docc

I mean, I have a RedFrame Sport, so I bought mine new with half the bloody motorbike missing . . .

And the side covers? And the airbox? And the rear fender . . .

The TPS replacement checked out. The setting is still not perfect, but the awful (almost unrideable) hesitation/falter is gone. This is my 4th TPS. Number two was a PF4C for Harley-Davidson and #3/#4 are ca-cycleworks. First two lasted 50-60,000 miles each. This last ca-cycleworks about 19,000. That it "went bad" after it was adjusted makes me wonder if the method of tapping the TPS back and forth with a screwdriver handle to get the delicate setting could be suspect practice. That is the only action I can imagine that could have damaged the TPS during the tune-up. What with my decidedly worn throttle body shafts, finding the "fully and completely closed" throttle position remains enigmatic. I can change the reading about 30 mV pushing the throttle crank closed along with deflecting the shaft laterally. My understanding is that is about four "steps" on the mapping. A moving target . . .

Several well informed posts by @2Stroke-Racing on this thread:

There is something very V11-ish about this . . .

Otherwise, other than the TPS, I have no explanation for what the Sport is doing now. I'll know tomorrow if this new TPS addresses the issue. At that point, I will have feedback on the ca-cycleworks TPS and will likely split these TPS posts to a dedicated TPS thread. At which point I don't want to type "TPS" again for a long time . . .

Someone else will have to talk you through the map installation. Not hard, but I haven't done it.

Nothing wrong with that thinking. Or that the input was exceeding the selected range and causing the "1" to display and appear like an open circuit. That I could get it to repeat consistently gently rolling the throttle on and off at that throttle position (with the meter, but also while riding) has me thinking it worthwhile to change the TPS. The replacement arrived today.

Correct. Two nipples under the tank. Seems like some regions the vent was left open to atmosphere?

Mine didn't. But they are very sensitive that everything is set perfectly. Even if you end up running a new mp, everything needs to be set perfectly first anyway. The "Titanium" map might be where you end up if you have to got that route (said to be richer across the entire range). Otherwise, the Meinolf Map is well spoken of.

Have you synchronized the throttle bodies and performed the rest of the basic tune-up?

Trying, rather earnestly, to set this TPS again after diligently cleaning the (really dirty) throttle body bores and plates (yeah, I had skipped that step) I really thought I had pinned this down. But then . . . With the multimeter set to resistance (kΩ), rolling the throttle ever-so-slowly, I caught this reading several times at low throttle openings. Yep, that means the TPS goes "open"/disconnects. At which point the ECU just goes to sleep . . . zzzzzzzzzzzzz FWIW, I can never see these TPS failures looking at the mV output. Very telling when the TPS goes "open"/dead looking at the resistance through the TPS/potentiometer at various throttle openings. Makes me more more hopeful the new TPS will address this new falter . . .

Taking my Falter Struggle back to the Air Bypass thread and give Joe his topic back . . .

Cannot get the throttle position to be reliable after changing it this last time. Planning on installing a new TPS and hoping for a resolution . . . Once again, there are many, many contributors to the various V11 stumble/hiccup/cough/falter. No doubt, several of them can combine to make for challenging fettling.

If this falter were longstanding or gradual onset, I too would suspect "mapping" or injectors. But it was there, new, upon start-up after the "Tune-up." As usual, I figured it was "something I did." The fact that I cannot find the perfect TPS setting now is maddening. I have no idea why the TPS could "go bad" with a setting change except that it was in a sweet spot before and now I keep setting it where there is a fault in the potentiometer. 17,000 miles on this "California Cycle Works" PF3C. To be determined if a new TPS addresses the issue . . . Valves are 0.006/0.008" I/E. With only 4250 miles since the last valve adjustment, the left needed no change and I loosened the right "maybe" 0.0005". Enough to make the feeler gauge slide easier rather than tightly. I was jazzed with this since I have been monitoring a left exhaust valve tightening up over the years.

Yeah, I have no doubt Meinolf's Map, especially in the last version, embodies intelligent improvements and refinements over the factory mapping. Yet, I have long been the poster child for the factory map. In fact, my Sport had never run better until this latest tune-up. So, for sure I mucked something up. First, I had to be certain the non-metric O-rings I put on the air bypass screws were not the problem. They weren't. Then, it became all about finding the "fully and completely closed" throttle position to baseline the TPS (what with my worn 130,000 mile throttle shafts). After maybe five or six tries at the TPS setting, it runs great. Once warmed up and with the throttle changing or well open. The falter is decidedly throttle position specific. You know, that barely cracked throttle we use to make a tight parking lot turn or pull out into traffic. The worse possible times to falter. The first response is more throttle. St. Vitus Dance on a 500 pound motorcycle with the front wheel turned in a slow speed maneuver is bad form, at the very least. So, next is a replacement TPS. Coming down to the wire, Waddington and me . . .

Weather is certainly too far out to forecast specifics, yet dew points (sweaty stickiness) look to drop after a midweek system and weekend rain should be more of the afternoon thunderstorm variety. Waddington and I continue the waltz toward my departure. Everything I touched in my preparation went sideways. Turns out those original green "paper" valve cover gaskets won't quite make 130,000 miles. And tightening the fasteners more is never the answer. Thread repair complete, along with a fresh gasket. My Decent Tune-up not only ended in a leaky valve cover, but also a TPS that refuses to find a decent place to set. Replacement TPS here tomorrow. Along with high hopes that solves the new hesitation/hiccup. The stuff SpineRaids are made of . . .

There's an "idea!"

FFP/BH . . . Far From Perfect/ But Hopeful . . . .

From MG Cycle, the rear Brembo "carbon ceramic"/ blue back GF were $26.43US/pair in October 2022. That same order, the front Brembo "sinter"/ red back SHH (that I had to take off immediately) were $34.67US. The front Brembo (OE)/ black back FF from OPP Racing I just received were $44.50US. YMMV I just rode some miles to do a bedding exercise on those new pads and they have great feel, no excessive dusting, and don't sound like a lathe rolling the sport up onto the lift.

I mean, there are 4 pads at the front and two at the rear. Not sure how the rear could "cost more." Perhaps the message here is: Beware of aggressive HH and even "sinter" pads. If they eat your V11 rotors, you'll be halfway to a bad day. Replacing rotors makes any pads look cheap and easy.

Haha, well, I've been to Daytona, but I don't have a Daytona.

The last Brembo rear pads I found for the V11 are the blue backing. The wear pattern on the rotor looks "compatible." As far as I can discern, the (black backing) OE pads are FF, the blue backing "Carbon Ceramic" are GF. *Perhaps* pads rated GG are okay? But I have had two distinctly bad experiences with HH and "SHH" pads on our rotors. Sure, they brake aggressively. Plan on new rotors.

Note to @Joe . . . What with inaugural SpineRaider @Bill Hagan coming, @Skip coming all the way from Michigan, and now longtime SpineRaider @Josh bringing the "Bus Bike ", no doubt you have shared a quite good idea* . . . . Shoot, even @gstallons thinks this is a good idea!

This is AWESOME news!