(Sigh.) 'Nother one.

Funny, I actually like the look of the stock pipe - I just don't like that it weighs so much, and could def use some more bark.

Pete Roper wrote:

PS, on the 'Dubious Throttling' issue I have to say I'm always a bit baffled by this? Yes, throttle control has to be done very carefully at low RPM but we are talking about a 1200cc twin with a very light flywheel and no Cush drive to speak of in the driveline. You have to be careful and removing as much free play from the cables as possible pays big dividends. My very early A5 GRiSO will, with care, pull cleanly and happily from 2,000 to redline in any gear. If mine will do it? Any 8V should do it!

The 'Dubious Throttling' is the sole reason I installed the PCV. I had removed the slack from the cables and was careful wih my throttle hand, but at 50kmh in third gear she would surge. Using fourth gear helped somewhat, but I had it in head that lugging the bike was not a good thing. Noob Guzzi owner. I couldn't have done that at all on my old Suzuki. I know better now.

You know what? Simply turning off the lambda stopped that. If GuzziDiag had been around for the 5AM when I forked over all that do$h for the PCV , I could have spent it on a nice Matris shock instead. Sigh.

If yer after a Matris I can get one trade from AF1, (Not a huge discount but it helps.). Come down and spend a few hours helping me get my head around Guzzidiag and it'll be cheaper than you think......

Pete

That's an offer I can't refuse.

Gents -

I'm a G8V owner.  My bike was set up @ Rosehill Classics, and was everything I could have hoped for.

Until I started my commute.  Ew.  I experienced extreme surging at lower throttle positions and RPMs, where I spend a lot of time during my daily commute.

GuzziDiag really helped my bike.  First was turning off the lambda - this made a huge difference with only a few clicks.  Then changing the CO setting; Paul says that +/- 8.5 is the magic setting - my bike likes +8.  Now I'm busy trying to get my Delta Fuel settings really sorted out - but I need a wideband O2 sensor to do this properly.

However, what work I've done has made an incredible difference to the quality of my ride.  Most of the fueling changes I've made were leaning the AFR out, not enrichening it.  So my ride has improved and my mileage is better by ~20% during low-speed / -throttle riding.  If I had to stop working on my bike today, I'd call it a success.  I just want to know exactly what is going into and coming out of my engine, so I'm going very granular on this.

I'd be happy to help you with your quests, if you'd like.  I can't pretend any expertise; everything I've done has been pretty much lifted from the WildGuzzi forum and some time spent on the bike [frequently improving my previous efforts... ].  PaulDaytona, Father of GuzziDiag, has been an incredible resource.  The first hurdle = get the cables to work.  

NBG,

I've noted the opposite. I've needed to enrichen my fueling slightly. I've not touched the CO setting as yet, which I may need to tweak eventually. I'm with Pete, and taken on board that an AFR meter will not help, and am therefore reading the plugs and going by seat-of-pants feel. I can tell you that riding my GRiSO now feels the same or better than when using the PCV/AT package, and my mileage is is actually somewhat better than stock and WAY better than with PCV.

The delta fuel is an issue that bothers me. The right cylinder will always run leaner and hotter with the stock map and lambda on. It runs hotter and leaner with lambda off and the map enrichened. I believe this is due to the longer header pipe causing difference in the scavenging effect between left & right. I doubt the cams are different, so I guess that the Guzzi engineers fiddled with the fueling on the right cylinder to fix it. IMO you will never get the correct AFR by measuring the stock exhaust because the GRiSO only allows for one O2 sensor, and you can't tell what's going on in both cylinders with a sensor that is placed after the collector.

Am I talking out my arse? Pete, comments?

There's nothing that says my mapping needs to be the same as your mapping; they could have different maps, different add-ons will require different tweaks, etc.  All I can say is that after leaning things out a bit [I'm sure some parts of the map got richer; I just don't have the notes for that], my ride is much smoother: no pops, no surging, no stutters.  Certainly nothing to indicate pre-detonation or giving me cause to think I'm too lean.

