dlaing

I don't fully agree with him. I think the true truth lies somewhere between G2G's and RH's truths. The thermal paste's mojo will never perfectly balance that of the cooling finned heat sink. But the concept of getting the sensor probe tip conductance to engine heat, while balancing the over heating, by keeping the sensor body at a consistent ambient temperature makes sense. My doubt is because of the inconsistency of the sensor body's temperature over various air speeds, especially when a heat sink is attached. A wind shield could mitigate the issue. You mentioned duct tape....

Which picture? the square wheels?

Your work is appreciated, but the results are based on controversial theory and seat of the pants observations. My situation is different. I ordered the plastic adapter years ago and it still has not arrived, so I am stuck with the brass adapter. Some say it makes it run richer, some say it runs leaner. Whatever, I'll stick to my view that more heat is transmitted through it, but I will agree that the brass adapter may run richer if the ambient conditions cool the adapter faster than the engine, in conditions such as high speed and or rain. The heat sink you added will exasperate any wind speed and weather related changes at the sensor. How much it exasperates the situation is unknown, but like anything it can be theorized that the heat sink is lowering the sensor reading more under conditions where you would want less lowering. Because of that theory, I initially rejected your idea of adding a heat sink, but on further thinking it, I am open to the idea that when the sensor tip is immersed in conductive goo, the reading MIGHT be more "consistent" when you add a heat sink. My situation is also different because I have tuneboy. I want to know what the sensor reading is when I get bad running. Is it off the chart (above 125C)? If it is off the chart, my re-mapping could be futile and a heat sink might be a good idea. If it is on the chart, whatever the point of rough running is, that is the point in the map where I could modify it. My initial idea is to insulate the sensor at the threads with teflon tape, but that is limited insulation and your heat sink idea may still prove valuable, even with the brass adapter.

Been there, done that (at least that was my experience after putting thermal paste between sensor and Brass Adapter. I actually want to do both. The readings on my Wide Band Oxygen Sensor are difficult to read, but if I have a rich/lean switch, I could flip i t and see how the reading shifts, helping to eliminate issues that give false readings. For example it may read lean because of incomplete combustion, not because it is too lean. A flick of the switch with intelligent observation could get past that analysis. That would be one big heatsink! What I would like to know is how much of the reading is effected by heat at the tip of the sensor and how much of the reading is effected by heat at the body of the sensor. Trial and error I suppose. It would be good to hook up a volt meter to the sensor output and observe the output. Something an 8th grader could do, but I am lazy.... Is this statement meant as bait? They have the opposite effect. The brass sensor actually transmits more heat to the sensor. The heatsink pulls the heat away from the sensor. I initially wrapped a good amount of teflon tape around the threads of the sensor, but many on the forum said it would not get too hot, so I removed the tape and added paste, and I don't think it has not run as well since. I don't think I noticed at first since it was tuned and had a rich map installed, but a little out of tune and it acts up. Ratchet's posts helped reinforce my suspicion. Still I need to re-insulate at the threads, not the tip. But getting some bonafide voltage readings is really the way to go. Yep! Is that a triple negative? vs. http://www.taybehbeer.com/

If it hits 4000, it would bring a whole 'nother meaning to Dow of Poo

I have talked about both. The disagreement is about the comment on the sensor itself, but in the real world, it is how the ECU interprets it that matters, so both are relevant. Sorry, I have not been clear enough. According to the chart you posted, both the volts after bridge resistor and the PERCENTAGE difference in Ohms, before resistor, for every ten degree change in temperature, we see the greatest difference occuring between 30 and 40° and the lowest differences as we approach the outer temperature limits, both high and low. It is not an even curve of "difference" The difference does not correlate to accuracy but it does correlate to sensitivity. Usually with greater sensitivity you find greater accuracy. I am arguing about sensitivity not accuracy, because that is all we can determine from that chart, and that is the word that Dan chose in the statement that was disagreed with. From the chart between 90 and 110 we get an unexceptional change in voltage or ohms. Between 30 and 50 we get the greatest change, which supports Dan's argument if he moved the curve to the temperature range spec'd for 5% W/°C accuracy from -40 > 125. Of course how often are we riding below 0C???? So, I can see why Dan assumed they would make the accuracy center on nominal driving temps. Certainly if people in this thread, myself included acted with greater sensitivity and reacted with less sensitivity, we would have greater accuracy in pinpointing the disagreement and we could shorten the discussion by ten pages or more

