Possibly, a dead horse ....Fuel injection

[VALKen]

...
the 1500 valkyrie with its individual runner (IR) carb system makes more HP and lbfts than the 1500 wing.  an IR intake system will always make more power than a plenum manifold...

You would think so wouldn't you, but as I said, Honda's own literature for the F6C quotes:-

Max. Power Output = 74kW (99.2hp) @ 6,000rpm
Max. Torque = 130Nm (95.9 ft lbs) @ 5,000rpm

From which we can be sure that you would never get 81kW at the rear wheel of a std. Valk. Anyway...

The only figures I can find for the GL1500 (not from Honda) are as follows:-

Max. Power Output = ~74kW (99.2hp) @ 6,000rpm
Max. Torque = 150Nm (110.6 ft lbs) @ 5,000rpm

The power figures I found varied by a few tenths, so let's accept it's the same as the Valk, but the max. torque is significantly higher than the Valk and at lower rpm.

According to the above figures, the best I could find, the Valk is NOT the better performer. What figures are you using to state:-

"the 1500 valkyrie with its individual runner (IR) carb system makes more HP and lbfts than the 1500 wing"

??

[VALKen]

VALKen,toovalks here...

First of all, I dispute that the Valk makes more 'power' than the Wing. As far as I can tell, the actual power is the same and the Wing makes more torque. Not that I'm suggesting individual carbs is a bad idea, just that it doesn't appear to provide the advantages that are often claimed and hence I see no reason why the GL1800 approach shouldn't be at least as good. However...

I'm not looking at FI for any performance increase. I simply hate carbs. They are an incredibly clever mechanical device but have become so complex that maintaining banks of multiple units becomes increasingly problematic as the machine ages. Also, my particular gripe is that as I have a few bikes, any one might sit unused for extended periods of time and FI is a godsend here as no matter how long it is left, the bike starts immediately. I left a CBR929RR for several years and it started first press of the button. Try that with a Valk after a few weeks and any longer period will have you scrabbling around draining the float bowls etc before it'll run properly, or maybe even start. I loved my previous Valk's, but simply got fed up with it when my other bikes (with FI) had no such problems.

The one thing that FI often does not solve however is intake balancing. But unlike carbs, the fuel input and air flow control do not have to be co-located. The ideal solution appears to me to comprise a single butterfly controlling the air and no syncing required - ever. While the fuel is squirted downstream into each actual intake. Makes infinite sense to me and although the 1800 Wing uses a twin butterfly TB, they are not connected by fragile bendy linkages so any minor sync adjustment can be done with air bypass passages and unlikely to ever change, so seems like a good system to me.

Anyway, it's long been in the back of my mind to do this and when the opportunity of a cheap wreck presented itself, it was the ideal opportunity to do it and having determined that the GL1800 system was the way to go, I was delighted to find your identical conclusion and that oke had in fact already done it and I'm currently on the hunt for all the parts (FI is not the only GL1800 system going onto this Valk  )

Enough of all the reasoning behind my choice. Back to the tech stuff...

I've been pondering pumps. Oke added a return connection to his tank and my tank is in dire need of re-finishing so work like this would not concern me. But I would like a fuel gauge. An Interstate tank is an option, but will have to be bought and still doesn't solve the pump issue. BTW, the GL1200 injection bikes used an external pump, but you don't want to know the price Honda want to charge for one.

I may take a different route however as I have a Kawasaki Mean Streak tank that I originally got for a GL1200 project as they look good and can be fitted to the 1200. That project has been shelved in favour of this Valk and so the tank is available. I've not tried fitting it yet, but it is from an FI bike so has an internal pump (or will have when I buy it). This may well be the route I take, although the Mean Streak has no fuel gauge so it's not completely ideal. I don't like the idea of running a FI system dry by mistake, although there is a low level warning sensor which might suffice. Oh and it has a feed and return connector which solves one issue.

I'm not sure about the idea of a supplementary tank for the pump. If too small, the fuel will simply heat up possibly eliminating the main reason for having it. However, the larger the tank, the more unsightly and difficulty in integrating it into the bike.

So, the jury's still out on choice of tank, but reading back over my reasoning above, the Mean Streak tank is odds on favourite.

