The most accurate Fuel Gauge you will ever find ...

[Joesmoe]

Aye, so I'm looking at this parametrically -- not a 1-2-3 recipe.

 

[DEcosse]

... So the numbers may well be different. Fuelling almost certainly will be ... (insert ending here)

I'm not sure if the unstated ending to that was "the same" or "also different"?
It reads as if the fueling would be different as well as the pulse count.
The fueling number should be pretty much the same for any R3 with stock injectors (within the limits of individual component variance which should not be much)
Regardless of what map it is running the volume will always be directly proportional to the duration it is on - even one with forced air or piggy-back controller (unless the injectors have been changed or modified)

* aside from the L to Gals scaling of course

 

[barbagris]

I'm not sure if the unstated ending to that was "the same" or "also different"?
It reads as if the fueling would be different as well as the pulse count. The fueling number should be pretty much the same for any R3 with stock injectors (within the limits of individual component variance which should not be much)
Regardless of what map it is running the volume will always be directly proportional to the duration it is on - even one with forced air or piggy-back controller (unless the injectors have been changed or modified)
* aside from the L to Gals scaling of course

I think we might well be surprised at the ms/Litre (gallon) values from bike to bike. Especially where the bike has been WELL DYNO'D at cylinder level.The fact that some of us attain 40mpg and others barely 30 attests to that. Those with well flowed heads will see better efficiency.

In the past I remember reading how INCONSISTENT the injectors are (were anyway). not +/- a percent or two. iirc 15% was mentioned. An interesting test would be to run tapped into Cyl1 - then 2 - then 3. Balancing the throttle bodies will affect things. I know guys in the past have tried to match injectors to get things more or less even - though generally they are not that worried about range.

I always check the exhaust ports when I mess with the exhausts - and found one was rich, one weak, one OK on standard header/map/pipes. With the PCV/Jardine-header/Thugs they're all OK-ish tending to rich.

Scott would be my point of info now - or one of the forced air guys - or Carpenter(Art). Before, we had Wayne Tripp - though Nev Lush will know.

The pulse/km count SHOULD be totally standard against the stock speed sensor. I will check at fill up. The more ticks I have the more accurate the recalibration - if I bother.

The only thing is I am not sure if the final "diff" ratio on "T" is the same - I know it is a different unit. If the FB2 fitted old Guzzis (we have carb's) - then this would matter as there are different final ratios between models. It was a nightmare in the early '80's.

 

[barbagris]

So - as coincidently I had done a fairly precise "Tankfill/ODO" record immediately (26kms) before fitting the Fuelbot I've decided to do a Rule Of Thumb calibration.

Filled to brim as always - 18.36L - Odo (which is as we know almost identical to the ROT Fuelbot calibration) 249.8kms. - = 7.35L/100kms (38.43 imperial mpg - 32.00 USmpg)

Fuelbot showed 2.77L/100kms - Divide 2.77 by 7.35 = .376870748.

"As delivered" ms/L = 125046. Times .376870748 = 47126.

Note it's been recalculated on-board as 7.37L/100k



Needs a proper recalibration at tank-fill using same pump as previous fill but will do for now. What it really needs is a (say) constant-ish 500km run - with known gas station distribution.
Happily I have one imminent. - Sept1.

Not going to get much riding done this weekend as we're on call for an imminent bereavement.

 

[barbagris]

So - waited for the light to come on which it accommodatingly did today as I left home and so was able to repeat fill at my usual fuelstop - though not my usual pump.
237.15kms (per FB2 ODO ). 16316763 ticks. Triumph ODO 236.6. 0.5KM difference on a tank. For now that'll do me.

Inj_ms 861927 - Fuel 16.64L. - Comes out at 51792-ish ms/litre.

Reset and went for a forks/tyre test ride. I have a big trip coming up.

One imputed I now have a much more optimistic Kms/100L value (6.91L or 34US mpg). That feels a bit optimistic tbh - we'll see.
But a good part of today I was riding more conservatively than I normally would - My GPS speedo went a bit haywire and so I was ultra cautious.
Think I've sorted it - but it'll be tested this weekend.

I'd say starting value for tics/km on a Standard/Roadster etc - 68800 - 69000.

Note that if you manoeuvre the bike about a lot with the ignition on you quickly add a lot of ticks as ticks are counted forwards and backwards. Just pushing the bike forward a little bit in the garage added a few ticks.

Starting ms/litre would be 50000 ish

I am filling RIGHT TO THE BRIM so as well as telling the FB2 I only have a 23.1L tank I probably have a good litre or two more (for use in case of DIRE emergency).

I'm now relatively content to take on the Santander run . Now on Sept5th. 450kms at a pretty much constant 120-140km/h.

 

[barbagris]

Just had a refill - FB said 12.1L used - squeezed 11.98L into the tank at my known favourite pump. About 1% out.

Seems well calibrated for now. I'd rather it was a little pessimistic.

My guess is even when it says 0 kms left - I'll have about a litre left.

When I'm back from the UK - I'm going to look at the 5th gear AFR values - pretty sure I can improve high speed "cruising" consumption.

I am very grateful to Ken for bringing this to our attention - and to Dave for getting mine over here so fast.

 

[Mittzy]

Hmmm cant seem to find my user instructions, I have it installed but have no idea how to use it. Anybody got a pdf copy?

 

[Mittzy]

Got some Thanks @ozrider

 

[Johnsen]

Hmmm cant seem to find my user instructions, I have it installed but have no idea how to use it. Anybody got a pdf copy?

Hi
Is the unit ( display ) waterproof?
--Johnsen--

 

[DEcosse]

yes