What did you do to your V11 today?

[guzzler]

G'day Mick

Yep, back in 2011 the gap on mine was 1.4mm and reduced to 0.7mm!

Cheers 

[gstallons]

The factory manual gives 0.6-1.2mm clearance or 0.023-0.047" clearance. IDK what the hot setup is.

 I would think the 0.7mm clearance is the best.  You want the tooth to be in the center of the bore when measuring this clearance.

Edited 12 hours ago by gstallons

[Pressureangle]

6 hours ago, gstallons said:

The factory manual gives 0.6-1.2mm clearance or 0.023-0.047" clearance. IDK what the hot setup is.

 I would think the 0.7mm clearance is the best.  You want the tooth to be in the center of the bore when measuring this clearance.

If memory serves, (Bendix factory brakes training) *all* simple coil-type inductive sensors are set at .030" +or- .010". 
So that's supported by this spec. 

[docc]

So.... it induces or it doesn't?

Not like you can get more or less induction by setting it closer or further?

[Pressureangle]

1 hour ago, docc said:

So.... it induces or it doesn't?

Not like you can get more or less induction by setting it closer or further?

Well... well.

Yes, they induct by the square of the distance. This obviously means they generate the strongest signal set to zero; actually some ABS sensors are set this way, push them in against the reluctor and the bearing clearance pushes them out just enough not to rub. They are designed particularly for this. However, the electronics that the sensor serves are perfectly happy at anything less than about .060" (generally) and .030" guarantees that they won't rub the reluctor and self-destruct. 

[docc]

1 hour ago, Pressureangle said:

Well... well.

Yes, they induct by the square of the distance. This obviously means they generate the strongest signal set to zero; actually some ABS sensors are set this way, push them in against the reluctor and the bearing clearance pushes them out just enough not to rub. They are designed particularly for this. However, the electronics that the sensor serves are perfectly happy at anything less than about .060" (generally) and .030" guarantees that they won't rub the reluctor and self-destruct. 

So, as long as they are in the specified range, the trigger has the same outcome? In other words, there would be no "tuning" effects to setting it close versus furthest out in the specified range?

[audiomick]

 

5 minutes ago, docc said:

So, as long as they are in the specified range, the trigger has the same outcome? In other words, there would be no "tuning" effects to setting it close versus furthest out in the specified range?

As far as I understand it, no "tuning" effects. Either it works satisfactorily, or it doesn't, i.e. under a particular value, the pulse is too weak. Above that, it is enough, but "more" doesn't make it better. The ECU sees the pulse, or it doesn't.

4 hours ago, Pressureangle said:

... .030" +or- .010". 

What is that in sensible units? 

 

 

[Pressureangle]

4 minutes ago, docc said:

So, as long as they are in the specified range, the trigger has the same outcome? In other words, there would be no "tuning" effects to setting it close versus furthest out in the specified range?

Exactly. The sensor itself is an analog device, sending an alternating current waveform. The AC voltage, at a given RPM, will increase or decrease nearer or farther. The waveform is seen as a simple +/- by the digital electronic device served by the sensor. There is a minimum voltage to trigger the electronics (the measure of which escapes me at the moment) and once they're triggered, they really don't care how much extra is there. If the sensor gets too far away, such as if an ABS sensor gets debris or loose wheel bearings that increase the distance to reluctor, the voltage becomes marginal or intermittent to trigger the electronics so you get...the scientific term is 'intermittent wonkiness' I think. 

[Pressureangle]

Just now, audiomick said:

 

As far as I understand it, no "tuning" effects. Either it works satisfactorily, or it doesn't, i.e. under a particular value, the pulse is too weak. Above that, it is enough, but "more" doesn't make it better. The ECU sees the pulse, or it doesn't.

What is that in sensible units? 

 

 

"30/1000 of an inch, plus or less 10/1000 of an inch"

[audiomick]

2 minutes ago, Pressureangle said:

....the scientific term is 'intermittent wonkiness' I think. 

Fantastic. Can I use that? It would be very often useful to "explain" the behaviour of sound equipment. 

[audiomick]

4 minutes ago, Pressureangle said:

"30/1000 of an inch, plus or less 10/1000 of an inch"

Yes, I understood that. But what about sensible units, you know, millimetres and so on.  

 

Yes, I'm too lazy to look it up... 

Edited 1 hour ago by audiomick

[Pressureangle]

1 minute ago, audiomick said:

Fantastic. Can I use that? It would be very often useful to "explain" the behaviour of sound equipment. 

Free to steal.
Though 'intermittent Honkiness' came to mind.

 

[Pressureangle]

1 minute ago, audiomick said:

Yes, I understood that. But what about sensible units, you know, millimetres and so on.  

Isn't 'metre' a musical measurement?

[audiomick]

3 minutes ago, Pressureangle said:

Isn't 'metre' a musical measurement?

Well, yes, as well. 

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Metre_(music)

 

[Pressureangle]

2 minutes ago, audiomick said:

Well, yes, as well. 

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Metre_(music)

 

Well there's the crux of it. Music isn't sensible. So we didn't convert to a system that accommodates both Beethoven and Thelonious Monk.