I have heard stock timing is too advanced already but the timing was retarded in gears 1-4, 0%-50% throttle. That was what one of the TREs was made to cure. I'd like to bring that in line with the unrestricted part of the timing curve if anyone knows any numbers for Dynojet ignition mapping.

* Last updated by: Rook on 10/26/2017 @ 3:39 PM *

May be of no help or anything,but when I installed the Brock's manual timing wheel on my 07,the setting was 4 degrees advanced.

Yeah, Grn, that's the key according to what I have read on forums but advancing all across the rpm/TP range is not a good idea.

The stock timing is restricted in gears 1~4 at 0~50% throttle from idle to 6000 rpm. People seem to agree advancing 4° in that zone makes an improvement.

Is it safe to advance timing below 6000 rpm by 4° in gears 5 and 6 or is that 4° just for gears 1~4?

I would be able to tell if I had timing maps/gear but all I have at present is this stock timing map from Romans and IDK what gear it is for.

* Last updated by: Rook on 10/29/2017 @ 2:31 PM *

WAIT! here we go!

"In the mean time here is the timing map from the 06/07 zx-14. The 08 may be slightly different but most likely they are the same. BTW the ECU has individual ignition maps for each cylinder but they are all identical."

halfway down page, with pic.

http://www.zx14ninjaforum.com/messages.cfm?threadid=A5BBD9DC-1372-66AE-3BD2DE55209E284D&page=3

So if there is a timing map for each gear but they are all the same, The gear position sensor must tell the ECU to pull timing in the first 4 gears, not the mapping. That must be why the TRE locked the gear position sensor in 6th gear. Unrestricted timing of 6th gear then applies to all gears.

To simulate the TRE by using an ignition module, the question remains: "how much to advance in gear 1, gear 2, gear 3, gear 4?" Does the ECU pull the same timing in all those gears or does it pull more for 1st gear than 2 and does 2 pull more than 3 and 3 more than 4?

More pics of gen1 timing here:
halfway down the page, compares stock gen1 timing to DJ timing map...

http://www.zx14ninjaforum.com/messages.cfm?threadid=C7E75527-1372-66AE-3B161D1B39C67F71&r=16&page=26

* Last updated by: Rook on 10/29/2017 @ 2:21 PM *

I'm getting some confusing info in my stock ignition map research but near as I can tell, this is it for the Gen1.

These two are from different sources and they are the same so I guess this is it.

In case anyone comes across this in the future, here's where my research has lead me.

A TRE will eliminate all timing restrictions 0~50% throttle below 6,000 rpm in gears 1 through 4) but according to Ivan himself, that wont make a big improvement by itself. The TRE's main advantage in increasing power is opening the flies quicker.

If you want to optimize timing, a TRE is probably the safest way to do it. I'll give it a try and see how it feels. Ivan said it would be a good idea to use a TRE if you are going to adjust timing with an ignition module because it will keep the ECU on one map instead of switching through each map for each gear. The ECU pulls timing differently for different gears and different throttle percents so locking the bike on one map is advantageous.

http://zx1441r.com/forum/viewtopic.php?f=9&t=4136

I plan to try the TRE and then compare it to advancing 2~4 degrees below 6000 rpm with the ignition module.

Unfortunately, Ivan is the only one who knows for sure what the exact timing restriction maps look like and he doesn't hand that info out. I'd love to be able to program every cell perfectly but I doubt I will ever have that info. Get an Ivan flash and according to him, you got perfectly adjusted timing for every throttle position and every rpm. All gears derestricted.

* Last updated by: Rook on 11/13/2017 @ 6:59 PM *

I would love to know what the ignition map that the TRE locks the ECU to looks like. I'm feeling kind of lazy and not really wanting to read through those other threads, so I'm just going to assume that the ignition map that you posted was for a non-TRE map.

I've been waiting for a couple of years now for Dynojet to get off their ass and update the firmware for either the POD300, ignition module or PCV to feed current timing info to the POD300. I asked DJ about the fact that the POD300 doesn't show what the current timing is years ago and they said "its a known bug and that they are working on a firmware update to address it". I'm interested as there's a few points when accelerating where it feels like I hit the turbo button and the bike pulls a lot harder.

I want to compare what the timing maps looks like in the cells near these points to see if the ECU map has a significant change in timing to account for the somewhat sudden increase in power or if its simply an efficient point in the engine (ie, intake resonance). I've already tuned the fuel map in these areas as much as I can so short of paying out to use a dyno and doing a "guess and check" method of adjusting the timing then measuring the results I'm at the end of what I can reliably do (seat of the pants dyno doesn't really count in my opinion).

