My experience with EVO2, T800 D184SR, cordona shifter and Jester exhaust

ArcticWhite

ArcticWhite

Joined Jun 2019
456 Posts | 532+
canada
Finally finished all my testing and just about to do a tuneboy tune on my bike.

Here is what I have done and what I have experienced.

I had my bike flashed to EVO 2 with stock tune on stock bike. I immediately noticed an improvement in the shifter. It is smoother under all throttle positions, less disruptive to the chassis, and does not suffer from the odd long delay shift like the stock shifter tune does.

I then put the Jester exhaust on and the T800 D184SR tune on. It appears the T800 tune overwrote the EVO2 quick shifter settings as the shifter went back to shifting like stock or even worse than stock. Long delays and at times, shifts that disrupt the chassis. Very disappointing on that front. EVO2 traction control was not overwritten nor was the EVO 2 new riding modes.

The T800 tune was also horrible with my Jester exhaust. Definite lean issues during part throttle cruise and constant highway cruise. It seemed like the bike was going into deceleration fuel cut before closed throttle. Low RPM (3000 to 4000) smoothness was better with the T800 tune. WOT power seemed OK, but did suffer from a flat spot. I really wouldn't recommend using the T800 Termi tune with the Jester exhaust. For me, I was not happy with how the bike ran.

I then had the dealer flash the bike back to stock while I left the jester exhaust on. Of course, it now triggered the engine like for exhaust valve. However, the bike ran much better at part throttle. Almost stock like. WOT has more of a flat spot than with the T800 tune. The shifting was back to what I experienced when the EVO2 flash was first applied to my bike stock. Super smooth and quick. Honestly the bike was better to ride with the stock tune and Jester exhaust than the T800 tune. I would not waste my money on the T800 tune. However, I did no testing of AFR ratios at WOT. I would expect them to be lean with the removal of the valve, cat, and addition of a free flowing exhaust. Because of this, I don't feel running an after market exhaust with the stock tune is a good long term option. If it is indeed lean, it will take its toll on engine longevity.

Finally, one the tune was returned to stock and the EVO2 software restored, I added the Cordona shifter to my bike. It was yet a noticeable improvement to shifting. Shifting was already good and smooth from the EVO2. What the cordona adds is what seems to be shorter kill times (likely due to the quicker acting load cell vs. mechanical switch), more consistent shifts, and better shifter feel. Since I could perceive an improvement in shifting, I feel an aftermarket shifter is a worthwhile investment on the V4, especially when you take into account the failures with the stock shifter.

I can say this for certain, road riding is one thing, but either option (T800 or stock tune) with the jester exhaust disrupts how the bike runs enough that you would not be happy with the bike on a racetrack. It would definitely be a step down from the factory bike. If you spend time on the track, or have expectations of the bike running like stock or better than stock on the street, I would not add a jester exhaust to the bike without being prepared to dyno tune the bike.

To me, it is worth putting the effort into the bike for how the jester exhaust sounds. I think it is fantastic, even more aggressive sounding (deeper and more rumble) than the Akra exhaust.

I'm going to start the tuneboy tuning today. I am curious to see if the tuneboy tune overwrites the EVO2 shifting. I am also curious to see how well I can get the bike to run.
 
  • Like
Reactions: KurtP, craig bush and DucatiKev
The back and forth sounds like a bit of a headache. Hopefully the tuneboy sorts out the best of both worlds with the better shifting and better power application.
 
  • Like
Reactions: craig bush
I posted in your other thread on this....getting part throttle rideability right on a road bike with close loop fueling disabled is difficult.

for my edification, when you say "flashed to evo 2" what does that mean?

Following with great interest...good luck!
 
KurtP said:
I posted in your other thread on this....getting part throttle rideability right on a road bike with close loop fueling disabled is difficult.

for my edification, when you say "flashed to evo 2" what does that mean?

Following with great interest...good luck!
Click to expand...
It means Ducati's EVO2 upgrade. It does not modify fueling or spark, just enhanced on-track traction control (different module than the ECU) and enhanced quick-shifting (some of these changes are in the ECU and appear to be overwritten with any of the aftermarket tunes). I was really hoping TuneBoy could read the ECU file, then just modify the fuelling and timing tables. If you could do this, you would not have to worry about overwritting any of the other functions/enhancements. I do understand why they do this, however, since at any time Ducati flash enhancements could change physical locations of the tables in the ECU which then, if the software went to modify those locations could really mess things up.
 
