Ignitech Optimum Fuel Economy Settings

[Prairiehammer]

I replaced my TCI with the Ignitech this Spring. Previous to that I averaged 42 mpg while mostly two up and often fully loaded (GVW of approximately 1250#). Twenty-eight hundred twenty-six mile trip to Florida (solo, mixed Interstate and flower sniffing) averaged 40.85 mpg.

Lake Superior trip, 2830 miles, 42mpg, two-up heavy load (camping for two weeks) mostly two lane.

Two tanks this early Spring (before the Ignitech) averaged 42 mpg.

Installed the Ignitech, and averaged 35 mpg for two tanks.

Pulled a trailer to Freebird's MD and averaged 33.3 mpg (one-up, nearly all Interstate speeds).

Took a 600 mile trip this past weekend (all two lane roads, two-up) and averaged 37 mpg.

 

We are planning a 3500 mile trip next month, pulling a trailer, two-up and I am imagining average mpg at about 30-31.

 

My question: since it seems installing the Ignitech has resulted in reduced fuel economy, what settings can I adjust and what should those settings be to more approximate the stock OEM ignition settings. I am presuming the current Ignitech settings/program deviates from the OEM settings.

[dingy]

I have received no input from any one regarding fuel economy settings.

I know the timing advance is pushed out farther, this may be a factor.

Gary

[Prairiehammer]

I know the timing advance is pushed out farther, this may be a factor.

 

Broadly speaking, increased ignition timing should result in better fuel economy, correct?

 

Retarding the timing usually results in poorer fuel economy, correct?

 

So, with that, the Ignitech as delivered with the advanced timing should have better fuel economy. Perhaps, it is not the more advanced timing, but the actual ignition timing curve should be tweaked?

[Kirby]

Maybe a "learning" curve? May be relative to right hand and left foot.

[dingy]

Broadly speaking, increased ignition timing should result in better fuel economy, correct?

 

Retarding the timing usually results in poorer fuel economy, correct?

 

So, with that, the Ignitech as delivered with the advanced timing should have better fuel economy. Perhaps, it is not the more advanced timing, but the actual ignition timing curve should be tweaked?

 

The two curves are variable in several ways with the Ignitech.

 

1st you could vary the TPS (MAP) setting voltages on the Misc. screen to alter the vacuum response.

 

2nd, on the Advance tab, you could change view to 'Tab'. By backing off the 1st four rows in the graph a few points at a time, you may see a change in mileage.

 

I attached a screen shot of Advance screen in TAB mode. With range I would suggest lowering slightly.

 

Gary

[icebrrg3rd]

Other than I still have that 4k rpm drop-out issue every now and then, my mpg is around 35, but that is city (25-30 mph & many stoplights/stop signs and an aggressive right hand). My latest hwy cruising averaged 43.4 mpg, with speeds maybe exceeding the legal limit . So my TCI seems to be working ok. Just my $.02.

 

-Andrew

[Prairiehammer]

According to the factory manual for my 1990, the ignition timing advance is at about 36°BTDC at 2500 rpm, and at 48°BTDC at 5000 rpm. It remains at 48° through to redline.

 

The Ignitech advance curve shows about 13°BTDC at 2500 and 28°BTDC at 5000 rpm topping out at 32° at 7000 rpm remaining at 32° to 10000 rpm.

 

If I am reading the factory manual graph correctly, I should bump up the timing in all ranges substantially.

Am I reading the graph correctly? There is a Big difference in the advance maps if I am.

[dingy]

According to the factory manual for my 1990, the ignition timing advance is at about 36°BTDC at 2500 rpm, and at 48°BTDC at 5000 rpm. It remains at 48° through to redline.

 

The Ignitech advance curve shows about 13°BTDC at 2500 and 28°BTDC at 5000 rpm topping out at 32° at 7000 rpm remaining at 32° to 10000 rpm.

 

If I am reading the factory manual graph correctly, I should bump up the timing in all ranges substantially.

Am I reading the graph correctly? There is a Big difference in the advance maps if I am.

 

In the manual, all you are seeing is a 2D representation of the advance curve that is in the TCI, It doesn't take into account the boost sensor.

