engine oil temp sensor

[Dan M]

I have NEVER said the stock sensor reads temp from the exposed brass part of it. I did say that part of the sensor was exposed to the outside air and could (does) radiate heat to the outside air.

Which is again splitting hairs and wrong. If you believe the brass hex radiates heat quickly enough to alter things you do not have a grasp of this whole speed of response issue.

 

But you did imply the sensor RH was using was vented to outside air so that it could better measure the temp of the air. I would guess that you just misspoke and that it was not what you meant.

It is exposed to air outside the sensor. I did not misspeak. I said what I meant.

 

But since you accuse me of contradicting myself and slammed dlaing for having "a strong opinion about a device you don't know much about",

I did not slam him. He has been making fun if this set up and the use of this thermistor and he clearly does not know about it if he didn't know it was vented. I pointed that fact out. Dave & I have sparred before and will again. This is a discussion forum. We have communicated in the past via PM. I have no personal problem with him and I believe he does not with me.

 

I have no sympathy for you.

I have not been looking for sympathy. I am not a needy person who requires sympathy especially from someone I do not know.

Although now that you say it, I don't know how I can go on another day without it (sniff)

 

You posted incorrect information and then slammed people when you were called on it instead of manning up and clarifying what you meant to say in a polite manor.

Incorrect or misinterpreted by the uninformed?

 

Everybody makes mistakes, what says a lot about you is how you act when YOU make mistakes.

Yes I make mistakes, plenty of them. There is a difference between making a mistake and spouting on topics without facts. If I have ever posted erroneous information here, I apologize to anyone who was led astray by it. If I did it was certainly accidental as I pride myself in accuracy. I generally only reply to technical posts that I fully understand. I am not one to post just to post. I do have a considerable amount of mechanical experience and try to share it. When people who clearly do not understand something and post BS I generally try to correct them so others are not misinformed. If however someone wants to twist what I post just for the sake of argument, then I will respond likewise.

[Dan M]

...[sigh]...

 

 

Come on Jaap, this has been great fun. Never before have we had so many write so much about so little. It seems to have run its course now though. All the facts have been posted and re-posted. All that is left is the shouting....

 

Look at the numbers 55 pages, 811 replies, 23000+ views. Almost, dare I say it, like a Honda forum.

[GuzziMoto]

Dan M, so when you said "An open to the atmosphere thermistor can read the surrounding air immediately" you did in fact mean the sensor was vented to outside air? (as in the atmosphere we breathe?). I don't think that is what you meant, but if in fact you "did not misspeak. I said what I meant" then so be it. Not a normal use of the word, but I guess in your world the responsibility is on the reader to understand what you meant and not the speaker to pick the most appropriate words.

The reference to the body of the stock sensor was in response to statements made by people to the effect that the stock sensor body acted like some sort of magical heat trap (heat goes in but it don't come out) that actually causes the sensor to heat up higher then the temp of the engine (those with superior grasps of thermodynamics no doubt). Due to the fact that the sensor tip is actually connected to the sensor body, yes some heat that goes into the sensor tip would end up in the sensor body.Some of that heat may end up flowing back into the sensor tip if it ends up being cooler then the sensor body but the rest of it would just radiate out the exposed part of the sensor body to the atmosphere ( that's the outside atmosphere, not the inside atmosphere). I do not feel this is an important aspect of the stock sensor, but to those who think the mass of the stock sensor is an issue it is relevant.

dlaing has actually been fairly interested in RH's concept, and while he does question things when they don't add up he is clearly not against the idea completely.

But to me it comes down to this. If you want to do it fine. But if you want to convince me that air transfers heat better then metal, you're going to have to do a better job of choosing your words then you have done so far. In fact, why don't we both hold our fingers 1 inch from a blow torch flame. I will fill that 1 inch with air and you can fill it with metal and no air. Yes air can change temp faster then metal, but no it does not conduct heat even remotely as well.

Any 3rd grader could tell you that. You and RH act like people who don't agree with you are morons or something. But then you two make assumptions based on opinion, treat it like fact, and wrap it in B.S.

