My 2013 Heritage has a throttle cable for both the fuel and clutch. Never had a problem with tire pressures lol

 

Mine is cheap plastic, I would love a Chinese aluminum one

 

FOBO 2 Specs...

https://my-fobo.com/product-family/F...e_2#pills-spec

Battery - CR1632
Weight - 7.6g (0.27 oz)

Smallest wheeling balancing adhesive weight - 0.25 oz. (based on a quick lookup). Does the FOBO sensor weight impact wheel balance? Good question. It doesn't appear that FOBO addresses this question anywhere that I can find. Q&As in review sections seem to say no. So do many forum post here and there.

As to reviews and ease of use issues... I pretty much take reviews with a grain of salt. If you scratch below the surface you'll often find that reviewer issues stem from ignorance. On the other hand you can find decent reviews which offer little nuggets of useful information that are helpful in making buying decisions. Also one should be cognizant of the fact that both the software/firmware is upgradable. Issues may get resolved, usability improved, new features added etc. On the same token updates can break things. Goes with the territory. But overall, it looks like the FOBOs gets pretty favorable reviews.

 

As noted... pressure is supposed to be measured "cold". Cold in this case simply means that the tire has been at rest for enough time that temperature variations from rolling resistance has been factored out. I would hazard a guess that other sources of temperature variability (such as mentioned here) have been factored in by the manufacturer. So, seems best to simply measure (cold) and set based on the given manufacturers recommendation. I would also set thresholds accordingly. As to having only one thresholds for both tires... Seems like an (disqualifying) oversight to me. Maybe an oversight based on ignorance? Or perhaps they were just too cheap to update their app for motorcycle applications. In fact - thinking about it - this wouldn't work well for my truck either. The delta between the front and rear pressures on my truck is significant (IIRC 55 front, 80 rear).

It's good to know that the motion required isn't significant. I still would prefer that they register with no interaction with the bike. Battery life/savings might be a factor with this approach. But, if FOBO is correct and their setup's battery life is a year, then I don't see this savings as any big deal. Just add replacing the batteries to the regular annual maintenance schedule.

Multiple bikes and multiple phones would be a factor for me. But yes... It all depends on the individual's needs/requirements.

 

It seems a backward step to go with the smaller battery that only gets half the operating time. I don't how its usage is increased or decreased considering it is on all the time.

Still looking...

 

Pretty lazy I guess... at least in my case. And yes... If I could afford it, I would also send the bike out to be washed and waxed.

In my mind checking tire pressure can be a pain... rolling the bike around to get access to the valve etc. This can be particularly so when riding in the winter when one might be all bundled up like the Michelin Man (kneeling down/bending can suck in this situation). If this contraption can make one of the pre-ride safety checks that much easier/less onerous (and therefore more likely to be done), then I'm in favor.

One might take a similar view about ABS, traction/stability control, rider modes etc. Are these features really necessary? My '09 Nightster has none of this stuff and I still get around on it just fine. But I would suspect many would say that they are not just "nice to haves", but are mandatory. If given the choice, I believe most would rather have these features than not. It would seem that TPMS would also fall into this category. It's ubiquitous on cars (and likely will become so on motorcycles). I wonder, for those that have this feature on their vehicles, how many consider it to be unnecessary gimmickry. I suspect few. Most probably appreciate having it. It seems like a nice option to be able to inexpensively/easily retrofit vehicles (bikes) that don't come with TPMS from the factory.

So in my mind... Pre-ride safety checks made less onerous (more likely to be done) - check. Early warning while riding - bonus.

 

It is mandatory here across Europe. My car from the factory is equipped with run flat tyres. It wouldn't be apparent there was a loss of pressure with them.

I have had a warning from my car as a tyre lost pressure, so I know the system works. The BMW system isn't particularly very accurate but having reset it and then see what it shows it is easy to calibrate in my head.

 

Well which tradeoff are you most concerned with? At first your concern was the size and weight issues that would come from using a larger battery (CR2032). Now that we are talking about a smaller battery (CR1623), size and weight, your concern is the battery life. Got to pick one - its a tradeoff after all.

Seems to me that the size and weight would outweigh battery life, particularly if one finds the manufacturer's estimated battery life of 1 year to be acceptable.

Of course... if battery life is paramount, then one of the other options (with feature tradeoffs) might work better.

 

Just messing! Yes I am concerned reading that some have had rubber valve stems break with I assume the heavier older unit. Fobo even seem concerned and warn users following the link you gave. A seasons worth of riding and then change the battery as part of the service. It is not a real issue.

The stems on my bike seem quite low profile though.

 

Fortunately for me, both my Nightster and Heritage have laced rims, inner tubes and metal valve stems. The valve stems on my Nightster are vertical - so no problem there. Since the rear valve stem on the Heritage is on the side, I'd have to check it to see if there was a clearance issue.