GuzziMoto Posted April 30, 2009 Posted April 30, 2009 OMG GMoto, you're still completely lost, continuing to demonstrate an extremely primitive comprehension of heat flow. For 3 months and over 100 pages now, we've been discussing LAG TIME in response of the OE sensor to changes in head temps. It's not simply a question of "too hot" or "too cold". Accuracy in monitoring head temp depends on temp changes IN BOTH DIRECTIONS -- UP AND DOWN -- on a timeline, as clearly explained ad nauseum. I can't be bothered anymore trying to start over with you from square 1. You're on your own. This from a guy who thinks air conducts heat better then brass. I understand heat flow. I also understand lag time. In this case lag would be minimal due to the small mass of the OEM sensor in relation to the cylinder head. Because that is what matters for lag in this case. Not what the sensor weighs but what it weighs compared to what the cylinder head weighs. And what lag there in in a metal heat flow path would be more then compensated for compared to a setup that uses air for the heat flow path by the fact that air does not conduct heat very well and metal does. But I am confident that you will fail to grasp this and once again either change the direction of the conversation or rebuff it with some insulting remark about me instead of actual facts about the superior heat flow characteristics of air over brass. Edit, WOOOHOOOO. Page 58.
Guest ratchethack Posted April 30, 2009 Posted April 30, 2009 How do you experience "symptoms of less than accurate sensor operation" unless it was detected in the "way [your] Guzzi was running?" Did you remove the sensor and test it independently? What, aside from experiencing a problem, would prompt you to do this? MM, I would hope that what I would ever choose to do at any given time is most certainly going to be lots different from what you choose to do, but that's entirely irrelevant here. I tend to experiment with lots of things on the Guzzi because it's a hobby. My motivation for experimenting with sensors in the dead of Winter while waiting out the cold and rain was explained in full months ago -- but I need not repeat myself here for your benefit, or anyone else's.
Motomonster Posted April 30, 2009 Posted April 30, 2009 A semantic distinction? :lol: :lol: You win. You're king of the thread.
Guest ratchethack Posted April 30, 2009 Posted April 30, 2009 . . .lag would be minimal due to the small mass of the OEM sensor in relation to the cylinder head. Because that is what matters for lag in this case. Not what the sensor weighs but what it weighs compared to what the cylinder head weighs. And what lag there in in a metal heat flow path would be more then compensated for compared to a setup that uses air for the heat flow path by the fact that air does not conduct heat very well and metal does.. . . Yet another demonstration of an extremely primitive grasp of heat flow and basic thermodynamics. . . What knowledge and hands-on experience, EXACTLY, are your conclusions about what would and would not happen based on, GMoto? How many hours and miles have you conducted testing the sensors in discussion here side-by-side, EXACTLY? NOTE: You have a mighty poor position from which to attempt any challenge wotsoever to anything I've actually done and backed up with over 500 miles and 3 months of experiments (all well documented in this thread). . . .[sigh]. . . I grow so very very tired of dealing with fools and idiots. . .
Motomonster Posted April 30, 2009 Posted April 30, 2009 RH: Doc, I seem to be experiencing blurry vision. Doctor: When did you first notice this problem? RH: What problem? Doctor: You said your vision was getting blurry. RH: But I never said I was having a problem. Doctor: Then why are you here? RH: Because I've got a round tuit. Sheesh! Why must I suffer fools and idiots? Doctor: Hmmm. Interesting. Blurry vision, eh? How frequently do you masturbate?
