Bike has the Ducati 900SS motor with the 2-valve Monster heads as stock. Motor is stock internally.

Added Uni Filters and stock Hypermotard Pipe.

Dual Lambda sensors. Running the bike in open loop for most of the map, closed loop in the cells that seem to be where I'm in cruise mode.

Idle is quite lean, but if I richen it up, the bike doesn't run as smoothly.

Generally, the bike accellerates great and cruises very well. I still have some work to do at the low end and the very upper RPM range.

I was surprised at how much I had to lean out the base map, and also at how much leaner the rear cylinder ran than the front.

It's still a work in progress, but I'm happy with it overall.
Pete

PS: I shifted the break points around to cluster them at the areas where I seemed to be spending most of the time

Thanks for your comments, they are most welcome. One of the reasons I wanted to post was to get feed back from those who'd already been there.

Pods - I'm pretty sure that's what we call UNI filters. Individual foam filters to replace the single filter in the big box, yes, I've got them.

My thinking with the O2 targets was to activate closed loop mode only at the cells where i seem to be holding steady throttle for long periods. This means highway cruising, backroad droning along, or surface street cruising. Here in Florida most of our roads are straight, flat and boring so I do a bit of just rolling along.

I am going to focus more on the idle, agreed it needs some attention.

I'll take a better look at the upper range, truth is I haven't spent too much time there. The cluster of throttle openings and RPM break points at the lower end was based on where I was spending the majority of my time riding. I do plan on playing around some more.

All comments or suggestions are welcome.
Pete

I'll try that out this weekend.

I'll admit to being a bit stumped though. I assume the numbers they give for TPS are degrees of throttle, not mv? I can convert, but they have duplicate entries for some numbers. There are two rows for value 3 and two for 6.

They also seem to have rounded the numbers off somewhat.

greenmonster wrote on 01/16/11 at 21:52:42:


I thought I'd post a follow up. I changed the breakpoints for TPS & RPM to match the factory map and added some fuel to the upper range.

Low to mid throttle response was noticeably worse. Top end felt better. Needs more testing, but I'm reverting back to my breakpoints.

Thanks Raz. I did the change in ECUController, I'm sure it would have made a mess otherwise.

I wasn't expecting any performance difference just from re-aligning the breakpoints, so that was a surprise. Of course, there's the possibility that the difference was just in my head, but the bike just didn't seem as crisp under accelleration.

greenmonster wrote on 01/26/11 at 23:03:12:

But of course! If you change the breakpoints only, the map will not match its intended breakpoints.
Let's say you have this part of the map (and that these values are very good):

RPM         ...  4000  5000  6000  7000  ...
InjDur14    ... 10000 11000 12000 13000  ...

Now, say you decide you can ditch the 6000 column because it will interpolate just fine, but would benefit from a new one at 4500 because you happen to know things vary more at that range. If you just edit the breakpoints in WordPad:

RPM         ...  4000  4500  5000  7000  ...
InjDur14    ... 10000 11000 12000 13000  ...   <-- unchanged

You end up with a pw of 12000 instead of 11000 at 5000 rpm, and 12500 (runtime interpolated) instead of 12000 at 6000 rpm. If the map was good before, it is ruined.

When you use ECUController, it will transpose the affected portions of the map, so the net result at any given rpm and throttle is unchanged - but hopefully with a better foundation for future tweaks:

RPM         ...  4000  4500  5000  7000  ...
InjDur14    ... 10000 10500 11000 13000  ...   <-- transposed

The pulsewidth at 5000 rpm is unchanged, as is the (runtime interpolated) pw for 6000 rpm. For the new column of 4500 rpm, a new value is interpolated from the surrounding cells. At this point, the map should virtually perform the same as the original. But future tweaks or AutoTune could later tune this newly inserted value to, say, 10700 while the original map would always use 10500 from runtime interpolation between cells.

Hey Rat, which injectors your bike run the IAW-042 (red top,190cc/min) or the IAW-031 (green top, 270cc) ?
I have a 1990 900ie which comes with the reds, but I am using the cams from the 900ssie which I think use the greens.

I have just about finished the restoration of my bike and was going to stay with the reds for run up on the OEM ECU and switch to the greens once a few things where sorted however tonight I have found that my reds are jammed up so I have switched over to the greens and may have to run up with the caj ECU.

P

I have my Elefant running now using this map as a starting point with a global adjustment for my injectors(250cc/min).
A dyno session and improved my rwhp from 60 to 75! (will post my maps in a separate thread).  Most of that come from removing fuel so perhaps I would have been better without the global adjust !
Attached is a visual for the map. Funny looking spark map with some big advance which gave me a good deal of detonation when I moved to the Dyno but I hadn't noticed it on the road.
http://www.flickr.com/photos/83597740@N03/13272072115/lightbox/

The spark map in the FIM map looks better to me:
http://www.flickr.com/photos/83597740@N03/13272074215/lightbox/