  • Like
Reactions: KurtP
ArcticWhite, I have the jesters and t800 and on the road it seems not too bad. I have the same map you had.
If I use the t800 to go back to the stock tune which I believe you can are does it bring back the good QS program of the evo 2 which I also have?

I have not managed to get my bike on the track with all this ..... bs. I did my evo 2 upgrade around the time I did the jesters and t800 and was doing very short rides as we were in lockdown and can’t remember my sequence of it all. I seem to remember having great shifts for a very short time as I also have the translogic QS.

I’m in Australia and tune boy is a 40 minute ride from home so considering Wayne to tune my bike but I really really want my QS back to being spot on.

Help!


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
 
I also just noticed there is a new t800 tune on the upmap website for Arrow slip ons and wondering if that would be the goods


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
 
  • Like
Reactions: DucatiKev
Has anyone tried the new Arrow Slip-on tune from UpMap?



Motzarelli said:
I also just noticed there is a new t800 tune on the upmap website for Arrow slip ons and wondering if that would be the goods


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
Click to expand...
 
Motzarelli said:
ArcticWhite, I have the jesters and t800 and on the road it seems not too bad. I have the same map you had.
If I use the t800 to go back to the stock tune which I believe you can are does it bring back the good QS program of the evo 2 which I also have?

I have not managed to get my bike on the track with all this ..... bs. I did my evo 2 upgrade around the time I did the jesters and t800 and was doing very short rides as we were in lockdown and can’t remember my sequence of it all. I seem to remember having great shifts for a very short time as I also have the translogic QS.

I’m in Australia and tune boy is a 40 minute ride from home so considering Wayne to tune my bike but I really really want my QS back to being spot on.

Help!


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
Click to expand...

ArcticWhite do you know the answer to this QS question?


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
 
What I found is the T800 does not fully restore the stock map. When I flashed back to stock, it felt like it had the stock tune and the bike no longer said racing pro at start up, but the evo 2 shifting did not come back and the bike still didn't throw a exhaust valve DTC, so there was no way T800 returned the bike to full stock tune.

After the dealer reflashed it, it threw an exhaust valve DTC and the shifting was super smooth/quick again.

There does not appear to be a tuning option out there right now that maintains the evo2 DQS. Im sure eventually someone will include it, and there will be many many happy people.

If i had the ability to have tuneboy custom dyno tune the bike, i would. I bet it will be very good.

Their remote support sucks. I still haven't been able to get the logging software working and they are just starting to answer questions i asked them a month ago. A person needs the ability to talk to someone on the phone when they are having major software issues. With one month delays between email questions and answers, 12 questions will take me one year. They keep collecting people's money and making sales even though they can't service the sales. Very bad business practice.

Sent from my SM-N975W using Tapatalk
 
Last edited:
  • Like
Reactions: DucatiKev
That sucks, I am really hoping that tuneboy works out because I see it as being the most promising solution available.

You’re from Alberta right? Will you continue plugging along through winter?
 
tune boy is the worst possible option on the market. No o2’s to regulate closed loop, bad tabling without full alphaN, and forced to run openloop. It just “feels good” because its over fueled as opposed to too lean From stock.

tuneboy is great if you want to spend all your time trying to get your bike to run right. A tune for all 4 seasons; a new tune everytime you change geographic locations or elevation, a tune because its super hot a humid today, piston detonation because its super cold today. Unknown impact on the other electronics of the bike. All without a dyno. So its back to the ipad strapped to the tank bag watching a/f and knock correction and injector Duty cycle at 165mph.

i cant think of a worse way to go about tuning a street bike. We’ll be reading this thread a year from now and the OP’s bike still wont run the way it should.
 
Last edited:
burton said:
That sucks, I am really hoping that tuneboy works out because I see it as being the most promising solution available.

You’re from Alberta right? Will you continue plugging along through winter?
Click to expand...
I'm in Sask. I'm likely done when the snow hits unless I can get some dyno time.

