forums.mytzr.com

Just waded through all of this and a very interesting read indeed.
I'm using stock Sp-20 cylinders with TZ pistons & leaded heads, TZ pipes, SP36mm carbs.

I think I'll be sticking with my Sugo 9A CDI for the time being

(although I do have a 4DP-40 CDI I have been meaning to try out)

Hi guys,

Ndwedwe,

As Louis says my ignition curve has been tweaked on the dyno over a big number of runs to get it really close to optimum for my set up. If I had developed the curve myself then I would put it up but as I paid someone to do it for me I don't think it is fair as this person makes a living from setting up bikes on the dyno and I don't want to do anything that will jeopardize that for him. The sugo curve with less advance up top will be a good place to start I would say. Go for 14 degrees at 11k to start off and see what the engine does. We don't know what Mr Coker did to your ports and pipes so it is difficult to know where it is going to peak. This it the problem I had with my kr1. Looking at other dyno curves suggested that 10500 rpm would be where peak advance should be placed but it turned out my bike peaked at 9800 so was over advanced.

Anyway I wish you luck with getting your bike sorted, I will help where I can

Dan

I hear you.
BUT, when you pay for something, it belongs to you. If he did it for free it would belong to him.
Not pushing at all. These bikes are hitting 17-21 years of age. It's all been done before.

Hmmmm. Interesting. Got up to 11000 on 14deg at 11000. Dropped it to 13. See if it goes further.

dropped to 13 at 11000 and bike pulled up to 11500, will drop to 12 and see tomorrow
i dont want too get excited too early but this is without any flywheel modifications.
the bike is wide awake and has a sharper sound and dratttatatat like an old 1992 KX125 x 2

once again this is the limit at 10500



and this is tomorrows test curve, hoping to get into 12000

Sounds good to me mate! would be nice if the ignitech worked without any mods. Good luck

Dan

Have you actualy measured base advamce (in mm from TDC)? The thing is the limiting is still present.

EEKNOWS wrote:Have you actualy measured base advamce (in mm from TDC)? The thing is the limiting is still present.

Hi lozza
Yes, I own a dual guage, I bribed one of neals spark plug adapters off him, he had 2 made. I measurded the TDC and then 23deg using the dial guage and marked it on the flywheel with a tdc reference on the casing.
A flat curve of 23 needed a base advance of 19 to be true.
It was right there, within 4deg. With the zeel it was 40deg off!!!!!

sorry it's a bit big, 12Mb, but if you want to see a 3XV running on a programmable without and mods to flywheel or wiring loom...

Just to confirm, no sign of the limiting at all? Remember 12k on the tacho is about 11300 real. I know I keep banging on about the tacho's overreading

When on the dyno mine did the limiting problem at 12300 real it was about 13k on the clocks.

I've just got some stuff to do but then I will explain why I think the ignitech works without modification and the zeel doesn't.

Dan

Ndwedwe wrote:

EEKNOWS wrote:Have you actualy measured base advamce (in mm from TDC)? The thing is the limiting is still present.

Hi lozza
Yes, I own a dual guage, I bribed one of neals spark plug adapters off him, he had 2 made. I measurded the TDC and then 23deg using the dial guage and marked it on the flywheel with a tdc reference on the casing.
A flat curve of 23 needed a base advance of 19 to be true.
It was right there, within 4deg. With the zeel it was 40deg off!!!!!

Ignitech base advance and Zeeltronic static angle are not the same thing. Glad to see you have it running again

maccas wrote:Just to confirm, no sign of the limiting at all? Remember 12k on the tacho is about 11300 real.

mine is 200 out measured on the zeel, will check on the ignitech

maccas wrote:When on the dyno mine did the limiting problem at 12300 real it was about 13k on the clocks.

i will get to really testing it soon, got new piston and rings so don't want to whack it just yet, i am also rich which i am happy with for now so i have to roll it. funny, i have lost my bottom end, would like to know where it's gone!

maccas wrote:I've just got some stuff to do but then I will explain why I think the ignitech works without modification and the zeel doesn't.

EEKNOWS wrote:Ignitech base advance and Zeeltronic static angle are not the same thing. Glad to see you have it running again

hmmm, me thinks i am about to learn something all over again, lozza, i think ignitech has a static correction built in with each model, that is pure guessing but lozza you simply have to explain this because in there is the problem. dan, hurry up, i am burning with curiosity

lozza, i have a question for you old buddy, before i jet my bike to suit it working on the current curve (thanks dan for discretely pointing me there) i want to wire in my PJ's, can you help me here. with zeel the one wire of the PJ had to be wired to a 12v+ and the other wire going into the zeel would be the negative when you programmed it, completing the circuit. so to switch the PJ off (to stop the petrol getting to the jet, you turned the PJ on the zeel)
can you tell me which wire to use, how it works and how to program it. please man.

