engine oil temp sensor

[Motomonster]

My two cents:

 

I actually find this thread interesting and have learned a lot from it. The problem (in a nutshell) is an inaccurate sensor and subsequently inaccurate map. Judging from the Tuneboy data, the problem is especially egregious with the early models, like ours. Not as much with the later models. So, a person may address the inaccuracies on a later model only to have their solution cause bigger problems for someone with an earlier one, which is what I think happened (a lot of the conflict here likely stems from this). What’s good for the goose is not necessarily good for the other goose.

 

So, I applaud RH’s quest for a more accurate sensor. It makes sense to me. That still leaves the ECU. If he also comes up with a method of re-mapping the ECU (good luck with that) he will be hero of the beach as far as I’m concerned. In the meantime, we’re still stuck with the same mapping problem. Thus, for now, a (perhaps slightly) more accurate sensor arrangement (brass and goo) and a good Powercommander map works very well; perhaps RH's sensor holder and a PC map would work even better. I've already paid for the other solution so I'm not going to worry about it right now. This thread has been very helpful in fine-tuning the low rpm range of my custom map, so, thanks RH. Jason at MI recently said that my bike was the best running V11 he’s ridden.

 

In any case, I think RH should keep at it. I also think he wouldn’t experience nearly so much resistance if he didn’t precede much of what he writes with a diatribe on what a genius he is and how stupid everybody else is.

[emry]

It is because of responses like the previous two from Motomonster that I even still try to follow this thread. 10 minutes later I am still laughing.

[GuzziMoto]

Laughable? Well, what else would one expect from the profoundly ignorant? I’d say something more like "very sad" would be a much better fit here, not to mention boring. So you Gents won’t mind if I don’t respond to more empty posts full of thudding profound ignorance and nothing else of any value going forward, will you?

 

 

PS Nice effort level on the bogus Confucius quote, GMoto. Here are a few quotes legitimately attributed to The Master:

 

Yes, you go on about things you have no knowledge OR experience with (like the "dangers" and "stupidity" of upgrading your brakes) and I'm the ignorant one. You are pathetic.

And as for the "quote", do you see any quotation marks on it because I don't. Therefore it is NOT a quote. Do you have a reading comprehension problem? I thought that was what everybody else had.

As for RHs temp sensor bodge, it is not a new idea to fudge the temp sensor to trick the ECU into supplying more fuel. In fact, you can buy a device for our bikes that does just that. But not many mechanically inclined people (none I know personally) will resort to such crude things. It is a hack job. Only fitting then that RH runs with it and tells everyboby that he has corrected a problem that he did not have and that he has improved on the "shortcomings" of a temp sensor that has worked fine for most people and continues to be used with no problems on a lot of bikes. Yes, if your bike runs lean and you fudge the temp sensor signal to read lower then it should the ECU will richen up the mixture. But making the leap from there to assuming the root cause of the problem (that your bike doesn't have) is the sensor (with NO evidence to support that assertation) and then lecture those that don't make that leap of faith with you as ignorant, well typing skills are not a reflection of intelligence is all I can say.

What you did was of interest until you took it beyond what it is, a hack.

[Dan M]

As for RHs temp sensor bodge, it is not a new idea to fudge the temp sensor to trick the ECU into supplying more fuel. In fact, you can buy a device for our bikes that does just that. But not many mechanically inclined people (none I know personally) will resort to such crude things. It is a hack job. Only fitting then that RH runs with it and tells everyboby that he has corrected a problem that he did not have and that he has improved on the "shortcomings" of a temp sensor that has worked fine for most people and continues to be used with no problems on a lot of bikes. Yes, if your bike runs lean and you fudge the temp sensor signal to read lower then it should the ECU will richen up the mixture. But making the leap from there to assuming the root cause of the problem (that your bike doesn't have) is the sensor (with NO evidence to support that assertation) and then lecture those that don't make that leap of faith with you as ignorant, well typing skills are not a reflection of intelligence is all I can say.

What you did was of interest until you took it beyond what it is, a hack.

 

There is clearly a problem. The root cause is a poor design. The whole "add goo, switch to brass" temp sensor bandwagon initiated by others than RH suggested that the bikes ran too rich. Others complain that the bikes have issues when extremely hot (too lean) so evidently there is a temp sensing problem. If most people's factory set up works well as you suggest, why all the sensor tampering? Why all the PC3s? Why all the tune boys? The system is flawed. The system needs an amount of tuning. You like to call it hacking but any altering from factory is a manner of tuning be it better or worse. A proper map on with a PC3 will not compensate for temp. If the temp sensor is faulty or does not react quickly enough the "proper map" will still be flawed. If any modification of any motor in any way causes it to run better or eliminate a particular problem that you are trying to get around then why not? Why not do anything if it solves the problem you are trying to solve or makes the improvement you are trying to make? Seems like personal choice to me.