 

I just emailed you another IGN file to look at.

 

If your RPM settings are going to 10000, you must have VMax curve in there. The Venture curve ends at 8400.

 

Attached a picture of 3D ignition view from Ignitech software.

 

I am all for some people experimenting with the settings in the Ignitech unit. I would suggest this involves the advance settings. The Bike tab is fixed on what it needs with possible exception of compensation settings. I don't know what they change.

 

The Misc tab setting has the MAP sensor voltage settings on it. There probably is better settings for these. Each bike may be a little different on voltage spread settings.

 

Servo tab has nothing for Ventures. Test tab is for bench testing outputs of TCI.

 

Gary

[mralex714]

 

I just emailed you another IGN file to look at.

 

Gary

 

Is this file going to get better gas mileage? my best tank so far has been 34MPG. Could you send me a copy also.

Thanks

 

Duane

[Prairiehammer]

[ATTACH]78272[/ATTACH]

 

[ATTACH]78273[/ATTACH]

Well.

My 3D map looks very much different than yours. I'm not certain what I am looking at when in 3D, but it appears there is a substantial dip in the advance. Shouldn't it be smoother?

 

I have been trying to provide a larger picture, but no matter what size the pic is on my computer, when I upload it, the pic is always reduced in size. Why is that?

Edited July 4, 2013 by Prairiehammer

[Ozlander]

The two curves are variable in several ways with the Ignitech.

 

1st you could vary the TPS (MAP) setting voltages on the Misc. screen to alter the vacuum response.

 

2nd, on the Advance tab, you could change view to 'Tab'. By backing off the 1st four rows in the graph a few points at a time, you may see a change in mileage.

 

I attached a screen shot of Advance screen in TAB mode. With range I would suggest lowering slightly.

 

Gary

 

No point in backing off the top row as nobody rides around with 0% TPS.

The 2nd row is 2% and I'm sure nobody is running highway speeds at 2% TPS.

So, I'd play around with the 3rd, 4th, 5th and 6th row.

[Ozlander]

Broadly speaking, increased ignition timing should result in better fuel economy, correct?

 

Retarding the timing usually results in poorer fuel economy, correct?

 

So, with that, the Ignitech as delivered with the advanced timing should have better fuel economy. Perhaps, it is not the more advanced timing, but the actual ignition timing curve should be tweaked?

 

Here is an article that suggests that max torque is obtained at less than max advance.

Me thinks that running at max torque would gave the best fuel mileage.

http://www.autospeed.com/cms/article.html?&title=Getting-the-Ignition-Timing-Right&A=109132

[dingy]

No point in backing off the top row as nobody rides around with 0% TPS.

The 2nd row is 2% and I'm sure nobody is running highway speeds at 2% TPS.

So, I'd play around with the 3rd, 4th, 5th and 6th row.

 

Where the bike would run in the "%" column would depend on what the settings where in the TPS voltage settings on the Misc page.

 

What I did to set the TPS voltage was to get the TP=-[%] bar (at lower left in all screens) bar to be all the way to left at a normal idle This is for the top (0%) voltage setting. If throttle was blipped just a little, bar would start to right. When throttle was cracked all the way open hard, I wanted the TP=-[%] bar to go almost all the way to right, Adjust the TPS 100% voltage setting to get this one dialed in.

 

Takes a number of tries to get this setting right. Each time you tweak it, program needs to be saved back in TCI, then recheck. It may take 10 or more tries to get it fine tuned in.

 

Gary

[Prairiehammer]

All this talk of "TPS" (throttle position sensor) and yet I am running with the "IAP" (MAP). Do I treat the MAP voltages as the same as TPS voltages?

On that note: the program shows an "IAP Error 19mv". Is that something I should try to fix?

[dingy]

All this talk of "TPS" (throttle position sensor) and yet I am running with the "IAP" (MAP). Do I treat the MAP voltages as the same as TPS voltages?

On that note: the program shows an "IAP Error 19mv". Is that something I should try to fix?

What is being used is a MAP sensor, hooked up to the TPS input. When using the IAP setting that Ignitech released with the V88 version seems to be the cause of the 3k~4k dropout problem that was experienced by some last year. That is why I am sending these out using the TPS setting.