I would love to know what the ignition map that the TRE locks the ECU to looks like.

I'm feeling kind of lazy and not really wanting to read through those other threads, so I'm just going to assume that the ignition map that you posted was for a non-TRE map.

From what I understand, that map shown above is the timing map for every gear 1 through 6th. The ECU makes adjustments to it according to TP and rpm. The timing intervention from the ECU happens only at 0 to 50% throttle and only below 6000 rpm and only in 1st through 4th gears. The adjustments are different for each gear, 1 through 4. First gear is retarded the most and the retard decreases as the gear gets higher. So yes, that is the timing map but through the adjustments from the ECU, it becomes a different map below 6000 rpm/50% throttle in gears 1 through 4. There are adjustment tables for gears 1 through 4 but Ivan and a few other people are the only ones who know them. I do not think Woolich software is able to see the adjustment tables. So, we are estimating when we adjust timing unless we are Ivan or perhaps D Guhl. I'm sure we have a good enough idea of what the retard is to make a reasonable estimate but it would sure be nice to know the exact numbers.

I plan to do more research so I know what I'm doing when I make an adjustment. For now, I think the retard is rather small. Advancing 2 to 4 degrees below 6000 rpm probably does more than just eliminate the ECU induced retard. I'm guessing advancing 2~4° might advance the timing a bit beyond what you see in the map above. I have to learn more about this though. I'm just getting started.

I've been waiting for a couple of years now for Dynojet to get off their ass and update the firmware for either the POD300, ignition module or PCV to feed current timing info to the POD300.

I've already tuned the fuel map in these areas as much as I can so short of paying out to use a dyno and doing a "guess and check" method of adjusting the timing then measuring the results I'm at the end of what I can reliably do (seat of the pants dyno doesn't really count in my opinion).

* Last updated by: Rook on 11/14/2017 @ 11:55 AM *

So yes, that is the timing map

Score for me! Its my understanding that the TRE for our bike sets the ECU to an "non-emissions map" in all gears, so I'm guessing that map also doesn't have the timing adjustments. Its been a while since I looked at my timing map but I don't remember seeing anything dramatic (2-4 degrees rings a bell).

Its my understanding that the TRE for our bike sets the ECU to an "non-emissions map" in all gears, so I'm guessing that map also doesn't have the timing adjustments.

It's either for emissions or just an extra safety backup like the flies are. Yes, the TRE 006A locks the mapping in Neutral. There's no need for timing adjustment there so I assume the engine runs straight off the table with no ECU intervention. The TRE 008 locks in 6th gear mapping and that has no timing restriction either, I suppose because 6th gear is docile enough that Kaw determined restricting timing would impede performance without any real need to provide the small margin of safety a timing retard gives in the lower gears. 5th gear also is unrestricted.

My only question about a TRE v adjusting by Ignition Module is, "is eliminating the timing retard better than advancing by ignition module 2~4 degrees?" Just eliminating the retard might only average 1 degree or less/cell for all I know. Every cell would have the retard removed perfectly but what if advancing another degree or two makes more power and still is safe?? Wouldn't you want the Ignition Module then? Ivan said just removing the retard without opening the flies faster is no big deal. Brock and Schnitz both overlook mentioning any improvement from a TRE as it regards timing, they focus instead on the flies. I'm guessing a TRE will not produce a big gain if the flies are out and tuned for. The increased timing may be hardly noticeable. My Texas buddy Kruz liked it on his flies out Gen1 but that was many years ago that he installed it. He commented mostly on the lack of on/off throttle backfiring with the 006A.

An interesting thing Ivan told me (Hub mentioned this a long time ago too) is that when you are decelling at 0% throttle, the fuel cut means there is NO fuel coming out of the injectors. The engine is NOT running--it's shut off the same as if you hit the kill switch. Touch the throttle again and the fuel comes back on. The engine starts up again. So all that cool decel noise is just engine vacuum. There is no ignition happening.

Too advanced(?) = Pings like a mother, will run backwards kind of too advanced. 'Our production bike is the worlds fastest' [when it came out] so now you are going to try to get more timing and do what with the [stock] parts?

TRE = If the gps sensor fails the tre kicks in. Say you're drag/road/hooligan racing and the sensor fails at over 150 mph. Will the tre retard @ 150+? Of course not. It could overheat the engine, score the piston skirts, snowball the aluminum off the skirt of the piston, begin to weld to the cylinder wall, lock the crank, and toss the rider off the bike. Would you design a bike like that with that kind of 'retard scenario?'

