GuzziMoto

Why did you replace the plastic holder with the brass one? Some bikes have fuel mileage issues (low fuel mileage) and they benefit from adding some sort of heat transfer goo between the sensor and the copper tip of the holder. This gives a more accurate temp reading to the ECU. If your bikes runs perfect the the ETS reading a little low and you add heat transfer goo or replace the plastic holder with a brass holder the more accurate temp reading may make the bike run lean. You can then adjust your map accordingly or put the platic holder back on. Alternately, you could add a variable resistor as RH did and give yourself manual control over the temp reading. If it does not run better with the plastic holder back on then you have other issues.

I prefer Redline Shockproof in the gearbox and CARC. I have heard that the newer Guzzis do better with 10/60w but I run 20/50w. Brands are a touchy subject but I suggest either bike oil or diesel oil, no car oil.

I would agree with you there. Same tires with different tread patterns practically.

Okay, this is pretty simple stuff. ANYTHING you do to increase heat transfer between the cylinder head and the ETS will also increase heat transfer the other way, from the ETS to the cylinder head in the off chance that the ETS finds it self in the position of being hotter then the cylinder head. Its a two way street. AHYTHING you do to increase heat transfer between the two parts will increase the accuracy of the ETS. ANYTHING you do that decreases the heat transfer or adds cooling to the ETS will decrease the accuracy of the ETS. The table is not a chart of values that Guzzi engineers came up with after running the engine to heat it up to certain temps and then measured the output of the sensor at that temp and wrote it down. It is based off a spec sheet for the sensor giving sensor outputs at given sensor tip temps. There will be NO consideration in that chart for deviations caused by lack of heat transfer or anything else. The biggest flaw in most of RH's theory (and yours) is that most of the V11's do not have these temp related issues. If the stock setup was flawed and/or made worse by adding goo then all the bikes that have done so would be running worse, not just a few. If your still not sure, please reread the first two parts.

Sorry, but RH will have to try harder if he is going to convince me (or any one else with two brain cells to rub together) that the sensor has more thermal inertia then the cylinder head and that the large chunk of aluminum we call the cylinder head can heat up and cool down faster then the little piece of copper and brass that is the ETS. And if you add thermal goo or a brass holder, that will only increase the heat flow between the two making them even closer to the same temp. And no the cylinder head temp does not change as rapidly as RH believes. The engine is a large chunk of aluminum and is not prone to sudden changes of temp. In fact a liquid cooled motor will heat up and cool down faster, although once heated up it will tend to be more stable then the air cooled motor. And how is it that the airflow that RH says suddenly cools down the cylinder does not cool off the ETS. I guess it does not transfer any heat to the air unless you give it a heat sink? The engine is the source of heat and the ETS measures it. The ETS will not heat up higher then the engine and being much smaller it can change temp faster then the engine can. Edit; 38, I can almost taste it.

Move along Pete, nothing for you to see here.

It may have been a defective tire, or even installed slightly off. But it also could have been a mismatch between the front and the rear if I understood you correctly. It sounded like you replaced only the rear with a Conti. Now I know most of the time two different tires will play nicely, but they tell you not to do that for a reason. Every now and then two tires will not work well together at all. I have experienced that both on a bike and in a car. If you want a low cost tire that perfoms almost as well as the topshelf tires, the Contis are a good choice. If you can afford topshelf tires they are better.

The purpose of the ETS is to tell the ECU when the motor is cold so it will add more fuel. That is what it does. Anything you do to improve it accuracy will give the ECU better more acurate info on the temp of the engine. Screwing with that in a way that feeds the ECU inaccurate info is not or will it ever be defined as improving the accuracy of the sensor. It will alter the fueling but it is not improving the accuracy. You cannot put a heatsink on the sensor and then say it is improving the heat flow to the sensor by drawing heat into the sensor. It is doing one thing and one thing only, it is cooling off the sensor causing it to read lower then it should. Call it what you like but it is doing what it does. Heatsinks shed heat cooling off the device they are attached to.

My wifes V11 has goo in the stock holder. Anything you do that improves heat transfer from the motor to the sensor will improve its accuracy. Improving the sensors accuracy does not mean your bike will run better automatically, but it is a step in the right direction. But if your bike was border line lean at some rpm or throttle position then improving the accuracy of the ETS may make it run worse at that point instead of better. But many bikes, and V11s for sure, are a little lean at lower rpms and throttle openings and too rich at higher rpms and throttle openings. Therefore bodging the ETS to richen up the mix at idle will improve the way the bike runs there but since the motor was already too rich elsewhere it will only be worse there. Improving the accuracy of the sensor is not the same as "making the bike run hot". If it is too lean it will run a little hot, but the sensor itself does not cause this. It just measures it.

