FZRSupport: the FZROnline Archive

Has anyone out there installed a wideband O2 on one of our bikes?

Thing is that i´m very familiar with them,and have been rather involved in the development of various parts of the VEMS EFI systems through my old friend Jörgen Karlsson.
Point being that i´m giving though to tossing one of the VEMS WB units onto my own FZR to see what the story is.

As is i´d say that the bike of mine is in rather good running order after some initial work since i bought it,and hence....being the curious kind i can´t but help to wonder what gives as far as AFRs asf for the bikes of ours.

Especialy so since reading various posts on "sure thing" mods for the Mikunis onboard.

From previous experience i´m well aware that AFR for max torq for an NA engine should hoover around the 12.8-13.0 mark,and around 13.1-13.3 for maximum power.

So.
In short,has anyone out there tried an onboard WB O2 and if so what was the results?

Racing wrote:Has anyone out there installed a wideband O2 on one of our bikes?

Thing is that i´m very familiar with them,and have been rather involved in the development of various parts of the VEMS EFI systems through my old friend Jörgen Karlsson.
Point being that i´m giving though to tossing one of the VEMS WB units onto my own FZR to see what the story is.

As is i´d say that the bike of mine is in rather good running order after some initial work since i bought it,and hence....being the curious kind i can´t but help to wonder what gives as far as AFRs asf for the bikes of ours.

Especialy so since reading various posts on "sure thing" mods for the Mikunis onboard.

From previous experience i´m well aware that AFR for max torq for an NA engine should hoover around the 12.8-13.0 mark,and around 13.1-13.3 for maximum power.

So.
In short,has anyone out there tried an onboard WB O2 and if so what was the results?

Hi,
its funny this should come up again as I have just obtained some of these Digital A/F meters for testing with Broad band sensors. I will not be able to test right away as the mid pipe (so it sees all four cylinders) need the sensor collar welding on and my pet welder is on holiday :{

For those of my sundry tech friends who test their " racing " engines (in the likes of bucket racing) they fit 5 collars one on each down pipe and one on the mid pipe.
For initial settings set the multi carbs up as per "the book" then synch. Then test each cylinder in turn once satisfied put the instrument in the mid pipe & go ride for real & see.
One genius has made a switching unit that strobes the cylinders & shows up alight as to what cylinder is being sampled and the A/F mixture (rotten bugger si NOT willing to share the design BUT I know it is based on a PIC so........ any PIC Hackers handy :-}

For all i care that would be a rather expensive way to handle the issue at hand?
What´s more,TBH,i kind of wonder to what good for the novice player out there?(Us that is)

Here´s the deal.
A WB sensor basicaly needs a heater control as well as a pump cell control.
That,and the fabled outsignal and you´re in business.
There´s what the basic 5 wires are for in essence.

Now,the issue at hand is that controlling for instance 4 or 5 sensors with one main unit would present a hazzle,switch or not, as each sensor is individualy referenced.
(If you check underneath that little black cap of the socket on the sensor side...that´s where the individual reference sensor is at...)
Ie;there´s not one sensor that runs the same as the next one and hence you calibrate a control unit after the given sensor.
In short,i guess it could be handled but to what good?

In such a scenario i bet a better,and way way way easier,solution would be to have the weldbungs installed coupled with the basic engine input like throttle opening,map value and revolutions.
Then log,and interface various runs with samples taken from respective pipes on the laptop-which would be rather easy to pull off if you ask me.
Being analythical enough would at least brings some sort of idea.

in a scenario where you would want to compare apples to apples i´d say a better idea is to monitor one sensor in the midpipe and interface that vs 4 individual EGTs which readings could be taken rather early on in each individual and respective primary pipe.
Again being both anal and analythical in approach in as much that you make DAMN sure each EGT is inserted the same amount as well as being calibrated and then make back to back runs where you toss the various EGTs around.
Whole idea with the EGTs being to spot a cylinder not doing its job-much as you would in a dyno cell.

Whole idea of a wideband would be to get a general idea as long as we´re talking the LSU crop anyways,as for REALLY heavy duty use they´re simply both to slow and to fragile to be of any value.
The common resolution of them being 1/10 of a second approx,and as you install one into the midpipe gas will take like "forever" to travel that distance anyway from a pure engine perspective.

Nah.
I believe in that the Yamaha engineers did a fairly good job,so i for one would settle for a WB installed in the midpipe to at least get an idea.
Hooked up to some sort of simple TPS counter and MAP sensor coupled with being hooked to the tach output will do just fine i guess.