dlaing

There are two potential "problems" here. One: (This is the problem that Ratchet denies he has, and that I was gullible enough to consider that I might have.) Greg's absurd premise that bikes that inexplicably don't run well with brass adapter, filled with conductive goo, and wrapped in duct tape MUST have a problem. Two: (This is the problem that Ratchet is working on a solution for, whether or not he admits it) The brass sensor acts as a heat reservoir, such that the heat does not accurately follow the cylinder head temperature. His bike works fine, despite this design problem. Yes it would run better if the sensor better followed the CHT but it is NOT A PROBLEM. Subjective definitions of the word, problem, seem to be clashing. What is interesting, is that Greg takes a stock bike, that has a "problem" and fixes it by adding brass holder, goo, and duct tape. (not a bodge (sarcasm intended)) Meanwhile, my bike and Ratchet's have no problem, but when we try adding brass adapters and or goo which creates a problem, it is our bikes that are abnormal and problem plagued. Simply mind boggling square wheel logic. I think Greg is just yanking our dorks...

No doubt lower RPMs than peak torque get better fuel efficiency in the real world when you have power to spare. Lowering the RPMs would be my strategy if easy enough. I am just thinking there may be other strategies... Even a V35 should give you adequate power, and better MPG! But the Nevada engine will give you much more reserve power, and possibly greater durability???? I'd like to take Buell Blast and turn it into an aerodynamic recumbent, but I don't have the skills for such madness. Keep us posted with the project!

The V65 swing arm is longer than the V50, and the V65 Lario is longer than the both the V65 and V50. Paul M. did some interesting swing arm modifications. If your goal is MPG, RPM may not be such a big problem. Efficiency is theoretically greatest somewhere near maximum torque, which I guess is about 5000 RPM Of course that is theoretical, and assumes a fairly heavy workload on the engine. Your streamline and lean wheels won't add up to a heavy load until you reach pretty high speeds. There was an interesting forum thread back a while ago discussing how airplanes will lean out to A:F ratios of about 16:1. At 16:1 the engine runs cooler than at 14:1 (where there is risk of burning valves) I have meant to experiment with this, but I fear damaging the engine by running in the map transition areas. I think forum member Raz may have experimented with this. You would have to run rich of stoich at some points just for drivability. Theoretically a toggle switch could be made with a fuel injected Guzzi to quickly lean it from 13:1 to 16:1 for extended touring. At 16:1 you would be losing power, which is probably OK, since your RPMs will be up. Just food for thought. It may not really be doable. Also I am sure the combustion chamber has room for improvement. If you want to run 16:1 dual plugging may help???? Best of luck! FWIW, my V65 got pretty good gas mileage, so I don't think it is such a bad choice for an MPG project.

Invest in diamond powder futures!

The sensor works OK but as you mentioned, it was designed for water cooled engines. The mass of the sensor and the nature of brass is such that it is slow to heat and slow to cool down. Ratchet's resistor alleviates fluctuating conditions that the Power Commander can't fluctuate with. FWIW, The PCIII map does not follow sensor changes the same way the ECU's map does. Essentially different algorithms. I don't understand it exactly, but I think the ECU is changing proportionally, while the PCIII is adding or subtracting, so if you map at the ECU with one set of sensor conditions, when conditions change, the ECU THEORETICALLY will go with the change properly, while the PCIII won't. We could argue for 40 more pages just on that point... The PCIII is still a valuable mod, just not as perfect as tuning the ECU directly. Adding a heat sink is different that just lowering the temp of the sensor. One, it does lower the temperature, allowing the ECU to more accurately match the engineers intended voltage output per degree, if one added thermal conductive goo. Two, it allows the sensor to cool down at a rate closer to the rate of engine cooling down. On the negative side, it will cause the sensor to heat up more slowly, but but but, since the thermal goo is added, and the heat is allegedly read at the probe and not the sensor body, we get an overall improvement. Not as great as if you plugged a sensor of less mass and an accuracy range that works well at a higher temperature, directly into the cylinder head and re-mapped to match the temperature output, but Ratchet's cooling fin heat sink and goo should be an improvement over the stock configuration. But I think his GM air sensor is more ideal because of the reduced mass. He just needs to get the conductivity to closely match ideal running, by setting the air gap or adding some sort of conductive, assuming it is not already ideal. FWIW the wonder knob could do anything if properly designed and administered....but that ain't likely to happen.