Sent from my SM-N975W using Tapatalk
 
KurtP said:
tune boy is the worst possible option on the market. No o2’s to regulate closed loop, bad tabling without full alphaN, and forced to run openloop. It just “feels good” because its over fueled as opposed to too lean From stock.

tuneboy is great if you want to spend all your time trying to get your bike to run right. A tune for all 4 seasons; a new tune everytime you change geographic locations or elevation, a tune because its super hot a humid today, piston detonation because its super cold today. Unknown impact on the other electronics of the bike. All without a dyno. So its back to the ipad strapped to the tank bag watching a/f and knock correction and injector Duty cycle at 165mph.

i cant think of a worse way to go about tuning a street bike. We’ll be reading this thread a year from now and the OP’s bike still wont run the way it should.
Click to expand...
I can't say I agree with your strong opinion on this. Right now I don't like Tuneboy because it is not working. However, it's tuning strategy is sound (if it works the way the documentation states). Unless you have direct experience tuning with it, I would be hesitant to accept your statements.

"No O2's to regulate closed loop" - there is no closed loop. Without O2's it is open loop.
"bad tabling without Alpah N". What does bad tabling even mean? I don't see many people mentioning Alpha N these days outside of Brentuning. A quote from Moats who builds tuning software/hardware for cars and has lots of tuning experience: "This is going to be rather brief because Alpha-N is rarely used as the primary strategy for engine management today. You should at least know what it is because it is often used as a “sanity check” for primary control strategies.

Alpha-N is also sometimes called “TPS maps” because the only sensor that is used for determination of fueling is the Throttle Position Sensor. (And measured RPM, or how fast the motor is spinning) Fuel and timing requirements for the engine are expressed as a function of RPM and TPS.

Alpha-N is used most of the time in tricky situations:

  1. When the MAP sensor or MAF sensor has failed and the primary control strategy is deemed to be invalid. Something-is-better-than-nothing is the idea. (“Load with Failed MAF” is an example from Ford-land)
  2. In conjunction with ITBs (Individual Throttle Bodies) due to the extremely low vacuum created by them (making Speed-Density tricky) and the desire to avoid needing to fit a potentially restrictive Mass Air Flow sensor (making MAF impossible). Again, something-is-better-than-nothing is the idea.
  3. In conjunction with ITBs and MAP as a load multiplier. (PowerFC D-Jetro for GTR Skyline, most notable example) ITBs + Boost – Alpha-N output is multiplied by a MAP sensor to come up with a composite load index.
  4. In conjuction with Speed-Density and some kind of blending algorithm. This approach is often used with very large camshafts that pull little vacuum at idle. Basically, TPS and MAP are allowed to contribute varying amounts to the overall load calculation. Net result: more stable and meaningful load index close to idle when MAP sensor readings are unstable. Found on the Electromotive TEC3 among others.
Alpha-N is very poor at dealing with hills (think about engine load going up and down hills at a constant throttle position), temperature variations and just about anything else that you’d care about except close to wide open throttle where it does fine."

In an open loop tune, you do NOT have to create a tune for all situations. This leads me to believe you do not understand open loop algorithms. Although they use tables rather than feedback from a MAF or O2's, it DOES compensate. Fuelling requirements for changes in temp and elevation are pretty standard equations and are built into open loop operation. It runs the calculations off of temp and Baro sensor and adjusts accordingly. Get the base tables right and the rest follows pretty well off of these calcs. FACT: most mountain snowmobiles use open loop strategy and they operate from sea level to 10,000ft over a broad range of temps and run just fine. In other words, they operate over a range of conditions you will never see on a Ducati and yet their factory designers use open loop fueling.

Also keep in mind the factory Ducati tune uses open loop fueling for everything other than idle and light throttle cruise. Wideband, closed loop all the time strategies have their own issues that have prevented them from becoming the mainstream ecu algorithm. They are susceptible to exhaust leaks as one example.

"So its back to the ipad strapped to the tank bag watching a/f and knock correction and injector Duty cycle at 165mph.". This is NOT how Tuneboy works. If logging was working, I could go drive around without looking at anything, running loggging through the different throttle positions and RPMS, look at the log files after and have the auto tune algorithms calculate the changes required to the base tables. Your statement shows a lack of understanding on how this software works. The only reason I did what I did was because I did not have Tuneboy's logging software working and I needed a rough tune to make the bike safe to ride.

