BrianG

Is there any definitive way to tell, short of disassembly? Also... I am now thoroughly confused! Is my 2000 V-11 Sport equiped with a single or dual plate clutch?

Great... 1 week before our annual 1000 mile trip. Is failure going to be catastrophic? Would you risk this trip and defer the task to after? Anyone have a secret way to get at the clutch FAST. I've never crabbed the bike before! What parts do I need on hand??

I have enjoyed almost 8,000 miles of riding this season, with nothing more that a little transmission oil seepage, and the need of new tires. In the last few days I have noted the onset of a new "clutch situation". This consists of something of a new noise....... It always sounded like noisy valve clatter when the clutch was released in neutral, but it would go mostly quiet when the clutch lever was pulled........ now there is a definite "whirring" noise. If I had to guess, I'd say the throw-out bearing is on it's way south (if this thing actually HAS such an animal). Also, I have noticed an irregularity in the feel of a gradual clutch engagement. It is almost as though the plates are not smooth, or something. There is a "chiggering" feel to the engagement process if I slip the clutch. It feels OK if the clutch is engaged quickly. Ideas?

Ghey

OK... we need some pics to go with this thread. 10-spring clutches Dual disc clitches Single disc clutches I'd love to see what this stuff looks like before crabbibg my 2000 V-11 Sport this winter!

I can't quite figure out the Italian philosophy of factory suspension parameters. I have heard the rationale for the Japanese parameters and they kind of make sense, but of course the MG parameters are pretty much the reverse of the Japanese. Anyway, for those who might care, or even be vaguely interested..... The current theory about Japanese motorcycle suspension parameters for retail street bikes is thought to go like this. The front is generally set up for the Japanese concept of the "average Americal motorcycle purchaser"; to whit, a 170 lb (equiped) individual. The idea being that keeping the front forks "lightly" sprung makes for a more plush feeling, so you have a fork set at the soft end for a 170 lb rider. At the other end of the bike, the legal beagles have suggested that the rear suspension had better provide all of the suspension required for 2-up riding, since everyone goes out sporting their sweeties or best buddies around, at least some of the time. Knowing that an undersprung rear end is frankly, dangerously unstable, the Japanese opt for a really firm rear suspension, for those few 2-up occasions, so that no-one ends up hurt from an unstable platform. At the end of the day, the Japanese SOP give us an undersprung front end, and over-sprung rear end, for most north american-type riders. With this set-up you get a diving front end, on braking...... disconcerting but hardly dangerous. You also get a harsh back end....... hard to thrash fast, but certainly not unstable. All-in-all a stable, if unrewarding platform for the neophyte. This whole soft rear spring of the MG is frankly surprizing to me. Perhaps the engineers of those days balanced increased compression damping with softer springs, but that's not the philosophy of today. Todays' suspension philosophy, even on the track, is that a more compliant suspension better controls the activity of the contact patch on the asphalt. There's a lot of suspension motion available in modern suspension components, and the goal is to use it up. Adjusted for personal taste and total chassis stiffness, the spring design goal is generally stated: to provide 15-20% free sag, and 30-40% laden sag. Once the chassis is properly sprung you can work out the damping, sorting out the rebound damping first..... trying to get one (and only one) full stroke cycle from most decent road bumps. Then add in a bit of compression damping to kill the second cycle, if you need to. Street bikes need precious little compression damping if they are properly sprung. You'll notice that the less sophisticated suspension systems provide adjustable rebound damping, if only one adjustment is provided. Once the damping is dialed in you get to mess with the idea of "turn-in" if you are really into the twisties, particularly on the track. The balance here is that the boundary of rapid turn-in bounces off the consideration of head-shake on powering out of the corner. A steering damper can help a bit here, but if you see corner-exit headshake, you have over-pitched the steering head geometry by lowering the front or raising the rear, too much. A street bike should tend toward stability at speed, over scalpel-like corner entry, generally speaking. Incidentally...... the most frequent cause of head shake in modern sport bikes is loose steering head bearings. Check them!! Anyway... not to flog a dying horse........ but that's the way I understand the whole chassis tuning thing. This isn't complete, by any means, but it's a decent smattering of the current concepts.........

Tip the bike hard over and fill the clip-on with #7 lead bird shot. I'm sure you've heard of a "dead-blow" hammer. This works wonders, and is cheap, to boot! We used to fill the whole handle-bar on old Nortons and Triumphs to prevent perma-numb hands on long road trips!

I have the black kit, which I haven't mounted to my 2000 Sport, because of the lowered riding position. I like the position where it's at so I got a GIVI bikini fairing and it's just fine. The black matches well to my bike.

Progressives......... bastard!! traitor!! non-purist!! Forget all I've said.... none of it applies to progressive springs. For Progressive springs you want 90% free sag at the front and loaded sag dosen't matter. You want 5% loaded sag at the rear. You want the compression and rebound set to full-damping front and rear. And you want the tires at 10 lb front and 8 lb rear. FWIW my Traxxion Dynamics modified Marz forks are using 1.05kg springs for a 220 lb (in full gear) solo rider. My Penske rear shock runs a 500lb spring.

