GuzziMoto

Even if the temp sensor had NO cooling air (which is not true, it gets cooling air) it would still have the same heat path available to it that the heat flowed into the sensor on, the point where it makes contact with the head (or almost contact if you have an air gap). This path is a two way street, heat can flow one way just as fast as the other. It cannot heat up faster then it can cool down. Neither of my Guzzis has had an issue with the temp sensor reading higher then it should and leaning out the mixture. RH has not even taken readings to show this is happening. He appears to be working off the assumption that since fudging the temp sensor reading to read lower makes his bike run better that the problem (that his bike does not have) MUST be with the temp sensor. This is a fools assumption. If he or anybody else wants to ride that train, well, you cant save people from themselves.

Yes, you go on about things you have no knowledge OR experience with (like the "dangers" and "stupidity" of upgrading your brakes) and I'm the ignorant one. You are pathetic. And as for the "quote", do you see any quotation marks on it because I don't. Therefore it is NOT a quote. Do you have a reading comprehension problem? I thought that was what everybody else had. As for RHs temp sensor bodge, it is not a new idea to fudge the temp sensor to trick the ECU into supplying more fuel. In fact, you can buy a device for our bikes that does just that. But not many mechanically inclined people (none I know personally) will resort to such crude things. It is a hack job. Only fitting then that RH runs with it and tells everyboby that he has corrected a problem that he did not have and that he has improved on the "shortcomings" of a temp sensor that has worked fine for most people and continues to be used with no problems on a lot of bikes. Yes, if your bike runs lean and you fudge the temp sensor signal to read lower then it should the ECU will richen up the mixture. But making the leap from there to assuming the root cause of the problem (that your bike doesn't have) is the sensor (with NO evidence to support that assertation) and then lecture those that don't make that leap of faith with you as ignorant, well typing skills are not a reflection of intelligence is all I can say. What you did was of interest until you took it beyond what it is, a hack.

The damper should have play but not in the direction of travel. It should be loose side to side at the frame mount, but it should not have any play in the direction of motion.

If I understand you correctly, the clutch is not engaging until you have released the lever completely. This is not typically something that bleeding will help. Bleeding tends to help when the clutch does not disengage completely. It sounds like you have worn plates or something mis-adjusted.

Confucious says.....because you get the result you wanted does not mean you understand why. If the o.e. sensor has such "shortcomings", why do most peoples bikes work fine with them? And how is it the o.e. sensor can heat up quick enough but can't cool down fast enough? In fact, the notion that the sensor can not cool down as fast as the cylinder head (which has much more mass AND a source of heat) is laughable. You replaced a water temp sensor, that was measuring the temp of a metal object with way more mass then the sensor, with an air temp sensor that has even less mass then the o.e. sensor but does not make ANY direct contact with the metal object. You got a signal sent to the ecu that corresponds to a lower temp (and therefore richer fuel mixture) and equate this to the difference in mass (but not the lack of contact or difference in sensor output?) And you think everybody else is in the dark?

I'm happy with my Griso 1100 but I feel I would be happier with a 1200. If some is good, more must be better. Actually, I am a little disappointed in the fact that my wifes V11 is stronger then my newer Griso1100. When the wifes bike is faster then mine, something is wrong.

Sorry, but I think you focused on the wrong aspects of my reply. I doubt you have ANY serious problem. These bikes WILL make bad sounding noises if you set the idle too low. Yes it will be more noticeable in a cold confined garage. Stock tachs are usually NOT very accurate on most bikes, not just Guzzis. Yamaha even got into trouble with its R6 a while back over its tach. Guzzi motors are very reliable mechanically. Don't jump to negative conclusions so fast. Start with the basics. Ste your idle, check your valve lash, etc. Then enjoy the ride.

Clutch hub splines or other transmission bits are a possibilty. Also a loose timing chain or weak timing chain tensioner spring. But if it's quiet above 1200 - 1400 rpm I would just set the idle there. (Remember the tach may be off by 200 rpm easily).

What rpm do you have it idling at? I don't think Guzzi motors like to idle lower then 1200 rpm. They get noisey below that. I would agree that if it is a rod knock it would probably not go away at slightly higher revs. What rpm does it knock at and what rpm does it go quiet?

When you put it that way it makes perfect sense.

Thanks Pete. Good to know.

Heck, I was getting over 70 mpg out of a stock Buell Blast. H-D's seem to have a much more effiecent combustion chamber then Guzzi does.

See, that's why I read stuff like this. If it weren't for reading this thread I wouldn't know that thermal mass and thermal inertia are unrelated, that putting a heat sink on a temp sensor increases its accuracy, that an air temp sensor is a better choice for measuring cylinder head temp then a water temp sensor, that a water temp sensorthat weighs less then a ounce or two has more thermal inertia then a cylinder head, and that the Easter Bunny is real. I take being insulted by RH as a good thing. It means I'm on the right side.

I certainly would not have put this much into "fixing" a problem that did not exist. But then , when I read things like; "Its considerable inherent property of thermal inertia means that the sensor body takes time to heat up and cool down.", "The temperature at the sensor body lags behind the temp of the cylinder head (in either direction) until heat can flow through the sensor probe (again in either direction) as it seeks equilibrium between head and sensor body.", "I beleive there are times when the head does cool faster than the OE sensor body,", "that being the heat flow problem and thermal inertia of the relatively high-mass OE sensor body", "(Again) taking measurements OVER TIME would be the entire thrust of my observation of the THERMAL INERTIA and lag-time problem with the sensor, as thoroughly presented and discussed in previous analysis." I tend to think that someone is saying that the problem with the OE sensor is that it has too much thermal inertia, and in this case, "too much" would imply that it has more then the cylinder head so that it cannot change temp as quickly as the cylinder head can.