Ign = I'm going to apply a 1970's delco remy kind of black box made for a harley. There are 3 ignition curve stages: idle-low/mid load/heavy load. The sensor fails, the idle/low remains, the heavy load remains. Mid curve is lost. So watt you feel is the idle to heavy [seat of the pants] transition or a more abrupt curve going from 10° to 55°. The 40° is lost, according to the harley shop manual's limited abstract explaining the failure of the vacuum switch called a VOES (vacuum operated electrical switch).

I'm going to say the same thing happens with the FI type ignition of today. If the gps fails the same full advance remains, the same ilde/low curve remains. That's why it starts normal with the tre, as you heard no starting complaints.

Conclusion:
Mapping wise, the adjustable advance is out of phase with the cam sensor so you almost feel a tre twitch.
Mapping wise, you'll never mimic the tre = Digital signal is set, no longer are you in the analog of 1N23456.
Mapping wise, you'll have to run 10° up to mid, then full advance from mid to WOT.
Mapping wise, you play with retard with more exotic fuels and their burn rates.
Mapping wise, you might ping/det with too much advance if not run the engine backwards with the advance firing too soon. And when it reaches the kinetic (TDC), that pressured bubble will make it spin in reverse. Retard fires late and the unspent is not helped so much after TDC (no heat build via kinetic).

An interesting thing Ivan told me

(Hub mentioned this a long time ago too)

is that when you are decelling at 0% throttle, the fuel cut means there is NO fuel coming out of the injectors.

Remember, I simply disconnected about 9 sensors, where some gave a seat of the pants change in mapping. And I can't remember which hack set the 16.5a on lift? So be it 18 or 16.5a, the sniffer measured an air to fuel ratio (AFR). So don't place me in Ivan's camp we start cutting the cuts.

The engine is NOT running--it's shut off the same as if you hit the kill switch.

Touch the throttle again and the fuel comes back on.

The engine starts up again.

So all that cool decel noise is just engine vacuum. There is no ignition happening.

My only question about a TRE v adjusting by Ignition Module is, "is eliminating the timing retard better than advancing by ignition module 2~4 degrees?"

Rook,

In short the timing retard in the first 4 gears will make a noticeable difference based on the assumption that there was a point in Kawasaki doing that in the first place. If it made no difference then I can't imagine why they would go through the effort of adjusting the timing. Its possible they could have done it to comply emissions regulations but I have heard on several different bikes that the timing is retarded in the lower gears to make the bike easier to control.

So why wouldn't Brock or Schnitz worry about the retarded timing in the lower gears? Most likely all they're caring about are the dyno numbers, how many HP is the engine making, what's the max torque output, how can I sell some more exhaust? I'm not completely knocking them as tuners, etc as its just a theory but its along the same lines of how some tuners only tune a bike at full throttle. Cool I get higher dyno numbers but 95% of my riding now sucks because the other throttle positions weren't adjusted properly.

The biggest issue as Hub was mentioning is advancing the timing too much and having flame front hit the piston before top dead center and causing a "ping". I would expect (another assumption sorry) that Kawasaki would build a safety margin into their ignition map. Properly timed ignition like a proper AFR will produce more power, in both cases there's always the risk of damaging the engine by setting them too far out.

For 0% throttle, again Hub is correct, I tested that theory by hitting my kill switch etc. The stock fuel map still has some fuel going into the cylinders, its too little and creates an overly lean AFR causing the backfire. The backfire is due to a excessively lean burn taking a LONG time to burn (I've seen this happen in a potato cannon, it literally took 1-2 seconds to burn a smallish area with a bad air/fuel ratio). This long burn continues past the compression stroke and into the exhaust stroke sending the flame front down the pipes and igniting any unburned fuel.

I've set my 0% throttle on the fuel map from 3,500RPM and higher to -100% (no fuel), it works flawlessly and as Hub mentioned above, I can feel as I'm decelerating when I hit that 3,500RPM mark when the fuel kicks back in (its not abrupt, just noticeable). Who cares if there's a spark with no fuel? Many engines have a wasted spark design, typically 2 ignition coils for 4 cylinders, the coils will fire every 2 rotations, cylinder 1 & 2 connected to coil 1, cylinder 3 & 4 to coil 2. When cylinder 1 is at the start of the power stroke cylinder 2 is on the exhaust stroke and the coil fires in both cylinders, no problem.

Hub,"

Thanks, hub.