 

Brian Kuhr (bkuhr) was working towards getting a convenient way to hook a TPS sensor up to the carbs. Don't know where he is at with this. I was supposed to try and hookup a unit he sent me to Tweety, but never got to it. I did buy a TPS sensor from Ignitech this last time. Would like to try and use it or similar on the RSV Hybrid bike.

 

Can you send me a screen capture or camera picture of the error you are seeing? "IAP Error 19mv"

 

gary(at sign)dinges.com

 

Your Miscellaneous screen should look like picture attached.

 

Gary

[Prairiehammer]

Here are screen shots of three tabs on the program as I am currently running.

How come I'm running with IAP if you send them out with TPS? If you recall, when I first got the Ignitech, we had a heck of a time just trying to get the bike to fire. Was this TPS to IAP change made to get it to fire?

As for the "IAP Error 19mv", I am not at the bike with a laptop right now and the error message does not show unless hooked up to the bike.

This "kpa", TPS, IAP, is all mumbo jumbo to me. "Play with voltage settings"? Explain how changing the voltage settings will manifest as a change in performance/mileage.

Edited July 5, 2013 by Prairiehammer

[dingy]

Here are screen shots of three tabs on the program as I am currently running.

How come I'm running with IAP if you send them out with TPS? If you recall, when I first got the Ignitech, we had a heck of a time just trying to get the bike to fire. Was this TPS to IAP change made to get it to fire?

As for the "IAP Error 19mv", I am not at the bike with a laptop right now and the error message does not show unless hooked up to the bike.

This "kpa", TPS, IAP, is all mumbo jumbo to me. "Play with voltage settings"? Explain how changing the voltage settings will manifest as a change in performance/mileage.

 

The voltage changes on the TPS setting on the Misc. page determine the actual range that the MAP sensor uses. If the voltages are not set to what is needed on the bike the advance curve can be shifted higher or lower on the Advance tab. Each bike could vary a little, depending on a number of factors. Air filter, sych settings, condition of motor.

 

Did you load curve into TCI that I sent you yesterday? I think it is a better overall restarting point than what is in your TCI now.

 

Gary

[Prairiehammer]

The voltage changes on the TPS setting on the Misc. page determine the actual range that the MAP sensor uses. If the voltages are not set to what is needed on the bike the advance curve can be shifted higher or lower on the Advance tab. Each bike could vary a little, depending on a number of factors. Air filter, sych settings, condition of motor.

So what recommendation do you have as a base line for the IAP voltages?

 

Did you load curve into TCI that I sent you yesterday? I think it is a better overall restarting point than what is in your TCI now.

Should I just manually adjust (TAB settings) the advance curve to match the IGN file you sent, or should I load the entire file onto the Ignitech that is on the bike? I noticed some different parameters in the "misc" tab from what I currently running.

[Ozlander]

I screwed around with adding an orifice in-line with the existing orifice, adding a fuel filter in-line and never got the %TPS to settle down during idle. With it jumping all over the place, it's hard to settle on a mv to use as a 0% TPS.

Just one of the things I need to work on.

 

If I wasn't retired I'd a lot more time to sort it out.

 

I feel we'll get the TCI 100% without putting a bike on a dyno. And with the CV carbs, a TPS is not the answer. And Ignitech needs to fix their MAP sensor problem.

[Prairiehammer]

And Ignitech needs to fix their MAP sensor problem.

What problem is that?

I thought v88 was written with a MAP sensor in mind, thus the setting for "IAP".

[dingy]

So what recommendation do you have as a base line for the IAP voltages?

 

Base line I would suggest 3.2V ~4.2V

Should I just manually adjust (TAB settings) the advance curve to match the IGN file you sent, or should I load the entire file onto the Ignitech that is on the bike? I noticed some different parameters in the "misc" tab from what I currently running.

You can open the TCIP4 softwre 2 times (or more) on your computer. Have existing program on one and new program on another.

