rologuzzi

Hi Scud Wondering whether you have any springs left? Been away from the forum for quite a while & have only now caught up with shift spring saga. I have a 2004 V11 Ballabio. Spring is OK at present, but no doubt it WILL break sometime. Thanks to you & others who contributed to developing a solution for this problem. Cheers.

Interesting thread. Haven't posted for some time but I've been following the windage plate saga with interest. Having recently installed one of Pete's plates (only taken me 18 months after getting it from him!) on my Ballabio, my rough measurements & observations regarding oil level & quantity are in broad agreement with those of ryland's. I'm running approx 4 litres & the oil level (cold, bike level on shop stand) is what I'd call a "comfortably small" distance below the base of the plate. I've not measured it nor the quantity of oil exactly. Full marks to ryland for going to the trouble of working out the figure in great detail, he has confirmed my rough figures. But I reckon in the final analysis, the level & volume aren't overly critical. Most V11's run fine for 99% of the time with no plate & 3.5 litres. It seems logical to me that the engine should run at least as well, if not better, & have an improved safety margin in certain circumstances WITH the plate AND a bit more oil. Anything over 3.5 litres & up to the bottom of the plate should be OK. 4 litres is neat (a full bottle of oil) & easy to remember so until proven otherwise, that's what I'll be running. Cheers Tony

Yes, my bike is well set up & I have no immediate intention of replacing the stock sensor holder. I believe in the old adage "if it ain't broke, don't fix it" & the plastic holder isn't broken (yet). However, its nice to know that there's a readily available alternative to the stock unit should (when) the unmentionable occur. Tony

The temps I've measured using Technoresearch software are consistent with your figures, although they were measured at idle from a cold start. Max has been around 100. No doubt it would get hotter & eventually cook if left to idle for long enough. Adding PC heatsink silver oxide thermal grease to the gap between the sensor & holder has definitely improved heat transfer (max temp indicated before was around 70-80) but hasn't had a pronounced effect on how the engine runs. So far, the sensor doesn't seem to be suffering too much at the higher temps. Resistance values are the same as before the addition of heatsink grease. I am running a stock setup with the exception of Staintunes. Starting, idle & response through the rev range are excellent, as is fuel consumption (18km/litre around town, 20-21km/litre highway). It doesn't seem to exhibit signs of being overly rich when cold as described by many others; why this should be is a mystery to me, but I'm not complaining either. I noticed MG's have a brass sensor holder advertised (part #30163301, $29.95). Does anyone know if this is suitable for the V11? If so, surely it would be a cost effective alternative to the very fragile plastic stock unit. Cheers Tony

John I've had the new controls on a week now & clocked up a few hundred kilometres in all types of riding conditions. As expected, the bike has been transformed. I can only echo loudly the positive comments made by others regarding the improvement in riding comfort. Quality of the components & the way they integrate with rest of the bike is first class. I especially liked the SS nuts & bolts - a nice touch. Installation was straightforward but as others have noted, somewhat time consuming, especially for the gearshift linkage. This is no fault of the kit; its the positioning of the linkage & shifter arm behind the starter motor. I found it easiest to remove the shock's external reservoir & starter motor to gain good access to the linkage, but this isn't difficult, just fiddly. Control action is very smooth & positive & as someone else has noted, the gearshift is now noticeably lighter & crisper - a function perhaps of the much shorter linkage rod? Whatever, its a significant improvement over the stock setup. Overall, I'm extremely pleased with this product & have no hesitation in recommending it to any V11 owner. It does exactly what's promised - in my experience, a rare thing these days. Your check for the shipping cost savings has arrived - thank you. I have found your service in this matter to be excellent in all respects. Many thanks again - keep the "nice bits" coming for the V11!! Cheers Tony

John Many thanks. Please disregard the latest PM I have just sent - I expected you would advise me of shipment by that means rather than the normal forum. Lower shipping cost is great. I take it there is a $49 difference between what you quoted & the actual shipping cost? If so, what happens to the $49? My understanding is there shouldn't be any issues with customs duties. All items except "prohibited items" under $AU1000 value can be imported without duty. I would expect that it would come straight through. This has been the case with other items I have purchased from the US over the last couple of years. Delivery shouldn't be a problem, I know the local UPS delivery person & we have an arrangement if I'm not home when he calls. I look forward to receiving your advice re tracking number. Cheers, Tony

John Somehow I missed this thread a couple of months ago (must have been blind!) but you have addressed, superbly by all accounts, one of the few major issues I have with my V11, that being the footpeg position. Just wondering whether you're still producing them & if so, is there any chance of sending a set of these out to the Antipodes (Australia)? If so, could you please advise cost, preferred payment & delivery methods & availability. The prospect of a centre stand is equally exciting, not least for keen DIY owners like myself who may not have the equipment or expertise to manufacture one themselves. Many thanks. Tony

Ratchet Apologies for the confusion. What I should have said is that there’s no perceptible difference between the way it runs now & prior to playing with the sensor! It certainly isn’t running any worse, hence my belief that the sensor is still working (not cooked) despite its much closer thermal acquaintance with the head. It will be interesting to see whether this happy situation can be sustained. Maybe I'm just lucky compared to some but my V11 has always run very well, right from new. Largely based on the collective wisdom of this forum, I've made some incremental improvements to the stock setup, such as careful TPS setup & TB synch as well as lubing the places that the Luigis seem to miss. I’ve carried out the specified periodic maintenance in the owners manual but beyond fitting a set of Staintunes, haven't messed with it. For me, the issue that needs most attention now is suspension setup, but that's a topic for another thread. Cheers, Tony

