO adjustments, TB syncing, octane and how fuel burns in this one. Unfortunately I have to report I just did a leakdown test today and heard loud hissing from both cylinders through the oil cap. It looks like I need to replace the rings.
Quote from: 2 Wheel Wanderer on June 03, 2010, 05:21:48 PM
I looked at the price for new OEM injectors $619 each. WOW!! I guess I'll have to find a place to get em cleaned.
$1200+ for a set of injectors?
Check out RC Engineering Inc, www.rceng.com (//http://). They know injectors! They supply injectors for all sorts of high performance applications, most of them are from $80 - $100 each. They can also clean your injectors and provide a report on the spray pattern and mass flow of each one.
Jeff
Quote from: 2 Wheel Wanderer on June 09, 2010, 06:16:41 PM
No worries I learned a lot in my past few threads about CO adjustments, TB syncing, octane and how fuel burns in this one. Unfortunately I have to report I just did a leakdown test today and heard loud hissing from both cylinders through the oil cap. It looks like I need to replace the rings.
Don't panic yet. Some compressed air will get by the rings. Even more will get by the rings if the engine is not up to running temperature. As a general spec, below 10% is acceptable on a warm engine.
<bookmark>
Alright I f*#ked up the Leakdown test and did it wrong, I retested and the rings are fine. I need to start a new thread cause I am kind of at a dead end on tuning this F*#KER.
gus, I remember quite well what happened with your bike.
@ first those guides didn't help and we managed to cover them u/w.
after that was taken care of those numbers came up because there was an issue as you stated with the valve seal dirting the mixture and as a consequence getting crazy co values, you can balance them a bit if the o2 sensor is on 1 pipe better than if it reads both @ the same time like you bike was but is not the best option, after that with that open loop ecu the bike ran better I think, right?
I still have nightmares about your bike but I'm happy that all went good for you and then you sold it.
Thanks for recommending the new owner to me and is nice to hear back from you again.
Quote from: devimau on June 10, 2010, 06:13:28 PM
gus, I remember quite well what happened with your bike.
@ first those guides didn't help and we managed to cover them u/w.
after that was taken care of those numbers came up because there was an issue as you stated with the valve seal dirting the mixture and as a consequence getting crazy co values, you can balance them a bit if the o2 sensor is on 1 pipe better than if it reads both @ the same time like you bike was but is not the best option, after that with that open loop ecu the bike ran better I think, right?
I still have nightmares about your bike but I'm happy that all went good for you and then you sold it.
Thanks for recommending the new owner to me and is nice to hear back from you again.
Close enough I suppose ;)
You were the only part of Del Amo I trusted........thanks for trying to make bike right & I except the fact the everyone makes mistakes. As long as you learn from them & not assume one problem is something else, it's all good.
Good luck with the new business [thumbsup]