I kind of miss the decel pops, though.  Kinda sexy, IMO.   

GuzziDiag has Main Fuel and Delta Fuel.  If Delta is the right cylinder, I would assume Main Fuel is the left; I'll have to check with Paul about that and bump things as appropriate.  Or perhaps only Delta can be manipulated; I haven't really explored that yet.

I find it hard to believe that a wideband O2 sensor won't give me readings accurate enough to tell if I'm too rich or too lean.  Not a PCV, not an AutoTuner, a real mechanic's-style wideband O2 sensor to provide some objective AFR numbers - at least to tell me if I'm going in the right direction with my changes.  That and seat-of-pants feel would, I think, be the most complete way to find the most accurate fuel mapping across the chart.  

Thus far, my seat-of-pants testing has been accel/decel to a particular speed/RPM combination, correcting the fueling until smooth and hesitation-/pop-free throughout the range I'm examining at the moment.  After ~5 hours, I have things pretty settled in the lower ranges of RPM/TPS/speed.  

After some finer-tuning of the lower-end, next up is the freeway; I smell incomplete combustion when coming to a stop at the end of an off-ramp, and that can't be good.  

beetle wrote:

NBG,

I've noted the opposite. I've needed to enrichen my fueling slightly.

Interesting. When I was researching the Todd ECU/PCV/AT solution, I was under the impression it forced way too much fuel into the engine. However, I claim no expertise, so you could be correct.

NorthBayGriso wrote:

 When I was researching the Todd ECU/PCV/AT solution, I was under the impression it forced way too much fuel into the engine.  However, I claim no expertise, so you could be correct.

Oh yeah, way too much fuel. I had a 16% increase in fuel usage after I installed the PCV.

Quote :

I find it hard to believe that a wideband O2 sensor won't give me readings accurate enough to tell if I'm too rich or too lean. Not a PCV, not an AutoTuner, a real mechanic's-style wideband O2 sensor to provide some objective AFR numbers - at least to tell me if I'm going in the right direction with my changes. That and seat-of-pants feel would, I think, be the most complete way to find the most accurate fuel mapping across the chart.

What I meant was that due to the design of the stock GRiSO header/collector with one O2 sensor position, you will be measuring the resultant gas of both cylinders. If one cylinder is slightly richer than the other, how would you know?

I've got a PM into Paul re: Main and Delta fuel map changes.  This answer will inform the O2 sensor questions/discussion, I think.

If nothing else, while it might not tell me which cylinder was rich or lean [good point!], a wideband O2 sensor & data collector should be able to tell me what my fueling looks like at a given RPM/TPS point under real-riding condition and styles.

Once again the 'Elephant in the corner' is being ignored.

It doesn't matter if you install a WBO sensor if the data it gathers is inaccurate. Well, it isn't that the data is inaccurate, its just that its telling you what is happening in the pipe, not in the combustion chamber.

Side draught head, narrow included valve angle, cam timing with a lot of overlap, events happening at the speed of sound and the mass of air being moved all have to be worked into the equation. Just looking at how much of anything there is in the exhaust gasses can only tell you so much about what is happening in the combustion chamber and it is what is happening there that is important.

The difference between how an 8V Guzzi motor pumps and say a truly modern engine like a V4 'prilla is obvious just by looking at the cylinder head design and horsepower/torque figures. The whole thing has to be looked at holistically. Just looking at one aspect or assuming that what works with one pump will automatically work with another is, I'm afraid, arrant stupidity.

Pete

...OK.  So, what do you suggest?  I don't have access to any inside-the-combustion-chamber equipment, and I want to improve my G8V's fueling.  I know what I experienced before my fueling changes, I know what I experienced after my fueling changes, and I want to continue the improvements to get things as close to my definition of "perfect" as I can.

