RC51 Forums banner

1 - 20 of 199 Posts

·
Registered
Joined
·
69 Posts
Discussion Starter #1 (Edited)
I was instructed to start a new thread, so here it is.

---

Intro
If you own a Power Commander 5 for your RC51, have you ever noticed weird surging or power fluctuations around the 5000 RPM range? If you have the auto tune, have you noticed that the trims will excessively lean the 4500 - 5500 RPM range? If so, read on! I'm looking for individuals who are using a Power Commander 5 (AKA PCV) on the RC51, who are willing to run a simple test to see if your PCV is having the same issue I have run across on two separate bikes with two completely different PCV units.

Back Story
Long story short, I purchased a PCV about a year ago (Sep 2014) with auto tune. I added the O2 bungs, installed everything and was off and running, only... it wouldn't run right at certain RPM ranges. I tweaked, adjusted trims, fiddled, advanced the map, demoted the map you name it, I tried it out. What I finally discovered, is that the PCV has a fundamental problem where I "believe" it is receiving RF interference from the bike, causing the RPM to bounce 400 - 800+ RPM with a constant throttle position. The issue is most common around 5000 RPM (+ or - 300 RPM) but I have also noticed the same issue around 3500 and 6500 (give or take) though it is nowhere as severe, it still causes problems.

The Problem
The problem with the RF interference (to my best guess) is that it causes the PCV to begin pulling fuel from not one cell, not two cells, but across three different cells simultaneously if you're on the 500 RPM map. Drop the map to the 250 RPM and it will try compensating for 6+ different cells. If the PCV is trying to pull fuel from more than the target cell at the exact same time, what do you thing is going to happen? Well, when the auto tune is hooked up, it freaks out and goes "whoa! That's way too much fuel!" so it leans out all of the problem cells, regardless of what you have dialed in for your AFR value. If the AT isn't hooked up, it doesn't matter WHAT you plug in for fuel values because the PCV is trying to give the bike too much fuel (if you have a downloaded map).

See the problem in action:
https://youtu.be/53I7zpZjlt4


Testing
So, in order to test the issue, hook your bike up to a computer, fire it up and begin revving it while in neutral. (You're gonna piss the neighbors off) When you get around 4800 RPM, begin slowly increasing the throttle. If the PCV is working properly, you should see the RPM bounce approximately 40 - 80 RPM. However, if it has the same problem as I have discovered on two different PCV units across two completely different 03 RC51's, you will notice the RPM bounce around, way beyond the 40 - 80 range. As you move past the trouble area, it should clear back up. The problem area is usually only in a window of about 100 RPMs but within that area, it will be very noticeable if it's acting up.

Problems with DynoJet
DynoJet is aware of "my" situation. I can't get their warranty manager Stan Lass to call me back, even though I started the issue with them back around March of this year (2015). I've spoken to those guys countless times and I've only spoken with Stan twice, despite multiple promises that he would call me back from various people. The last time I spoke with Stan around the end of July, he sent me out a second PCV unit to test (same issue). I can't get a hold of him to find out if he wants it back and since it doesn't work, I can't even sell it out from underneath them (not that I would...). I'm at wits end and finally biting the bullet to ask for help from the community to get enough people to test and hopefully confirm that it is an issue that needs to be properly and professionally addressed by DynoJet.

Additional Thoughts
Note: The problem does not appear on a Power Commander III, only the PCV. Changing the PCV negative location from the battery to the frame, does not help. Adding filters around various power wires, does not help. I was informed by Stan from DynoJet that the PCV runs on a lower voltage than the PCIII, so it might be more susceptible to interference. DynoJet thought maybe it was a stuck injector. The way you can check for a stuck injector, is to watch the "Duty Cycle". Normally the Duty Cycle will increase gradually with engine load. If the injector is sticking, you'll see the duty cycle spike way up to a crazy high %, then drop back down to normal. In my testing, the duty cycle remained fairly constant at 10% - 15%.

Several things need to be determined if we want DynoJete to look into this:
1) How many others are experiencing the same problem.

2) What years are being affected? (SP1? SP2? Both?)

