Gmc28

agreed. and that's neat that you got the chance to do that VFR corridor flight a number of times. I always felt guilty scooting along that route while slowed down to whatever the max speed that was allowed, in a lovely old, gas-guzzling, loud, 20 series Lear. Felt like somehow I was going to get in trouble. its a reasonable assumption in my mind that in DC the rotor driver just did an "oops", and then things happened pretty quick and ended badly.

ah yes, RA inhibited. don’t think it would make a difference in this case, as a pilot will typically need to mentally process what the barking-betty is saying, which should be quick, but whether its a “traffic, traffic” call or a “climb, climb” RA, there would be a brief pause before the pilot initiated real action, and in this case probably too late. And i’m not sure what the (simple) logic circuit would make of the path of the helo…

No TCAS below 1000’? not sure where that comes from… it should work fine, just with different parameters. Thats some really crowded airspace, so while its all horrible of course what happened, and the odds are astronomically in favor of a safe operation based on the zillions of flight hours and operations that have safely been done, its still not totally surprising that an “oops” from a pilot would cause the carnage in that crowded area. Well before 9-11, which of course changed everything, we’d sometimes depart Teterboro and fly down the hudson in a little jet (lear 20 series) very low… I believe the VFR corridor dictated we be at 1100’ or thereabouts, right in proximity to helicopters and little piston planes, and it felt like you could touch the statue of liberty. Seemed a bit naughty, as the corridor was intended for light aircraft and helo’s, but regardless, in addition to all those little aircraft swarming around us everywhere we were also sandwiched so near the arriving and departing IFR corridors for Newark and Teterboro. But somehow it all worked…. most of the time. the military guys are exceptionally well trained, but not always as adept with civilian ATC, as they may have more distraction and/or a lot less experience in flight hours in that realm. We’ll sometimes see helicopter pilots that finish their military stint and have not much more than 1000 hrs of flight time on their resume. not totally fair to compare the two types of flying, but in the fixed wing civilian world, you’d need more hours than that to even begin to sit as co-pilot.

that's hilarious, and certainly reminiscent of way back when that's the way things were going in the US. when was that class, out of curiosity? clearly its all just what we're used to. i'm all-in on metric, and get annoyed when i have to reach into the "stupid" side of my alternate toolbox to dig out SAE, and gallons/liters conversion is easy because of lots of necessary practice when flying international, (etc.,) but in the same breath can say that for woodworking & construction type things, I just never made the change (because no one else really has), so its all inches and feet still in my brain.

Interesting. And some good things to try on my end. yes, dot 4. Tying off the lever I’ll do, but maybe letting it gravity flow as suggested first for a while would be the thing. Then tie it off. All free and easy things to try. sad thing is that if that works, then I likely replaced a part or two for no good reason. Perhaps the original issue was just air in the system from it sitting outside for so long and maybe a loose fitting somehwhere. C’est la vie. But will see how it goes.

That. From Nate Bargatze playing George Washington on SnL last year: “I dream that one day our proud nation will measure weights in pounds, and that 2,000 pounds shall be called a ‘ton,’” Washington said. When a soldier played by Bowen Yang asked, “And what will 1,000 pounds be called, sir?,” Bargatze deadpanned, “Nothing.” Washington then waxes poetic about various bizarre American measurements, such as “rulers with two sets of numbers: inches on one side, centimeters on the other,” that “won’t line up and never will”. (except of course for 13mm.... 1/2"!)

I like it... thats the question/topic I more commonly am interested in when I'm bleeding systems, to get that last bit of air out. In this case I have no fluid making it through at all, which is bizarre for me, but in reality most of the time when i'm doing something like this what you're talking about is of key interest. at least for a "why not", i'll go lash the lever back for an overnight. I did, at least in my mind, seem to think there was a slightly different feel/sound when i released the bleed valve after holding the lever in for many seconds, and certainly notice over the years that when i get impatient and pump the lever too fast its different than when its slow and with a slight hold before opening the valve, as you'd well know. And for fun Phil, I checked for water on an old C140 a couple decades ago, only to learn the hard way that the sump drain on an unmodified 140 is mid tank, so as a tail dragger, I wasn't sumping anything but the fuel above the water that was hiding down there at the aft/bottom.... Ran great till about 800ft AGL, then I had a nice unplanned landing at my in-laws fallow field.

makes sense. had occured to me that the metal sheathed line could somehow be the core issue, but figured since there's no fluid leaking at all, that the line is ok. but perhaps there is a compromised line which allows air in, but doesnt' necessarily let fluid out.

