| Author |
Message |
    
Fresnobuell
| | Posted on Thursday, April 22, 2010 - 05:51 pm: | 
|
Well, in that case your disconnection idea is the best one.
Either extreme (lean or rich) is not desirable. Sorry. I figured my comment would be taken in context, but I see your point in extreme circumstances blanketly stating richer is always better is not true. |
Freezerburn840
| | Posted on Thursday, April 22, 2010 - 05:53 pm: |
|
I wish one of the engineers could come on BadWeb and explain why the location of the IAT was where it is? And if it would be better suited in a different location?
How about the Radiator Mod to begin with the cut outs that I see on Twin Motorcycles and on Eslicks bike in 09. Seems like people are trying ways to get the heat dispersed properly. |
Sportster_mann
| | Posted on Thursday, April 22, 2010 - 06:12 pm: |
|
Ratsmc, if your IAT was consistantly reading higher AT than it really was, then it sounds like your sensor was faulty - moving it will make no difference - it will still be reading high.
Did you test it against a thermometer that was known to be accurate ? |
Ratsmc
| | Posted on Thursday, April 22, 2010 - 06:18 pm: |
|
SPortster_mann, You missed the point. When the sensor was in the stock location it read wrong. Now that it is in hte airbox it reads correctly. The sensor is not the problem. |
Mountainstorm
| | Posted on Thursday, April 22, 2010 - 09:10 pm: |
|
I see temp spikes too when the bike is moving slowly or stopped. I guess here in the country there just is not the same issue with getting plenty of air.
I don't regret moving the IAT around to see what effect it had, it was an interesting experiment. Any controversy about it is being generated outside of the experiment.
I moved the sensor because it made sense to me that the ideal location for the IAT sensor is right close to the throttle bodies. It seems pretty obvious. The ECU will be reading the temp of the air in the most important zone of the airstream.
I was surprised (dismayed even) to see the IAT temp reading way higher than ambient even after miles of 55 mph riding. At first it was a little confusing because I assumed the open airbox would be sucking in all kinds of fresh air from the gap around the frame as well as what gets stuffed up the snorkel. But the IAT sensor reads 10-12F higher than ambient. We can work on how to keep that air from getting warm: solve that and get more power.
Why you have one finding and I have another is not a controversy either. It only underscores how important it is to methodically test any changes you make to the bike. Which is all I have done.
About ambient. It's simply a reference. Without it any talk of temperatures is without a referent and therefore meaningless. When I say 11F above ambient versus 3F above ambient that's data you can compare to your own.
Ratsmc I refuse to engage in the usual Jerry Springer antics this board is so famous for...I'm not going to argue about this subject. I just posted my findings.
The lower the temp the IAT reads the more fuel the ECU will provide. How can that be a bad thing? WIthin reason of course. So why would it be a bad thing to have the IAT sensor in a location that is as close to ambient as possible. That's what you did right? According to you the sensor now reads closer to ambient for you. If that works what's the controversy? Just because I found exactly the opposite for me does not mean either of our findings are wrong. It means that environmental variables are obviously a key element to air temp at the intake. |
Avalaugh
| | Posted on Saturday, May 08, 2010 - 11:33 am: |
|
Well i have been riding around the last few weeks with my IAT relocated into the airbox as described at the beginning.
My findings are as follows -
From cold the bike is the same, once up to temp it felt smoother and less jerky at low RPM's. The first few rides were all quite high speed with no stop start traffic.
I have found that once you get stuck in slow moving traffic and the engine temp rises the bike leaned out, it took along time for the ambient temp to show any drop in temp once back up to speed and the exhaust pop and banged alot more (sign of engine running lean).
I have since tried locating the IAT to the rear of the bike and early testing seems to be good.
I understand that the idea of putting the IAT as close to the throttle bodies should give an accurate reading of intake temps, but in my opinion due to the above mentioned heatsoak problems, this location i am now trying will benefit the running of the engine more so than it being in the airbox or infront of the fans as intended. |
|