Too advanced(?) = Pings like a mother

'Our production bike is the worlds fastest' [when it came out] so now you are going to try to get more timing and do what with the [stock] parts?

Say you're drag/road/hooligan racing and the sensor fails at over 150 mph. Will the tre retard @ 150+? Of course not.

Mapping wise, the adjustable advance is out of phase with the cam sensor so you almost feel a tre twitch.

Mapping wise, you'll never mimic the tre = Digital signal is set, no longer are you in the analog of 1N23456.

Mapping wise, you'll have to run 10° up to mid, then full advance from mid to WOT.

Mapping wise, you play with retard with more exotic fuels and their burn rates.

Mapping wise, you might ping/det with too much advance if not run the engine backwards with the advance firing too soon. And when it reaches the kinetic (TDC), that pressured bubble will make it spin in reverse. Retard fires late and the unspent is not helped so much after TDC (no heat build via kinetic).

[decelerating at 0% throttle] when I'd watch the AFR meter swing to 18a+, 18-22a is still fuel burning.

Try it then. Hit the kill and listen to the engine note change.

Think about it. You can't even feel the transition it's [the throttle] so fluid and/or linear; be it either up or down.

Mine is not--not in first gear from 0 throttle. It gets harsher when the motor gets hot. Second gear is similar. Fuel cut is my guess and the TRE should cure that too.

Think about it. If you flipped the kill back on, you'd probably get a pop in the pipe. Like a light switch coming back on.

That decel pop is a lean running engine. The AFR (less fuel) moves up (18a) in air numbers on lift. The PAIR cut; moves the numbers down (less air) and the pop goes somewhat silent.

IF the engine is actually running! LOL I like the idea it is dead! ...but lean in the pipe for sure, live or dead. little or no engine combustion = gotta displace exhaust gas with something = fresh air = afterburn. POP!

The TRE 006A is supposed to eliminate the fuel cut. It locks in N map. The bike needs to idle so there is no fuel cut. ..then again the bike might need to idle in 6th gear to with the clutch pulled...there is obviously no fuel cut then....IDK, Hub.

without knowing the cell numbers in the code map, you're guessing at it, might throw pings at it, might run it backwards, might overheat the bike. Have at it but I think you're wasting your time trying to make the bike even faster when it's all she wrote formula wise stock.

As for the 2% we might disagree on, that would be low(er) speed performance enhancement. If there is a retard there, I'd like to know what it is like to have it gone even if that is not the zone where I will going my fastest.

* Last updated by: Rook on 11/16/2017 @ 4:10 PM *

If it made no difference then I can't imagine why they would go through the effort of adjusting the timing. Its possible they could have done it to comply emissions regulations but I have heard on several different bikes that the timing is retarded in the lower gears to make the bike easier to control.

doing a quick wiki brushup on what timing is, seems to me retarded timing would be more likely to result in dirtier emmissions. If ignition happens later, that would give the fuel less time to burn...or so it seems.

So why wouldn't Brock or Schnitz worry about the retarded timing in the lower gears? Most likely all they're caring about are the dyno numbers, how many HP is the engine making, what's the max torque output

I would expect (another assumption sorry) that Kawasaki would build a safety margin into their ignition map.

For 0% throttle, again Hub is correct, I tested that theory by hitting my kill switch etc. The stock fuel map still has some fuel going into the cylinders, its too little and creates an overly lean AFR causing the backfire. The backfire is due to a excessively lean burn taking a LONG time to burn (I've seen this happen in a potato cannon, it literally took 1-2 seconds to burn a smallish area with a bad air/fuel ratio). This long burn continues past the compression stroke and into the exhaust stroke sending the flame front down the pipes and igniting any unburned fuel.

I've set my 0% throttle on the fuel map from 3,500RPM and higher to -100% (no fuel), it works flawlessly and as Hub mentioned above, I can feel as I'm decelerating when I hit that 3,500RPM mark when the fuel kicks back in (its not abrupt, just noticeable).

In short, when you advance the timing on an engine you tell the ignition to fire before top dead center (TDC), when you retard timing you have the ignition fire after TDC. Granted often the terms advancing and retarding the timing are referring to modifying the current timing as opposed to with reference to TDC. For example, if I wanted to retard the timing by 10 degrees and the timing was already advanced by 45 degrees the net result is an advanced timing of 35 degrees. You would want to do this when doing induced induction (turbo) or NOS to prevent pre-detonation.

There may be a small emissions factor when it comes to timing but I can't say for sure. Timing is important for efficiency of the burn, when the spark plug is fired it takes time for the spark to ignite the fuel and it takes more time for that flame front (explosion) to reach the piston.

