The oil pressure light troubles

[Greg Field]

We have had at least three V11 Sports come through the shop at Moto Intl. this spring with torched rod bearings, plus one Centauro. Two of these Sports, plus the Centauro, had intermittent lights. The third is an active member of this forum. I do not know if he ever experienced the light coming on.

[Guest ratchethack]

Hmmmmmmm......As my riding Pal with the '04 Le Mans demonstrates, if you don't ever LOOK at y'er oil light, you have very little chance of ever seeing it come on..........

 

He said the first time he ever paid any attention to it was after I had repeatedly noticed it watching from behind as he launched HARD - wheelie or no - from a standing stop........

[Guest ratchethack]

Hey Greg - The Centauro and Sport models would be my pick for those Guzzi's most likely to be "hooliganized"......

 

Two questions:

 

1. Have you seen the above symptoms in any V-11 Cal-series Guzzi's?

 

2. Any comments on why or why not?

 

TIA

[Greg Field]

Symptoms meaning the oil light flikering? Yes, but only if oil level was very low or if there was a split in one of the gaskets or the sealing rubber for the filter.

 

Symptoms meaning torched rod bearings? No, unless one of the above occured, or it had one of the hydro cams that grenaded. We had three that required new everything, including crankshaft.

 

Rod bearings, in general, die for lack of oil. Except in extreme cases, such as after the crankshaft sludge trap is full, dirt in the oil can take out the main bearings and leave the rod bearings relatively unscathed. Why? Because all the oil has to go through the mian bearings abd then the centrifugal sludege trap before it ever gets to the rod bearings. Much of the dirt embeds in the main bearings or gets thrown into the sludge trap.

[Guest ratchethack]

Symptoms meaning torched rod bearings? No, unless one of the above occured, or it had one of the hydro cams that grenaded. We had three that required new everything, including crankshaft.

Yeah, that's what I had in mind. This tends to support the theory that it's drag-strip launches and wheelies that eventually torch the big-ends due to the exposure of the oil pickup. Though I've seen a few at least semi-rapid launches by an EV (none I think nearly as hard as a Sport or Centauro is capable of), I've yet to see an EV with the front wheel in the air......

......dirt in the oil can take out the main bearings and leave the rod bearings relatively unscathed. Why? Because all the oil has to go through the mian bearings abd then the centrifugal sludege trap before it ever gets to the rod bearings. Much of the dirt embeds in the main bearings or gets thrown into the sludge trap.  

Thanks, Greg. I hadn't thought the oil circuit through this far. This explains why some of our controversial "favorite" air filters , known and conclusively shown to pass significantly more dirt than others [ahem], seem to have no OUTWARDLY PERCEPTABLE effect on the motor -- that is, until the sludge trap reaches FULL..........

[guzzimeister]

Hi

 

have you checked your oil sender, they do get marginal sometimes after 20000 miles, probably you are experiencing a pressure drop but I very much doubt whether you would have an engine left after 1 second or too at less than 3psi. Try changing the sender, it's an easy job and cost about a fiver. Cured it for me.

 

Hope it works for you

 

Bye

 

Guzz

 

 

 

Hello people,

 

I got a beautiful 2004 V11 Le Mans that I ride almost daily and I love it. I can see the bike is much more refined that the initial V11 sports and Jackal (my previous rides). My only concern is the oil light - it will come on for a ~second (pretty long time), but only after hard take off, on first gear from the stand still. Nothing in other running regimes. Nothing if one takes off gently.

 

I checked the engine oil level several times and it is normal. I can imagine the g-forces are high when accelerating hard from 0 speed, potentially causing a drop of pressure somewhere, but I am not sure. It is quite difficult to find any remaining dealer in LA, California, but of course I'll do my best if you think this problem is serious. Any suggestions?

 

Thanks a lot

 

Pavel

91086[/snapback]

[badmotogoozer]

controversial "favorite" air filters , known and conclusively shown to pass significantly more dirt than others [ahem], seem to have no OUTWARDLY PERCEPTABLE effect on the motor --

91271[/snapback]

 

Once again I am poked with the stick.

 

This "conclusive proof" Mr. Hack references is ONE semi scientific study of a K&N filter on a low revving DIESEL Chevy truck engine. His claim that there is "no OUTWARDLY PERCEPTABLE" effect on the motor is not even claimed by this study, but is instead an unproven corollary the good Mr. Hack has attached to it. The study claimes to have tested according to IEC (IIRC) standards, yet when one reads the standards, there are several test that are not mentioned at all in the study. The only thing conclusive about this study is its questionability. <_>

 

In a high revving engine, a filter that flows better WILL have a perceptable effect on an engine. You WILL notice a difference at the top of the rev range - an area left unexplored by our self proclaimed Road Geez. Yes it will flow more dirt, but it certainly isn't going to take out your rod bearings. As long as you change your oil and aren't riding on dirt roads full time. That's the trade off.

 

Question everything. Especially one who is telling you that apples are oranges.

 

Rj

[Guest ratchethack]

This "conclusive proof" Mr. Hack references is ONE semi scientific study of a K&N filter on a low revving DIESEL Chevy truck engine. 