Have you cut your 1800 manifold yet? How did you hold it while welding it back together? Did you mount both halves to the engine with the adapters and then weld, or make a separate template to fix the halves in the correct relative positions?

My intention is to not have engine guards on the bike. Foolish maybe, but it's a style choice and that would avoid the problem of interference with the adapters. You had yours CNC cut? Looks like oke 3D printed? Would that not be easier (and cheaper). Would plastic suffice? In fact its flexibility might help with any heat related expansion issues between the manifold and the rest of the engine.

Thinking of that. Why weld the 2 manifold halves back together? Could they not be flexibly joined with the TB assisting with maintaining alignment, but still with flexibility. That would totally avoid any expansion issues. I'd think Honda were sure the manifold would expand at the same rate as the engine and prevent its eventual cracking, but if both side are flexibly joined, it neatly sidesteps the whole problem. And eliminates one weld job. 

Regarding timing, I'm sure a Cam Position Sensor could be rigged up, but is 'wasted squirt' a bad idea? As previously pointed out, there's a good argument to say it is not a problem and oke reports no issues. Which brings us to...

The ECU. What are you using? Have you decided on the MegaSquirt? MicroSquirt? Anything against the Hestec? It does make sense to me that we all use the same system as that would allow sharing of maps etc?

Ok, this is long enough. I'm sure there'll be more, but right now, food calls.

[98valk]

Max. Power Output = ~74kW (99.2hp) @ 6,000rpm
Max. Torque = 150Nm (110.6 ft lbs) @ 5,000rpm


[/quote]


that's at the crankshaft.  
I'm stating rear wheel Hp which are below.

GL1500 Gold Wing SE ’99 4/99  79.7 Hp 91.2 ftlbs
F6 Valkyrie 7/96                      100.0 Hp 102.3 ftlbs

                                             HP      ftlbs
GL1800 Gold Wing ’01 2/01     100.7 108.3
GL1800A Gold Wing ’04 10/04 96.0 104.1
GL1800 Gold Wing ’12 9/11     100.05 105.04
Gold Wing F6B 6/13                100.1 105.24
Rune 10/03                            97.4 112.1
Valkyrie (2014) 1/15              102.3 109.5

source 2015 motorcycle consumer news performance index based on their testing and reviews.

[98valk]

[/quote]


Regarding timing, I'm sure a Cam Position Sensor could be rigged up, but is 'wasted squirt' a bad idea?
[/quote]

the GW GL1500 has many sensors already installed that u might need. It used electronic carburetors made to operate like fuel injectors, hence the sensors.

[Toovalks]

VALKen....I  did not weld my manifold back together for the same reasons you stated...expansion allowance. Oke used 3D printed adapters and I feel that welding was a good choice for him, 3d printing being a layered process has its greatest weakness in the strength of bonding between layers. This is precisely how the weight of the manifold, TB's , and air box  would torque the adapters if not welded. In addition those adapters are about 2 Inches above the intake valve I'm just not sure about the durability of the plastic. They were also much more costly to have 3D printed around here. I can assure you that the manifolds un-welded are rock solid mounted on my Aluminum adapter.
 Oke thought $500 was a great price for the six adapters even though that quoted price was for the first six which included the  creation of a Mastercam  file to be able to run them or tweak them at will. I imagine that I can get the cost down to $30 to $50 ( the hard work has been done) each depending on how large a production run I make. (I'll post a pic if any are interested).
I purchased a Microsquirt $360 with harness. one of the few units that is fully tuneable and weather sealed. With a six cyl you are held to bank injection with Microsquirt. I  agree that sequential/cam sensing could be added but as I believe  I stated earlier in this thread... the real difference
 For SEQ MPI is in pollution  control and at relatively low RPM only when it comes to real power Production.
 

[oke]

With these dimensions I let the laser cutter cut a 5mm steel plate. Then I fixed the intake manifold halves to it, and took it to the professional welder.

[Toovalks]

Hey Oke... Glad you are here following all this... Let me know if I step on your toes or if I have miss Quoted you...TG

[PatrickDoss]

Regarding timing, I'm sure a Cam Position Sensor could be rigged up, but is 'wasted squirt' a bad idea?

the GW GL1500 has many sensors already installed that u might need. It used electronic carburetors made to operate like fuel injectors, hence the sensors.