"Just looking at how much of anything there is in the exhaust gasses can only tell you so much about what is happening in the combustion chamber and it is what is happening there that is important."  True to a certain extent, but added to spark plug examination and seat-of-pants analysis, wouldn't WBO data increase objective and/or holistic analysis of what is happening in the combustion chamber?

"Arrant stupidity" or not, I can't see how a WBO would hurt and absent a reasonable alternative it still seems the best way to go.

I'm not saying it has no value. Simply that relying on it alone is not some sort of holy grail that guarantees correct set up. This is the problem I have with the PCV/AT set up. It uses this one input to make pretty much all the decisions about fueling and requires a slavish devotion to the one orthodoxy that EGA explains all and will magically open the door to perfect fueling. Its quite obvious to me that this is crap. I've seen the results in other people's engines, not mine I hasten to add because when I drank the Kool-Aid and tried to use it on my bike it didn't work. By the time I was ready to take it back to the point of purchase the factory had released the #68 map for the GRiSO which made the whole point moot. This worked splendidly not only on my bike here but on my one in the USA as well.

On that trip I was invited to ride a Stelvio which had dad the full box 'n dice number done on it. It was only a short run but the bike was warm and supposedly ready to be ridden and TA-DAH!!! It felt just like a Stelvio that was over fueling at the bottom end. Soft and fluffy. Certainly not the extraordinary mountain crushing monster I was led to believe it was.

Since then I, along with a variety of other people, have found from bitter experience exactly what occurs with the system. When Beetle came to my workshop and I serviced his bike the moment you popped a rocker cover you could smell the unburnt fuel in the oil. This experience is not unique, in fact in my now considerable experience with bikes equipped with this system, both 2 and 4 valve per cylinder but particularly the 4V's it has been UNIVERSAL, no exceptions. I don't tell people to take the stuff off their bikes. I do explain my thinking and then leave it up to them to make their own decisions. The majority I have to say decide to remove it.

A lot of people think that I have some sort of personal vendetta against Todd Eagan. This is not the case. The PCV/AT bizzo though is seen though as very much his baby and its one of the main reasons I've decided to withdraw from contributing to his Guzzitech board as I can't in all conscience continue to be involved in a site as a contributor that promotes something that I consider counter productive if not downright damaging. The other thing is that since Paul has developed and spruiked Guzzidiag the need for a separate map modifier as a 'Bolt On' accessory has evaporated. With this system you have the ability to remove, modify and replace maps and control, as far as I can make out, just about every aspect of the mapping including spark advance which is also critical to engine performance and behavior.

Your statement that you don't have access to *Equipment* to allow you to see what is happening in the combustion chamber is a false premise. Nobody can see through metal! The principal method of checking though is the time honoured one of looking at the plugs, combining this with dyno time, even if it is only a 'Butt Dyno', will almost universally yield useful results.

Yes, using a WBO will give you some very interesting and useful data. But like any data it has to be evaluated and compared with other data and the information collected has to be catalogued and compared with data collected by others. This is the SCIENTIFIC approach. Concise, collectable, repeatable results that can then be published and put up for peer review. Note also that science is never 100% right. It simply works on probabilities, its just that when the odds get long enough any alternative becomes so unlikely as to prove a hypothesis as a fact. The alternative to the scientific approach is to simply rely on stuff because its been repeated so many times it gets accepted as fact. That certainly doesn't make it right. Its essentially the difference between science and religion and I'm sorry but I'll take science over a sky-fairy any day.

Pete

Pete -

While I have zero experience with the PCV/AT/ECU solution, I think we are in the same boat, if not the same page. One of the reasons I had hoped to use a WBO with my GuzziDiag efforts was to help verify the more subjective observations provided by looking at spark plugs and "butt Dyno" [ ] results.

And, of course, share my G8V .bin files with anyone that wants to have a look at them and make improvements.

I don't suppose you have a link to a spark plug removal pictorial?