I did ask G2G and am waiting a response, with baited breathe I don't think it is a matter of dissecting words. And you have certainly had your share in beating this to death. G2G and I merely wanted a simple correction or clear explanation why what you said was correct. We got neither. I thought Raz could clear this up, but apparently not. As I stated before, the sensor is rated at 5% accuracy from -40>+125°C FWIW the mid range of that is 42.5°C coincidence?

Thanks Ratchet. The more I think about it, the more I like your strategy.

Seems like we are changing the topic from the sensor's spec'd sensitivity to the sensitivity interpreted by the ECU. The only place Guzzi or Weber/Marrelli would have put this alleged resistor is in the ECU, right? What Resistance maximizes the sensitivity so that 90-110C is the most the sensitive, and what proof do we have that that is resistance used by the ECU?

Is this the bait? From back in 2007!!!! Clearly it is not an on/off switch. The TuneBoy charts show that.

Where is your original "baiting" post? I read all your recent posts and could not find it.

I predict the Dow will hit 4,444 within 4.444 days of Ratchethack's 4,444 post, and Nasdaq will hit 1,111 within 11.11 days of Dan's 1,111 post, but only if Bill Gates will buy his wife an iPhone

What was incorrect is your statement that the sensor "is ranged to be most sensitive in the 90C to 110C area." The charts show the greatest difference between 30 and 40 which I believe indicates it is ranged to be most sensitive between 30C to 40C area. Unless I am missing something.... What is also is incorrect is that you shut up. Thankfully you did not shut up as your comments are greatly appreciated and informative, although not always 100% correct, as none of our comments are always correct. If I am incorrect, perhaps you could explain why the sensor is more sensitive in the 90C to 110C area, than the 30C to 40C area?????? Perhaps it has something to do with the pre-load resistor value that G2G posted about, but his chart does not seem to support greatest sensitivity in the 90-110 range. Or is that part of his fish bait that I had missed? BTW where is the original bait that G2G posted? I'll go back and look for when Raz corrected him.... G2G, please don't do that again!!!

So, I guess we are all in agreement You just had G2G (presumably) and me thrown off a bit with the incorrect 90-100 C comment.

Thanks Garsdad! My next bike will have to have LoJack, or maybe it will be worth it if I pour some money into the V11. I don't expect insurance companies to reimburse me for $X,000 in upgrades.

Actually it is the brand, "Philistine Slayer" The brand that slays the notions of materialistic ignoramuses, you know the ones that gold plate their temperature sensor adapters

Why do you think Dan is correct when he says, "Looking at the spec'd sensor's values. It is ranged to be most sensitive in the 90C to 110C area"? Sensitiveness to me means that the Volts or Ohms will vary more with less change in temperature. According to the chart you presented, the greatest variation in Volts over a ten degree change in temperature occurs between thirty and forty degrees. FWIW the sensor is least sensitive between the -40 and the -30, ( the average temperature in Sweden ) And the next point of equal insensitivity probably occurs beyond the opposite end of the spectrum, in Death Valley when a 140mph blast across the open desert turns into a 20 minute ride behind an RV going 10 MPH up a long twisty road with no chance to safely pass. In that situation, I suspect the temperature may get over 125C, and maybe just a hot Summer day stuck in traffic in Milan could bring the temperature out of the spec'd range. If it does go out of range, might we see the bridging effect and maximum richness???? Maybe that is the vapor lock some people have experienced?!? °C ohms mV ADC Difference to next ten degrees -40 100950 4927 1009 X -30 53100 4863 996 13 -20 29120 4755 974 22 -10 16600 4586 939 35 0 9750 4333 887 52 10 5970 3996 818 69 20 3750 3571 731 87 25 3000 3333 683 48 30 2420 3087 632 51 40 1600 2581 529 103 50 1080 2093 429 100 60 750 1667 341 88 70 525 1296 265 76 80 380 1011 207 58 90 275 775 159 48 100 205 601 123 36 110 155 468 96 27 125 100 313 64 this row is 15° change so, (32*2/3=~21)