Current Update as of 11/11/2015
If you haven't been following this thread and don't feel like going through its entirety, the current "fix" for this problem is to run a Power Commander 3 inline first, then the Power Commander 5. Yes, you will need to run two power commanders to currently fix the problem. The PC3 does not suffer from the RPM bounce problem and cleans the fuel injection pulse, which then sends it to the PCV. So, ECM -> PC3 -> PCV. In theory, it doesn't matter what values are in the PC3 tables, however it is recommended to zero all of the tables.

If you don't have or want to run a PCIII, then you do NOT want to use the AT (auto tune) system as this amplifies the problem and can potentially create dangerous scenarios. If you do not wish to run the AT system and you also don't want to run the PCIII, then it is highly recommended to run your base map at 500 RPM instead of 250 RPM which creates a smaller window of error for the problem to amplify itself. Drive ratio gearing (sprocket teeth changes) can also affect the perception of the problem. By changing the drive ratio, you can move the problem window into RPMs where you are not doing static, constant throttle cruising. There are no suggestions for magic ratios at this time.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
2,186 Posts
This is from your earlier post
As a result, the AT if hooked up, leans the map WAY out... It's an issue with the PCV though, NOT the AT. Turning off the AT or zeroing the AT not to tune in those ranges, wont solve the problem because it is fundamental to the PCV unit.

The map doesn't matter either; advanced, demoted, 250 RPM, 500 RPM, AT attached, no AT attached, I can replicate the issue. I've contacted DynoJet and gotten nowhere, so if you also notice the same symptoms, call DynoJet and make it an issue! As far as I'm concerned, the PCV isn't worth buying for the RC51 until this problem is fixed.

Watch for an example:
https://youtu.be/53I7zpZjlt4

Interesting. Though this potential issue should not affect a fixed fuel map. The PCV does not alter the fuel map (and trim tables) unless the AT is on. With the AT off, the PCV will adjust fuel to whatever is in the corresponding cell, whether it is from one or three cells. There will be no issue with leaning, etc.

And if you want the have the AT on and not have this potentially affect the AT adjustment , one can zero out the AFR in these corresponding rpm/throttle opening cells to get around the problem. You can manually tune the fuel settings in the map to what you want.

My AT has pulled a lot of fuel at 5% throttle opening from 3250 to 5250 rpm, but it is also with a map that had added a lot fuel to this range. So I don't know what is the actual cause. I'll also note that I don't run the AT at 2% throttle opening.

I do see a relatively stable pattern to how my AT is altering the loaded fuel map. Trim values of pulling fuel become less as the throttle opening increases.

Of note though, I don't have a lot of miles so the trim maps still have many areas that need to be populated, not to mention more sampling runs to better average out the values.

I need a laptop to confirm the bouncing rpm measurements, which I have not done yet.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
69 Posts
Discussion Starter #5 (Edited)
Interesting. Though this potential issue should not affect a fixed fuel map. The PCV does not alter the fuel map (and trim tables) unless the AT is on. With the AT off, the PCV will adjust fuel to whatever is in the corresponding cell, whether it is from one or three cells. There will be no issue with leaning, etc.

And if you want the have the AT on and not have this potentially affect the AT adjustment , one can zero out the AFR in these corresponding rpm/throttle opening cells to get around the problem. You can manually tune the fuel settings in the map to what you want.
The issue DOES affect a fixed fuel map. The video I posted, is from a fixed fuel map with the AT completely disconnected from the bike. (I didn't have O2 bungs installed yet). When you watch the video, you can see it highlight three plus cells at the same time. It should never try to be in more than two vertical cells at the same time and ideally, it should only be in one cell as a constant. The only time / reason it will be in two cells is at the crossover point where the RPM is high enough to bounce to the next cell, but not high enough to keep it there permanently. You can adjust the fixed map to your hearts content, but it will always cause issues at the affected area. Zeroing out the AT AFR cells is a work around, and zeroing out the fixed map for those cells is a workaround, but it is not a solution that fixes the problem, it just makes it less noticeable. I know, I've tried.

Keep in mind, unless you are at a constant throttle in the problem range, you'll never notice it. It is a very small window that causes issues but if you manage to find that problem area, you'll surely notice it.