OMG, No........is it time to re-open THIS can o' worms again?!

 

Ryan! Er, I'm SO pleased that you STILL find my posts so irresistible....(I think...)

 

Uh,..........Once again (Part III, or is it Part IV?), it's generally a pretty good idea to actually read and pay at least some kind of attention to anything you so strenuously object to - especially when you put your objections in print....and especially again after you've already been called on this several times before - on the same subject! As I recall, you seem to have a quite a history of this, my friend...as a quick scan of the thread in question shows........

 

As I've pointed out to you at least TWICE after you said this the first couple of times, NO TRUCKS WERE USED - nor were ANY engines of any kind used - in the 2003 Duramax ISO 5011 Test, the main reference for the topic I opened on this subject!!!!! The testing was done on a TEST BENCH designed for the purpose of testing air filters. This is very clearly explained in the second sentence of the study.

 

Once again, the link is here: http://home.usadatanet.net/~jbplock/

 

If you didn't read as far as the second sentence, Ryan, you more'n likely missed the relevance, basis, and important aspects of the testing, as well as quite a bit - or even all? - of the content of the study itself. You've made it quite obvious that you weren't nearly as interested in reading and understanding the testing as you were in posting so many times in objection to it.........

 

Since you ALSO hadn't noticed that I've corrected you at least TWICE BEFORE on this, you don't seem to have paid much attention to me, either -- and yet your objections seem to be directed as much toward me as to the Duramax study.......

 

Why, you've made it crystal clear several times over that you STILL haven't got the faintest clue about what it is that y'er objecting to, Ryan.

 

His claim that there is "no OUTWARDLY PERCEPTABLE" effect on the motor is not even claimed by this study, but is instead an unproven corollary the good Mr. Hack has attached to it. 

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

Uh, perhaps you misunderstood, or maybe I'm just missing the part where there was some such "unproven corollary" that I attached to the study? If you can find a "corollary" that I attached to the study, please do point it out so I have an idea what y'er referring to???

 

The context of my statement above was the lack of observable negative effects by users of K&N filters, as expressed so many times in one o' y'er "favorite" threads.....If you hadn't quoted me out of context above, you'd have noticed that following "outwardly perceptable", I said, "that is, until the sludge trap reaches FULL."

Question everything.  Especially one who is telling you that apples are oranges.

Question everything indeed! And leave us by all means identify the fruit correctly!

 

I reckon you missed this too, Ryan -- Questioning common practice was actually the entire basis of my posting the thread in the first place (see the opening paragraph and entire opening post here: http://www.v11lemans.com/forums/index.php?...ic=6815&hl= ). The widespread popular delusion that one of the most expensive air filters that money can buy provides any advantage over others is not only questioned, it's substantially debunked, as those who actually read the testing study will recall.

 

Question Everything (Part II), I'm always PARTICULARLY careful to question the motives of anyone who so obviously hasn't made much of an attempt to understand what he's talking about - but that's just me.....

 

Now I don't find it all that amazing that people form emotional commitments to their own habits and practices that don't measure up to objective analysis. This kind of pedestrian-grade rationalization is just human nature. But what I find to be absolutely incredible is the lengths to which some people will go to defend those kinds of "commitments" in the face of evidently objective, contrary hard facts when they're presented.... In retrospect, that thread seems to've been quite the unintentional case study on the behaviors of justification and denial....

 

Those who actually read the Duramax study will note that the K&N filters used in the testing were found to be less efficient, had poor dirt capacity, passed more dirt, hit the restriction limit faster, and after a TEMPORARY, BRIEF initial period of freer-flowing when brand-new, were overall not significantly better at flowing air than others to boot. Now if you take exception to any aspect of the testing, Ryan, you and anyone who actually made any attempt to read and understand it had ample opportunity to fire away with y'er best shots. But if testing on a diesel truck engine is STILL the best objection you've got - and I reckon it must be, or you wouldn't have made it the basis of y'er prior posts and your post today, and SURPRISE! (still today!) no truck engines were in fact any part of the testing - well, I find this behavior not only foolhardy on its silly face, but more than somewhat sad....

 

Ryan, it might be important to you at this point to comprehend that you've not brought any comparable testing to the discussion (or any testing at all) that would back up your obviously falsely deluded, extremely sloppy perceptions. I've gotta wonder just WHAT KIND of a series of testing you would consider valid, if not the 2003 Duramax ISO 5011 Testing?!?! A simple read of the parameters under which the tests were conducted shows it to be about as rigorous, scientific, independent, and free from bias as can be designed -- but again, if you're not gonna read it (since you evidently haven't done so yet, I reckon the chances it'll ever happen by now are somewhere between slim and none), of course you won't have much of a chance for the faintest of ideas about how to challenge it without making even more of a fool of yourself....

 

Now anyone who would refuse to even read anything that appears to show their choice of filter to have fallen down so badly against it's competition will of course have a tendency to believe that A CONSPIRACY is involved, as I believe you've suggested, Ryan, when you posted that the test was "obviously sponsored by AC Delco" - yet you also failed to make reference to any basis for having said this, nor have you pointed out anything that would even suggest this. Nor as a matter of fact have you yet cited anything that could be considered valid that would as much as put the testing study into question in any way, other than RESULTS YOU DIDN'T LIKE!!!!