Right meeting done and now on dinner break, here is what I and others have established so far in the last few months.

Ok, static angle on the ZEELTRONIC is the angle from TDC to the FRONT of the lobe on the flywheel as wired by the wiring diagram supplied by Borut. On the IGNITECH base advance is the angle from TDC to the BACK of the lobe on the flywheel.

The stock 3xv flywheel (both SP and R/RS types that I have seen anyway) both have ~64 degrees to the FRONT of the lobe and ~20 degrees to the BACK of the lobe from TDC.

These figures are confirmed by both Paul and myself as with the zeel wired by the wiring diagram as Borut supplied the zeel needed ~64 degrees static angle for our programmed flat curves to match appropriate timing marks on the flywheel.

With the ignitech paul is running 19 degrees base advance for his marks and programmed curve to match up which is pretty close to 20. And I know that on the ignitech you can only change it in 1 degree increments.

Ok, both paul and myself found that with 64 degree static angle on the zeel the problem occured at roughly 10500 rpm on the tacho. The problem to clarify is the right hand cylinder (might be left too I haven't checked) at those revs still sparks BUT the advance is 0 degrees. I confirmed this with my strobe light. I.e the cdi starts to fire the plug at TDC, too late to produce any power and the engine will not rev on any further. The engine note changes and you get a blap blap blap from the right pipe as mixture is ignited in the exhaust pipe. The problem happened in neutral and in gear.

We were both going round in circles trying to get around the problem, I myself tried:

Wiring the zeel direct to the pick ups, coils, battery etc. Bypassing the stock loom. Problem still occurred.
Removing the blue/green wire (speedo restrictor wire) from the wiring loom where it joins the white/black (negative for pick ups, PV potentiometer and TPS), also unplugged the red plug behind the clocks and all the other plugs going to the speedo restrictor Problem still occurred.
Separated the shared negative from the pick ups and wired it straight to the red/white and brown/white on the zeel. (as it would be wired on an RGV and RS 250) Problem still occurred

By connecting the zeel direct to the bikes components should have told me that the loom isn't the problem, anyway here it is : in my opinion the loom is not the problem

So this is where I started thinking about the lobes and the pick ups:

I swapped the wiring round on both pick ups, i.e I had to chop back the engine loom to find where the two white/black wires join together and separate them and carry them onto the main loom and swapped them round where they get wired to the zeel. So white/black swapped with white/blue and white/black swapped with white/green. Set the static angle to 20 degrees and them I'm running off the back of the lobe like an ignitech does.

Ok with this set up I found that in neutral the bike would rev right round past 13k on the tacho, BUT as soon as the bike was under load you would get to about 8k on the tacho and the bike would just stop sparking completely until you dropped back under those revs. I know why this is. Its because my ignition curve at the time was running alot of advance, 30 degrees in some places. For the zeel to work the static angle needs to be LARGER OR EQUAL TO maximum advance you have programmed in your curve. I didn't know that at the time and found out about a week later. So if my ignition was only running upto 20 degrees advance it would have worked ok when under load.

This lead me on to play around with static angle and moving the pick up accordingly:
I found that with the back of the lobe placed 48 degrees infront of TDC (static angle=48 with reversed polarity pick ups) the limiting occurred at 11900 on the tacho (a good improvement on the 10500 but not enough)
I then moved the flywheel clockwise more to give me a static angle of 33 degrees (static angle=33 with reversed polarity pick ups) the limiting occurred at 12300 real (dyno evidence) and 13k on the tacho.

And this is where we are upto, the zeel works with a lower static angle and the flywheel moved accordingly. I am yet to try reducing the static angle further but I am going to reduce it to about 27 degrees. Hopefully pushing the problem nearer 13k real where it is no longer a problem.

So the easiest way to get a zeel to work is reverse the pick up polarities and machine a bit of material off the back of the lobe of the flywheel that corresponds with the static angle that you need to run the desired advance that you want in your curve.

