Reducing Decel Popping?

Well I've bitten the bullet and ordered a ramair kit before I get the bike to the dyno shop towards the end of August.

As detailed in this thread the bike also has a 3 into 1 link pipe to stubby exhaust fitted to the stock headers for now. What sold me on the dyno approach is they do direct ECU tuning and have told me if I changed headers and exhaust later they'd adjust the tune for free the first time, then by the hour after that, and it would be a quick job to adjust after doing the first lengthy tuning session.

What would you suggest for a default tune to baseline against on the dyno?

I want tuning to be done using the L tables as well as F tables, given that I'm more interested in a smooth running bike than extra oomph I figure L tables ought to be utilised much like default?

I was thinking of either going real lean and popping the aftermarket tors tune on or going for a Hanso ramair/outlaws tune which is based in the same with some tweaks (what I would use if having no dyno time)...

It's maybe a 3 mile ride to the place so running the bike overly lean to the place, and on the first dyno run, would be okay right?....

What do you guys think?
What would your approach be?

Edit: I'm not concerned with popping for now...I may restrict exit flow on the can later or just go with something else instead....right now though its about getting the bike running smoother and correctly fuelled.

kaivalagi said:

It's maybe a 3 mile ride to the place so running the bike overly lean to the place, and on the first dyno run, would be okay right?....

Click to expand...

Keep it under 3000rpm and ride from cold (do not warm up) - 3 miles - it'll probably still be on "enrichment" to some extent.

Any suggestion on map to baseline against or does it matter...

Baseline Map - If they guys you are going to really understand - IT SHOULD NOT MATTER. They will know where the F/L switch is and what is does, will know about the secondary throttle etc etc. But see if any of the tunes in the "resources" section are close to your bike. If @Claviger loaded them up you know they are free of bugs.

I don't want to use clavigers map as it zeroes the f/l switch and uses all f tables from what I've seen...I'll double check though...

Any point in turning on the o2 sensor, I assume not right? Its only for adaption on idle and nothing else?

kaivalagi said:

I don't want to use clavigers map as it zeroes the f/l switch and uses all f tables from what I've seen...I'll double check though...

Any point in turning on the o2 sensor, I assume not right? Its only for adaption on idle and nothing else?

Click to expand...

If you REALLY want to use the L tables - You need lambda for the L tables imo. I'm sure Rob has a L table map somewhere. It most certainly is NOT only for idle. I am now running (albeit with a PCV) on pressure based tuning at 4000rpm. Triumph switches over from L depending on TPS and RPMS at about 3500 iirc.

Thanks for the clarification, its because everyone seems to go full on F based that I think the sensor is more or less redundant....I'll use the aftermarket tors tune with o2 on as a baseline then, to ensure standard f/l approach from the start.

I’ve been drafting different responses, none suffice.

Good luck with your setup and tune.

Claviger said:

I’ve been drafting different responses, none suffice.

Good luck with your setup and tune.

Click to expand...

Hope I didn't offend Claviger, I don't mean to, am I really that difficult I'm just typing out my observations is all. Looking at your tune (Ramair / CES) in the resources section (which people seem to use successfully) I can see the F/L switch is zeroed off...so everything is based on the throttle position...this makes sense if the o2 sensor is switched off and unused right?....makes even more sense if all this is then accompanied with a PCV and AT so they will do all that aspect of things instead I am guessing...

But, if the bike is running with a dyno tuned factory ECU then it would make sense to have all the bikes functions in play including O2 sensor and L tables via the F/L switch right? Please, if I am not grasping something then spell it out...I don't pretend to be an expert, I'm just asking if I have got it right....if you think it would make more sense to go with tuning of F tables only and to use your ECU map as a starting point or if you think there are problems with L table use in general please say so....that's why I am asking for advice on here on an approach with direct ECU tuning

i.e. Is it a case that going the F + L route with a dyno tune is difficult and it's more successful to tune towards throttle position based fuelling only? The guy I am taking the bike to mainly does track based bikes, although he does road bikes too, so maybe that suggests an approach? Any questions that would be worth putting to him so I can make a sensible decision on the approach for him to take?

No offense taken, just didn’t feel like typing a long reply.

I only meant that you’re running a unique exhaust and it will require a unique tune, that CES tune will be all wrong.

The lack of L table tuning is a nonissue for most bikes, but, if you want to keep everything in place then use them. Zeroing them just eases the Dyno operators life a lot.

Regarding O2 sensor, really there’s no right answer in my opinion. On and Off have their pros and cons.

In your case, I would take a TORs basetune, set the FL transition to something under 11 but over 3, open secondaries 100% full table, copy i3 into i2 and i1, raise speed limit to 299, fan turn on to 99, redline to 6700 and go to the dyno.

All restrictions removed and ready to be tuned. That’s to say, it’ll work as a goodoptimized stock tune when done, different reworked ignition tables would benefit you.