I'm new to the forums...hello everyone... Just wanted to let you guys in on my experience with the Zero=Zero procedure on an R1150GS (mine is a 2001). I tried it and didn't know it was only for the 1100 so of course I screwed up the bike and it ran like crap. I only got about 200km out of a tank of fuel!!! Anyway, to make a long story short, all I had to to to correct the problem was fully close the throttles by backing off the throttle stop screws and set the TPS to 0.010 volts, then use the left throttle stop screw to get the TPS to 0.310 volts. Then I balanced the right throttle stop screw followed by the idle screws, and finally the throttle cables. I found that the TPS voltage at idle was different with the engine running, so then I adjusted it back to 0.310 volts with the engine idling, and re-adjusted everything else! Voila...runs like a charm... Basically the same procedure as the R1100GS zero=zero, but use 0.310 volts instead of 0.380 and leave the bike idling while setting the TPS voltage! I used ordinary vacuum guages for balancing... Could have done better with a twinmax I suspect.
Good instinct. You done good. Too bad people don't realize the zero=zero won't work on the 1150's. Glad to here your back in business. That situation can be a real nightmare for the uninitiated... R-dubb
Yah, I found a posting somewhere on this forum that said the TPS setting from the factory was around 0.310 volts at idle, so this helped me get things straightened out. I can't remember how much difference it makes with the engine running, but it was quite a difference if I recall. I don't know if that would be the case with the R1100GS...
How did you take the idle screws out of the equation when you balanced the right throttle stop? Set them the same turns out or what?
AFAK Motronic 2.4 doesn't really care too much about tps voltage as long as it is low enough for the Motronic to understand the engine is idling. Jacking the TPS up to .450 might be a problem, but .310 vs .369 isn't really going to matter because the Motronic "learns" minimum and maximum TPS voltage. Another way to balance the system would have been to set both brass screws 3/4 - 1&1/4 turns out from a lightly seated position, then perform the idle sync using the throttle stop screws, then sync at high rpm with the cables, and finally set the TPS voltage to .3xx. Then disconnect the battery or pull the Motronic fuse for a minute or so, reconnect, turn on the ign, and work the throttle from closed to full open a few times. The method doesn't matter as much as the end result.
mdmaroon writes: "runs like a charm" I believe that would be "works like a charm." Ifn your bike "ran like a charm" All of the shit around you would be turning into shinola as you passed it. Carry on...
I think the main problem with using the zero=zero procedure on an 1150 is that setting the TPS voltage to 380mv using the throttle stop screws leaves the throttle plate open too wide. My bike would idle (slowly) with the brass screws turned all the way in when I had it adjusted this way! Closing the throttles more and then opening the idle ports more made the bike run smoother at idle. I'm almost wondering if I can achieve even better results by closing the throttle plates even more! So I believe you may very well be correct in saying that the Motronic 2.4 system doesn't really care too much about the TPS voltage at idle. My improvements probably have more to do with the airflow through the throttle bodies. Air going through the idle ports is probably more accurately metered and less turbulent than air passing around the mostly closed throttle plate. Oh, and with higher intake vacuum the air going into the cylinders is being sucked in violently rather than just sort of wafting in. That probably results in better fuel/air mixing. That's my little theory anyway.... :)
Mike, The setting of .310 works great. I bought an '02 1150 where the stop screws were "mal" adjusted and the thing ran terrible. Using the "zero = zero" as a base with .310v as a stop point, has turned this nightmare into a great running bike. Thanks for reposting what you did. Paul
Right on, that is 100% accurate. And yes the bike will run better with the throttle plates closed as far as possible. The limitation is that when they get to far closed, minor wear and tolerance in the spindle allows the throttle valve to bounce on the stop. Not good; that will destroy the throttle over time and it also causes the idle to stumble and stammer. So the trick is to get it closed further than stock, but not too far. JohnJen likes to use a base TPS voltage to set the left throttle stop. I prefer to set both brass idle screws to 2 1/2 turns out, sync both throttle stops to idle and then do a minor TPS adjustment. If the right throttle rattles at that setting, I move to 2 turns out and try again. R-dubb
One important thing to note - and IBMWR should put it on the "Tech Articles" web page - is that when Rob Lentini developed "0=0", he was riding a 1994 RS which had Motronic 2.0, the early cable setup, not enough miles, and a horrible surge problem in traffic. With all the various attempts being made to find a simple cure to a complex problem, some people had diddled the throttle stop screws: Rob, being an inquisitive, jet-mech kind of guy, proceeded to answer the question of "How do I get my throttle blades back to stock now that I've moved them??", and the result was "0=0". He claimed his bike ran better set from that base, but I tried it on my RS (95 model) and found the only "zero" in the equation was zero performance improvement. Motronic 2.2 came in 97, then 2.4 in 2000, and "0=0" remained as folklore, forever (seemingly) posted for all to see even though it doesn't work on later bikes (and wasn't a robust fix for surging on the early ones......) mully
I am new to the forum, however I have been reading about the Zero = Zero TPS settings, I fitted new TB shafts etc recently to cure TB rattle(which it did) on my 03 1150GS which has 170,000 klms on it. My problem now is that I have a terrible flat spot, if I open the throttle to fast, now reading the above comments saying this settings are not suitable for a 1150 adds up, I set my TPS to .310 at idle and then balanced the rights stop, following the Rob Lentini method. What is the correct method for the 1150, the bike is running very smooth and fuel consumpsion is good, its just this dangerous flat spot that surfaces when you try to overtake, someone please enlighten me on why this is happening only since I replaced the TB shafts and orings etc.
My experience in this is that with a warm engine it will idle raggedly slow with the BBS's screwed fully home, match the r/h throttle stop screw to the l/h using mano etc then match BBS's for idle then adjust for open throttle at the r/h cable adjuster. works for me.
Almost exact scenario Moose! (02-1150) But i think my prob is worn out cables. The PO replaced them once, & now at 173k this is next step along with Injector cleaning. I also used the 0-0 w/.370v and later read the motronic learns the TB position so I didnt worry about readjusting it until next time.
It is worth repeating what R-Dubb mentioned early in this thread. The Motronic MA 2.4 learns the TPS range and the zero=zero is not appllicable to the 1150s. Also, the 1150s have a TPS sensor with two parallel potentiometers, one for the first 25 degrees of throttle opening and one which goes all the way to a bit over 80 degrees. On the 1150s, as long as you get the TPS set inside the "capture range" of the Motronic, it does the rest.
Wonder if my off idle boggy-ness is a worn/faulty lower 25% pot? Dead spot? I have another TPS on orig set of TBs. I will check em out & compare. Thanks regor.
You are correct. I double-checked and they are indeed the same part. Thanks for pointing it out. I will go back and fix the Posting. Bosch makes a single-wiper part but clearly it's not used on the R1100RT. Thanks for the catch.