Guest ratchethack Posted April 30, 2009 Posted April 30, 2009 Doctor: Hmmm. Interesting. Blurry vision, eh? How frequently do you masturbate? I had a great uncle who was suffering from dementia. At family functions he would frequently try to participate in the conversation. The things he said were often interesting and they seemed relevant; sometimes he appeared totally normal -- until he unzipped his slacks and began to masturbate. Hmmmmmm. . . . You clearly have some kind of a deviant obsession here^, MM. Don't s'pose you've yet discovered that dementia is often hereditary? "Genes clearly play a role in the development of some kinds of dementia. . .Some people develop cognitive and memory problems that are not severe enough to be diagnosed as dementia but are more pronounced than the cognitive changes associated with normal aging. This condition is called mild cognitive impairment...many patients with this condition later develop dementia." SOURCE: http://www.medicinenet.com/dementia/page5.htm Seems you must've got a couple pints o' bad pee into your ancestral genetic pool at some point. . . The early signs you've been demonstrating here are pretty compelling. . . Tough break, MM Try to stay away from sharp objects and open sewers.
Motomonster Posted April 30, 2009 Posted April 30, 2009 "I know you are, but what am I?" I'll bet you learned that in Junior High too. Naw. No obsession. Just amazement at seeing you obsessively stroke your ego in public. If I live to get dementia in my nineties, I suppose that's fine with me.
GuzziMoto Posted April 30, 2009 Posted April 30, 2009 NOTE: You have a mighty poor position from which to attempt any challenge wotsoever to anything I've actually done and backed up with over 500 miles and 3 months of experiments (all well documented in this thread). RH, you have not backed up any of your experimentation (no, that's the wrong word. Experisumption is better, I know it's not a real word but then your experiments aren't real experiments) with anything but opinions and personal feelings. You have yet to actually measure how far off the stock sensor reads, you have not measured how far off your custom sensor reads. In fact you have not measured much of anything. What you have done is start with a stock sensor. You then modified it in a couple different ways, some of which actually improved the heat flow from the head to the sensor (that appears to be how it started, you wondering if adding thermal paste would improve the accuracy of the sensor. The answer is yes it does). When this experimentation resulted in a poorer running bike you then assumed that what you had done must have resulted in less accurate sensor readings, not more accurate (based on what I don't know). You then built a rig that cooled the sensor off (heat sink) and this improved things. Unfortuneatly the train jumped the tracks here and you decided that the heatsink was somehow ïmproving"sensor accuracy by causing heat to constantly flow into the sensor (it did, but this was because the heatsink was constantly COOLING the sensor). You then built a device to allow you to adjust the error of the stock sensor, by either adding to the error that was already there or even by replacing the signal with one under your control. Somehow you then seem to have decided that thermal mass and lag time were the culprits to this decrease in performance. Even though the stock sensor weighs a fraction of what the head weighs (and therefore has a fraction of its thermal mass) you decided you needed a sensor with less mass. Not a bad idea really, but when you picked a sensor that was designed to measure air temp and would not allow direct (or even near direct contact) with the head you made a mistake. Yes your new sensor setup has less thermal mass then the stock sensor. But the fact that it does not make contact with the head (or even near contact, the thermistor is actually inside a cavity in the nose of the sensor) was lost on you. You did manage to get better performance out of your Guzzi with this setup, so you therefore assumed that it must be more accurate then the stock setup. I am not really sure how you came to this result, but since you made several modifications previously that enhanced the accuracy of the sensor and each time was meet with poor results, and you only achieved improvements when you decreased the accuracy of the stock sensor (the variable resistor and the heatsink), but when a train jumps the tracks I just stay out of the way. So, please go on about how I'm a idiot and can't possibly understand all this high brow intellectual stuff. As I have said before and I'll say again, coming from you I take that as a compliment.