That would depend on the type of riding that you do and your personal preferences/standards. Pilots have what I consider to be a better feel of the road and a more nuetral steering trait. They also tend to have quicker warmup and more grip. But if you want a number, all I can give you is my opinion. I would pay $20 more a tire for pilots but they usually cost more then that. If you can get a good deal on them or if you have more disposable income then I do then I definetely recommend the Pilots. But since your last set of tires were Shinko (I'm cheap but I'm not that cheap) I'm guessing you're in the same boat as me. You could ride your whole life on tires like the Contis and be happy. Even better if you never ride on tires like the Pilots. For street riding I would say there is no serious reason to pick the Pilots (or a comparable top shelf tire) over the Contis unless you want and can afford the increased feel and grip. There is nothing I would do on the street that the Pilots can do that the Contis can't. The Pilots just do a nicer job of it.

dlaing, the two posts you quote talk of the fact that the ETS in stock form tends to read low yet much if not all of the mods to the ETS discussed herein result in the sensor reading (or misreading) even lower in the name of "improving sensor accuracy" and the fact that the engine can heat up quickly yet takes more time to cool off. This is normal to pretty much any internal combustion engine. Neither of those two facts support fudging the ETS to misread lower. If you want to fudge the ETS or any other sensor on your bike, fine. I only have an issue when doing so is presented as improving the sensors ability to read or correcting the erroneous sensor output. Adding heat transfer paste and/or installing a brass holder will only improve the accuracy of the sensors reading. That does not mean it will improve the running of the motor but it can be a step in the right direction. Fudging the sensor reading is a bodge, and while it may improve the way the motor runs (possibly for reasons other then you think) it is still a bodge and should be considered as such. Yes, you can trick the ECU into adding more fuel and the engine may run better at idle, but the extra fuel the ECU is adding it is adding at pretty much all rpms even though it only needed extra fuel at idle (or whatever rpm the issue was at). That is why it is not the correct way to adjust the fueling of the bike and deserve the title bodge. And as a side note, have you considered that you may have something mis-adjusted with your bike? My wifes V11 (and many others I suspect) does not have this issue nor has it ever had an issue with poor running when hot.

I have ContiForce tires on both my Griso and my wifes V11. They seem to work fine. As you said a great value tire. Not up to the standards of Michelin Pilots but close enough and much cheaper. They (the ContiForces) seem to last very well so far.

And what is going to provide the heat to raise the temp of the sensor above the temp of the engine? It does not matter how long you leave something in a 200 degree oven, it will NEVER get above 200 degrees. It will not happen. This thread would have serious value if people actually measured things like what the sensor reads instead of speculating on why the ETS reads higher then the actual engine temp with out any evidence that it does. Not to mention that above a certain temp it does not matter anymore. The ECU only responds to temps up to a certain point and above that it does not matter. The sensors range is not "spec'd to 125C", that is just what the table covers. Thermistors have a large range that they respond to, and while the sensor probably isn't as accurate as you go further and further past 100 degrees C it does likely keep going for a while. Probably long past the point where the ECU stops caring. Yes, fudging the ETS can alter the way the bike runs, so can fudging the TPS or the IAT sensor. That does not mean it is the right thing to do. But if you do wish to do so, go ahead. Just don't kid yourself or anybody else that it is anything other then a bodge.

First off, I specifically directed my questions (yes, there were questions in my post) at dlaing and not you because I knew you would go on and on about this and that without actually answering the questions. Maybe dlaing will. And second, the fact that you seem to think the ETS will get hotter then the thing that heats it up (the motor) and I do not does not make you a genius. In fact some might say it makes you a bit less. Yes, there is a lot of miss information and false assumptions in this thread. I hope others can tell the difference between good info and bad atleast as well as I can. Do what you will in regards to tricking your ECU, but how fast you can type is not a reflection of your I.Q..