Oh yea, that last time I checked, points are awarded around here for "bodges". Perhaps you are on a higher level and should not rub elbows with the rest of us.

[Greg Field]

Is this the right place for an argument?

 

On this topic I agree with R. What he's done makes perfect sense and parallels what I've experienced on my own machine.

 

I don't see how someone can constantly argue the idea of the sensor's mass. Do you really think that a sensor that is made of plastic with the thermistor exposed to air does not have less thermo mass than one that has the thermistor encased in brass? Do you really think that the brass will change temp as fast as the surrounding air? Do you really think it is a good idea to use a coolant sensor on an air cooled head? I mean do you? Really? Or is it just an argument.

 

This thread reminds me of this:

 

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=k3HaRFBSq9k...=PL&index=1

 

Do you really think a cylinder head that weighs 20 times what the sensor and holder together weigh and which is hooked directly to the heat source will cool down faster than the sensor, which is up in the wind? If you do, I just don't know what to say. If you agree that the head cannot possibly cool faster than the sensor, then lowering the sensor's and holder's thermal mass will be entirely inconsequential. All else falls from that. Some prefer their square wheels, though, and will defend their use because ego demands it.

[Dan M]

Do you really think a cylinder head that weighs 20 times what the sensor and holder together weigh and which is hooked directly to the heat source will cool down faster than the sensor, which is up in the wind? If you do, I just don't know what to say. If you agree that the head cannot possibly cool faster than the sensor, then lowering the sensor's and holder's thermal mass will be entirely inconsequential. All else falls from that. Some prefer their square wheels, though, and will defend their use because ego demands it.

 

Remember the head is being cooled by air flow when moving and the temp rises when stopped. The sensor is not up in the wind. It is enclosed in a holder. Some are even enclosed in a holder and packed with grease. They lag behind. They get heated all right but not cooled as fast. If the coolant sensor was submersed in moving coolant that would be a different story. My point is a temp sensor that allows air to flow around it, (plastic and vented as what RH has settled to) it will be quicker to react to head temp. As the head heats and cools it also has to heat and cool the sensor. Without coolant flowing around a probe that was designed to be submerged in liquid, the response will be slow. If you use an air temp sensor that will change quickly with the air around it, lag will be less.

 

But I am repeating myself, again.

 

Perhaps taking a different path to this whole temp sensing thing rather than following what was put out as gospel is bruising someone's ego.

[Greg Field]

We, too, speak different languages. C'est la vie. There is no way the head, with all that mass and connected to the source of heat, will cool faster than the sensor. The sensor is mounted in a holder that is up in the breeze. I think he should look at his valves and guides. I'd surmise they are as loose as a female porn star's essential equipment. I guess enquiring minds only want to look at what makes them feel like they are "outside the box," though.

[GuzziMoto]

Remember the head is being cooled by air flow when moving and the temp rises when stopped. The sensor is not up in the wind. It is enclosed in a holder. Some are even enclosed in a holder and packed with grease. They lag behind. They get heated all right but not cooled as fast. If the coolant sensor was submersed in moving coolant that would be a different story. My point is a temp sensor that allows air to flow around it, (plastic and vented as what RH has settled to) it will be quicker to react to head temp. As the head heats and cools it also has to heat and cool the sensor. Without coolant flowing around a probe that was designed to be submerged in liquid, the response will be slow. If you use an air temp sensor that will change quickly with the air around it, lag will be less.

 

But I am repeating myself, again.

 

Perhaps taking a different path to this whole temp sensing thing rather than following what was put out as gospel is bruising someone's ego.

Even if the temp sensor had NO cooling air (which is not true, it gets cooling air) it would still have the same heat path available to it that the heat flowed into the sensor on, the point where it makes contact with the head (or almost contact if you have an air gap). This path is a two way street, heat can flow one way just as fast as the other. It cannot heat up faster then it can cool down.

Neither of my Guzzis has had an issue with the temp sensor reading higher then it should and leaning out the mixture. RH has not even taken readings to show this is happening. He appears to be working off the assumption that since fudging the temp sensor reading to read lower makes his bike run better that the problem (that his bike does not have) MUST be with the temp sensor. This is a fools assumption. If he or anybody else wants to ride that train, well, you cant save people from themselves.

[Motomonster]

 

Someday this thread is going to end...

[Dan M]

Even if the temp sensor had NO cooling air (which is not true, it gets cooling air) it would still have the same heat path available to it that the heat flowed into the sensor on, the point where it makes contact with the head (or almost contact if you have an air gap). This path is a two way street, heat can flow one way just as fast as the other. It cannot heat up faster then it can cool down.