Guest ratchethack Posted April 30, 2009 Posted April 30, 2009 I'm well past the point of being interested in repeating myself ad nauseum on the most simple and basic concepts already covered months ago and in some cases, literally DOZENS of times in this thread. Nor am I under any obligation here to spoon feed all the "critics" -- one at a time -- who never showed enough sincere interest to pay any attention to what I've repeated too many times already, and/or who lack sufficient basic knowledge of and/or interest in heat flow and thermodynamics to comprehend the simple concepts I've already covered in spades. Judging by the PMs I've been getting from those intelligent enough to comprehend what I've done here, who also seem to possess sincere interest, but (for obvious reasons) don't want any part of the childish, thuddingly idiotic behavior demonstrated by those inclined to heap ridicule on anything beyond their comprehension here, it seems I've somehow managed to reach at least a few with some ideas that might help them achieve the same results I've demonstrated and documented here. My own ~10% improvement in mileage over the OE setup with the low mass GM/NAPA Echlin sensor has been enough to satisfy my own efforts, but the added benefit of losing the rare, yet irritating low RPM sensor body heat soak hot lean-burn feedback loop symptoms has been a nice little "capper" in terms of real-world results on the road. My Guzzi has never run better than it does today at 35K miles. For those who STILL don't get it -- I can't provide an education in basic thermodynamics for you here, I can't raise your IQ, nor can I improve either your attention span, your interest level, nor your reading comprehension level. In all liklihood, your windows of opportunity for developing your abilities in these areas (assuming there ever was any potential there) came and went years ago. For the many knee-jerk status quo cases who made up your minds NOT to get it without as much as attempting to comprehend, you likewise have a slim to ZIP chance of ever getting it now. If you truly aren't experiencing ANY of the temp-related symptoms that I've described, and you're already getting as good mileage as you ever hope to get (or you just don't care) you aren't missing anything here. On the other hand, if you you think you might be experiencing temp-related symptoms described previously in detail (the next 5 months will likely flush out lots of low RPM hot lean-burn symptoms), and particularly if you replaced your plastic OE sensor holder with the Sport-i brass holder and immediately experienced an unrideable level of low RPM hot lean-burn feedback loop symptoms (as I did), you might be every bit as happy with a low mass GM/NAPA Echlin sensor as I've been, and I'd encourage you to give it a try. If I can be of any assistance, I'll continue to be pleased to answer any sincere Q's (discreetly if you prefer) by PM. That's all.
dlaing Posted May 1, 2009 Posted May 1, 2009 (Again) I have no "problem" to solve. (Again) I wouldn't even think about this stuff in better riding weather. (Again) My Guzzi runs better than perfectly satisfactorily with the OE sensor/holder and no thermo-paste, and, though I've already learned enough to encourage further experimentation, if I learn nothing more of value that I can EVER apply to my Guzzi, well then -- I'll happily put away the experimenting, go back to my OE setup without any thermo-goop, and be happy as a clam, possibly in possession of a better understanding of how the cyl head thermo sensor works. Apology retracted.
dlaing Posted May 1, 2009 Posted May 1, 2009 RH: Doc, my vision is perfect Doctor: So why are you here, this time? RH: I have niggling nits. Doctor: And that's not a problem? RH: Why must I suffer fools and idiots? Again it is not a problem. Doctor: Then why are you here? RH:To enlighten you to the fact that I cured niggling nits twice. Doctor: Hmmm. Interesting. What are these niggling nits and how did you cure them. RH: My nits niggle when my head gets hot and then cools down quickly leaving my receptor hotter than my head causing distorted vision. Doctor: Hmmm. Interesting. I am glad that is not a problem. So how did you cure these niggling nits? RH: At first I tried putting the receptor into direct contact with the head, but my vision became worse. So, I then added a Sun Glasses to modify the direction of the refractive inertia and Voila! better than perfect vision! But that was not good enough, so I ripped off the Sun Glasses, backed the receptor out and set it to the focal length that makes my dong look big enough to wrap ten times around my drive shaft , and Voila! better than better than perfect vision! Doctor:Hmm Interesting. I am going to increase the dose of your Risperdal® prescription. RH: Don't bother. I gave up on the Risperdal® just before the niggling nits showed up. Doctor: (please note the above is for humor purpose only and I truly respect RH's true improvements to the sensor system)
Recommended Posts