dlaing

I thought The V1100i is supposed to be more stable and less flickable. It has a little longer wheelbase. They are very similar bikes, so I would compare some of the measurements like front axle to to steering head, how much ground clearance, seat height, handlebar width and height, front and rear sag, etc. But ditto on tires. I think an OEM sporti rear tire is more narrow. Raising the rear, lowering the front will make it more nimble. This might increase stability problems, but only if something else is wrong to begin with, like sag being way off, bad bearings or bad tires.

Thanks for the reply, Mike. Interesting. Your bike may have run similarly to ALdad's who also gets a high idle. My bike is also a year 2000, but idles fine. I do run the tappets set to .15/.20mm as opposed to the raceco .20/.25mm. I do not think that should make such a difference that you can't use the air adjustment screws to correct. Probably something else is happening. As for the air adjustment screws, FIM says to close when balancing, that the default is closed but to open and adjust to get the right CO reading and balance. They also say, "tap the butterfly with your finger to ensure that the butterfly is completely closed against the body" but I believe you do want to be gentle with it. I don't think it is designed to take force the way it is at WOT where I assume there is some sort of stop. And they say some other interesting stuff, like set it to 150mV exactly, rather than ±5mV. I found that depending on how I seat the right throttle body, I get an inconsistent reading at completely closed throttle. I should measure the variation, but I recall is around ±5 or 10mV. I must verify, but that will vary by bike. If you get the mV set to exactly 150mV there should be less room for error. I guess we need more people to test the procedure. People with custom mapped PCIIIs, remapped ECUs and aftermarket ECUs might not get good results, but there is not much we can do for them. But we should be able to figure out why some get a high idle following the instructions, assuming that is really what is happening.

Another possibility, leaky intake manifold??? What spec did you use for the valve adjustment? As a general rule, looser valves provide higher idle. Do you have a PCIII? That would not explain the high idle, but try disconnecting and go for a short ride. You may need to trial and error determine what TPS it was mapped to. A good starting point would be to set the idle and then adjust the TPS sensor to 500mV. I would not recommend that for anything other than a mysteriously mapped bike. Many bikes were set to a higher TPS voltage to enrichen the mixture.

Yes, Please! People might not reply, but we are reading, learning and enjoying! Here is a related post by Pete about the lube system http://www.v11lemans.com/forums/index.php?...amp;#entry95471

Was your TPS voltage at idle below .5V? If so, than you were not using the method we created. If a PCIII map is used, the bike should be tuned to the specs that the bike was mapped to. Unfortunately people simply take there bikes to dyno for mapping without giving the bike a proper tuneup, and then they share their maps.

No, the procedure has not ossified to become dogma. Perhaps this thread has. Maybe this thread should be unpinned. The procedure is not recommended for Ti ECU bikes. Likewise it has not been tested for any aftermarket ECUs nor Harley Davidson TPS. This procedure is in my opinion the best freely available TPS set up instructions. I am sure the Ti ECU owners would appreciate a How-To. We considered adding the numbers you previously posted for the Ti-ECU, but you were not sure the difference was meaningful. And we wanted to keep the instructions simple. We could create an alternate complex instruction set. Do people get the instructions when they buy the Ti kit? Perhaps someone who knows how to tune the Ti Mufflers could write some instructions.

We are talking measuring with dipstick screwed in, right? I don't think so. I think there is enough room between sheet and low level mark to allow the oil to slosh away from the pickup. But if you are willing to lower your oil level that low, install a pressure gauge and watch it during WOT uphill runs through all the gears, I will accept your results. What do people think about riding wheelies with the shloppage sheet installed? Safe for the wheel coming up briefly if filled to the top of the sheet? Riding for a city block could be devastating, regardless of oil level?

Latent heat at cylinder walls compared to heat transfer to bath? What relevance would that have? I was only pointing out that vaporization does occur, and I suggested that I did not know how it compared to oil in aerosol. But since you asked, I will do my best to answer: I'd guess that neither the latent heat of vaporization, nor the heat transfered to the oil bath have much effect on windage, engine breathing, and condensation. How the two compare? The heat of vaporization will directly result in vaporised oil that will increase windage slightly, condensation is probably already maxxed out, and engine breathing should be immeasurably effected. While the heat transfered to the oil bath has no direct effect on windage, breathing or condensation. The direct effect is that the oil warms! The warmer the oil the lower the viscosity. I would guess that a lower viscosity might go into aerosol more easily and thus increase windage slightly, and engine breathing might be slightly effected as the warmer oil swells. As I said, I don't understand the relevance of comparing the two. Comparing Vaporization with Aerosolization (made up word) is much more relevant. And even that difference is not very important. If vaporization is a significant cause of oil loss, than using an oil with a higher flash point would help reduce oil loss.

Ratchet, Yes, I agree that the aerosols are generated mechanically(largely by the motion of the crank). I only suggested vaporization occurs at the heat of the cylinder walls.

