Greg Field Posted March 27, 2009 Posted March 27, 2009 Page 36, anyone? And can anyone guess what number the BQ is at?
savagehenry Posted March 27, 2009 Posted March 27, 2009 At this point I only care about ONE thing...What the hell is the "BQ"? My bet is in; I think this will go well beyond the 42 page estimate. This thread reminds me of that old saying: "Arguing on the internet is like being in the Special Olympics... even if you win, you're still a retard."
Greg Field Posted March 28, 2009 Posted March 28, 2009 At this point I only care about ONE thing...What the hell is the "BQ"? My bet is in; I think this will go well beyond the 42 page estimate. This thread reminds me of that old saying: "Arguing on the internet is like being in the Special Olympics... even if you win, you're still a retard." BQ is the acronym for "Bloviation Quotient."
savagehenry Posted March 28, 2009 Posted March 28, 2009 Yeah,,, I see it NOW, thanks...if it were a snake, it woulda bit me! Whoda thunk ol' niges little inquiry could of stirred up this electronic bee's hive!
Guzzi2Go Posted March 28, 2009 Posted March 28, 2009 ...We have barely even touched on what the real operating temperature is. Where is Docc with his infrared temp reading gun? luhbo posted his observations in this very topic about a decade ago. Try looking up his post.
Greg Field Posted March 28, 2009 Posted March 28, 2009 Why not just jumper around the temp sensor if your intention is to simulate a manual choke on your EFI bike? I remain flummoxed. Perhaps a trailer full of electronics hooked to your sensor will get you to where you'd be if you just loaded a proper map onto your PC III? Perhaps the trailer is the point? Perhaps I really am a philistine? God, help me, but I want to get to 40 pages . . .
Guzzi2Go Posted March 28, 2009 Posted March 28, 2009 Everyone is a Philistine! Except Samson, of course...
dlaing Posted March 28, 2009 Posted March 28, 2009 luhbo posted his observations in this very topic about a decade ago. Try looking up his post. If this was a BMW forum we would have had the sensor bench tested for voltage output and temperature ten different ways by now. Unless I missed some posts, here is what we have got on temperature readings: It's interesting this has come up as I was at a rally this weekend and took my Axone tool up with me purely to show anyone who was interested what it could tell you about your bike. I plugged it in to several bikes, both V11's and Calis, and I think that most of the people who were there (Morris Sod was one of 'em.) would agree that the temperature reading being sent to the computer was CONSISTENTLY considerably lower than the actual head temperature. In some cases by many tens of degrees centigrade. BTW, on my bike I can monitor the head temperature on Cliff's Optimiser. After about 3 miles it shows 75°C (ambient 10°), operating temp. is about 95°C (ambient 20°C). Interesting is the fact, that at idle it rises rapidly to 120° and more. 125°C I can see also when I show off the Quat-D while cruising between all those Coburg street cafès The temperature rises fast, but goes down only very slowly and never in city traffic! Hubert So, I assume Hubert has seen 125C in 10C weather, with plastic adapter and no goo. And nobody is criticizing the people who are adding goo and wrapping the stuff in duct tape, but they are criticizing Ratchet for adding cooling fins and a switch to make the ECU run richer when it gets hot enough to pop and miss, which is quite likely when it is getting over 125C. But then we have the claimed master of thermodynamic science, Ratchet seeing no value in knowing the measured temperature. "Who needs a farkin' voltage reading" --Ratchet misquoted cause I am too lazy to look up the real quote So far the only thing that makes sense is for everyone to rush out and buy TuneBoy and VDSTS or Cliff's My15, but we don't have that money to burn. How hot is metal when spit bounces off of it? Either really cold or well above 100C. I know the exhaust gets that hot, but what about the sensor adapter. My spitting aim isn't like it used to be.