"We'll be reading this thread a year from now and the OP's bike still won't run the way it should" - My bike is already running better than with the T800. In fact, I would bet very few people would be able to tell the tune is off on my bike from riding it. I'm one of those perfectionist type people and am doing this to get the most out of the bike. I want it the best it can be.

Anyway, this is coming from someone who has done tuning on multiple platforms: powercommander, rapidbike, LT1Edit, TunerCat, and HP tuners. I have no affiliation to Tuneboy and am not recommending it until I get a product that works as they state. I have already tried the canned T800 tune and know I would not recommend that with the Jester exhaust. Maybe its closer to good on other exhausts. And, I'm willing to invest the money in other tuning solutions if they are out there and proven. However, I want something I can do myself. And right now, all that is available is Tuneboy. I am not sold on Brentuning. It is just a canned tune no different than other canned tunes, unless you go to their shop for a dyno tune. A canned tune will never be perfct. Many people have had good success with it and many people bad experiences. The problem is, on the V4, there is very little scientific evidence of how well Brentune works (I don't see independent before and after dyno's with AFR or actual table reads by people that demonstrate what has been changed in the tune, etc).

Right now, there are no custom (specific tune made based off of how your specific bike operates) tune options available so you are stuck with canned tunes and therefore rideability and power are not as good as they could be. There could a little left on the table or a lot. We won't know until custom tuning ability exists and has good independent verification. For now it is what it is and I am sharing my experience.
 
  • Like
Reactions: KurtP and DucatiKev
ArcticWhite said:
"No O2's to regulate closed loop" - there is no closed loop. Without O2's it is open loop.
"bad tabling without Alpah N". What does bad tabling even mean? I don't see many people mentioning Alpha N these days outside of Brentuning. A quote from Moats who builds tuning software/hardware for cars and has lots of tuning experience: "This is going to be rather brief because Alpha-N is rarely used as the primary strategy for engine management today. You should at least know what it is because it is often used as a “sanity check” for primary control strategies.

Alpha-N is also sometimes called “TPS maps” because the only sensor that is used for determination of fueling is the Throttle Position Sensor. (And measured RPM, or how fast the motor is spinning) Fuel and timing requirements for the engine are expressed as a function of RPM and TPS.

Alpha-N is used most of the time in tricky situations:

  1. When the MAP sensor or MAF sensor has failed and the primary control strategy is deemed to be invalid. Something-is-better-than-nothing is the idea. (“Load with Failed MAF” is an example from Ford-land)
  2. In conjunction with ITBs (Individual Throttle Bodies) due to the extremely low vacuum created by them (making Speed-Density tricky) and the desire to avoid needing to fit a potentially restrictive Mass Air Flow sensor (making MAF impossible). Again, something-is-better-than-nothing is the idea.
  3. In conjunction with ITBs and MAP as a load multiplier. (PowerFC D-Jetro for GTR Skyline, most notable example) ITBs + Boost – Alpha-N output is multiplied by a MAP sensor to come up with a composite load index.
  4. In conjuction with Speed-Density and some kind of blending algorithm. This approach is often used with very large camshafts that pull little vacuum at idle. Basically, TPS and MAP are allowed to contribute varying amounts to the overall load calculation. Net result: more stable and meaningful load index close to idle when MAP sensor readings are unstable. Found on the Electromotive TEC3 among others.
Alpha-N is very poor at dealing with hills (think about engine load going up and down hills at a constant throttle position), temperature variations and just about anything else that you’d care about except close to wide open throttle where it does fine."
Click to expand...

exactly what i said Re open/closed loop. Removing the o2’s limits you to openloop, which you have to table the values for. You dont want to use alphan which is one of the only ways to make a NA engine run predictably without a o2 sensor reference, stft, and ltft. Why youre worried about maf or map and lack the redundancies while removing the built in reduncancy in the first place is a mystery to me. Im not arguing for alphan as the best strategy, im
arguing for it possibly being the best one when youre determined to alter the way the system was designed to work in the first place. Why you think alphan checks of the same sensors youre restricting yourself to wont accomplish the same or better environmental adjustments is also a mystery to me.

alphan came to fame when dtm m3’s used it. They were all individual throttle body engines with cams so big they practically choked at idle. What alphan needs is accurate data on airflow and volume, so you need it calibrated for the individual set up. Hardly a disadvantage since thats what we’re all trying to do anyway.

running “open loop” may run “fine”, but youre very likely going to be dumping fuel.

