audiomick

For those who don't happen to speak German.... Those documents were produced by a company that doesn't seem to exist anymore. A quick search turned up a newest reference from 2010 in some forum or other. Nothing newer. What's on the page? Farhzeuggeometrie = Vehicle geometry. Lenkkopfwinkel = steering head angle. Nachlauf = trail. Radstand = wheelbase. So the first section is all about the basic dimensions of the bike. In the next section: Winkelabweichung = Angle deviation. Verdrehung = "twist". "zur" = "to the". "zum" = also "to the". Has to do with conjugation with various different genders for the definite article. "zu" = also "to the". Just take it for granted... Lenkkopf = steering head. Schwingenachse = swingarm pivot. Vorderrad = front wheel, Hinterrad = rear wheel, Lenkachse = the axis of rotation through the steering head. In the last section: Versatz = offset (i.e. error in that case) Räder = wheels Radaufstand Punkt = the point where the wheel touches the ground (I think...). Spur = the line along which the wheels travel. EDIT: "nach" = "to", Links is left, Rechts is right, so "nach Links" is "to the left". The bottom line: both bikes were tested by a company in Bavaria that believed it knew what it was doing, and was recommended in at least one forum. The results show that both bikes were within less than 3mm of being absolutely straight.

What @GuzziMoto said... I've had that issue even bleeding the old-fashioned way by pumping the lever.

That's the best plan. My sister figured out the physics of it some years ago: When you look for something, the act of searching builds up an energy state that, if the search goes on for more than a couple of minutes, causes the sought after object to pop across into another dimension. Only when you stop looking does the energy state dissipate, allowing the object to fall back into our dimension and be found.

Don't worry mate, you get used to that.

Naa, wouldn't have that. Wouldn't pull the skin off a custard...

From the link in the edit from my post further up....

To the question, of course it does. By the bye, is the "cleveland" designation commonly known in the USA? I'd imagine so, but don't know. "Cleveland" or "Windsor" was a subject of some discussion amongst Ford afficionados in Australia. I'm not that solid on the difference, as I was more interested in Holdens. For the sake of completeness, in case the whole discussion is new to anyone: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ford_335_engine#351_Cleveland https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ford_small_block_engine#351W EDIT: just found this section, which brings as back to de Tomaso at the end. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ford_335_engine#302_and_351_Cleveland_(Australia) Ummm, no. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Moto_Guzzi#1973–2000:_De_Tomaso_years The early Le Mans models, and the small-block engine and frame that is the origin of the current V7 models, were all introduced during the de Tomaso years.

That sounds good. The way I go at it on the V35, and the one time I've done the V11, is to turn the second one in finger tight whilst wobbling the swingarm to see how much play is in there. The aim is no play, and the swingarm stills moves without any restriction, a bit like head-stem bearings. If you're using a tool with leverage to tighten them, they are too tight.

Yes, but my taste in 4 wheel vehicles is more in this direction

@docc you got it down.

Nice Le Mans.

"Curve", most likely. "Curb" ist the edge of the gutter or footpath on the side of the road.

I've heard rumours that NZ is pretty (apart from the way the locals speak). Apparently there is some substance to that.

Ok, that's not a bad start. What is it powering? Going by the mag wheel, I thought it might be a '70s sports car.

@Tomchri what does that wheel belong to? Looks kind of interesting...

Indeed. I can remember one of the first moments that I started getting interested in Moto Guzzi. It happened here. https://www.openstreetmap.org/relation/2382203#map=16/-37.72292/145.04858 I was walking from the sports fields back to the uni, about where the La Trobe Sports Stadium is, and saw and heard a Guzzi going along Kingsbury Drive towards Plenty Road. It was probably an early Le Mans, that was in about 1985, and quite possibly had the "competizione" Lafranconis on it. The sound...

@Steve Swan bear in mind that some people have a spoked in rear rim offset by as much as 5 mm, or more, to accomodate a wider rim. That seems to work without trouble, although I can't imagine that a really good rider might not notice it. What I'm getting at: putting the swing arm back in the way it was is a good plan, but on an old, second-hand bike there is no garauntee that the adjustment was really accurately correct. Put it back in, @docc 's suggestion works for me, and ride it and see how it handles. If you want to be sure, pull a bit of string past the back wheel such that it touches the back wheel front and back on both sides, but isn't bent out of true by that, and measure the distance from the string to the front wheel, both sides front and back. Take your time, and repeat the measurements a few times. That should tell you if your front and back wheels are aligned, and what you might have to do with the pins to get them aligned if they are not.

Yes, so it seems. There is this thread here: and then I found this, which corroborates that pretty well https://www.mgcn.nl/database/modeloverzicht/13-v11/139-v11-modeloverzicht from there: What I have marked in green applies to mine. Also, long tank and fuel pump in the tank, both characteristic of the 2003 and onwards models, I gather.

Yes, that is she. Edith says, by the way, the fairing screen is not original. Doesn't fit very well, either. I took it off the first time I delved into the area under the fairing, and it was a pain in the proverbial to get it back on. Edith also wants to note that you can see pretty much all of the VIN plate in that picture. That US models have the month on the tag had been mentioned here, and I went looking for it. I'm pretty sure it is not on the tag. The bike was first registered on the 16th May 2003, which might be an indication that it was built fairly late in 2002, but that is a long way from being a sure thing.

Thinking about this again today, I had a closer look at the VIN. In the papers, the number is listed as ZGU KT A01 0 2 M 111456 Here is an enlarged crop out of the photo further up: I looked at the frame numbers list here, which explains what the various segments of the frame number denote: https://www.mgcn.nl/database/mg-framenummers According to that page, the three digits after the "KT", which denotes the model, indicate the version of the model. So that would be "A01" in my case. However, in their listing, they don't list an "A01". The closest they come is these two entries ZGUKT002,ZGUKTA02 V 11 CAT. 1100 2003-2004 ZGUKT000,ZGUKT001 V 11 LE MANS 1100 2002 The tenth digit of my number is "2", so the bike was built in 2002, so it is a fair bet that it really is a 2002 Le Mans. The questions are Has anyone else ever seen the "A01" in a frame number? I thought briefly that my number might be a badly engraved "001", but I've gone off that idea. I'm also aware that a list like the one in the link has no guarantee of being complete. If anyone has seen the "A01", what was it on? Assuming it is a 2002 Le Mans, which forks should it have? Can anyone say for sure? As indicated further up, and in the thread about the Andreani cartridges, the upper triple clamp is obviously not original, as it has holes for the brackets for a handlebar which a Le Mans shouldn't have. The question is whether it was just the triple clamp, or the whole front end? Not that I'm worried about it. I have the 43mm Marzocchis, and that seems, from what I have read, to be a good thing. I'm just curious about how much the bike has been modified.

This is a bit of an in-joke. Maybe most of the people here wont get it. I don't really care. I found the link just now whilst searching through the links in my browser for something completely unrelated, and felt the need to share it. I have to admit, though, that I have no idea what he meant with "girt" in the first point. So maybe I have been away from Australia for too long. The rest of it is, for me, very amusing. https://www.smh.com.au/culture/tv-and-radio/bunnings-snags-and-the-meaning-of-girt-42-ways-to-tell-if-you-re-australian-20200121-p53tam.html PS: I'd be particularly interested in hearing (reading) what the rest of the world makes out of Point 19 And the rest of it, actually.

I guess he hasn't finished pulling it apart to have good look yet.