I need to ask: "Are you running the 250 RPM map or 500 RPM map?" The 500 map makes the problem less noticeable and a lot more bareable. With the 250 map, it will register fuel from 5 - 6 vertical cells simultaneously.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
2,186 Posts
The issue DOES affect a fixed fuel map. The video I posted, is from a fixed fuel map with the AT completely disconnected from the bike. (I didn't have O2 bungs installed yet). When you watch the video, you can see it highlight three cells at the same time. It should never try to be in three vertical cells at the same time. You can adjust the fixed map to your hearts content, but it will always cause issues at the affected area. Zeroing out the AT AFR cells is a work around, and zeroing out the fixed map for those cells is a workaround, but it is not a solution that fixes the problem, it just makes it less noticeable. I know, I've tried.

Keep in mind, unless you are at a constant throttle in the problem range, you'll never notice it. It is a very small window that causes issues but if you manage to find that problem area, you'll surely notice it.

I need to ask: "Are you running the 250 RPM map or 500 RPM map?" The 500 map makes the problem less noticeable and a lot more bareable. With the 250 map, it will pull fuel from 5 - 6 vertical cells simultaneously.
My point was that it is not a significant issue with a relatively smooth "fixed" fuel map (AT off). IMO. The way your first post was written it could be interpreted by readers that the PCV would lean out from this potential rpm reading issue under all running conditions. It won't if the AT is off, or if the AT is adjusted to manually trim that area.

The issue may technically be there, but it won't significantly affect the bike performance with the described work-arounds.

I'm running the 250 rpm gradient map.

Hope we get more info and samples, and that DJ responds back. Until then, at least it sounds like we have some work-arounds.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
69 Posts
Discussion Starter #8 (Edited)
My point was that it is not a significant issue with a relatively smooth "fixed" fuel map (AT off). IMO. The way your first post was written it could be interpreted by readers that the PCV would lean out from this potential rpm reading issue under all running conditions. It won't if the AT is off, or if the AT is adjusted to manually trim that area.

The issue may technically be there, but it won't significantly affect the bike performance with the described work-arounds.

I'm running the 250 rpm gradient map.

Hope we get more info and samples, and that DJ responds back. Until then, at least it sounds like we have some work-arounds.
Sorry if I made it sound like the AT would cause issues across the board... That was not my intent.

You're right in saying that the workarounds make it bareable, but it doesn't fix the underlying problem with the PCV and it only makes the symptoms less noticeable.

Bare in mind that the RPM range is the issue. In my video, I'm showing it off while in neutral, with no load on the bike. It's only sitting in the 2% - 5% columns. When you ride the bike, those RPM areas will cause issues in every single throttle position, regardless of what gear you're in because the PCV figures its cell position based on throttle position and RPM. It pulls the RPM from the injector pulse. So, if a person were to "work around" the problem, they would have to zero out the entire row for 4750, 5000 and 5250. For me, that's normal cruising RPM on the highway if I'm in traffic and need quick response.

So, if you're having issues with the surging around 5000 RPM, with the AT enabled, you'll see it making lean trims for the 4750 5000 5200 5500 5750 6000 6250 and 6500 cells and that's the entire row through the throttle position. You can zero the most offending row, but if you're riding at that particular RPM, it's now making incorrect trims for the other RPMs because the PCV thinks its in those RPM cells when it really isn't...

Anywho, point of this is to get others to test it and either confirm or disproove that the PCV has an issue that needs attention by DynoJet. I'm one guy. Big company's won't drop what they're doing for one person. If we can get 5 or 6 guys to confirm it, they might be more willing to look into it further.

Since the problem seems minor and isn't easily detected without setting the proper conditions, I'm guessing most guys just think "eh, it's an old bike..." Or "eh, it's a vtwin... Vtwins are always funky", then dismiss it and live with it. I would have never even noticed the problem had I not strapped a netbook to the bike and rode it around, watching what the software was doing at the time of the problem. For the longest time, I thought it was a fuel map issue. It wasn't until I disconnected the AT and applied multiple maps, including a zero map which uses the stock ECM map, that I realized it's a PCV problem. I thought maybe it was just my bike, until I totaled it in May and picked up a different RC51, only to discover the same problem.