1. Remove wing
2. Pop out little MG symbol with small screwdriver
3. Remove plug cover with allen key
4. Use cable tie method to remove cap: [You must be registered and logged in to see this link.]
5. Use tube spanner in GRiSO tool pouch to remove plug.

The important thing when removing the plug caps is to not bend or twist them unduly at the right angle at the top.

I have developed my own technique where I use a big flat bladed screwdriver under the elbow as close as possible to the main tube to the plug. I then place my thumb on top of the elbow above the blade of the screwdriver and lever the cap up being careful to not stress the right angle of the elbow. What can sometimes make this difficult is if the sealing 'Rings' on the caps have rusted to the tube through the head. This is only a problem on earlier models though as later ones have a re-designed cambox and sealing system. In all cases I always lubricate the 'rings' with a bit of rubber grease before re-installation.

Looping a cable tie or piece of twine around the cap before re-installation beneath the elbow will mean next time you pull the caps off you can just pull up, (Gently!) on the tie or twine and pop the cap off with little risk but always use care.

Plug is a standard 10mm plug with an 18(?)mm hex. The 1400's use very long reach 8mm, (I think?) plugs with a 14mm hex, two per pot. Their caps are much better designed though.

Pete

NorthBayGriso wrote:

 Certainly nothing to indicate pre-detonation

Oh, this was something else I meant to mention. There is no such thing as 'Pre-Detonation' its a meaningless, made up word.

What there are are two completely different ignition problems an engine can suffer from. Pre-ignition is one. Detonation is another. I think the term 'Pre-Detonation' is one made up by someone who doesn't really know what they're talking about. Where was the source?

Pete

Hey guys - Rob Sherman here. Been riding Guzzis since '75 ... yes, showing my age here!
Anyway, I've got a '10 GRiSO (along with a '76 LM and '74 Eldo project) with just over 10k miles. Mods are Zard pipe, BMC air filter element (no airbox mods), evap crap removed and intake manifold ports plugged ... and this summer I added a fatduc O2 optimizer. I've read pros and cons on these. I indeed had the service light come on a few times, as others have complained about, when playing around with trim settings. I now have the pot set at just about the mid-way point and the bike runs beautifully, with no more service lights! It's noticeably snappier at lower revs, no stumbles and off/on throttle transition is smooth .... and I average ~42mpg in the summer (live in MA, USA) but has dropped a little with the crappy winter fuel at the pumps (typical for this region) .. even runs fine on regular. I have the Techno-research Centurion software, have balanced the TB's as perfectly as humanly possible and set TPS and this motor is smooth as can be.

You do NOT have to sink a bunch of cash into the 8V motors to get them to run right. It was pretty close from the factory and - just about perfect now.


Rob

Pete - I'm in Brisbane this week for work. Arrived yesterday and heading home Saturday. 1st time in AU but unfortunately won't have much time for any site-seeing. Not sure where you're at ... anywhere near Brisbane?

Alas no, I'm a thousand Km south!

"You do NOT have to sink a bunch of cash into the 8V motors to get them to run right. It was pretty close from the factory and - just about perfect now."

While some are better than others I've generally found that as long as they are set up right they are, in near stock trim, perfectly acceptable. Yes I'm sure there can be subtle improvements made but making the large outlay for the PCV/AT set up that in my experience is ineffective if not downright damaging strikes me as a poor choice when Guzzidiag is available for nothing!

Having said that I keep trying to get my bike to misbehave and I can't. I really can't! I've tried everything, small throttle, big throttle, all sorts of engine and road speeds in a variety of gears, trailing and light throttle on a downgrade? It just works! My other one in the US was the same???

Pete

And now, with Beetles help it is lots better. Much better than any PC equipped 8V I have ever ridden and fuel economy is up without filling the sump with petrol.

For those happy with the PCV/AT route? All power to you. Its not my choice though.

Pete