This is incorrect.  The carburetors on the GL1500 Goldwing are far from electronic, and the only sensors that it has that the Valkyrie doesn't are an air intake temp sensor at the filter housing, and a manifold vacuum input at the ECM.  The only outside controls to the carburetors are air jets, but as there is no feedback system (O2 Sensors), they operate on pre-determined parameters.  It can help fine-tune the mixture under different (pre-determined) conditions by allowing or not allowing air through two different sets of passages, but if you removed them, it would still operate at probably 98% of it's normal efficiency.  You've still got jets to get clogged, and CV Diaphragms to get holes in. Nothing at all like fuel injection.

[98valk]

Regarding timing, I'm sure a Cam Position Sensor could be rigged up, but is 'wasted squirt' a bad idea?

the GW GL1500 has many sensors already installed that u might need. It used electronic carburetors made to operate like fuel injectors, hence the sensors.

This is incorrect.  The carburetors on the GL1500 Goldwing are far from electronic, and the only sensors that it has that the Valkyrie doesn't are an air intake temp sensor at the filter housing, and a manifold vacuum input at the ECM.  The only outside controls to the carburetors are air jets, but as there is no feedback system (O2 Sensors), they operate on pre-determined parameters.  It can help fine-tune the mixture under different (pre-determined) conditions by allowing or not allowing air through two different sets of passages, but if you removed them, it would still operate at probably 98% of it's normal efficiency.  You've still got jets to get clogged, and CV Diaphragms to get holes in. Nothing at all like fuel injection.

First off I didn't state the carburetors worked like a fuel injection "System", I stated like
"fuel injectors". As in the air/fuel ratio is being controlled electronically.
The carbs fuel-air mixture is adjusted by two solenoid-operated air bleeds to the main air jet. Solenoids are controlled by an electronic carburetor control unit, hence an electronic carburetor. there are a few other sensors used also by the control unit. 

[Toovalks]

Why are we bothering to debate the power output ... EFI is  a cure for a lot of ailments on the valk.
We love our bikes, the design, the handling, the longevity/bullet proof nature of these engines.
 Why not seek to improve the experience??.... Is the raw power the main reason to own this machine amongst all the other cycles available ?? I bet most of us would be in hog heaven( sorry for the reference)if we could snap our fingers and have EFI and ABS on these great bikes.

I know that the response of some of you would be "If you want those things buy a new bike"

Personally what draws me to the Standard is my love for "engine,Tank,wheels and seat" ...in my mind
a/the real motorcycle....basic elegant machine.... not 40 pieces of plastic body work you have to remove to get to anything that matters. I'm almost 67... I have not owned a valk nearly as long as most of you , but the 2 that I have purchased have spent more time torn down chasing carb problems than  they  have on the road.  I have never even ridden one of them... my reason for chasing simple EFI... I intend for these to be  "my last for ever machines"

[oke]

  Spot on !!

[VALKen]

Max. Power Output = ~74kW (99.2hp) @ 6,000rpm
Max. Torque = 150Nm (110.6 ft lbs) @ 5,000rpm

that's at the crankshaft.  
I'm stating rear wheel Hp which are below.

GL1500 Gold Wing SE ’99 4/99  79.7 Hp 91.2 ftlbs
F6 Valkyrie 7/96                      100.0 Hp 102.3 ftlbs

                                             HP      ftlbs
GL1800 Gold Wing ’01 2/01     100.7 108.3
GL1800A Gold Wing ’04 10/04 96.0 104.1
GL1800 Gold Wing ’12 9/11     100.05 105.04
Gold Wing F6B 6/13                100.1 105.24
Rune 10/03                            97.4 112.1
Valkyrie (2014) 1/15              102.3 109.5

source 2015 motorcycle consumer news performance index based on their testing and reviews.

Yes, I quoted crank figures and as such they are comparable between the 2 bikes. One then expects about 10-15% losses to the rear wheel as indicated by your 1500 Wing figures, but those for the F6C state it makes the same power and torque at the rear wheel as at the crank which is obviously nonsense. They also suggest the 1500 F6C makes as much or more power than the 1800 Wing which is also equally unbelievable.