The song says diamonds are their best friend, but my wife wants platinum Diamond powder appears to be about $10 per gram++, (if a cts is a carat or 200mg????)

Another solution, if needed is from forum member, Ryland3210 http://www.motratech.com/ These move feet forward, to stretch your legs out. FWIW, I am 6' 3" and was comfortable enough with the stock set up, but I got higher Convertibars. I also added the lower Buell pegs which helps a little. But a Quota would be more comfortable.

Some sort of powder may be the ticket. Higher mass than any gas, but lighter than goos, the thermal diffusivity number for powders could be ideal if they offer high Thermal Conductivity. Diamond has better conductivity than copper or aluminum. I am not sure how good the conductivity is in powder form, or what the best source might be, or even if it is at all economical. Graphite would surely be more economical, and offer qualities that may work better than goo. Boron Nitride may be another option. But getting it to fill the chamber for consistent temperature readings could be challenging. You would need a sealable fill hole. But if the gap area is small enough, the mass of a thermal paste should be pretty minimal. I know some of the thermal pastes I have scraped from heat sinks are pretty light and dry.

(not that you are stupid!!!) I see some room for improvement, but I think I'll be ordering one of these sensors! I'd consider replacing the brass threaded piece with an aluminum one, and I might pursue something other than the Delrin, but I don't know what....glass? I am having trouble with the photo, is the GM sensor threaded?, if so, what is the thread size/pitch?

Greg's books covered revolutionary bike designs

BTW Sorry Ratchet for not believing in your cooling finned heat sink idea, at first. Sometimes a good idea takes a while to 'sink' in

Someone said if you disconnect the wire to the sensor the engine runs fine. That could be the solution Or buy a Honda Or make your own adapter out aluminum, bakelite,(with cooling fins on the sensor side)(design it so it can be tightened with a spark plug wrench without torquing the bakelite section), add goo, and use TuneBoy to modify the map.

Forget what I said in the last few posts. Dan says it much better.

Or the plastic part of the sensor. Or keeping the sensor in designed ideal range.

The amplitude is increased, too. Ratchet and I have verified this with testing, yada yada yada. Of course if you wrapped the sensor in neoprene foam and duct tap, then that amplitude ain't gonna change much from adding goo, but of course it will be even hotter. And if you added Ratchet's heat sink we get a cooling effect that hopefully balances the adding of goo. In this case, the change in amplitude from adding goo will be even greater. Whether it is hotter than no goo and no heat sink depends on the size of the heat sink and some other factors. But what is a valid point is that benefits in speed increase may out weigh the increase in read temperature, if your bike is running rich enough to begin with or your are prepared to modify the fueling.

I did not use goo, I used a coil of solder to increase the conductivity. I pulled it out and it immediately ran much better. The lean running symptoms were greatly reduced. I am sure the base map has some cells that are "too lean to begin with, just within the margins for not giving much problems" That is why people rave about the PCIII, which mostly enrichens on top of the base map. Both the goo and an aftermarket exhaust make it run leaner than the engineers planned. Running leaner than the engineers planned is not necessarily going to produce symptoms that people will detect. But compounding the leanness from aftermarket mufflers and goo without modifying the fueling is looking for trouble.

Thanks Dan! Unfortunately I don't have a compressor, just a bicycle pump But I am curious as to what the process is.

Yeah, that is my point, that leaning these motors out by adding goo may cause these issues. Sure if you also have an overly rich PCIII map, the goo is going to help. My bet is that is the case with many of the advocates stories. Valve guides sure could be my problem, and maybe Ratchet's too, as he has many miles on his. I guess I'll pay someone to figure that out for me, as it is above my level of expertise and tools to fix.

