Pierre

Antonio, not sure I am understanding what you are telling / asking me. Here's what I did. I ended up working with Mike Rich to achieve a complete combustion chamber package. He installed new valves the same time he flowed the heads. He knew exactly what cam I was using (he sells same cam). So ... he did the entire combustion chamber as a package - all designed to work with his pistions and my particular cam. As I indicatd, it is a fairly radical grind so he had to recess the valves to gain piston / valve clearance. He did a straight "flow equals x HP" calculation prior to beginning the work, and then gave me the actual flow numbers when he was done. He was pretty close (both on predicted flow and predicted HP), and actually I can probably get to exactly his predicted HP with a little more ignition curve and fuel map tweaking. I have to believe there are European sources for this kind of thing as well. Doesn't Dynotec over there offer turn-key packages? It's really nice to let a pro who's done it before duplicate prior efforts with predictable results. I have to believe if you told Dynotec your target numbers, they'd put together a full package (head work, cam, valves etc.) for you. I have various ignition maps laid out on a spread sheet as no one I could find had a a modified map for the sport i, but they are "best guess" interpretations of existing stock and after market ignition curves. Happy to share that information with you, though I think Dynotec has their own chip which probably includes a modified map. Not sure abourt that.

... or, (and you know this debate is raging even within the GP riders circle) there's been a great leveling. Where formerly riders who couldn't carry Rossi's jock strap now look down on him from the podium. It all depends on who you talk to. I do know Stoner was "crash" Stoner before TC ... and a non-factor. I also know F1 has banned it. I really have mixed feelings about TC in racing. It's kinda' like a "restrictor plate" for the rider. Normally I'm all in with all the technology that can be brought to bear in GP racing. TC however gives me pause.

Antonio, last Monday i put my sport i on the dyno to get it mapped. First ran three chips (ignition curves) back to back just to get best power curve. Best pull was 98 RWHP - just a little under Mike Rich's calculations. I ran into fueling issues while mapping. Probably plugged fuel filter - but want to look at injectors again also. Bike did sit idle for over a year. It's getting the fueling issues sorted now, and will be back on dyno for final mapping early next month. I'll update my hot rod 101 article on guzzitech when it's fully mapped and final results (with dyno chart) are ready. But yes, close to 100 RWHP is attainable with flowed heads, pistons and stock bore. It cost me a lot of money to get there, but a big chunk of that was due to mistake after mistake I made. If you wait a month, you can read my updated article and then build your own for a pretty reasonable amount. Profit from my trial and error.

Does Guintoli qualify as a rookie this year? Partial season last year ... so maybe he still qualifies?

Lucky devils! Nothing over here. Not even iive timing on the Moto GP web site. Gonna' go for a ride. You guys enjoy!

So true. Use mirror. Repeat. Yea ... and Santa Claus is coming for x-mas. It's NEVER bye with you. More's the pity. Seems the less you know about a topic, the louder and "more often" you get. Give it a rest. Let people who know what they're talking about discuss matters for awhile. I'm here to learn ... not to listen to you bellow your inanities.

David, don't panic. I'm pretty sure Todd has plenty of spots left. Remember a lot of us (and Todd, I expect) got on the CA parks site early and nailed down large blocks. I assume Todd will parcel those out as people sign up. The "too late to bring anything but a bike" comment I expect has to do with his advisal some time back that if you wanted to bring a motor home, you'd need to reserve a space for that directly with the park. I think that's what's going on. So, have you signed up yet? Gonna' do the track day?

Ouiji, I take your point. However, I feel compelled to observe that I came to Guzzi's from Harley big twins. When I was making that transition it seemed to me Guzzis were revy things compared to the just off idle full torque of a Harley. So when you mention you don't like having to spin it beyond 4K all the time, may I remind you that there's a whole world of pretty aggressive riders out there mounted on bikes who also can "remember" they don't care to ride around much above 2K all the time. I am reminded of an old comedic shtick. In short, I hate to see us get into the "if he's going faster than me he's an idiot, and if he's going slower than me he's a moron" mentality.

A jeez - I don't know if I'd have the balls (pun intended) to straddle something spinning that hard and fast. Do they have a frag plate in there? Fun stuff. Thanks for the link. I confess that for those of us trying to crack 90 HP it's a reality check to be reminded of what modern motors are capable of. Won't stop us, of course. I suppose we pursue Guzzi HP just as relentlessly as the Hyabusa guys. It may be a smaller cup we're filling (hey, NO PUN INTENDED), but by god we'll give it full measure!

I'm in for two sets. As to a business case, I assume if the numbers are sufficient there's a buisness case. If they aren't, there isn't. Thanks for taking this on. Hope the numbers are sufficient to warrant the effort. I trust that those who aren't interested in your improvements will simply sit on their keyboards and let you ping the market free from the previous endless arrogant drivel some felt compelled to spew forth the last time this topic was broached. It's off to a rocky start. Guess we'll find out if Jaap's message has a shelf life.

