Throttle Position Offset

[Kiwi_Roy]

Hi,

I am very new on this forum but I spent my working life troubleshooting electrical and electronic equipment.

Seeing all the posts re Throttle Position Sensor I was wondering if anyone has tried adjusting the mV on the fly.

The simple circuit attached would cost pennies and allow you to raise or lower the mV while riding to find the sweet spot.

Once found you could then tweak the position sensor and remove the temporary circuit.

I would just solder the two components directly to an AA cell and tape it to the bars. The battery would last several

days with the components shown.

What do you guys think?

 

Revised sketch

Guzzi_Trim_Pot_2.pdf

Note re revision

In hind-site the original sketch would have too many mV so I have added a 1K resistor in series

with the battery, this will reduce the mV from +/- 750 to +/- 250

You could add a switch which will eliminate the offset when open and perhaps add a scale in mV

to check the operation just connect your multimeter to the wire in and the wire out.

None of the component values are critical. It is only intended as a temporary addition.

[Guest ratchethack]

I like it, Roy. Kudos for your ingenuity and resourcefulness.

 

Like you, no doubt, I found the TPS at the very least, fiddly to adjust. In my case, I wired in "permanent" back probes to the connector just to make adjustment relatively quick and easy, as opposed to such a "chore". The ability to adjust on the fly would seem to take this concept a few giant steps further.

 

Myself and several others hereabouts have experimented in much the same way with the head temp sensor. In my case, and in one case before me (John A.) we wired in a variable resistor to adjust output on the fly. In all cases of such experimenting, much was learned that had not been understood previously about the way the OE brass water jacket sensor and holder works, the significant OE shortcomings as (mis)applied on the V11 were fully identified, and significant advances in performance were achieved. In my case, and in two other cases I know of, we ended up with permanent replacement with a low mass air temp sensor (no brass heat reservoir to skew temp readings) with very significantly shortened lag time responses to head temp changes. This has yielded a consistent 10% improvement in mileage in two cases I know of (mine included), and a complete absence of former relatively minor, yet annoying, hot low RPM lean-burn feedback symptoms at full operating temp. The latter has been the kind of thing I never knew bothered me until it was GONE. When I started my experimenting, (Winter, waiting out the cold and rain) I had no such objective, nor any performance "problem" to solve, but the knowledge I gained allowed me to apply what I learned, and the resulting improvement in performance has taken me many thousands of considerably more enjoyable riding miles ever since -- not to mention the extension of my riding range and significantly lower fuel costs.

 

A word to the wise. As John A. fully warned this Forum by his experience long before I began, learning such things by experimenting and doing things that others don't understand, and/or will not, and/or lack the knowledge and/or capacity to understand, then reporting about it here seems to be insufferably unacceptable behavior, a terrific threat to the status quo, and simply will not be tolerated by a select few. Sure enough, many who obviously never understood the first thing about heat flow, nor had any experience wotsoever with what myself and a few others achieved, put up the most astonishing daily Forum filibuster (a first in this Forum's history, I believe) and constant heaping of ignorant, empty, and baseless ridicule in response to open, honest, and fully road-proven results, including an absurd "professional" diagnosis of bad valves and guides on top of repeat accusations of bolting on square wheels.

 

The good news for you here is that myself and others have previously flushed the usual Forum hyenas out of the shrubbery for your easy identification. (You're welcome.) For wotever reason, the carrion-feeders seem to be unseasonably early this year in their annual Winter rooting around for a dig-up and gnaw on an old well-fermented carcass, toward which, per their usual gluttinous and gruesome feed, in typical hyena fashion, they contribute nothing in the hunt -- save constant annoyance and attempted distractions for those doing all the work. . .

 

See the continuing aftermath of casting pearls before swine nearly one year on, here:

 

http://www.v11lemans.com/forums/index.php?...t=0&start=0

 

If such infantile behavior as this^ should dog your efforts here (I would hope not, since you're a newcomer ) I'd simply ignore it. There's no helping wot fools are incapable of, and/or unwilling to comprehend. I'd highly encourage you to press on undaunted. Dung flies are after all, obligatory annoyances in the paddock, and easily enough ignored.

 

I, for one, would be very interested in what you learn, as I'm sure many others with sincere interest would be as well.

 

By all means, carry on!

 

 

The Square Wheel Express Rides Again!

[Kiwi_Roy]

I like it, Roy. Kudos for your ingenuity and resourcefulness.

Thanks Rachethack, I will remember your advice. I don't worry about that sort

"What upsets me would kill most people"

I woke up in the middle of the night and thought perhaps +/- 750 mV would be a bit extreme

so I revised the circuit to show a series resistor to drop the voltage down to about 0.5

 

Regards

RoyGuzzi_Trim_Pot_2.pdf

 

"I have to figure out this file attachment thing eh"

Guzzi_Trim_Pot_2.pdf

[Guest ratchethack]

. . .I revised the circuit to show a series resistor to drop the voltage down to about 0.5. . .

This would seem to me to be a more ideal range to work with also.

 

Looking forward to your findings, my friend.

[GuzziMoto]

Hi,

I am very new on this forum but I spent my working life troubleshooting electrical and electronic equipment.

Seeing all the posts re Throttle Position Sensor I was wondering if anyone has tried adjusting the mV on the fly.

The simple circuit attached would cost pennies and allow you to raise or lower the mV while riding to find the sweet spot.

Once found you could then tweak the position sensor and remove the temporary circuit.

I would just solder the two components directly to an AA cell and tape it to the bars. The battery would last several

days with the components shown.

What do you guys think?

Regards

Roy

I like the approach, but I would suggest that you add a means for measuring the altered signal as well. Then the changes you made could be quantified and you would know what numbers mean what. I am not suprised Hatchet Wacker did not suggest this... He is not so much concerned with details like that.

[Kiwi_Roy]

I like the approach, but I would suggest that you add a means for measuring the altered signal as well. Then the changes you made could be quantified and you would know what numbers mean what.

Yes, you could easily measure it but that makes it more complex.

The idea was to set the pot for best performance then square it all away later

e.g. measure the mV with the throttle closed, remove the circuit and set the sensor to give the same mV

I haven't tried it and probably won't get a chance for a while (next riding season)

Regards

Roy

[Dan M]

I like the approach, but I would suggest that you add a means for measuring the altered signal as well. Then the changes you made could be quantified and you would know what numbers mean what. I am not suprised Hatchet Wacker did not suggest this... He is not so much concerned with details like that.

 

I like Roy's approach of finding what works well and seeing where you are after the optimum setting if found. Keeps it clean and doesn't cloud your judgment by knowing the numbers during the ride.

 

Like most adjustments, all bikes are a bit different but it would be interesting if there is a good number for most bikes that alters from current standards.

 

Nice going Roy.