Old topic, but the nuisance issue i'm having hasn't gone away. Next step is that i'll try another version of a lid for the reservoir, as the one i got cheap online and which seems to fit just fine, gushes brake fluid out through the threads. Made a decent home-made seal/gasket, and same issue. Must be threads on the cap that are "just exactly wrong" to look and feel right, but actually causing it to go on a bit crooked. odd. I'm thinking a larger cap that assures i have a clean, flat interface with top of the reservoir, and a decent seal/gasket, then clamp it in place, and that should work. However, the core issue is more the question for anyone who wants to weigh in, which is related to why the system won't bleed, even the "old fashioned way". I've bled lots of brakes, and always the same technique (squeeze, twist/open, twist/close, release, re-squeese... slowly), with the only question being how much patience was required. But this Cagiva clutch setup came to me from my son with no action... just a smooth, no-resistance pull on the clutch handle. it would barely bleed when i checked it, so i "shotgunned" the decision that it was the master, and replaced it. no change.... it would bleed a little fluid, but barely, after a lot of bleed action. ok, so i popped on another slave i had laying around from another old Duc i had which cross referenced (it worked when it came off), and now after a hundred (?) pulls to bleed it manually, its just a tiny spurt of air at the bleed/lower end each time, never even a hint of fluid. Bled the master first, just to assure it was coming out of the master at the banjo fitting (which introduces air, of course), then a zillion pumps later its the same spurt of air but no fluid movement. Technique flaw? Never had this issue before, having replaced a good number of slaves, but this simple issue has me scratching my head. the solution to push fluid through using the new contraption had been just a nifty way to enhance the process, but now i see it as a way to validate that all the air is gone by pushing fluid through, so thats where i've become focused. I also have an old, old suction version of the brake bleed tool, which I never liked, but may try that just to eliminate some variables.

if you'll distribute some sweet mascot logos to us all!

seems brians noun use and grammar would pass just fine with Count Olaf ("grammar is the greatest joy in life, don't you know...", or maybe it was some other character from that Lemony Snicket movie my daughter used to quote), or any of our jr high grammar teachers, and pressureangle will be the helluva guy in this group to perhaps soon have a proper new gear box :->

all sounds great. as has been said by me and others, dave is a helluva guy, and I was just dragging my feet, not wanting complicate things for Dave at all, but looking to see if there might be some good pathway to happiness in all this. Sounds like Brian is in direct contact too, so i'll back out.

all good. I don’t think dave is on this forum, but he’ll get back to me at some point and i’ll let you know. he’s a really good guy, with a very long resume of working directly for moto guzzi and various moto guzzi tech and race teams back when they did that going on, but dont think he does a lot of forums or email. i’ll get back to you soon once i have info. might prove helpful one way or another.

agreed, and thats the main reason i let this very minor “unsolved mystery” fester in my mind. exhaust flow dynamics can yield all kinds of results, but it does seem very unusual to have a non-2-stroke motor with an expanding outlet/exhaust, except in oddball cases, like the “power bomb” chambers on some dirt bikes, etc. The double wall thing certainly would explain things, though i’m guessing that mid pipe isn’t double wall. it is worth noting that while the V85 mid pipe pictured above is illustrative of my V11, it isn’t quite the same and is definitely more extreme. the V11 mid has a much milder expansion where the header and mid join. i’m sure its all fine, though it’s still mildly of interest as to why that mid pipe slightly flairs to a larger diameter (on top of the fact that the header slides into and not over the mid pipe, making it a double step change in diameter as it flows downstream)

is removing just the injectors fairly straightforward? i remember cleaning them on one of the v11’s many years ago, before i owned it, and don’t recall any special drama but i’m forgetfull….

gotcha. so tie it up with 5lb fly line, or some yarn, then use a 9lb sledge to nudge the gearbox, and voila! i now see that the throttle body assembly for sale has no injectors or tps.

roger roger. i seem to recall it being a bit tricky when i tried to remove the whole setup a few years ago, but its fuzzy.

i just texted Dave. I just saw him last at the John Day gathering this summer, so will see if he gets the text. who knows what he might know.... some perry mason work.

hmm. how much cursing, or body english, or removal of other stuff is needed? true, the long frame may help slighlty, but i wouldn't think much.

Thx gentlemen. For more specific, I should add that there’s a used full assembly available from an ‘03. whether I’d do nothing, or replace both sides, or try and just remove the left one from the assembly and install on mine, that’s part of the evaluation playing out. Was going out tonight to eyeball the assembly and see what makes sense. I know some of that assembly doesn’t just “pop apart”, so weighing the body overhaul vs maybe just replacing the one side, or the whole thing (both sides).

thx Docc. would just be a single throttle body. I've collected most of the bits needed to do Phil's process of addressing my seeping left throttle body, but weighing that against popping on a used throttle body and putting off the rebuild process for a while.

anyone know off top of your head if the throttle bodies from ‘03 v11 fit the ‘02 V11’s?

dave blue? I know dave.... I can ask him, but doubt he'll have much to say. i'm quite fond of him, and his guzzi knowledge and experience transcends most living beings. is he a closet tranny thief? perhaps, but i'd guess not, fwiw.

makes sense, and matches the reality that the cut ends, which are meant to be allowed to slightly squeeze another pipe inserted inside, are on the outside of my setup, which is to say the mid pipe that receives the headers has the cuts. It's clear i'm making more of this than it deserves. But its dark outside, so i indulge myself, and still sits odd with me that the mid pipe narrows down/tapers on the front/intake side where it receives the header pipe, and that the exhaust is again narrowed slightly more (going forward) by the smaller header that slides inside that narrowed mid pipe. maybe as phil says its by design, which is certainly something seen commonly on 2-stroke exhausts, but doesn't it seem slightly odd for these 4-strokers, to start narrower out of the head then widen out in 2 stages at the mid pipe?

thanks Phil - sounds like a plan. mostly just itching my OCD at this point, as it runs and looks fine, but struck me as odd. If someone knows if the mistral header pipes are larger diameter, that would be of interest as well.