Right regarding the ignitech, the reason I think this seems to work so far is because the ignitech uses the previous revolution to calculate the spark timing for the current revolution of the engine. If this wasn't the case, with a base advance of 19 degrees it would be impossible for the CDI to fire the plug at say 27 degrees of advance. The cdi cannot predict the future can it now? The zeel works by the firing edge of the lobe (front or back depending on wiring) passing the pick up, the cdi gets a signal, the cdi knows how this signal corresponds to crank shaft rotation and TDC position and delays the spark accordingly. So say static angle of 33 degrees to the back of the lobe, I want to run 28 degrees of advance. Back of lobe passes pick up, the cdi knows that TDC occurs 33 degrees later, we want 28 degrees of advance so the cdi delays the spark by 5 degrees.

The cdi can only delay the spark, it can't fire the plug before it gets a signal so it must calculate its timing based on the previous revolution, it has to surely. I still think that if revved high enough the ignitech will have the same problem as the zeel to be honest, but with the base advance at 19 degrees, the revs at which the limiting occurs might be so high that no-one will ever notice. So hopefully this is the case and hopefully Paul will soon find out once he has ran his bike in some more.

I hope all of that makes sense and that it is useful to prospective ignition buyers.

Dan

Massively admirable development work! And plenty of it too! Hats off.

There's a guy over here in the States (Vince24 on the TZ250racing.com forums) and another Dutch guy (Anand - again, same forum) that have extensive experience with the Ignitechs on the TZ. Perhaps they can help you further sort it out.

Been a massive amount of fun, but my pistons didn't get lunched
Nice write up Dan, but for me we still have a elephant in the room, what causes the auto retard?We are none the wiser. Neither of the ignitions are smart enough to program themselves the inputs only react to the signals they get ? I dunno where or how it could occur. I still come back to something hidden in the loom maybe through the earth return. Seeing were throwing theories around here's mine. The 3xv (road) was designed from the top down, not the bottom up. Meaning Yamaha started with the SUGO and engineered it down to JDM restricted mode, where as every other 250 was based aroud the road version with boxes and boxes of 'kit' bits to bring it up to Japper F3 spec. IMO that was done because probably some shops/individuals found out how to de-restrict them in Japan, like the famous NSR 'wire splice'.MOT/RTA/TUV types must have got wind of it and were watching closely. Yamaha made it so nobody could de-restrict the 3xv with out the 'race track only' Yamaha ,CDI's looms etc.My wild speculation.......and I'm sticking to it

Paul.
Check 'special setting'
the matrix is either RPM or TPS dependant
if you want them on(shut) tick the box.
wire them to earth and a wire corresponding to a 'power out' pin
Does that help?

Dan
Once again I say, well done. That was as accurate and concisive as it could get.
Are you studying law? As far as fact collecting goes you would make a fine lawyer.

Dan,

That is some very good explaining you do, and very use full.
Even this Dutch man knows exactly what you mean .

Louis

Jeezo ! ! ! I'm gonna stick with my -40 / -00 CDI's & home made advance keys as I'm crap with electrickery.
Kudos for sticking with these boxes of tricks guys. I'd 'ave given up long ago as there's no one in my patch ( that I know of ) that could physically help out with all this.
I take it there'll be an idiots guide for electrical numptys like myself when you get the time. ( I hope so ! )

Lozza

I'm not convinced there is any trickery in the std loom, as reprted by Dan.
When I built my first 3XV with -70 Sugo CDI this was using the std loom and there were no limits of the types discussed by Dan & Paul.
The Sugo loom mere allows the power jets to be enable and removes the junk wiring not required, And I eventually split open this loom and removed all the redundant wires - no black boxes, diodes or anything like that. Compare the two wiring diagrams and you will see. - (Interesting to see my originally developed wiring schematics are still in reference Paul !!)
The std loom for race purposes needs all the un used stuff strapped to earth or bypassed (neutral sw, side stand sw etc) but there was an adaptor available for the power jets that plugged into the std looms air solenoid wiring as it is these connections that are used by the Sugo CDI for the power jet operation.
I eventually obtained a Sugo loom for this bike and there was no difference - revved out to 13000 no problems. The cylinders & heads were fettled by Bruce Woodley and the most we saw from it was 63hp at the rear wheel. The next step was to try out playing with the fixed pick up positions or try a Vortex programmable ignition. Due to a highside at Wakefield Park this never occured. I sold the bike while recovering & this is the bike that Garry See now owns, and I regret selling it now.

My latest 3XV is a 92SP with 93SP top end, Sugo loom and 9A Sugo CDI. I had some issues with the rear cylinder which came down to getting the correct needles. This bike feels much stronger than the previous one, although that could be due to my fondness for period 5 bikes of late !!
Once I have the cylinder replated and new piston in it will have some decent set up time on the dyno, and possibly as SS spec tuning job.
I always run TZ consumeables and pipes - never had an issue with the pin position.