 

You can copy & paste entire curve between different programs. Place cursor in uuper left corner of graph, then click and hold left mouse button, drag to lower right corner, release button and then press & hold CTRL & C key. (copy). Or like excel, there is a small block left and above the upper left entry in chart that will highlight all of chart as well. Then in existing program click on the upper left entry (#10) and press & hold CTRL & V key. This will copy all numbers in chart over. You can also do same thing for RPM settings in top row.

 

 

 

There is a couple of differences with the 90-93 Ventures.

 

1st, I don't believe the 90-93 will have the dropout problems that were seen using the IAP settings. The 90-93's have a single pickup coil setup. I have not had anyone that has a V88 unit running IAP report a dropout issue with a single pickup coil.

 

On the 83-89 Ventures/VMax, Ignitech tied pickup coils into two pairs and used a wasted spark setup.

 

Where I believe that this ties into the dropout problem is the 6 pin connector on the Ventures is in a very dirty location. It is prone to getting poor connections. Due to Ignitech tying pick up coils, the Ignitech unit seems more sensitive to a poor connection or pickup coil problem. This is reason I have been sending out a new connector for this connection.

 

But the 90-93 & 90-07 VMaxs seem OK. I have been running my bike with a V88 using TPS setting and have seen no 3000-4000 dropouts.

 

All this means on the 90-93 Venture you will probably be alright using the IAP settings.

 

What is nice about using IAP settings is that the left hand column on advance chart can be adjusted so that each row of the chart is in a linear increment. Meaning you could set it at 10,20,30,40,50,60,70,80,90,100. The TPS setting has fixed numbers on the left side of chart set at 0,2,5,10,20,30,40,60,80,100. This non linear setup somewhat skews what is being looked at on the advance settings.

 

As Ozlander said, a dyno will be best way to get this figured out. With being able to vary the timing in at least 3 different parameters, it is very confusing.

 

I do not have a program that replicates the stock TCI because there is no documentation an the effect that the boost sensor has on timing in a graph form that could be extrapolated to the Ignitech settings, at least that I am aware of.

 

Remember to program and settings you change back into the TCI, key on & press program button at top of TCIP4 window. You should see a blue bar dispaly in lower right of window indicating successful program.

 

Call me if you want and I will try to help., number is in my user profile.

 

Gary

[dingy]

I screwed around with adding an orifice in-line with the existing orifice, adding a fuel filter in-line and never got the %TPS to settle down during idle. With it jumping all over the place, it's hard to settle on a mv to use as a 0% TPS.

Just one of the things I need to work on.

 

If I wasn't retired I'd a lot more time to sort it out.

 

I feel we'll get the TCI 100% without putting a bike on a dyno. And with the CV carbs, a TPS is not the answer. And Ignitech needs to fix their MAP sensor problem.

 

Couple of pictures of what I did to smooth pulsing out. I am not currently using this though. The pulsing is there on a stock bike, you just don't know about it.

 

I tied all 4 intake ports together using a 5 port connector. Then ran line into short chamber made from 1.5" PVC, then to MAP sensor.

 

Ignitech doesn't supply the MAP sensor you get from me, it came from another source. I have talked to them about it and they do not admit to a problem. I have came across a post on Internet where there was another person not involved with any I have supplied complaining about same issue. Ignitech had his TCI back, but did not admit finding any issue with it.

 

Gary

[mralex714]

Couple of pictures of what I did to smooth pulsing out. I am not currently using this though. The pulsing is there on a stock bike, you just don't know about it.

 

Gary

 

Is using the airbox for the MAP sensor vacuum an option?

[dingy]

Is using the airbox for the MAP sensor vacuum an option?

 

I would doubt it. But with a sensitive enough sensor it might be possible. Interestingly, one of the new products I am involved with at work in a differential pressure sensor. It has -125 to +125pa sensitivity. I will check with electronics engineer to see if it could be adapted. I am the mechanical side of product.

 

The closer sensor is to the cause for the pressure drop, the better the response of the sensor will be.

 

Gary

[Ozlander]

My bike when using the IAP program had a fairly regular dropout around 4000 rpm and the definite dropout under hard acceleration at 3200 rpm.

 

Changing to the TPS program eliminated both problems.

 

I don't believe connectors were the problem.