If your bike ran lean when it got hot, got worse when you put heat transfer paste in between the sensor tip and the head, and that went away when you used an air temp sensor to measure the air gap temp instead of the head temp, well if you can't figure that one out I guess it is not my job to help you understand (because in all likelyhood you do not want to understand).

[GuzziMoto]

. . .[sigh]. . .

 

Wrong again, GMoto.

 

By “everything that has been posted” above, I understand that you’re referring to my experiments with thermo-compound, heat sink, and variable resistor with the OE sensor/holder, brass Sport-i holder, as well as the subsequent replacement low mass GM/NAPA Echlin air temp sensor/Delrin holder that I’ve described in some detail, and which I’m running now -- (another never before possible 42 MPG, 120-mile mountain climb loop yesterday).

 

Enquiring minds. . .(well, you know). . . <_>

 

If you don't understand how fuel mixture effects mileage and performance for your Guzzi (i.e. In my experience best power is achieved at between 12 and 13 to 1, and best mileage is usually between 13 and 15 to 1. Leaner mixture can hurt mileage along with richer) and that along with the concept of the power of suggestion (It will happen because you want it to), well then perhaps you could actually post some FACTS instead of the crazy speculation you have been, or better yet explain why stock your bike ran "perfect" but was suffering from occasional issues when hot (lean), you added goo and improved the heat flow to the sensor tip and the bike had more "hot" bike issues (obviously the higher temp the sensor was registering was not to your bikes liking), then you thru several permeatations settled on a air temp sensor spaced of the surface of the head to measure temp and this final solution works the best (even better then the original setup) without reading a lower temp (and thus richer mixture) then the others. Is there some sort of accuracy threshold? Where things are worse and worse as the temp reading is more accurate right up to the point where you cross thru and then with the most accurate temp readings the symptoms of a lean motor go away and all is well.

Actually I think that was a waste of time. You will never understand how anyone could question your superior wisdom and/or see any flaws in your reasoning. Your Honor, I withdraw that last question.

[Greg Field]

You've quite evidently missed a great deal, Greg. I'm not about to repeat myself with a full explanation again. If you had any sincere interest at all in what you've been responding to (well north of 100 posts of your own by now, by someone else's count), whether you were prepared to comprehend it or not -- I reckon you'd have picked it up by the third or fourth time I repeated it.

 

Ah, so you leaned the mixture to cure the non-problem with it being too lean when hot, making it run even more perfectly than perfect? Singular brilliance, Commendatore. Singular. Bravo! I'm telling you, if you used pre-global-warming low-CO2 Italian air in the gap that it was mapped for, it would be even more perfect.

[Dan M]

I'm telling you, if you used pre-global-warming low-CO2 Italian air in the gap that it was mapped for, it would be even more perfect.

 

A smear of extra virgin olive oil may help speed transfer.

[Ray R]

Ok....after all this, I'm still trying to figure out the right thing to do.

 

I have my tank off for other reasons, and so replacing the sensor housing would be easiest if I did it now.

 

Does ANYONE know of an instance where the plastic failed, broke, or otherwise disintegrated all on its own without someone attempting to remove it? If so, I'd be inclined to replace it with brass while the convenience factor is there...and of course insulating said brass fitting with the appropriate strip of duct tape as Greg suggests. If not, I'll leave well enough alone and wait for failure sometime down the road and just cuss again at the fuel "quick release valve" when it doesn't quick release again.

 

And if I use the brass fitting, is it appropriate to use the copper antisieze to fill the air gap between the sensor and head in all cases? Or only if my bike is running too rich? And is that rich condition only experienced during warm-up? Or all the time? Or is it a case of YMMV?

 

Sorry, I know all the answers are imbedded in here somewhere. I just don't have the patience to take another 4 hours of my life to review all the posts again.

[Dan M]

Dan M, so when you said "An open to the atmosphere thermistor can read the surrounding air immediately" you did in fact mean the sensor was vented to outside air? (as in the atmosphere we breathe?). I don't think that is what you meant, but if in fact you "did not misspeak. I said what I meant" then so be it. Not a normal use of the word, but I guess in your world the responsibility is on the reader to understand what you meant and not the speaker to pick the most appropriate words.