From the man himself: http://www.guzzitech.com/JTsRosso-PtII-John_T.html

I trust she was suitably disciplined.Nice looking pipes - except for that ding. You need a night out with the boyz to recover.

Do you need any help? I'm available cheap - cost of the flight and a cheap room and I'm all in! I can hold yer' gear bag - lenses - whatever. Don't hesitate to ask.

Whoa! Stoner a full second faster than the next best. He's flying! Yee haw!

... or tractors, of course.

Yes, well said.

It's amazing how many threads are going right now dealing with the same issues. Pistons, cams, head milling, timing. They all inter-relate so I guess it's not surprising. 1. I think the MR pistons may help reduce ping by extending the squish band up into the chamber a little further. Those who have examined the stock, the FBF and the MR pistons have opined that Mike's have a flatter top but carry the squish band up into the dome a little. Still, I wouldn't start with pistons to address ping; 2. Squish IS a significant compnent of getting a proper burn, and reducing tendency to ping. Optimum squish (according to the literature) is .030" and the thickness of a crushed V-11 (torqued) head gasket is .032" I believe ... so if you mill the heads until the piston kisses the head w/o a head gasket (should be tested by hand cranking, of course ) you get pretty close to perfect. For some reason I recall reading that milling the head as opposed to the barrels yields better results - but not sure on that. Mike Rich of course knows and I'm sure would be happy to tell you all about it. When I'm trying to figure out what actually works in the real world I generally go to the literature available for Harley twins. More hop up work on air cololed twins has been done there than anywhere else - and it's been refined over decades. OTOH, Harley addressed a lot of issues issues by going to a different shape (bathtub) for the combusion chamber, so it's not an automatic crossover anymore in terms of what works. The second best place is to read what V-8 push rod race motor builders are doing. An old fashioned Dodge Hemi race moter holds a lot of secrets to how to make power, but of course water cooliing, better gas and the move to shallower combusion chmbers has rendered much of that obsolete ... except of cours on our Guzzis - a design firmly planted in that same era. Here's a squish calculator: http://www.rbracing-rsr.com/squishcalc1.html And here's an article discussing squish: http://www.nrhsperformance.com/tech_squish.shtml The reason a big bore kit can be so effective IMHO is that it does 3 things - more displacement, higher CR, and extends the squish laterally the width of the increased bore. Mike's pistons extend squish in the other direction - pushing it up into the dome, or so those who have studied them tell me. Never asked him directly. Doing it that way (if in fact that's what he's done) also changes the angle of the squish - but if I was over my head before, that concept takes me into wilderness I'm not sure I can see my way through. Again, I'm sure Mike could tell you all about it. Hell of a resource and very generous with his advice. Fun stuff. Sounds like a proper winter project for a denizen of the northeast facing 2 more mothhs of winter.

I think that kind of generalization over simplifies and ultimately misleads. Sure, there are issues created when valves are sunk, but they can be dealt with. I like to go to the Harley engine builders to read about what works - no air cooled mills are more heavily or more often modified than harley motors. Anyway, I got 92 RWHP out of my sport i using the RR3 and some modest "unshrouding" of the valve pockets. Milled head, sunk valves, unshrouded pockets and voila - real HP. There is no question motor work has to be organic - gotta' be approached that way. There are no "drop in" solutions - though a hotter cam comes closest. But the hotter the cam, the more "other" work needs to be done. High lift extended duration cam, sink the valves to gain valve to valve clearance, unshroud to preserve flow, mill to recapture lost CR - it's all good. 92 RWHP good. Adjusting valve to valve clearance is generally done by sinking the valve in the head, which is done by cutting the seat farther down. Sinking the valves hurts low lift flow, though, because it shrouds the valves. When we have to do it, we always "unshroud" the valve with a special cutter that removes chamber material around it so that flow is restored. The sinking and unshrouding of the valve then makes the chamber bigger, which in turn lowers compression unless the head is also milled. And milling the head introduces it's own set of issues, you really never want to mill a head any more than necessary. So sinking the valves excessively causes a chain of undesirable events; we often refer to it as "molesting the heads to make them work". Done in moderation, say up to about .050", sinking valves is manageable. Beyond that, it starts causing more issues than it solves and you're better off to seek a solution through a smaller exhaust valve, for example. http://www.nrhsperformance.com/tech_xlcaminstall.shtml

Mike sells the x8 cam as well. I got one from megacycle. It's the old Norris RR3 - then it became the megacycle 620 x 8. Requires sinking the valves. No idle problems. Excellent drive-ability and power. PCIII got it all working for me. Here's the specs on those megacycle cams. http://www.guzzitech.com/Files/megacams.pdf Don't know if they still make 'em - but as Greg said Mike Rich caries a few of 'em.