As I'm sure you know, the true brake dynamometers used by the manufacturers under strictly controlled conditions are capable of consistent measurement of actual power. Whereas the rear wheel 'accelerometers' such as from Dynojet do not actually measure the power. They measure the acceleration, then compare that to the figures of a known engine and extrapolate back in order to obtain the apparent power figures they produce. Useful though they are, they are subject to huge variations due to weather conditions at the time of the test, the actual machine used and even the operator can affect the results.

Truth is, many motorcycle journalists do not understand this and in many cases mix up crank and rear wheel figures indiscriminately.

Whatever the veracity of the crank figures I quoted, it is inconceivable that a rear wheel 'dyno' would be able to obtain a RWHP figure actually in excess of the manufacturer's (carefully measured) figure at the crank and since that figure in question (that the 1500 F6C makes 100 RWHP) is clearly out of line with all the other figures so quoted, I can only conclude it is obviously spurious and not to be taken seriously.

Either that or Honda must have been lying abut the F6C/Valkyrie which actually made 15% more power than what they quoted. Somehow, I don't think that's likely. Do you?

In fact, looking again at the figures, I would strongly suggest that whoever produced them used the 1500 Wing figures as measured on a rear wheel 'dyno' but for the F6C/Valkyrie quoted Honda's true figures as measured on their crank dynamometers which would obviously give a completely false impression of the superior power of the Valkyrie over the Wing.

None of which particularly matters to me as I am going to put the 1800's fuel injection on the Valk, whatever the figures may or may not show. This is not a 'power up' mod. At least, not for me. It is to take advantage of the many virtues of EFI. Having said that, I am confident it will not result in any loss in performance.

[VALKen]

the GW GL1500 ... used electronic carburetors made to operate like fuel injectors...

Sorry, I don't understand that. A carburettor is a carburettor and FI is FI. How can a carb be electronic and how can it act like a fuel injector?

[VALKen]

With these dimensions I let the laser cutter cut a 5mm steel plate. Then I fixed the intake manifold halves to it, and took it to the professional welder.
...

Great stuff. Thanks for that.

[VALKen]

VALKen....I  did not weld my manifold back together for the same reasons you stated...expansion allowance. Oke used 3D printed adapters and I feel that welding was a good choice for him, 3d printing being a layered process has its greatest weakness in the strength of bonding between layers. This is precisely how the weight of the manifold, TB's , and air box  would torque the adapters if not welded. In addition those adapters are about 2 Inches above the intake valve I'm just not sure about the durability of the plastic. They were also much more costly to have 3D printed around here. I can assure you that the manifolds un-welded are rock solid mounted on my Aluminum adapter.
 Oke thought $500 was a great price for the six adapters even though that quoted price was for the first six which included the  creation of a Mastercam  file to be able to run them or tweak them at will. I imagine that I can get the cost down to $30 to $50 ( the hard work has been done) each depending on how large a production run I make. (I'll post a pic if any are interested).
I purchased a Microsquirt $360 with harness. one of the few units that is fully tuneable and weather sealed. With a six cyl you are held to bank injection with Microsquirt. I  agree that sequential/cam sensing could be added but as I believe  I stated earlier in this thread... the real difference
 For SEQ MPI is in pollution  control and at relatively low RPM only when it comes to real power Production.
 

All good points about the adapters and a flexible centre joint. I would like to discuss having 6 more adapters made. Perhaps we should do this direct without involving everyone in this thread?

The price of the MicroSquirt is certainly more attractive, but what do you mean by 'bank injection'? All 3 LH cylinders squirt together and all 3 RH cylinders squirt together? I prefer the idea as oke had with the Hestec that I call 'wasted squirt'. Still doesn't require any cam sensor and although something could be added for that, much simpler if not required. Could the MicroSquirt operate in that mode, so 3 squirts per crank revolution (every 120° triggered from crank pulse wheel) and each squirt into 2 cylinders, one each side. Or have I misunderstood how the Hestec does this?

[VALKen]

...As to the fuel pump issue... the Gold wing pump was in the tank. The pressure regulator is on the end of the fuel rail has a vacuum line that must be attached on the underside of the throttle plate. The issue I have is the return line to the tank. It is easy to put a Walbro pump inline between our petcocks and the fuel rail  but inline pumps don't last as long as pumps cooled in the tank by the fuel. It would require a special fitting or a new bung installed in the tank to set up the return line. I believe that in order to eliminate the return line either the pump must run intermittently or there has to be an intank regulator that dumps fuel at any pressure above designed injector needs. I have designed a small pump tank to sit below the regular tank  but I haven't built one yet. ..