You are confusing me! Now I am thinking that whether you are spam or be legit. Please make it clear to us. Sorry, if you are legit, and welcome to the forum! This forum used to get a lot of spam. Often bad grammar combined with links to commercial websites, is an indicator of a spammer, so forgive me for assuming you might be a spammer. Heck, my grammar can be bad, too, and some people here are programmed to treat me like spam

The two do not accomplish the same thing. Your method is like taking a square wheel, turning it into an octagon and calling it round Adding thermal transmitting goop speeds up and increases the temperature reading, reducing the over-enrichening at low engine temps. Field loop gromenators controlled by microprocessors if properly applied would result in a much more ideal fuel mixture, much more of the time. Heck even RH got more than half way closer to nirvana than your method could, with a microprocessing PCIII, some thermal goop, some cooling fins and a variable resistor If I ever get my Windoze machine working, I'll be modifying the temperature maps, which is in another way to get half way to Nirvana. I am skeptical about cooling fins, but resistors are an excellent idea, IMHO.

I assumed it would simply read 0V, but I'll trust your knowledge of this bridge resistor, as backed up by RH's observation. Thanks!

That was about the most sensible post yet! The only thing I might lean toward disagreeing with, is that I SUSPECT that the plastic was spec'd for reason of insulating the sensor from the engine, but yah, I'd agree we don't know that for better than 99% certainty. I am only about 95% certain. Skeeve is probably about 5% certain, RH is certainly uncertain or certain or something.

It would depend on the fault. If disconnected I think it would run lean. As an experiment it might be worth pulling the wires to see how it runs, but don't go burning valves! Dude! I thought you had died! Looking at your posting history, however, you have been back since November. A belated Welcome Back to You! Do you still have your Guzzis?

surprisingly rough curve! Accuracy of sensor is not shown, but any inaccuracy of sensor is more forgiving when the ECU interprets between 30 and 40 degrees at the 103 difference, right? °C ohms mV ADC Difference to next ten degrees -40 100950 4927 1009 X -30 53100 4863 996 13 -20 29120 4755 974 22 -10 16600 4586 939 35 0 9750 4333 887 52 10 5970 3996 818 69 20 3750 3571 731 87 25 3000 3333 683 48 30 2420 3087 632 51 40 1600 2581 529 103 50 1080 2093 429 100 60 750 1667 341 88 70 525 1296 265 76 80 380 1011 207 58 90 275 775 159 48 100 205 601 123 36 110 155 468 96 27 125 100 313 64 this row is 15° change so, (32*2/3=~21)

First-year students at Texas A&M's Vet school were receiving their first anatomy class, with a real dead cow. They all gathered around the surgery table with the body covered with a white sheet. The professor started the class by telling them, "In Veterinary Medicine it is necessary to have two important qualities as a doctor: The first is that you not be disgusted by anything involving the animal body." For an example, the Professor pulled back the sheet, stuck his finger in the butt of the dead cow, withdrew it and stuck his finger in his mouth. "Go ahead and do the same thing," he told his students. The students freaked out, hesitated for several minutes, but eventually took turns sticking a finger in the anal opening of the dead cow and sucking on it. When everyone finished gagging and coughing, the Professor looked at them and said, "The second most important quality is observation. I stuck in my middle finger and sucked on my index finger." "Now learn to pay attention. Life's tough, it's even tougher if you're stupid."

Thanks Raz! Just what I wanted to see! and Dan Thanks, that makes sense if it is jumping increments and the number increases with temperature. But then wouldn't the greater accuracy be above 110C?