Antonio, didn't mean to imply you were new to this or unsophisticated. Nor was I trying to suggest I knew all the answers. I am NOT the hackster! I was just trying to suggest that there are those who make a living making motors make more power, and their gudance is invaluable. the points I made were an attempt to lay out the issues I (IMHO) felt should be addressed before embarking on motor work. So ... at the risk of further pissing you off ( ) ... how about this? ... if you are considering flowing and dual plugging the heads anyway, why not deck them at the same time? That'll get you your CR increase, and get you better squish as well. I don't think pistons wear out, and I've never heard of any quality issues with the guzzi stock pistons. If you want an ignition map for just such an approach, I've got it on a spread sheet. Same grid as on the ecu program you use to flash the chip. Happy to send it along. Many ways to skin this cat, Antonia. Just not clear where you want to go with the motor. If it's piston life, I don't think that's an issue. Stock is fine. Life of the motor stuff. I got 92 RWHP with cam, dual plugged and decked (and cleaned up, not flowed) heads and stock pistons. But I'm running a very radical cam (RR3). Take a look at this article: http://www.guzzitech.com/Sporti-EngMods_PierreP.html and this article: http://www.guzzitech.com/JTsRosso-PtII-John_T.html Two slightly different appproaches, but each focused on cam and head work. Now a lot of the (really expensive) mods described in both those articles have nothing to do with making power. Carillo rods, lightened clutch, (even new pistons) etc may change the way the motor feels a little, but they're mods on the margin. Power comes from cams and head work. Period. Again, JMHO. And believe me, I wouldn't have engaged in this discussion with you if I didn't recognize you've been down many of these roads already. Just sharing the adventure, and the pain. Good luck with it my friend.

Antonio, here's a few suggestions. All JMHO - but with a pretty extensive sport i hop up under my belt to draw upon. When you call Mike, have a goal in mind. What are you trying to accomplish? I'm afraid dropping new slugs in won't yield much in and of itself. Maybe bump the mid range a little, but possibly at the price of some pinging. So you should start with "what do I want from this motor" and that will dictate what you need to "do" to the motor. If you're chasing HP (and who isn't?) - a new cam is the cheapest and quickest way there. You can hit mid to high 80 RWHP with pretty much just a new cam. Mike can tell you what grind gets you what HP - and more importantly he can tell you what else you need to do to the motor to fully exploit the new cam ... but cams are the easiest most straight forward bang for the buck (euro). Next is head work. Flowed heads will help you get the most out of the new cam. Only after new cam and flowed heads (or at same time) would I consider pistons. New slugs will help you fill in the mid range and help offset any loss of power there since a new (more aggressive) cam will have moved it up the rpm range a little, or a lot. But NOW now you will have to deal with ignition timing issues. Depending on the cam selected (remember, a more aggressive overlap lowers the effective CR) I wouldn't go high compression without retarding the timing. I wouldn't retard the timing without dual plugging the head. So new slugs immediately puts you into the realm of multiple issues - much more so than a new cam and some head work. It's all doable ... but what do you want to get done? If you just want new pistons, well - ya' can't see 'em once they're installed and just dropping them in without other modifications, I doubt you'll feel 'em much either. Have a goal. Let Mike (or another experienced engine builder) explain how to achieve your goal. Wherever you want to get to, he's already been there. He knows how to do it. Someone (many someones) before you spent a lot of money adding to his data base. Take advantage of that. Hopping up your ride is great fun - but it's a lot more fun, and a lot less expensive BTW, if you know what you want before you start. Enjoy.

Anthony, I don't know about "quality" from a materials stand point, but I do recall a thread in which the piston shapes were analyzed and several here noted a superior squish band with the MR pistons. As I recall those here in the know opined that It looked like the MR's had a less pronounced dome (for more direct flame travel), but a more extensive squish band extending further up the head wall for better turbulence and faster flame propagation. I think that's how a motor can tolerate higher compression, by adding squish and shortening flame path. If you then twin plug the head you can further shorten the flame path, allowing you to retard the timing (reduced ping) while still getting full burn. As to FBF credentials vs those of Mike Rich - well I don't know FBF as a Guzzi specialist. I do know Mike has been building racing guzzis for at least 20 years - Charley Cole's very successful efforts and of course the land speed record setting guzzi (a sport i) sponsored some years back by MGNOC in the US are just two of many.

Fair enough.

Wow, Hopkins has just paid a huge dividend for Kawasaki. Check this out: http://www.motogp.com/en/motogp/motogp_new...p;news_id=21918 Monster drink - Hopkins personal sponsor last year, is stepping up to be the premier sponsor for Kawasaki Moto GP effort. Hopper had a nice round of testing at Se[pang as well - 5th fastest on day 3. Nice to see N icky at the top of the time sheet. Another good year coming up.

With that revision / explanaiton, I pretty much agree with Kevin on this. However, there is one modification that in my experience substantially increases mid range without harming (though not helping much either) top end, and that is to increase the CR. Of course, then you do have to deal with timing and so forth. It's a mixed bag of trade offs. Cam, then head work, yield the biggest gains in peak HP IMHO, while adjusting a/f ratio and timing are secondary but absolutely necessary to accommodate cam and head work.