The reference to the body of the stock sensor was in response to statements made by people to the effect that the stock sensor body acted like some sort of magical heat trap (heat goes in but it don't come out) that actually causes the sensor to heat up higher then the temp of the engine (those with superior grasps of thermodynamics no doubt). Due to the fact that the sensor tip is actually connected to the sensor body, yes some heat that goes into the sensor tip would end up in the sensor body.Some of that heat may end up flowing back into the sensor tip if it ends up being cooler then the sensor body but the rest of it would just radiate out the exposed part of the sensor body to the atmosphere ( that's the outside atmosphere, not the inside atmosphere). I do not feel this is an important aspect of the stock sensor, but to those who think the mass of the stock sensor is an issue it is relevant.

dlaing has actually been fairly interested in RH's concept, and while he does question things when they don't add up he is clearly not against the idea completely.

But to me it comes down to this. If you want to do it fine. But if you want to convince me that air transfers heat better then metal, you're going to have to do a better job of choosing your words then you have done so far. In fact, why don't we both hold our fingers 1 inch from a blow torch flame. I will fill that 1 inch with air and you can fill it with metal and no air. Yes air can change temp faster then metal, but no it does not conduct heat even remotely as well.

Any 3rd grader could tell you that. You and RH act like people who don't agree with you are morons or something. But then you two make assumptions based on opinion, treat it like fact, and wrap it in B.S.

If your bike ran lean when it got hot, got worse when you put heat transfer paste in between the sensor tip and the head, and that went away when you used an air temp sensor to measure the air gap temp instead of the head temp, well if you can't figure that one out I guess it is not my job to help you understand (because in all likelyhood you do not want to understand).

 

Guzzimoto, you need to comprehend what you read a little better. Perhaps you should reread the old posts more slowly.

For the last time, I said the thermistor was vented, not the holder. (there is atmosphere inside the holder, it is the same stuff we breathe, just sealed inside)

I never said air conducts temperature better than metal.

I never said my bike ran lean before adding conductive paste. I also never said I used an air temp sensor.

Please give examples of what I have "wrapped in BS"

 

My theory from the start of this (if you read this from the start and understood) is that the engineers decided to use the air gap inside the plastic holder to smooth the temp readings and avoid reading the temp spikes associated with an air cooled engine. (all the reasons why have been discussed at length) Following that line of thought, since it is air temp inside the holder that is being read, it would follow that if you sensed the air with an air temp sensor you would get a faster response and still avoid the temp spikes. Ratchet agrees with this theory. He took it further and adapted an air temp sensor and has shown positive results. These are just my thoughts and they happen to agree with RH. His work or play has worked out for him. Now I'm not asking you to swallow any of this. I really don't care if you do. I'm just asking you to stop misinterpreting plain English or taking things out of context. That behavior is what I consider moronic.

[Dan M]

Ok....after all this, I'm still trying to figure out the right thing to do.

 

I have my tank off for other reasons, and so replacing the sensor housing would be easiest if I did it now.

 

Does ANYONE know of an instance where the plastic failed, broke, or otherwise disintegrated all on its own without someone attempting to remove it? If so, I'd be inclined to replace it with brass while the convenience factor is there...and of course insulating said brass fitting with the appropriate strip of duct tape as Greg suggests. If not, I'll leave well enough alone and wait for failure sometime down the road and just cuss again at the fuel "quick release valve" when it doesn't quick release again.

 

And if I use the brass fitting, is it appropriate to use the copper antisieze to fill the air gap between the sensor and head in all cases? Or only if my bike is running too rich? And is that rich condition only experienced during warm-up? Or all the time? Or is it a case of YMMV?

 

Sorry, I know all the answers are imbedded in here somewhere. I just don't have the patience to take another 4 hours of my life to review all the posts again.

 

 

RAY!, STEP AWAY FROM THE COMPUTER! PUT YOUR MOUSE DOWN AND JUST STEP AWAY!

 

Yes - leave well enough alone......This is truly an area of YMMV, as you can see.

 

BTW, welcome to the asylum.

[Guest ratchethack]

Ok....after all this, I'm still trying to figure out the right thing to do.

 

HEY! Another poster with actual SINCERE INTEREST in the topic at hand!