 

This is the crux of it. It is enclosed in plastic, blocking the air flow. It's thermistor is encased in brass which is designed to be submersed in moving coolant which would change the temp of the brass quickly. As designed the sensor is sitting in a small air pocket that is attached to the head. It will lag in response time because the head heats the air which heats the brass which heats the thermistor. The reverse is true when cooling. An open to the atmosphere thermistor can read the surrounding air immediately without having to heat and cool the brass encasement. All major manufacturers use a plastic body, open thermistor when reading air temp. All RH is doing is the same thing. He is simply reading the air temp right off the surface of the head with an air temp sensor rather than a coolant temp sensor. It is simply a better way to read air temp. Is it a requirement? Of course not, it is up to the individual.

 

Neither of my Guzzis has had an issue with the temp sensor reading higher then it should and leaning out the mixture.

 

Mine developed one on very hot days only after adding goo to the factory sensor. This tells me something and it is not too hard to figure out.

 

well, you cant save people from themselves.

 

This is true enough.

[Dan M]

 

Someday this thread is going to end...

 

You are assuming none of the players have side bets on how long it will last....

[badmotogoozer]

You remind me of him.

 

dammit MM! You made coffee come out my nose.

[GuzziMoto]

This is the crux of it. It is enclosed in plastic, blocking the air flow. It's thermistor is encased in brass which is designed to be submersed in moving coolant which would change the temp of the brass quickly. As designed the sensor is sitting in a small air pocket that is attached to the head. It will lag in response time because the head heats the air which heats the brass which heats the thermistor. The reverse is true when cooling. An open to the atmosphere thermistor can read the surrounding air immediately without having to heat and cool the brass encasement. All major manufacturers use a plastic body, open thermistor when reading air temp. All RH is doing is the same thing. He is simply reading the air temp right off the surface of the head with an air temp sensor rather than a coolant temp sensor. It is simply a better way to read air temp. Is it a requirement? Of course not, it is up to the individual.

 

 

 

Mine developed one on very hot days only after adding goo to the factory sensor. This tells me something and it is not too hard to figure out.

 

 

 

This is true enough.

The tip of the sensor is inside the plastic housing. The body of the sensor is exposed to air and easily visable. It is the brass part at the end of the plastic part.

Yes it was designed to measure coolant temp and not air temp. But since we are measuring cylinder head temp and not air temp that is somewhat beside the point. There is an air gap between the sensor tip and the head stock. Any gap here will cause lag in the reading and lower the reading. But the stock gap is very small. None the less, some people experience that their bike runs rich for too long after starting and consequently gets poor mileage. It has been suggested that the gap can cause this and that a fix is to put some sort of heat transfer goo in the gap. This will decrease the lag IN BOTH DIRECTIONS and reduce the gap between measured temp and actual temp. If your bike does not have this issue there is no reason to add the goo and doing so could spoil the way your bike runs if it is already border line lean.

As far as "All major manufacturers use a plastic body, open thermistor when reading air temp.", this is probably true but since we are trying to measure cylinder head temp and no manufacturer I am aware of uses a plastic air temp sensor to do this I don't see what that has to do with it. Reading the air temp right next to the cylinder temp is not the same thing as measuring the cylinder head temp. But that is not that big a deal either. What it comes down to is RH is tricking his ECU into adding more fuel by feeding it a LESS ACCURATE cylinder temp reading. I don't have a problem with anybody doing something like that (although it is hack) but when they start talking about it improving the accuracy of the stock sensor or fixing a problem (that their bike doesn't actually have) I gotta say B.S.

 

"Mine developed one on very hot days only after adding goo to the factory sensor. This tells me something and it is not too hard to figure out."

You would think, but it appears not. When you added goo you decreased the lag and decreased the gap between measured and actual. The goo would improve heat flow in both directions, helping the sensor heat up AND cool down. Some here seem to think the goo would only help the sensor heat up, and even going so far as to say it could cause the sensor to heat up to a temp HIGHER then the cylinder head. This is not possible. What your temp sensor goo experience told me was that your bike was fueled correctly with the lower temp reading that it had stock and when you added go and decreased that temp difference and got a higher, more accurate reading it leaned the bike out accordingly causing you bike to not run as well. Does this mean there is a problem with the sensor, well no. You only had a problem after you changed the configuration. Besides, the sensor only measures temp. If your bike is running lean and your temp sensor is reading the temp correctly but if you alter that reading to read lower so the ECU richens up the mixture does that mean the temp sensor was the cause of the problem? Not in the real world.

[Dan M]

There are statements and contradictions in your last post that illustrate your lack of knowledge about how these sensors work and how flawed the MG system is. You should reread it and compare it to your previous writings.

 

I don't have the time, energy or interest to respond to this at the moment. Maybe later....

[gavo]

DAMN my bike must have the only sensor made that works properly in temps from 40c to -5c no hiccups ,no stalling and good mileage, 11500ks without a prob luigi must have had a good day