Here's another idea. On another thread where an 1800 lump is being inserted into a 1500 Valk frame:-

http://www.valkyrieforum.com/bbs/index.php/topic,79491.msg976941.html#msg976941

The tank is an interstate tank, but maybe this could be done with a std. Valk tank. I personally have no need of the extra capacity of the IS tank and would prefer to not have to buy one, hence was considering the Mean Streak tank I have. But, if the new 1800 Valk pump and fuel level sender assembly would similarly fit into the std. Valk tank, this might be the best way to go. It does mean cutting open the underside of the tank, but even if the tank is a good one, it would only require the new cut edges to be sealed against corrosion. It would not require the entire tank to have to be re-painted.

For me this would be a great solution as I have a std. tank that definitely needs painting so cutting into the bottom is not a concern. But, would the 1800 Valk pump/sensor fit inside and if there is room, I'm not sure how to create a suitable mount in the new hole in the tank. Perhaps machine a suitable mount ring in steel and weld it in the tank base? Or 2 Al. rings that would clamp and seal to the tank hole edges.

This is not something I've ever attempted before, so I have no experience of what would be the best way to make a new mount hole into the base of a tank, so any ideas and suggestions would be useful.

If we can establish that the 1800 Valk assy. will fit into the std. Valk tank and also how to adapt the tank to mount this assembly, I think this would be the perfect solution. Not only is it using a stock Honda (Valkyrie even) part, but at a stroke we'd obtain the internal pump we want AND a fuel level sender that certainly I would very much like to have. Of course being a Honda part means it's outrageously highly priced, but if it does what we want, then I think it might just be worth it, at least if purchased in the US as prices over here are always more and often many times more.

[VALKen]

Why are we bothering to debate the power output ... EFI is  a cure for a lot of ailments on the valk.
We love our bikes, the design, the handling, the longevity/bullet proof nature of these engines.
 Why not seek to improve the experience??.... Is the raw power the main reason to own this machine amongst all the other cycles available ?? I bet most of us would be in hog heaven( sorry for the reference)if we could snap our fingers and have EFI and ABS on these great bikes.

I know that the response of some of you would be "If you want those things buy a new bike"

Personally what draws me to the Standard is my love for "engine,Tank,wheels and seat" ...in my mind
a/the real motorcycle....basic elegant machine.... not 40 pieces of plastic body work you have to remove to get to anything that matters. I'm almost 67... I have not owned a valk nearly as long as most of you , but the 2 that I have purchased have spent more time torn down chasing carb problems than  they  have on the road.  I have never even ridden one of them... my reason for chasing simple EFI... I intend for these to be  "my last for ever machines"

Yup, exactly. I am in fact the exact same age, have been riding for over 50 years and likewise prefer my bikes naked and not covered by acres of plastic. I'm way past needing the fastest bike on the road, although I do still have something I prepared earlier:-
https://www.dropbox.com/sh/mwwn4hy90tza9bk/AAA8aNvPWsZ53KaUclYf-6s5a?dl=0
which is a FireBlade based bike if I want super performance thrills. But that is not what I'm building this Valk to provide.

[Toovalks]

Bank injection is just a term for not squirting all injectors at the same time or sequential injection. It primarily refers to v8's,6's or,4's . The Microsquirt does only have 2 High current Injector outputs. The Megasquirt on the other hand can do up to 12 sequential I believe, but the unit can't be sealed from moisture or the weather and costs more than twice as much. The Microsquirt was for me, a compromise
I wasn't doing this just to see if I could do it, I wanted to find a path to EFI for any interested folks that was as economical as possible so that more would adopt it, not to profit from it either. I just love doing this stuff, like my heel/toe shifter design.