 

As far as who's selling apples for oranges -- I reckon you'd best pay closer attention, lest you further enhance your reputation for mixing up fruit salads that're - shall we just say - less than appetizing......

[jrt]

No no no no no no no....

No K&N air filter arguments here. No. Take it to the Global Warming thread; I'm trying to read here.

[Guest ratchethack]

No no no no no no no....

No K&N air filter arguments here.  No.  Take it to the Global Warming thread;   I'm trying to read here.

Sorry, Jason. I reckon I somehow provoked Ryan into ambushing me.....

 

I'm done here. Ryan, if'n y'all want to return fire, I'll meet y'all over at y'er favorite thread......

[jimbemotumbo]

As Pete has pointed out, real damage has been done by the time the indicator light comes on ...

 

That is where my questions are exactly. I am not so sure any damage is being done at all (except in extreme cases). I wonder if the light is truly in response to a real oil loss. If true, of course the damage is done in some degree. I simply can't imagine anything electronic on a goose being so accurate and sensitive.

 

This investigation warrants two new grisos (one for a control subject). I happily volunteer. See you in 40 thou when we unblind the study and release data.

[richard100t]

My 01 Rosso's oil light is starting to flicker at idle only, & only after a few miles of riding. I just changed the oil so thats not it. I've checked the dipstick & its about an 1/8 of an inch over the top mark & clean. Can that small amount of extra oil make the light come on? Any advice on how the check the oil pressure? The light has never come on except at idle.

[Guest Nogbad]

My 01 Rosso's oil light is starting to flicker at idle only, & only after a few miles of riding. I just changed the oil so thats not it. I've checked the dipstick & its about an 1/8 of an inch over the top mark & clean. Can that small amount of extra oil make the light come on? Any advice on how the check the oil pressure? The light has never come on except at idle.

91559[/snapback]

 

You need to check the pressure with a gauge. If you can find an automotive capillary type gauge they usually come with a T piece that can be inserted between the sender and the engine.

 

As I said before, the oil pump shifts a fixed volume of oil per revolution, so the faster the engine goes the more oil is fed. The pressure rises as the flow increases because you need more pressure to drive the larger flow as the pump goes faster. At idle, the clearances should be tight enough such that the minimum flow is enough to generate sufficient back pressure to keep the light off. If the light comes on it could be:

 

Very low idle speed (<500 rpm)

Faulty sender

Relief valve not seating

Blown gasket between oil pump and block / filter assy and block

Loose filter / leaking filter gasket

Collapsed / clogged filter internals

Worn oil pump

Worn mains / big ends.

 

Unless you are absolutely sure the sender is the culprit, you need to investigate inside the sump.

[richard100t]

Ok thanks are in order for Nogbad! I removed my sump to check the oil filter because I just recently (within 50 miles) changed the oil & filter. I unscrewed the filter checking for stripped threads, cracks, etc. I found nothing wrong...then I looked down on the floor & guess what??? There was the rubber O ring gasket from the previous oil filter!!!! Apparently the old o ring stayed on the whatchacallit when I removed the old filter. When I took the new filter back off the old o ring fell out. Voila!! No engine problems for me thank God. Apparently 2 o rings do not make for a tight seal lol. Well I'm off to go for a ride & make sure that pesky light doesnt come back on. Oh btw I believe Nogbads in charge of the golden bodge points, so I'll just wait patiently with my dunce cap in hand

[Guest Nogbad]

Ok thanks are in order for Nogbad! I removed my sump to check the oil filter because I just recently (within 50 miles) changed the oil & filter. I unscrewed the filter checking for stripped threads, cracks, etc. I found nothing wrong...then I looked down on the floor & guess what??? There was the rubber O ring gasket from the previous oil filter!!!! Apparently the old o ring stayed on the whatchacallit when I removed the old filter. When I took the new filter back off the old o ring fell out. Voila!! No engine problems for me thank God. Apparently 2 o rings do not make for a tight seal lol. Well I'm off to go for a ride & make sure that pesky light doesnt come back on. Oh btw I believe Nogbads in charge of the golden bodge points, so I'll just wait patiently with my dunce cap in hand

91577[/snapback]

 

Truly this is a bodge of monumental seriousness. However, it doesn't seem to have been a deliberate act of vandalism. The Golden Point is the right award. In my topsy turvy world, the standard black and red bodge point is strictly awarded for a deliberate bodge, whereas the Golden is for a bodge that can be understood due to adversity (propping your bike up with a beer bottle), for non-bike bodging (Buying your wife tat from the garage because you forgot her birthday for instance) and for ACCIDENTAL bodging caused by rushing the job etc.

 

SO You are hereby awarded the Order of the Golden Bodge, and may display a Golden Bodge Point in your sig. DeBen has some resized small ones you can link to which will save Jaap's storage.

 

I think your bike has had a lucky escape. The additional ring could quite easily have shifted across completely, loosening the filter and resulting in a complete loss of oil pressure.