After a few sad posts on this thread about sensor holders breaking whilst removing them, I was extremely careful when removing both the sensor from the holder & the holder from the head. On my bike they were both held in place with a weak varnish-like material (?? thread locking compound), almost clear in colour, which was baked onto the threads. It came off readily with some gentle proding from a scriber tip & thorough wash in solvent. I reassembled applying only silver oxide thermal grease to the sensor tip & inner metal base of the holder, as well as a small amount to the threads. No Loctite, as I believe the holder is a tight enough fit in the head with only a very modest amount of torque applied to it. The sensor is held in the holder with a fairly large diameter coarse thread (didn't measure the exact size) & what looks like an alloy crushable washer. It wasn't crushed much (the plastic holder wouldn't take the necessary torque) but formed a good seal, again with only minimal torque applied to the sensor. Hopefully without Loctite, I'll be able to remove them both again if necessary with a slightly decreased likelihood of damage. As has been stated by others, the plastic holder does not feel like it would tolerate anything other than kid-glove treatment. I used a very well fitting 19mm open end spanner extremely carefully when things got too tight for fingers. A metal sensor holder would be a great improvement, IMO. My bike continues to run extremely well with the closer thermal contact between the sensor & head, which is consistent with dlaing's (& possibly others?) experience. I haven't as yet checked the sensor for signs of life by measuring its resistance - this requires removal of the tank to do properly & I'm simply being lazy - but will do so when sufficiently motivated. But I'd suggest its likely working as MG intended.

skeeve's musings on this make a lot of sense to me, particulary about the "cheapskate" approach to mounting the sensor as well as the delay in transmitting correct head temp readings due to the air gap. Its difficult to know for sure whether the stock maps have been built using CHT readings obtained by direct thermal contact or the somewhat cheap & nasty setup we have to deal with on production bikes. But I think its fairly logical to assume the latter was used. In any event, my bike is continuing to run well with the improved sensor-head contact. Cold starts & idle haven't been affected (they have always been very good) & I haven't done enough distance as yet to see any effect on fuel consumption. Apart from a check of the sensor resistance (to see whether the higher temps have fried it) I probably won't mess with it again until something breaks. But before then I'll do what many others already have & that is to make or buy a brass sensor holder. Its only a matter of time before the plastic unit becomes brittle & falls apart. My new Direct Link hardware/software has just arrived this morning so I'm off now to explore the wide & wonderful world of fuel & ignition maps. Thanks to all for your words of wisdom. Tony

I'm a bit late in replying to this but I believe its an important thread. Whilst the engine will still run, a poorly or non-functioning CHT sensor will do nothing to enhance running & response of the EFI system. I've had no specific symptoms of poor CHT sensor operation (my V11 has only done 7000km from new & is running very well) but after reading this thread & thinking about it for a while, it made sense to me that the ideal would be to have perfect thermal contact between the base (tip) of the sensor & the (metal) base of the sensor housing. So I removed them (luckily without damage) & after thorough cleaning, added a dollop of silver oxide thermal grease to the sensor tip & base of the housing & reinstalled. On startup, the CHT temp (as measured using Technoresearch VDSTS software) rose very quickly, certainly much faster than without the thermal grease. It was obviously having the desired effect. I shut down the engine after a few minutes, by which time the temp has risen to > 90 degress Celsius. The engine was running fine, just as before (ie. nice idle & throttle response) & no adverse effects were apparent. This was later confirmed on a couple of runs - it hasn't affected the way the bike runs. But after rethinking the issue in the light of the elevated temp readings as well as previous comments by others, I'm now not so sure this is, in fact, the ideal solution & may even have some undesirable outcomes. My reasoning for this is that the tip of the sensor & the base of the housing are shaped such that there is a very small air gap between them when the sensor is screwed right in to the housing. Given that the housing is insulated (plastic) this effectively means that the sensor isn't, at any point, in direct thermal contact with the head. I assume this has been done to avoid cooking the sensor, as the head can get quite hot under normal operating conditions, possibly hotter than what is healthy for the sensor. So by adding anti-seize, thermal grease or any object which brings the sensor into direct thermal contact with the head, it may be running the risk of frying the sensor, or at best, shortening its service life. It now occurs to me that perhaps the sensor actually NEEDS to be at least partially insulated & that the CHT temp information provided by a properly installed & functioning sensor is what the ECU has been calibrated to. By placing the sensor in direct thermal contact with the head, temp data may be significantly elevated & therefore adversely affect the fuel map at various points, in addition to potentially reducing the life of the sensor (or cooking it completely). I haven't as yet measured the resistance of the sensor after addition of thermal grease & a couple of runs to full operating temp but will do shortly & post. This will soon tell me if I've cooked it. Resistance (cold) for CHT (before addition of thermal grease) & the air temp sensor (mounted on the airbox) was exactly as per factory manual specs. Apologies for the lengthy post. I'd be interested in comments on any of the above from those who undoubtedly know more about this than myself. Cheers, Tony

Cheers Richard, I'll give it a go.

docc, I know about the bearings of which you speak from my first wheel removal when the bike was new. I lubed them then & so far, they seem to be OK. Thanks. The driveshaft on my bike, one of the later V11's to make it to Oz, has dimples (punch marks) which will provide guidance when the paint marks eventually wear off. In any event, ratchet & Richard's comments are all you need to correctly align the two halves of the shaft. I've pumped plenty of fresh grease into the joints & they now feel smoother. Hopefully will be good for another year or so. On a slightly different subject, I'd like to remove the fuel tank but I'm having trouble figuring out how to disconnect the fancy fuel line connectors from the tank. Is there a procedure described somewhere for this? I can't find any reference to the connectors in either the owners or factory shop manual, presumably because they weren't in use when the manuals were published. Thanks Tony

OK, thanks Ratchet. I think I now have it sussed. Tony