In an open loop tune, you do NOT have to create a tune for all situations. This leads me to believe you do not understand open loop algorithms. Although they use tables rather than feedback from a MAF or O2's, it DOES compensate. Fuelling requirements for changes in temp and elevation are pretty standard equations and are built into open loop operation. It runs the calculations off of temp and Baro sensor and adjusts accordingly. Get the base tables right and the rest follows pretty well off of these calcs. FACT: most mountain snowmobiles use open loop strategy and they operate from sea level to 10,000ft over a broad range of temps and run just fine. In other words, they operate over a range of conditions you will never see on a Ducati and yet their factory designers use open loop fueling.
Click to expand...

you would do well to validate those equations for your application. Those checks were designed to work in conjunction with stft and ltft, which you removed.

i have zero data on how snowmobiles run, or how well they hit their afr targets. I suspect it may not be the gold standard we are looking for in a road going performance bike.

it may compensate, but It has to compensate without a check reference; which means you have to validate all of those equations and values and then likely adjust them to your needs. The ecu isnt going to be able to add fuel based on a sensor input and result in correct fueling until something does the reference check. Either an o2 sensor or you. “Making power” and ”running correctly” arent the same thing.

Also keep in mind the factory Ducati tune uses open loop fueling for everything other than idle and light throttle cruise. Wideband, closed loop all the time strategies have their own issues that have prevented them from becoming the mainstream ecu algorithm. They are susceptible to exhaust leaks as one example.
Click to expand...

ive never worked with the continental ecu. I would suggest looking at how much time it spends in open vs closed. Bosch bmsx and bmsk spend way more time in closed loop than people thought at first. As high as 2/3 into your rev range and over 50% throttle angle. The idea that closed loop is this rare event in engine operation is old thinking. I think it would be interesting to see how much time its referencing closed loop the notion that you need wide bands for closed loop to run correctly is flat wrong. i lambda shift my narrow bands to a smooth 13.9-14.1 closed loop afr all day long. All thats needed is a wide bad reference check for how much voltage needs to come off the o2 sensor. Your assertion that this cant be dont with narrowbands is incorrect. and, the learning is maintained This way.

"So its back to the ipad strapped to the tank bag watching a/f and knock correction and injector Duty cycle at 165mph.". This is NOT how Tuneboy works. If logging was working, I could go drive around without looking at anything, running loggging through the different throttle positions and RPMS, look at the log files after and have the auto tune algorithms calculate the changes required to the base tables. Your statement shows a lack of understanding on how this software works. The only reason I did what I did was because I did not have Tuneboy's logging software working and I needed a rough tune to make the bike safe to ride.
Click to expand...
.

How sure are you about that? Your post after post of frustration about how you cant figure out how the software works and that you cant get them to answer your emails leads me to question how well the interface is designed and how well it works. i mean. Im glad youre datalogging at least.....well. Trying to....maybe one day youll be able to reference the data you need to actually tune the bike youve ripped half apart. Good thing the engines are cheap!! Hahaha

"We'll be reading this thread a year from now and the OP's bike still won't run the way it should" - My bike is already running better than with the T800. In fact, I would bet very few people would be able to tell the tune is off on my bike from riding it. I'm one of those perfectionist type people and am doing this to get the most out of the bike. I want it the best it can be.

Anyway, this is coming from someone who has done tuning on multiple platforms: powercommander, rapidbike, LT1Edit, TunerCat, and HP tuners. I have no affiliation to Tuneboy and am not recommending it until I get a product that works as they state. I have already tried the canned T800 tune and know I would not recommend that with the Jester exhaust. Maybe its closer to good on other exhausts. And, I'm willing to invest the money in other tuning solutions if they are out there and proven. However, I want something I can do myself. And right now, all that is available is Tuneboy. I am not sold on Brentuning. It is just a canned tune no different than other canned tunes, unless you go to their shop for a dyno tune. A canned tune will never be perfct. Many people have had good success with it and many people bad experiences. The problem is, on the V4, there is very little scientific evidence of how well Brentune works (I don't see independent before and after dyno's with AFR or actual table reads by people that demonstrate what has been changed in the tune, etc).

