I'll check in the morning and let you know.
As far as wire resistance, yes....that's a problem. I cant answer that, but how does the bike run well if there is a real issue there?
I also have to call tech support, often, on machines I've never seen or worked on before. More often than not, they will ask me to drag out a meter. It's always the same..."What's your voltage here, they ask?" " 24.9, I'll say". Ok, good....turn that up to 25 even...what's your resistance?" I'll usually ask, " What should it be?" " Well, that depends..how warm is it? How old is it?" Unless the part tests open, I dont recall ever having to replace a component just because of a low or high ohm reading. They have been replaced when the ohm reading was off, AND something else I could verify before the part was replaced. That other thing might be cost...its too cheap to worry about, or time.....its been in there for 10 yrs, so why not replace it. But never just because the reading was off.
My point is that the physical secondary throttle plate actuator does not care about the amount of resistance in the circuit, since it is not an open, the secondary throttle plates still function normally because they still receive power. The ECU is what cares about the resistance range, therefore returning a code and disabling TCS because the resistance it sees is out of spec.
You need to look at it as two separate entities. 1. what does the actuator need in order to function normally? 2. what is the ECU expecting to see in that circuit.
1. The circuit is not broken or open, so power is still reaching the actuator which allows it to function normally.
2. The ECU is expecting to see a resistance within spec, since it is no longer in spec, the ECU is throwing the code.
3. I suspect the ECU needs to see that resistance value when applying TCS, so this is why you get the error code and TCS is disabled.
I agree with this.
And I don't have bike experience much less bike FI, I have experience with GM TBI and LS but not to the point of programming either although I have access to HP Tuner and have adjusted some transmission settings and corrected tire size on my 2500HD and have not bricked an ECM yet
However, the TBI experience was adapting the systems to non-GM vehicles and specifically an AMC 258 in my CJ and a 360 V8 in my Cherokee. Bill Hamilton of Binder Planet who did the programming of the chips was ruthless as far as people verifying voltage and resistance pre-checks and GROUNDS on all sensors and the ECM before he offered input.
So I can understand the ECU going into limp mode (disabling power and traction control adjustment) when getting incorrect input.
The question of course, what is causing the bad input: mechanical components, sensors, wiring, connectors, ECU or possibly tire size.
Just my opinion, if it was tire size I would expect this to have happened from the start and to other riders.
The bike wasn't being ridden when the resistance tests were done, so the low ohm reading could not have been due to the tire size. At this point, I think it's a bad component in the circuit, but what caused it is still the question. The more I think about it, I really don't see how the difference in rear wheel speed due to the tire size change could damage a component like this. I am leaning more toward a faulty component from the beginning and has probably been dropping in resistance the whole time and just now dropped outside the range limit for the ECU.