I gotta ask, dlaing, in regards to ypur statement "I still suspect the sensor is getting too hot." what is the source of heat that is making the sensor too hot (for that matter what is your definition of "too hot"). If you have a 200 degree source of heat it is pretty hard to heat something up with that to a temp higher then 200 degrees. The sensor, if in good contact with the motor, will never (in normal use) be hotter then the motor. The motor is a large chunk of aluminum that contains the heat source. The sensor is a small bit of copper and brass that has no heat source and derives all of its heat from the motor. Therefore, it can not heat up to a temp higher then the motor. It will heat up and cool down entirely based on the temp of the motor. Also, I submit that the fact that someones Guzzi does not run quite right with the temp sensor giving a good reading of the engine temp and if they fudge that reading to make it read lower does not mean whatsoever that the reason the bike does not run right is because of the engine temp sensor. The ETS is just an input that the ECU uses to establish outputs. Something is making the bike run lean at idle and fudging the ETS reading to a lower value so that the ECU adds more fuel is correcting the symptom not the problem. Adding a heat sink to a temp sensor does not in any way make the sensor read more accurately, nor does insulating the sensor from the heat source in any way. If that is what anybody wants to do, fine. I don't care. But when they veil it in scientific dogma and babble, and they would completely rip someone else a new one for doing the same in another situation, I find it humerous at the least and possibly offensive. This has become a thread about rigging a ETS to read lower then it should to trick the ECU into adding more fuel to make up for something else not being right. It has been humerous but don't pretend it is anything of serious value. Edit; Page 35, WOOOOHOOO. We're getting there.

Jesus guys, why are you so mean to poor Ratchet. He could be on to something. Clearly the CHT sensor is not accurate or the bike would run perfect. Why would you suggest that he needs to measure the reading it provides and compare that to what the actual cylinder head temp is when he already has proof that it is not reading correctly, the aforementioned running issues. Clearly part of the problem is it needs a heat sink, after all there are fins on the motor so there should be fins on the temp sensor or they'll never read the same. And clearly the little temp sensor Guzzi uses stock has way more thermal inertia then the motor does so you need to address that to. How is the stock temp sensor going to keep its temp the same as the motors? Obviously it won't. It's gonna heat up and get substantially hotter with out something to pull heat back out of the sensor into the motor, or is it keeping a fresh flow of heat going into the sensor so you don't end up with stale heat in the sensor(hence the need for the heat sink). It's a wonder it even runs as delivered by Guzzi. This from the same guy who said that if God wanted my Guzzi to have better brakes Luigi would have installed them at the factory.

Heck, it just needs freshing up. Should be right as rain with some new rings.... I have blown up some motors in my time but that is a good one.

Welcome, and good luck on your search for the right V11.

Some people love corbins, some do not. I am on of the do nots. I find them very different then stock but no better then a stock V11 seat. Rich Maund has a good reputation for rebuilding the stock seat on V11s. I have no direct experience with him since the stock seat has so far been fine. http://www.v11lemans.com/forums/index.php?showtopic=10430

Here's some good info on FI. The first is bike specific (BMW and Ducati), the second is car oriented. http://www.moto-one.com.au/performance/ope...d_loop_efi.html http://www.aa1car.com/library/o2sensor.htm

I believe so. But I would not call it the most important sensor on a closed loop bike. It only listens to the O2 sensor at lower throttle positions and rpms. And while it is a great thing from an emissions standpoint, it does not adjust the fueling for max performance but instead for best emissions. But unless you have a plan for setting the bike up to correctly run without it you would be wise to keep it.

I thought the bikes with O2 sensors had different ECUs. I could be wrong though. Normally O2 sensors will trigger an ECU fault if removed without some sort of resistor pack to trick the ECU into thinking it's still there. While I would think you could delete the O2 sensor if you wanted, you would likely have to adjust the fuel map and you may run into emissions related legal issues down the road. Plus O2 sensors can be a good thing to have in some cases. If you want to delete it, do some research first. http://www.moto-one.com.au/performance/ope...d_loop_efi.html Here's a good place to start.

I'm thinking Argon.

There is more to get out of hot rodding a V11 motor then there is out of a typical Japanese motor because they are not even close to the limits output wise for what they are. They have a lot in common with Harleys in that respect. No, you're not likely to make a V11 competative HP wise with a 1000cc four banger, or even a Ducati 1098. But you can add roughly 20-25% without too much effort and little cost to reliability. Try getting that kind of improvement out of a 1098 ($$$$$$). Hell, just normal breathing and fuel optimizing can net you 10-15%. Dyno readings vary, so it's hard to compare readings from different dynos and/or operators but my wifes V11 went from about 70 at the rear wheel to 75 with pipes and a PC. K&N filter in the stock box along with porting and adjusting the fueling to match has brought it up to 85 at the rear wheel. I don't think the fueling is perfect yet and could see hitting 90 with a bit of time and a few small changes, but for the time being she's happy with it like it is. And there has been zero loss of ridability and reliability.

Doh!!!!