 

Welcome, Ray. You're in RARE COMPANY hereabouts lately.

 

Wot Dan said above^.

 

Within the span of this very thread, like you, my OE sensor/plastic holder was working just fine, and so was my Guzzi. But I bought a Sport-i brass sensor holder from Greg based on the CONSENSUS OPINION of wot I read here well over a year ago, and finally gave it a try this Winter just for the helluvit, whilst waiting out the rain and cold. Well, as soon as the engine reached operating temp, it made the Guzzi run like a 3-legged camel with 2 feet stuck in the same bucket, no matter how I doctored it up (5 different ways) -- and JUST LOOK WOT HAPPENED when I CHALLENGED wot turned out to be the empty, poorly founded, and mindless CONSENSUS on this thread by finally getting to the bottom of how the OE sensor actually works (and doesn't work) this Winter. . . 3 months of flushing out the most toxic sludge from the bottom of the Forum cesspool (all such self exposure voluntary, mind you!), conjuring up collective bile spitting and leaping to false conclusions in group formation, not to mention Giant Clusterfarge behavior -- and by all means, leave us not forget the Great Wallopping Group Dork Wrappage 'round the ol' driveshaft. . .

 

Not that I regret a single thing that eventually came from my efforts as far as my own improved knowledge, considerably better mileage (~+10%) and better hot low RPM manners went, but trust me -- you don't want to tempt fate -- or The Inquisition -- by posting the truth, fully backed up by your own actual experience here. . .

[Greg Field]

Also another person with a sincere interest who can't wade through all the bloviation. Are we to 60 pages yet?

[dlaing]

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.

It would have been clearer if you had said

My point is, a temperature sensor that allows the heated air to directly contact the thermistor, (An open thermistor as used in the GM air temperature sensor that RH has settled on) will be quicker to react to head temperature.

Words like flow and vented imply that RH vented the holder.

I would describe the sensor as caged, not vented, but whatever...

Your vague choice of words is why I ASKED if you meant it was vented to open air.

I don't need to be insulted about not understanding your writing.

Few of us are English majors here, so we should all cut each other some slack.

I am not nit picking about split hairs, I am just asking for clarification and politeness.

Likewise I shouldn't be mocking RH for making his bike run better than perfect, unless he had actually said that...

[dlaing]

Ray,

Greg Field was one of those that had the plastic holder crack just from riding the bloody thing.

Mine broke from very light torque with a six inch wrench. It was replaced with the brass holder, ran well till I increased the conductivity which resulted in lean running, eventually undoing it ran made it run fine.

Others run fine with conductive goo in either the brass or plastic holder. YMMV!!!

If I were you I would stick with the plastic and never tighten it with a wrench.

[Dan M]

It would have been clearer if you had said

My point is, a temperature sensor that allows the heated air to directly contact the thermistor, (An open thermistor as used in the GM air temperature sensor that RH has settled on) will be quicker to react to head temperature.

Words like flow and vented imply that RH vented the holder.

I would describe the sensor as caged, not vented, but whatever...

Your vague choice of words is why I ASKED if you meant it was vented to open air.

I don't need to be insulted about not understanding your writing.

Few of us are English majors here, so we should all cut each other some slack.

I am not nit picking about split hairs, I am just asking for clarification and politeness.

Likewise I shouldn't be mocking RH for making his bike run better than perfect, unless he had actually said that...

 

Sorry, I try to be concise and certainly not vague. Sometimes I try to avoid redundancy so repeating what has already been posted as is the case with the sensor is omitted. I feel like if someone is participating and arguing, they have read what has preceded. As you know lengthy posts draw fire around here. (BQ)

You have mocked RH and myself. You dissect every word to look for fault then you whine about insults and ask for politeness. It is a two way street Dave.

[Greg Field]

Ray R: If it runs well, leave it alone. If it starts getting horrible mileage, consider looking into faultyb readings to the sensor as the cause. Often, the holder will crack as soon as you begin messing with it. If it does not crack, I'd recommend re-using it. If it does crack, you can either replace it with the stock plastic one or something else. I use the brass one because it won't crack. From there, you can add goo or not. Also, you can insulate the holder or not. I do both.