Right now, there are no custom (specific tune made based off of how your specific bike operates) tune options available so you are stuck with canned tunes and therefore rideability and power are not as good as they could be. There could a little left on the table or a lot. We won't know until custom tuning ability exists and has good independent verification. For now it is what it is and I am sharing my experience.
Click to expand...

Thats a lot of expertise. Only thing ive got that competes is the fact my bike runs right.

i applaud the desire to make it run the best it can, but at this time the best way to make it run was a stock or akra exhaust with an upmap and lambda shift closed loop in either case. Or correcting fueling with a piggy back Until solutions are better sorted. But, i guess someone has to be first.

brentune may or may not be the best option. It has to be evaluated On the merits When its done, but its worked great on my bmw. i think the best we will be able to hope for out of forced open loop/tuneboy and likely rexxer down the road is a bike that makes good power at wot and runs Too rich everywhere else. My previous ducati fit that description to a t.

I genuinely hope you end up proving me wrong. It would be great if you get this software to make the bike run well tuned...powerful and efficient. power isnt the only thing that makes an engine run “well”

edit typed from phone with all punctuation and grammar issues therein. Huzzah.
 
Last edited:
Still on phone traveling.

to clarify- i dont advocate for open loop only mapping of ANY kind over good closed/open combination on a road bike application. the data gained from the o2 sensors migrating to open loop tables via ltft is a good thing to have on a road/traveling/touring bike. My brentune file is still lambda enabled, which is why i like it.

alpha n has its limitations too. Going from zero ft to 10000ft and back in one shot can be difficult to dial in perfectly. If you can show me am open loop map for your bike when youre done that has stable and appropriate afr summer, winter, 10000ft and 0ft; then great. Like i said, i hope for performance sake you can prove me wrong. My speculation is that your bike will run smooth and make good power most of the time and have .... mpg, and possibly gas contamination in the oil from running too rich most of the time. And again, i hope you can show the data that proves me wrong.

the other question i have re:tuneboy is are you able to access the tq and throttle limiters in the ecu? If not, why use this and not a piggyback? Id guess rapid bike will have the evo and race out soon if not already. These adjust closed and open loop fueling.

youre definitely blazing a trail here, and its a road that looks rife with frustration. My argument is that i think the *only* advantage tuneboy gives is that its available right now, although one could argue the lack of support raises the question of how realistic that availability is. This looks and feels to me like leaping before looking.
 
  • Like
Reactions: craig bush
KurtP said:
Still on phone traveling.

to clarify- i dont advocate for open loop only mapping of ANY kind over good closed/open combination on a road bike application. the data gained from the o2 sensors migrating to open loop tables via ltft is a good thing to have on a road/traveling/touring bike. My brentune file is still lambda enabled, which is why i like it.

alpha n has its limitations too. Going from zero ft to 10000ft and back in one shot can be difficult to dial in perfectly. If you can show me am open loop map for your bike when youre done that has stable and appropriate afr summer, winter, 10000ft and 0ft; then great. Like i said, i hope for performance sake you can prove me wrong. My speculation is that your bike will run smooth and make good power most of the time and have .... mpg, and possibly gas contamination in the oil from running too rich most of the time. And again, i hope you can show the data that proves me wrong.

the other question i have re:tuneboy is are you able to access the tq and throttle limiters in the ecu? If not, why use this and not a piggyback? Id guess rapid bike will have the evo and race out soon if not already. These adjust closed and open loop fueling.

youre definitely blazing a trail here, and its a road that looks rife with frustration. My argument is that i think the *only* advantage tuneboy gives is that its available right now, although one could argue the lack of support raises the question of how realistic that availability is. This looks and feels to me like leaping before looking.
Click to expand...

the discussion between you and ArcticWhite is way over my head, but i appreciate the insight from members like the two of you with advanced levels of knowledge.

if i understand correctly, there is generally room to improve the factory ecu mapping for performance due to oem constraints regarding fuel economy. what do you consider the best solution?
 
