The extra coding is what I was talking about and apparently didn't work. The issue was really bad leaving work today but holding the button and giving a little rev does the trick... I really an curious what causes this.
Having played around with EFI systems like MegaSquirt as well as some other EFI systems - OEM, piggyback and standalone - my guess is that the PCIII isn't capable of sending a signal to the Honda ECU that's within the values the cylinder temp sensor would normally produce at those temperatures. That's the usual source of failure with piggybacks and cold starts, anyway.
Or, to be more precise, what the coolant temperature sensor is reporting is not what the PC III is passing along to the Honda ECU. That's how the PowerCommander works - it spoofs the inputs the Honda ECU would normally get and alters them to get the ECU to change its fuelling. In this case, it takes the voltage sent to it from the coolant temp sensor, looks at it and instead of sending the same voltage to the Honda ECU's input port, it sends the closest thing it can at start. Which isn't enough, or is wrong in some other fashion.
One interesting investigation to find out how it's broken is for someone with a PCIII-equipped bike that won't cold start to check the voltage at the coolant temp sensor and then check the voltage at the input port on the Honda ECU and see how they're different.
Every 919 has it stock, as proven by the dynos. It's there, see for yourself.
Can't comment on the Megasquirt, never heard of it. Can you share more info please?
Click the link I added to the post. Megasquirt is an open-source standalone EFI solution - I've been working with MS projects for years and years now.
And as for "OMG dynos," let me post this about my other bike regarding how dyno charts don't always track with how the vehicle feels.
First, the 700's dyno sheet, as carried in a period publication:
Please note the powerband graphs and the power drops, much like its later 919 descendant.
Second, a review from another publication (just so you know I'm not the only one saying this.)
Now comes the surprise: On the road, the Nighthawk's lumpy power delivery smooths out, the engine feeling stronger in the basement than the dyno numbers indicate.
Dynos don't tell the whole story. As a practical matter, both my 700 and 919 don't seem to bog or drop accel like their dyno sheets indicate they should. It's just one continuous push (and in the case of the 700, a sudden hard - for the era - rush as it gets on the cam at ~8500) not a staggering on-off-on accel. So I'm not seeing the practical need for the FailMander to 'fix' power delivery that doesn't seem to be broken. Keep in mind I have stock pipes on both, which may have more than a little to do with it. Change your exhaust and your mileage not only can but will vary.
Shit throttle response below 3K is not something I'm seeing as a practical matter either. I can and do sneak up on pedestrians at low speeds and low revs as well as trundle along in heavy traffic. I also regularly have to evade idiots by ripping the throttle open at low revs to rocket out of the way. I am not seeing problems with throttle response *or* precise throttle metering/modulation with my bike. Again, doesn't seem to be broken, why 'fix' it?