If the front reaches the piston before TDC the compressed gas tries to force the piston down while the piston is traveling up which results in a "ping" sound and is detrimental to the engine. If the front reaches the piston while the piston is well past TDC than a lot of the force (power) of the compressed gas is lost since there's more space to fill in the piston (its moved away from TDC) so there's not nearly as much pressure. This results in less power for the same amount of fuel. If the front reaches the piston the moment it passes TDC than you maximize the amount of power that is transferred from the explosion to the piston resulting in the most efficient use of fuel and the most power.

This is a simplified explanation from what I have personally learned about engine mechanics, similar to AFR there are other factors that need to be considered. For example the type of fuel, temperature of the fuel, air, engine, and a really important factor is the engine load (how hard is the engine working). Different fuel burns at different rates under different conditions.

It is my understanding that high octane fuel resists ignition due to compression, this is great for a high compression engine or forced induction as the fuel can ignite on its own without a spark when its heated enough by compression. The problem being that high octane fuel technically won't burn as fast as low octane fuel (since its specifically designed to not ignite as easily) so if you put low octane fuel in an engine that was designed for high octane fuel without adjusting anything else and assuming that the fuel won't auto-ignite under compression I would expect to hear pinging from the engine.

Huge power gains can be realized by advancing the ignition under certain conditions when going from 0 degrees to 10, 20, 30, etc degrees of timing due to the scenario described above. If the engine is already firing the ignition such that the flame front reaches the piston at lets say 5 degrees after TDC advancing the ignition by 1 or 2 degrees will likely result in only a small efficiency gain. If the front reaches the piston at 15-20 degrees you would see a much bigger gain.

Unless the timing has been retarded excessively the only way to really know for sure if any changes make a positive difference would be using a dyno.

Thanks, Nightmare. If I do a tutorial on this, I'll quote that explanation.

Watch the movement of kinetic with a tire pump: Ever run your finger over it (no hose) and the heat builds as you pump?
Watch the rocket leave the atmosphere with LOX (liquid oxygen) as in 'abundance' there of.
Watch the acetylene tank empty with oxy still on http://www.wisegeek.org/what-is-hydrogen.htm.
Watch the petrol turn off and you add this as the spark http://www.wisegeek.org/what-is-oxygen.htm.

So here we have one abundant chemical in the air is the compound and metal to act as the fuel.
All you need now is the spark so the oxy being the most abundant is... lift my molten metal off the skirt of the piston and snowball that theory about no gas to cool down that potential chemRe and Kinetic... yes or no? (let me know if you understood that, Rook)

Watch how being retard causes overheating. The idea is to use up as much fuel to heat up and expand that bubble in the chamber. That's where the power is. That's perfect advance. Retard is when the flame is still lit, but the exhaust valve already burst the bubble when it opened. While the timing is that off vs speed burn vs the spark begins to ignite at so and so degrees, isn't that exhaust valve facing a virtual flame and has not time to cool off? Isn't that making the head hotter times 8 valves? Isn't there a blown head gasket down the road you keep heating that one side in the retard type flame front?

So here we have one abundant chemical in the air is the compound and metal to act as the fuel.
All you need now is the spark so the oxy being the most abundant is... lift my molten metal off the skirt of the piston and snowball that theory about no gas to cool down that potential chemRe and Kinetic... yes or no? (let me know if you understood that, Rook)

The idea is to use up as much fuel to heat up and expand that bubble in the chamber. That's where the power is.

Retard is when the flame is still lit, but the exhaust valve already burst the bubble when it opened.

[with retarded ignition timing], isn't that exhaust valve facing a virtual flame and has not time to cool off? Isn't that making the head hotter times 8 valves? Isn't there a blown head gasket down the road you keep heating that one side in the retard type flame front?

You can see how this all gets confusing for a newb. In the first place, a lot of us would assume ignition is only supposed to start after TDC because that makes sense even if it is not necessarily always the case. Secondly, I was thinking of advancing and retarding timing the same way I think of advancing or retarding the hands on the face of a clock (with 12 o'clock representing TDC). It appears, that is not true either. Advancing timing is the opposite of turning the time ahead on a clock. It's probably better to think of it in terms of an analog gauge that measures vacuum to the left of 0 and pressure to the right of 0, 0 is TDC. I'm sure I will come back to this but for today, I've learned a lot.

Thanks fellas.

* Last updated by: Rook on 11/18/2017 @ 9:50 AM *