We were perfectly safe on our 45 hp 400 lb Nortons and BSA's. I think the era of 150hp / 300 lb race-replicas has substantially changed the paradigm of what's acceptable.

I suppose that 90% of riders ride at 10% of the capacity of their motorcycles capability, and everyone in that group is happy-happy. Another 5% ride way over their head and end up on the asphalt complaining about the machine. For them, optimization might be a margin of error to protect the incompetent. It's the 5% of riders, like that dork Ratchethack, that feel that their equipment should be optimized for themselves. Not that they ride at 90% much, but they just enjoy the satisfaction of squeezing everything possible out of a nice piece of machinery. Optimized equipment provides both greater maximum performance potential, as well as greater riding comfort at moderate performance levels. There are engineering compromises in motorcycles that have far more effect on performance than similar compromises in automobiles have. This is because the "load" is generally a greater percentage of the total mass. Also, there are legal-engineering compromises that argue toward designed stability, often at the cost of performance. The differences that are being discussed here are probably useful for the perfectionists among us more than the racers, because the real hot-foot riders wouldn't be herding a 500lb /90 hp Guzzi around the curves when there are 300lb /150 hp rocket sleds out there. A custom fit suit doesn't perform that much better than one off the rack, but to some of us, it feels sooooooo much better................ especially since we did the fitting ourselves.

Why do you say this? If removing the engine from the rest of the frame removes some structural rigidity, the engine is being used as part of the frame to provide that rigidity, hence IS a stressed member. Any isolated portion of the stress carrying system might well be weak in isolation. This assumption is inaccurate. Motorcycle frame design is aimed at providing torque and vertical deflection rigidity, but lateral rigidity is not desirable. Some lateral deflection is desired to provide additional suspension deflection while leaned over. This is because the vector of vertical suspension compliance decreases with increasing lean angle. The requirement for suspension compliance relates to the stability of the contact patch of the tires.

I was trying to pry up the larger chrome surround that contains the center button! Thanks!!

This might make an interesting project but unless I'm way off on my observation of the Spine Frame engineereing, MG designed the engine, in this application, as a stressed frame member, as opposed to designing it as a passenger power-unit carried in a cradle. As such, extra frame rails would contribute little to the overall stiffness of the frame.

OK...... I'm feeling a little dumb about this, now! I have peeled about 100 various fasteners and brackets off the front of by 2000 V-11 Sport in order to get at the ignition switch fasteners which have apparently vibrated loose, leaving the switch floating about in the top clamp. Having removed all of the top clamp fasteners and driven wedges into the 3 pinch joints, it still will not budge. This leaves the possibility of some fastener under the pretty little chrome center stem cover. This would be fine if it were apparent about how to remove that cover. Any hints?

My last tires wer Pilot Road's and I found the rear tire skittish. The Diablo Strada's do not demonstrate this characteristic on my V-11. YMMV

Nice to see that you got this down!! And you got it perfect, IMHO! The V-11 is a heavy bike and seems to suffer from ill-advised factory springing, if you subscribe to the 15%/30% static/laden sag theory. Also, try setting compression damping to "near zero" and rebound damping at "factory soft". Add rebound damping "to taste" as you ride. You'll need little compression damping off the track if the springing is right, and adding it only contributes to a feeling of harshness. I'd add......... Set the steering head bearing preload to 10-15 lb on good, well lubed bearings. You'll likely find the steering damper less necessary.

Is there a "better" speedo-cable lube? It's time for the mid-summer maintenance!!

Exactly the same observation I have when shifting from my Diablo equip'd 900RR to my "now Diablo Strada" equip'd V-11 Sport. Love 'em both!! Funny thing, now that Metzler and Pirelli are owned by one company.....

It did eventually show up. It took USPS and Canada Customs 3 months to get it to me, though!! I left it in the box when it arrived and hadn't mounted it when the pic was taken. It does live on the bike now, however! Thanks!! I love it!

My Honda VFR manual suggested that 20 lb ft to the steering-head-stem nut will provide the desired 4 lb ft of resistance to turning the headset. I found this correct on the VFR, although you don't even want to see the riggin' I used to check this out! I'm not sure whether to go for the 20 lb ft torque setting or the 4 lb turning resistance. I suspect that it's the 4 lb ft resistance that is the actual bearing preload parameter. And I suspect that the Honda steering-head-stem's thread pitch is much different than the Guzzi's.

LOL.... that pic was taken after a freak spring snow fall, about a month ago. We've actually not had snow since early April, although it took them all of April to get the sand and gravel swept up.....

Finally have all the bits, and the PC III dialed in. I'll throw a couple of pics of the 3-piece Givi luggage set up, once they're mounted.

LET'S AMMEND THAT TORQUE VALUE FOR THE STEERING HEAD BEARINGS. Honda's recommended setting for their tapered-roller type steering head stem nut is 15 lb. 20 lb. might make things a tad sluggish.

Are the head bearing ball-type or tapered rollers? Ball type are set to 0 (zero) preload. (and zero play) Tapered-roller type require preload. (20 lbs should be close)