Super curious to see what you figure out... Keep me posted :)
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
69 Posts
Discussion Starter #10 (Edited)
We're the second largest Powercommander distributor in the world. I'm sure there will be some eyes on this.
Thanks LDH. Any help on getting this resolved will be awesome. When I discussed this with Stan at DynoJet the second time I spoke with him, he did say there aren't a lot of PCV sales for the RC51. I theorized that they haven't heard of the issue before now because there aren't many folks using it.

I'll say there are more threads on the PCV for the RC51 now than there were close to a year ago...
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
2,248 Posts
Compared to the hundreds upon hundreds of PCIII USB's that have been sold since they came out in December of 2005 and one could easily claim the PCV version is kind of a small numbers unit since it hit the shelves in August of 2013 which is 7 years after the bike was discontinued :)

I do not have any way of tracking the quantity of PCII or PCIIIR units that were sold specifically for the RC51, but I am confident those were pretty substantial numbers as well.

I've personally used all 4 versions btw ;)
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
69 Posts
Discussion Starter #12
Compared to the hundreds upon hundreds of PCIII USB's that have been sold since they came out in December of 2005 and one could easily claim the PCV version is kind of a small numbers unit since it hit the shelves in August of 2013 which is 7 years after the bike was discontinued


I do not have any way of tracking the quantity of PCII or PCIIIR units that were sold specifically for the RC51, but I am confident those were pretty substantial numbers as well.

I've personally used all 4 versions btw
Yeah, I have the IIIUSB and it's rock solid. No complaints. Wish I could say the same with the V :-/
 

·
Premium Member
Joined
·
4,617 Posts
Interesting thread. I have a PCIIIr, which came with the bike when I bought it and works fine, despite having a lot less fueling cells on the map than later models. As the bike fuels perfectly I've never felt the need to mess with it.

I know you've probably already tried this, but have you tried re-installing the firmware to see if that makes any difference? I believe in the PC III that's possible, so would assume it also the case in the V.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
69 Posts
Discussion Starter #14
I know you've probably already tried this, but have you tried re-installing the firmware to see if that makes any difference? I believe in the PC III that's possible, so would assume it also the case in the V.
Yup, firmware has been re-flashed. I sent the original unit in for testing, which passed DynoJets tests with flying colors (they don't test on bike). They had me try different maps, different map modes, nothing worked. I finally convinced DJ to send another unit, which as you can see in the video, produces the same result.
 

·
Premium Member
Joined
·
2,697 Posts
I just tested mine.

2003, PCV, AT-300, 250 rpm cells, fixed map configuration

Similar results to what the OP described.

On my bike it starts jumping right around 5000 rpm and affects the +/- 2 to 3 cells around it in the 5% throttle column. I'm going to "0" out the affected cells on my AFR table as a bandaid and see what happens over the next week or so.

Here's my testing video, filmed at 1/8 speed, my cell tracer time was set 1 sec.
https://goo.gl/photos/m3CroJ1c1yvAXBDeA


So...Now what? I established that I have the problem but I don't know where to go from here.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
69 Posts
Discussion Starter #16 (Edited)
I just tested mine.

2003, PCV, AT-300, 250 rpm cells, fixed map configuration

Similar results to what the OP described.

On my bike it starts jumping right around 5000 rpm and affects the +/- 2 to 3 cells around it in the 5% throttle column. I'm going to "0" out the affected cells on my AFR table as a bandaid and see what happens over the next week or so.

Once the video uploads I'll attach the link.

So...Now what? I established that I have the problem but I don't know where to go from here.
Awesome! Thanks for the feedback. What I would recommend doing, is to go ahead and contact DynoJet and inform them of the issue. If possible, link over to this thread once you post your video. After that, it's a waiting game to see if 1) DJ will look into it further, or 2) if we need to collect more test results from others before DJ will take a serious look at it.

I can tell you from experience that zeroing out the AFR tables will help a bit, but you'll still notice the issue if you're riding at that RPM range at constant throttle. If you take corners hard, just be careful. I've had it sputter and buck on me doing a slow roll on through the affected ranges. (3500 5000 & 6500).