That was funny. RH telling someone else that THEY have no concept or understanding of thermal dynamics and the RH goes on to explain how they original sensor has more thermal mass then the cylinder head and cannot react as rapidly as the cylinder head to changes in temp so it ends up running hotter then it should.

Take a look at DB Dawgs. http://www.dirtwerkz.com/Pages/products/exhaust/dB_Dawg.html They are geared towards dirtbikes but noise is noise.

I'm sorry, not everything I said was specifically to you. I was addressing some things you said and got into some side notes as well. Sorry. I do think that if you think everything on your Guzzi is that way for a good reason you will be wrong every now and then. Adding fuel at very high temps should not hurt mileage much if any. Why Guzzi chose to take fuel away I am not sure, but if I were to guess I'd say it was for emissions reasons, not because it worked better.

If you feel your bike runs better with less accurate ETS readings, I have no problem with that. I will point out that "the way it was designed" was to meet EPA standards and using a completely different formula of gasoline then most if not all of us have today. Things change. New gasoline that burns leaner/cleaner. The whole goo concept was to fix an issue that many of us had, poor fuel mileage. My wifes bike now gets upwards of 40-45 mpg. Not stellar but better then it was. If your bike gets good mileage already or you don't care about mileage then keep the gap, or better yet add a heat sink to your ETS. But please don't try to tell me that adding a heat sink to your ETS or running a gap between the ETS and the head increases accuracy. Your bike may run better with a low ETS reading but that is not the same as more accurate. For what it's worth, I like RHs idea of putting a variable resistor on the ETS signal. It is crude but cheap, and will give the user the ability to adjust the overall mixture on the fly. It is no substitute for a PC3 or TuneBoy, but it could be used as a cheaper less effective alternative or even in addition to a proper map to allow you to tune on the fly and adjust for poor fuel quality or what ever. As far as an advantage in not reading the "high temp spikes", that may be. But my wifes V11 has no issues with them. It would make more sense if the engineers had set it up to add MORE fuel when the temp got over a certain temp and not less, but I would submit that not everything they did when designing spec'ing and building these bikes made sense, was for the best , or was done for a good reason.

There's your problem. You can't use Ford parts on a Guzzi and expect it to work right.

Goo is most likely to "cause issues" if there is something wrong with your bike to begin with (loose valves, TPS issues,etc). Many have added goo without adjusting the map including myself and had no issues. The ETS signal being sent to the ECU is more accurate when the signal more closely reflects the actual temp of the head. What the ECU does after that has NOTHING to do with accuracy of the ETS. Anything you do to make the ETS heat up and cooldown in sync with the head will increase that accuracy. If your motor runs better with an inaccurate signal then it does with an accurate signal then either something is wrong with the map or something is wrong with your bike. As many V11s have had the goo applied and only a few have had issues afterward you decide for yourself where the problem lies. I have. If you chose to alter the ETS signal as a cheap way of adjusting the fueling, fine. But it has limited control and can only move the whole range up or down. It is not without promise or usefulness, but please call it what it is and don't pretend it is anything more. As far as valves and guides, the stock valves tend to be soft and can wear funny which then wears out the guides funny. If this is the case with yours (sounds like it is) expect to replace the valves and guides. Tuning the bike until you have done so is a waste of time.

Why did you replace the plastic holder with the brass one? Some bikes have fuel mileage issues (low fuel mileage) and they benefit from adding some sort of heat transfer goo between the sensor and the copper tip of the holder. This gives a more accurate temp reading to the ECU. If your bikes runs perfect the the ETS reading a little low and you add heat transfer goo or replace the plastic holder with a brass holder the more accurate temp reading may make the bike run lean. You can then adjust your map accordingly or put the platic holder back on. Alternately, you could add a variable resistor as RH did and give yourself manual control over the temp reading. If it does not run better with the plastic holder back on then you have other issues.

I prefer Redline Shockproof in the gearbox and CARC. I have heard that the newer Guzzis do better with 10/60w but I run 20/50w. Brands are a touchy subject but I suggest either bike oil or diesel oil, no car oil.

I would agree with you there. Same tires with different tread patterns practically.

Okay, this is pretty simple stuff. ANYTHING you do to increase heat transfer between the cylinder head and the ETS will also increase heat transfer the other way, from the ETS to the cylinder head in the off chance that the ETS finds it self in the position of being hotter then the cylinder head. Its a two way street. AHYTHING you do to increase heat transfer between the two parts will increase the accuracy of the ETS. ANYTHING you do that decreases the heat transfer or adds cooling to the ETS will decrease the accuracy of the ETS. The table is not a chart of values that Guzzi engineers came up with after running the engine to heat it up to certain temps and then measured the output of the sensor at that temp and wrote it down. It is based off a spec sheet for the sensor giving sensor outputs at given sensor tip temps. There will be NO consideration in that chart for deviations caused by lack of heat transfer or anything else. The biggest flaw in most of RH's theory (and yours) is that most of the V11's do not have these temp related issues. If the stock setup was flawed and/or made worse by adding goo then all the bikes that have done so would be running worse, not just a few. If your still not sure, please reread the first two parts.