Using Power Commander 5 (PCV) without O2 Optimizer?

[metroplex]

I have a 2009 Ducati 696 with the Siemens DP ECU, but it still retains closed loop operation. I've read several reviews where PCV users commented their Check Engine Light comes on with a Lambda error when cruising at a set RPM for 30 seconds in the closed loop region. Some attributed it to the O2 Optimizers, others said it would be resolved with a recall/TSB for the crossed coil wires. I've never seen this CEL unless I disconnected an O2 sensor.

I did learn that the PCV draws power from the fuel injectors as well as the RPM signal. It does not have a way to obtain engine temperature without the use of an analog input from a transducer that produces temperature readings from 0-5V.

Would it be possible to use the Power Commander V on my bike and not install the O2 optimizers? I'm only looking to smooth out the throttle response and improve cold starting, and noticed that Power Commander's software offers an Accel Pump feature. I'm not able to tap out all 80 hp from the bike on the street, so AutoTune and a Dynotune aren't on my priority right now. It's mainly the closed loop operation.

[ungeheuer]

Would it be possible to use the Power Commander V on my bike and not install the O2 optimizers?

Yes.

If you like the lumpy, lean-as-buggery, closed loop fuelling then sure, you could not install the optimisers .

.....I've read several reviews where PCV users commented their Check Engine Light comes on with a Lambda error when cruising at a set RPM for 30 seconds in the closed loop region. Some attributed it to the O2 Optimizers....

I'd be interested to read one of these reviews.  Linky?

 

[metroplex]

http://www.ducatimonster.org/forums/tech/202052-m696-tuning-02-error-code-need-help.html

I found 2 more threads where tuners mentioned that the light might come on briefly, but not to worry about it as the bike will run fine.

[ungeheuer]

http://www.ducatimonster.org/forums/tech/202052-m696-tuning-02-error-code-need-help.html

I found 2 more threads where tuners mentioned that the light might come on briefly, but not to worry about it as the bike will run fine.

No mention there (aaaaaaaaaaaaaaaargh VS  ) of optimisers being responsible for the issue.

[metroplex]

http://www.ducati.ms/forums/42-monster/86736-powercommander-5-m696-m1100-3.html

http://www.ducati.ms/forums/42-monster/86736-powercommander-5-m696-m1100-2.html

[Raux]

NEVER had an issue with the PC V and O2 optimizers UNTIL I opened the exhaust too much.

it had nothing to do with the PCV or optimizers, it was a flow issue.

[Raux]

I personally spoke with Dynojet developers as they were working on the Siemens motor PC V and they wouldn't release UNTIL they got the optimizers correct.

Anyone have error codes with this setup is having other issues.

[Raux]

The optimizers enrich the mixture in the closed look area by telling the computers it's lean enough at a rich (power producing) A/F mixture.

There's even a way to adjust it inside the optimizers.

[ungeheuer]

I personally spoke with Dynojet developers as they were working on the Siemens motor PC V and they wouldn't release UNTIL they got the optimizers correct.

Anyone have error codes with this setup is having other issues.

^^ This.

[metroplex]

Dynojet wasn't too clear on how the PCV adjusts the closed loop area. I was under the impression the ECU would ignore the fuel map in this area. So if the O2 optimizers are just richening the mixture to 13.6:1, how does the mapping in this region correlate to the AFR? They say to adjust it between +6 to +10% fuel trim, but wouldn't the ECU just revert to 14.7:1? So if I set the cells to +0%, would it be 13.6:1? What happens when I set it to +10% as per the instructions, or stay with the +6% as per the Dynojet supplied maps?

This also leads me to the question, why is it important to have a rich AFR in the closed loop region? When tuning my cars, I always keep the AFR at 1.00 lambda or about 14.6:1 closed loop until I go above a certain load or throttle position where it switch to open loop mode and follow a 13:1 AFR for more power. The 14.6:1 isn't just for emissions, but also for fuel economy. There's no point in running a car open loop all the time. One of my cars has a factory wideband O2 (turbo gas direct injected) and it is set to run open loop all the time, and even that is set to 1.00 lambda until near WOT.

I also noticed a few threads where people commented that the stock ECU runs overly lean, but I am interested in how they are obtaining this information. One of my cars comes from the factory with a wideband O2, so I can see it swinging occasionally to 15:1 or 16:1 when the throttle is abruptly closed or some other condition, but looking at the fuel trim data (the big picture), the trims are still averaging 14:6 in that region.

[Raux]

PCV doesn't adjust the closed loop area. if you look at their maps, it's a flat +10 I Think, that works with the O2 optimizers.

the optimers trick the ecu into believing the 13.6:1 is really 14.7:1 (or whatever it's supposed to be)

if you don't + up the closed loop region on the PCV map, while you run the optimizers then you won't be giving it enough fuel. making it run too lean.

if you run the closed loop with the +10 and no optimizers, yes, the ECU will adjust to it's desired setting.

You really should read the closed loop threads.

[metroplex]

I didn't understand why Dynojet's supplied maps are +6% when the instructions say +10%. When I asked Dynojet, they said to adjust it from +6 to +10 and see how it feels.

[metroplex]

The Dynojet maps state they are for the stock ECU. Can I use these with the DP ECU without a dynotune?

[brad black]

I also noticed a few threads where people commented that the stock ECU runs overly lean, but I am interested in how they are obtaining this information. One of my cars comes from the factory with a wideband O2, so I can see it swinging occasionally to 15:1 or 16:1 when the throttle is abruptly closed or some other condition, but looking at the fuel trim data (the big picture), the trims are still averaging 14:6 in that region.

1/ people generally don't know what they're talking about.

2/ if they read it on the internet they parrot it about.  i'm often amazed at what people quote me as having said. 

3/ the phrase "leaner than desirable" means lean to many.  as with any specialised discussion, the terms become shortened to those people think they understand.

4/ 14.7 may be a little too lean for a bike.  maybe it's more the rich/lean/rich cycling.  I often run bikes around 14.4 or so, and generally they're still very nice.  but closed loop seems to really set them off.  I think it's the relationship between crankshaft inertia and total vehicle inertia that leads to the surging the way they do closed loop.  more so that any technology differences b/w cars and bikes.  while the bike operating systems are generally much more basic in that most are n-alpha based, whereas most cars are airflow measurement based (with more room for the hardware), closed loop still means feedback regulated, and as such, the operation system and logic thereof is somewhat irrelevant.

5/ lots of car engines are run at or near stoichiermetric for much of the load range, which surprises me.  maybe they're just more durable, but certainly it seems to me that they're too lean for most efficient operation.

6/ but I could be wrong. 

[ungeheuer]

....... i'm often amazed at what people quote me as having said.....

.....but I could be wrong. 

I doubt Brad is wrong.

After all I'm pretty sure it was Brad who pointed out that the new Monsters will run fine on diesel as long as you replace the spark plugs with solid steel threaded inserts  . 

I know he said some bloody thing about Monster Diesel anyway.   Pretty sure that was it  .