If you can, test it around 3000 - 3500. It should be less of a problem, but still a problem. The 6500 (and higher) RPMs really need to be checked on a dyno or infield with a netbook attached. Don't want to piss the neighbors off reving it to 6500+ ;-)

Oh, the other thing you can do that will help, is to change the map to the 500 RPM. It averages the fuel out and has less room to create problems.
 

·
Premium Member
Joined
·
2,697 Posts
Okay, so the end game is to get DJ to fix it. Cool.
I did some research on RF interference and ways to block/filter it and I have no idea on what to try to fix it that way, needless to say I'm not an electrical engineer.

I'll call DJ this week, I should have some time.

When I first installed the AT I spent a lot of time tuning the lower RPM's and didn't noticed any problems. And, I don't know about you but if I'm in the 6500 range, chances are I don't have a static throttle for this to be a problem, but I'll do as much of a full throttle sweep that I can (I don't high RPM on an unloaded motor) the next time I'm out in the garage. I'm sure I already pissed off the neighbors enough for one day.

I can see how the 500 RPM cells may help limit this problem but for me I'm going to keep with the 250 (for now). I don't want to reduce the overall tuning ability of the PVC just to sidestep a relatively small problem area that is outside my cruising RPM (about 4k).
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
69 Posts
Discussion Starter #18
Okay, so the end game is to get DJ to fix it. Cool.
I did some research on RF interference and ways to block/filter it and I have no idea on what to try to fix it that way, needless to say I'm not an electrical engineer.

I'll call DJ this week, I should have some time.

When I first installed the AT I spent a lot of time tuning the lower RPM's and didn't noticed any problems. And, I don't know about you but if I'm in the 6500 range, chances are I don't have a static throttle for this to be a problem, but I'll do as much of a full throttle sweep that I can (I don't high RPM on an unloaded motor) the next time I'm out in the garage. I'm sure I already pissed off the neighbors enough for one day.

I can see how the 500 RPM cells may help limit this problem but for me I'm going to keep with the 250 (for now). I don't want to reduce the overall tuning ability of the PVC just to sidestep a relatively small problem area that is outside my cruising RPM (about 4k).
I hear ya on the electrical thing... I'm not either. My Dad however, is an electrical genius. But, because of a stroke some years back and Parkinson's, I hate bothering him with it, especially to troubleshoot and fix a problem set in by a companies lack of attention to detail...

Since my issue with the PVC, I've been using another brands controller, but it isn't exactly official with the RC yet. I'm working with that company to get it dialed in but I will say, I've noticed surging on that controller as well, around the 4500 - 5000 range. I have a feeling that since the RC pulls tach from somewhere other than the fuel injector pulse, it isn't an issue with the ECM. The ECM isn't using that data so it doesn't care about the interference. All of the after market controllers use the injector pulse however, making every controller sucptible to the problem. I have a feeling that the voltage the controller runs on, whether PCV or the one I'm using, is low enough that it allows coupling. The PCIII runs at 9v - 12v which is why I don't think it has the problem. I'm going to contact the manufacturer of this other controller and see what voltage they run. Who knows, it might be the current map I'm testing on that controller.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
291 Posts
Philsward have you tried to isolate is it's the box, or wiring loom that's getting the interference? If neither one made a different then that would indicate it's coming from a connection. I'll test my pc5 once i hook it up. My bike has been a ground up build so I'll get back to this after i get the tank and tail ready to paint. From my car audio days, this can usually occur from being near a 12v power, which the main 12v power is in the loom by the tank/subframe. Might be able to shield the wires if the interfenerece is coming from external factors.
 

·
Premium Member
Joined
·
2,697 Posts
Philsward have you tried to isolate is it's the box, or wiring loom that's getting the interference? If neither one made a different then that would indicate it's coming from a connection. I'll test my pc5 once i hook it up. My bike has been a ground up build so I'll get back to this after i get the tank and tail ready to paint. From my car audio days, this can usually occur from being near a 12v power, which the main 12v power is in the loom by the tank/subframe. Might be able to shield the wires if the interfenerece is coming from external factors.
I was hoping for an audio guy to post up. When I read into what RFI is, most of it was about speakers.

There is a lot of 12v power wires that run through that same spot as the PCV harness. Fuel pump, rear coil, R/R, starter, just to name some of the higher amp ones.
 
1 - 20 of 199 Posts
Top