Could be, regardless, anyone taking a bone stock, already too lean, EPA tuned V11 and making it even leaner by only adding goo, is making a mistake. And anyone replacing the plastic with brass could be making a mistake if they don't make some of the aforementioned changes, especially if they are adding goo and wrapping it in duct tape. Ratchet's cooling finned heat sink is a fine way to make the goo method more ACCURATELY represent the temperature, relative to the programming in the ECU, and for what the heat sink can't suck away, the resistor bodge can (if used properly)

I have nothing against altering the table using Tuneboy or DirectLink. By bodging, do you mean using a resistor to change the voltage? That does not have to be counter productive. As Ratchet engineered it, he only activates it in relatively rare circumstances, like stuck at a traffic light or putzing behind motorhomes. Nothing is telling me that this is because of the sensor or table or anything else. The inaccuracy is because of the goo. Adding goo makes all bikes run leaner. It is only problematic on some bikes because many various factors. Send two V11s for full re-mapping and watch how far off their maps can be. Doug Lofgren's website shows an interesting comparison of two identical Ducatis with very different maps. Heck, we can't even figure out a TPS setting that works for every bike. I am sure I have a fuel map problem, otherwise it would always be smooth, I'd be averaging over 40MPG US and I'd be capable of pulling redline in top gear on the windless flats. I have tried quite a few PCIII maps, most make it run smoother and burn more fuel. I have altered the maps too, never getting it perfect in all conditions. The state of tune often does not hold long, too. A perfect map would be more forgiving of changes in weather, fuel, and state of tune. Could also be the engine is getting worn out... Compression seems good. Could be worn timing chain, or valves, I suppose. But the brass adapter had a negative effect, and adding solder to make it more conductive aggravated it. Re-mapping will happen, but that is not about what this argument is about.

No it is not. Adding goo makes the sensor more accurately indicate the core temperature inside the cylinder head. (but maybe not above 125C) Not adding goo makes the sensor more accurately represent the temperature for the ECU to inject the right amount of fuel, as determined by the engineers.

Now that we have reached 40 pages, we may need to get back to the questions: Why did Guzzi use an adapter? Why not just screw it into the cylinder head? Clearly that would be more "ACCURATE" than using an adapter SEEMINGLY designed to lower the temperature of the sensor rated 5% accurate from -40 to 125C. The whole idea that they wouldn't just tap to fit the sensor seems to indicate that they wanted the sensor running in its temperature range that produced reliable accuracy.

I'll have to nag my local dealer again. I gave up nagging them many months ago. The price is now probably twice what it was when I ordered it...

Adding Goo makes the sensor more accurately reflect the temperature of the cylinder head, but it does not give a more accurate temp reading to the ECU. The voltage output corresponds to fuel mixture adjustment table. Adding Goo increases the temp reading to the ECU causing the engine to run LEANER than the engineers planned. THIS IS LESS ACCURATE. If you go back to the plastic adapter, add anti-seize and screw it in very gently, finger tight or only slightly tighter. Mine cracked with about the same torque that would break a two mm bolt. If you can find a way to make the brass sensor work, go for it. But we certainly have no consensus here on how to make it work. I agree, "You can then adjust your map accordingly or put the platic holder back on.(if you still have it) Alternately, you could add a variable resistor as RH did and give yourself manual control over the temp reading." Or you could add a cooling finned heat sink, as RatchetHack did. (Much cheaper than TuneBoy, DirectLink or MY15M) I'll be using Tuneboy to make mine work. I would add goo if I was sure that the sensor designed for water cooled engines did not run too hot.

According to Greg Field, you neglected to fill with conductive goo and wrap it in duct tape. But apparently I am the only one who disagrees with his method. For me, adding conductive made it run much worse. I used a coil of solder as a conductive. Removing it made it run much better. In the interest of "science", give his method a try. My replacement plastic adapter has been on order for years, so I am considering ratchets patentable cooling fin design!