  • Like
Reactions: KurtP
As far as I'm concerned, for the v4 platform, there appears to be no proven custom tune software available to the public right now. However, this is not what the majority are looking for. Most do not want to tune their own bikes.

There are some tuners like SLR popping up that appear to be able to custom tune a V4. If you live close to one of the tuners that can actually dyno tune a V4, that is the best option. Canned tunes you download to your bike are hit and miss (outside of factory developed Akra tune, which likely still leaves some power on the table).

My advice would be stick with stock or Akra until you have someone you can take your bike to for a custom dyno tune.

The comments about tuneboy tunes running rich, etc likely comes from the fact that most use tuneboy as a canned tune. They load one of tuneboy's canned tunes on and call it good. They dont go through the effort of installing widebands, logging, and doing actual custom tuning with the tuneboy software, as this is a lot of work, time, and takes some tuning knowledge to get a good result.




Sent from my SM-N975W using Tapatalk
 
  • Like
Reactions: KurtP and craig bush
craig bush said:
the discussion between you and ArcticWhite is way over my head, but i appreciate the insight from members like the two of you with advanced levels of knowledge.

if i understand correctly, there is generally room to improve the factory ecu mapping for performance due to oem constraints regarding fuel economy. what do you consider the best solution?
Click to expand...

i think what’s “best” depends on your priorities and what you use the bike for. Arctic and I are from two separate camps at opposite ends of the spectrum.
for me, i think the bike should run as efficiently as possible across the widest range of environmental and geographic factors possible. I dont believe, nor have i ever seen in person, an open loop only map accomplish this.

my bike always runs 13.9 +/- .1 afr at closed loop. Summer. Winter. Spring. Fall. 10000ftasl 1000ft below dry or humid Good gas or bad. This has been proven with datalogging and multi continent operation of the bike, and i can adjust it as i see fit down to low 13’s or lean it out. this data keeps my openloop tables better adjusted For power while being efficient on fueling at cruise. artic says this isnt possible because he believes you cannot lambda shift a narrow band, but this is wrong, and theres data to prove it. My tune is “constantly learning” and adjusts to parameters. Is it possible an extra couple hp might be found with an ultra specific tune? Maybe. Sometimes. Question everyone has to ask themselves is whether or not the headache that comes with it is worth it or not.

i have yet to see an openloop only flash accomplish this. Theres a reason race teams always have The lap top connected to the bike at every race. The tune is getting adjusted. Artic does not agree with my assessment, and as ive said previously i hope he is able to put up data and prove me wrong at somepoint. It would make tuning much easier. He seems to have alot of experience tuning. Personally, id rather set it and forget it and have it work all the time. Im not big on having to make adjustments or constantly “check the tune“. I didnt like it in high hp cars, either. This is another thing I hope artic can eventually show isnt an issue and is sorted. I take pause at the notion of the idea that ”comments about running rich come from canned tune”. Thats exactly my point. The ability of the program to “learn” or adjusted is greatly compromised because by disabling closed loop you disable stft and ltft learning. personally i want that on a road going bike.

imo the best solution right now is to run akra exhaust and mapping on account of them seemingly being the best calibrated, vetted, and compatible with ducati electronics on this bike. Then lambda shift to 13.8-14.0 based on what you like the feel of. As other options get sorted, bren, tuneboy, piggy backs, etc something better might appear. and, imo, something like a af-xied is the best bet for it, if they would make it for ducati again or you wire up your own connectors.
 
Last edited:
  • Like
Reactions: craig bush

Similar threads

J
Panigale V2 Pops and backfires with Arrow Exhaust Slip
Replies
5
Views
260
Forewarned
Forewarned
H
SLR Tuning (my terrible experience)
Replies
37
Views
3K
Hok
H
L
Panigale V4S 2022
Replies
2
Views
327
SBK-SP
SBK-SP
Vicati
For Sale Panigale 1299s and Panigale 959 Full bolt ons
Replies
9
Views
369
Vicati
Vicati
S
For Sale 2017 1299 base - complete part out (second thread)
Replies
7
Views
265
SirJAG
S

Register CTA

Register on Ducati Forum! This sidebar will go away, and you will see fewer ads.

Recent Discussions

Recent Discussions