How notchy? EDIT Like Ratchet says, try hand rolling it out

Have you lubed your cush lately? Also, be sure to align the index marks when reassembling the shaft.

If you have the serial PCIII you will need a serial cable. Note: your PC will need a serial port, or adapter if it only has USB. http://66.132.187.150/powercommander_iii_u...ment_parts.aspx You can also find the USB cables there if you have the newer PCIIIUSB

I think it would look cool! But check on the headlight size. You might have to cut out a big hole for the V11 headlight. And consider how it will align with handle bars. You may need bar risers to get it to block the wind at your hands. Redhook's LongHammer IPA is yum, but not for the faint of heart.

From http://www.bobistheoilguy.com/motoroil.html And from Amsoil Propaganda http://www.synthetic-motor-oil-change-and-...ct-code-amo.php RESISTS HIGH TEMPERATURE VAPORIZATION I would assume that almost all the vaporization occurs at the hot cylinder walls, not at the sump bath. I wonder how much of oil loss is due to vaporization and how much is due to mechanically generated aerosol???? I guess it does not matter if you use a shloppage sheet as oil loss will be reduced.

albeit forgetful and error prone. I used the right set screw many times as my previous method, and our method only once. Our method works better. But my previous method stuck in my head better.

Frequent tuneups of simply balancing the TBs and setting the idle speed, and idle TPS reading can be done as you suggested. If the TPS sensor is not far from 150mV you can set the TPS to it's required voltage with the link rod connected by simply using the left idle stop screw. But one does not know if the 150mV is off unless you disconnect the linkage, etc. Taking the reading at WOT may offer a quick and easy decent impression, but as we mentioned, there are some potential gotchas that could make the reading inaccurate. The instructions we created start with setting the 150mV setting. It is not always necessary to check the 150mV reading, but it really is not that difficult to set it properly and exactly if you follow the instructions. Give it a try. You will find it will add less than five minutes to the tuning process, and then you will be sure it is set correctly. Also, note the WOT setting. If you are familiar with the bike, it can be used to determine a gross slippage in the TPS setting.

Has the technical forum hit rock bottom yet?

Egahd! drugs get smuggled for less money than that! Did you try here: http://www.ferracci.it/ instead of here: http://www.ferracci.com/ ?

Thanks for reminding me. I had forgotten the importance of removing backlash and how the process we outlined WORKS! I USED to set it up using the right set screw because it balanced better the compromise between idle balance and balance above 3000rpm. But I learned (and recently forgot) that it is better to use the left screw, and the right screw can be permanently backed out. When we created the instructions here http://www.v11lemans.com/forums/index.php?showtopic=12204 I learned that the value of no backlash is more important. Also, it is not important what your twinmax is reading between 3000- 8000 rpm Just take the reading at idle and between 2000-3000. Yes please do as the others suggested and follow the instructions. Sorry, mea culpa. I was living in the past, which worked too, but not as well.

FASCINATING!

Yes, and if one marks down the exact number after a tune-up, future tune-ups could be repeated with the WOTTPSmV reading! But the balance of the throttle bodies could throw the reading off if the linkage is not disconnected. Some bikes will tend for the right TB to top out at WOT and some the left TB. Individuals could determine their bikes nature and go from there. But that is getting too complex for a general howto instruction. Yes, in ALdad's high idle thread, I was unsure how to tell him to gently force the butterfly all the way home. Only a little pressure is needed. The visual confirmation that the 'choke' is not getting in the way is important, but the throttle body can still stick and gently pullling the lever closed will change the TPS reading, at least in my bike's case.

Derek Capito has posted in the V11LeMans forum http://www.moto-lab.com/ He can map to your ECU. Not as inexpensive as a PCIII and tuning link, but quite likely or maybe arguably better results. He uses multi-gas analysis and tunes for power, instead of just tuning for a target lambda as read from a wide band oxygen sensor. Ignition timing can be optimized too. It all boils down to how well you want it tuned and how much you want to pay.

From ALdad's thread, raz replied to my post Good point about the WOT TPS being the less critical. So, if the WOT to closed difference is not the same on all bikes, it would likely cause problems. Yes, with linkage disconnected, one would have to hold the right throttle body open by hand. I don't think this would be too difficult. Oh, and very good point about the multimeter. I'll have to check mine! I read the WOT reading months ago, so I don't recall, but I too may have lost a decimal of accuracy. I don't think that would be acceptable.

Hi Raz, I am going to move my reply to your post to the pinned thread.

ALdad brought up an interesting problem. He got a high idle after adjusting the TPS. Assuming I diagnosed it correctly, the solution is probably just to simply make sure the Right throttle really is closed, but this gets me thinking that maybe the WOT TPS, Wide Open Throttle Throttle Position Sensor measurement system would be better. The linkage should still be disconnected, but the results might be more consistent and there would be no need to back off set screws or choke. The one potential flaw to the method, is that we don't know if the throttle bodies are all built to the same exact dimensions. The question is: If we set to 150mV closed will the WOT measurement always be the same from bike to bike? If so, I think it would be a better method.