Back to your question. If the Hestech has at least three injector outputs, then it should be firing 2 injectors every 240º the first two in the firing order then the next two and so on. Bank injection would fire 3 injectors every 360º the first three cyls in the firing order , etc. This would leave the fuel charge hanging outside the intake valve for maybe a couple of milliseconds longer.
 If you imagine a carbureted  engine , as the intake valve opens and the suction begins, how long does it take for the new fuel charge to make it from the venturi to the cylinder???(based on volume/length of manifold which is all important to velocity of fuel charge)   Manifolds lengths are designed to  hopefully take advantage of the returning "shock"wave from the previous fuel/air charge that slammed against the closing/closed intake valve...so no matter what... a fuel charge is always waiting outside the intake valves.

[oke]

VALKen you are right. Hestec gives a squirt into two sylinders at the same time. Every 120 degrees. Just like the ignition works.

[VALKen]

VALKen you are right. Hestec gives a squirt into two sylinders at the same time. Every 120 degrees. Just like the ignition works.

I like that as the next best alternative to full sequential for each cylinder. In fact superior in one respect - it requires no Cam Position Sensor.

Which actual Hestec model did you use?

I'll have to compare all the possible ECU alternatives.

[oke]

I am using the HESTEC X32 32BIT. I also first tried an additional smal (about the size of an half a littre beer can) fuel tank, to recycle the fuel. But it did not work, because the fuel got too hot. That is why I made the direct return to the tank. I posted a picture of that earlier. The fuel pump and the filter is located under the swin arm.

   

[Toovalks]

Oke... I'm just learning about this But...that means that every revolution you squirt all 6 cylinders, only 3 of them fire, next revolution you squirt all 6 cyls. again the other 3 fire, am I right that you are squirting every cyl. twice per one intake stroke,360º apart ???

[VALKen]

Oke... I'm just learning about this But...that means that every revolution you squirt all 6 cylinders, only 3 of them fire, next revolution you squirt all 6 cyls. again the other 3 fire, am I right that you are squirting every cyl. twice per one intake stroke,360º apart ???

Just as each ignition coil fires to 2 plugs simultaneously, i.e. when both cylinders are just after TDC, but only one actually on the firing stroke, each injector 'channel' in the ECU fires 2 injectors, although only cylinder will be on intake. The other will be on the power stroke so the fuel pulse will just hang around in the intake port. But this keeps it the same for every cylinder. Each will have half the fuel squirted on the Power stroke and the other half on the Intake stroke.

Because of the similarity to 'wasted spark' ignition, I just refer to it as 'wasted squirt' injection, but that is actually a misnomer since nothing is actually wasted, unlike the ignition which truly wastes every other spark.

For every 360° crank rotation, 3 cylinders will fire, i.e. every 120° and 3 cylinders will also receive a squirt. During the next 360°, the other 3 cylinders will fire and also receive a squirt. So every 120°, there is a spark and a squirt (although offset from each other, not at the same actual time).

At least this keeps it the same for each cylinder. Squirting all 6 at once will mean some cylinders will receive it at a better time than others. Even a single squirt into each bank also means it will not be the same for each of three cylinders. Squirting on the power stroke should mean it hits the closed inlet valve, which should do a good job of vaporising the fuel ready for the next Intake stroke when it will be added to by the next squirt and also help cooling of the valve.

It just seems to me to make the most sense after full sequential but also eliminates the requirement for a Cam Position Sensor which is a major advantage on the engines for which I am considering this.

I'm currently looking at the Canems ECU. I think it will do what I need, the price looks reasonable and of particular benefit to me, they are a UK company.

One question though. What MAP sensor are you using and connected to vacuum where?

[Toovalks]

On further reading... That form of injection is commonplace and should be great. I can say for sure that a Microsquirt can only do two injector timings per rev. hence ,batch/bank fire capability only. I would be interested in looking at the Canems as well if ,for the money, it can do an equal or better job... I will say , about DIY Autotune , that their forums are vast and deep with information , their software is supposedly great, and can be run "live" ie, changing mapping on the fly with complete data logging. The Microsquirt
 also  uses Two  O2  sensors one for tuning each bank .if you want...
There is a Denso MAP sensor  on the throttle bodies, along with TPS and a 3 wire IAC. no need to buy any of these... but you may have to map  ( measure resistances ) on the TPS. You will also have to map the valks ECT sensor. TG

[CamTom12]

Did this end up going anywhere?

I’m tired of my carbs, they always have issues. I’m going FI on the Valkyrie. Just trying to work out how. I’ll start a new thread, just curious if Toovalks made any more progress.