Guzzi2Go Posted March 28, 2009 Posted March 28, 2009 If this was a BMW forum we would have had the sensor bench tested for voltage output and temperature ten different ways by now. But this is a Guzzi forum, and unlike those bareback f.... we all have seat of pants to measure with. No need for bench testing in ten different ways. So, I assume Hubert has seen 125C in 10C weather, with plastic adapter and no goo. And nobody is criticizing the people who are adding goo and wrapping the stuff in duct tape, but they are criticizing Ratchet for adding cooling fins and a switch to make the ECU run richer when it gets hot enough to pop and miss, which is quite likely when it is getting over 125C. But then we have the claimed master of thermodynamic science, Ratchet seeing no value in knowing the measured temperature. "Who needs a farkin' voltage reading" --Ratchet misquoted cause I am too lazy to look up the real quote The only way to properly measure temperature of an object is to shield a thermometer from external influences (plastic adapter, duct tape) AND to ensure proper heat transfer (thermo-goo). So far the only thing that makes sense is for everyone to rush out and buy TuneBoy and VDSTS or Cliff's My15, but we don't have that money to burn. Those who have TuneBoys, Powercommanders, whatnot, should use them. As Greg said, it is sufficient to "zero" the map after certain temperature point (again Cliff's OilT line gives a nice example). Others may resort to various tricks to fool ECU aiming for the same result - no influence of engine temp on the map after certain point. Trying to combine different tricks into a single one results in a setup one cannot control. Remember, the result of the EFI design is a compromise between two conflicting targets: - one to have engine running nice, which happens when it is running a bit rich - other to have engine consume as little fuel and to produce as little waste as possible, which happens when it is running as lean as possible. Ideally, when turning pot one should keep the work regime between these two "lines". Add air speed component to the setup, and you will be far more busy turning the pot than you would want to. I wrote earlier that emission tests are done at engine temps between 60-80°C. So one can safely zero the map at >80°C (with some risk even at >60°C) and still pass the test. If emission test is of no concern, one can go even lower. The map posted on MyECU page ignores everything >40°C. I understand you have possibility to change your map. Add goo, insulate adapter/sensor on the outside, towards the weather and zero any map adjustments over 40°C for the Engine/Oil temp. Take the bike for a spin, and report here. If it still sputters then your problem is most likely somewhere else (some other sensor, exhaust, whatnot...).
Greg Field Posted March 28, 2009 Posted March 28, 2009 Based on what I see here, maybe my square tires really will be a sales hit?
jrt Posted March 28, 2009 Posted March 28, 2009 I'm not into square tires, but I would like to find a SINGLE shock absorber for my sidecar.... (BQ +1)
Skeeve Posted March 28, 2009 Posted March 28, 2009 Everyone is a Philistine! Except Samson, of course... When your only tool is the jawbone of an ass, everyone looks like a Philistine...
GuzziMoto Posted March 29, 2009 Posted March 29, 2009 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.
Greg Field Posted March 29, 2009 Posted March 29, 2009 +1 to all of that. Some coonhounds're wasting time at the base of the wrong tree . . .
dlaing Posted March 29, 2009 Posted March 29, 2009 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. There have been various schools of thought here. Hubert's 125C reading suggests that the ETS is approaching a range of inaccuracy when hot. What exactly happens if the sensor reaches 150C? How about 200C? I guess it just reads 125C????? Does the plastic part of the sensor degrade? Pete Roper suggests the ETS often reads to cold and the answer is yak fat. Greg says to add goo and insulate. Most seem to agree with making it run hotter, but Ratchet and I have found that adding goo makes it run too lean. It is certainly possible something is wrong with the bike, or maybe San Diego's gas, but it is also a certainty that adding solder or goo to increase the conductivity in the brass adapter makes it run like crap in hot conditions. Ratchet also tried the brass adapter and did not have luck with it, despite what Guzziology says. Is your wife running the brass adapter with goo in it? If so, why? Why do you think the brass adapter increases accuracy? Adding goo does, but it also can make it run too hot. Bodging with a resistor can help reduce lean running at all RPMs, which would be a benefit to a V11 tuned to EPA spec.
Recommended Posts