Ryland3210

Thanks, kevdog, In designing the forward foot position controls, I did not have access to a Centauro, and a bought a set of Centauro controls as a starting point. Mainly I wanted to be sure not to make my peg location any farther down than them, but definitely much farther forward. What I found was that by moving the foot forward, the toe point more forward than down as on the original pegs, so ground clearance from toe to pavement was the same. Therefore, I'm not that familiar with the Centauro layout regarding the pressure gauge mounting options. I have a recent copy of Guzziology, so I'll check that and reply. Can you supply the website for COG? John

Hi docc, 1) I have a set left from the last batch. Price is $450 for the complete set plus $10 for shipping, including stainless hardware, left hand threaded ball rod end, connecting rod and LH threaded nut to replace the original rod, which was right hand threaded on both ends. The advantage is the ability to fine tune the shift lever position without having to disconnect the connecting rod from the shift lever (this makes it much easier to set up, or change if you wish). Easy to follow instructions are included, and they are accurate (this may sound obvious, but we all have been frustrated from time to time with inscrutable or inaccurate instructions). No special tools are required, and it's complete bolt-on kit. See the personal message I sent you for address and other details. 2) The distance from peg to pedal is exactly the same as the original, as is the ratio of the shift and brake levers. The original adjustment features are also retained. The brake cylinder orientation is also the same. The original mounting location is retained. PS, I can have these hard anodized in gold, red, blue, or black at additional cost. You can check it out and the pressure gauge kit I came up with on my new website: www.motratech.com best regards, John

I haven't any advice to give on the ignition switch. Hopefully one of the handy wrench guys will spot this and help out. If not, send a personal message to Pete Roper. He's done it all. Cheers, John

Thanks much for the details. I suppose the wire must have been multi-strand copper-can you estimate the wire gauge and how many strands? The more strands of thinner gauge, the better fatigue life. I'm in the same situation, with garage maneuvering. Cheers, John

OK, but it's not a matter of maximizing the appearance of the results, just me being my usual inquisitive nerdy self. This is the kind of thing that happens to us northerners with too much time on our hands, and not enough good riding weather. I was curious about what the performance was compared to others on an apples to apples basis. For example, it could be that even though the altitude was high, which would normally reduce power, barometric pressure might have been high enough that day that it was actually as if the bike was below sea level. Similarly, higher than standard temperature would have reduced HP. Humidity also affects HP. Applying the correction factors would make the chart more informative on a scientific basis.

I know it's not much, but I'm looking for an Airbox Cover.

The reason I asked about the correction factor was to normalize it to other dyno charts. When it's done right, the actual horsepower developed is corrected for the local barometric pressure, temperature and humidity, all of which affect horsepower developed. That's separate from the correction made by the Guzzi ECU. For example, on my dyno run the actual horsepower was reduced by 1%. Without knowing the local conditions on your run, we don't know what the HP would be under standard conditions. It could be more or less than what the dyno chart indicates. Also smoothing the curves can be done to filter out peaks and valleys which are often artifacts of the dyno's electronic signal conditioning. Sounds like a great running bike. If I make it to the SoCal Rally, I'll be looking for you to take you up on that invitation!

Think in terms of absolute pressure: as the throttle is opened, it increases on the intake side of the butterfly, but decreases on the airbox side, so they are the inverse of each other. The variation in pressure on the intake side is also far greater than the airbox side. Assuming the post I referred to is correct, then since the increase in absolute pressure is supposed to make the mixture richer, connecting that to the airbox would make the mixture leaner as the filter becomes contaminated. That's OK, I suppose, although if the regulator is designed to be sensitive to the much larger variation on the intake side, connecting it to the airbox would probably have a negligible effect.

Hi Jim, I'm not sure I understand. Where do you think the intermittent was, at the cable tie, or somewhere else? I'd like to see if I can do something to prevent this on my bike. Thanks, John

That may be true for Guzzi's, but timing curve modification of mechanical advances is certainly possible. Changing springs, filing the slots and so on are ways of controlling maximum advance, the RPM at which advance begins, and even two different slopes of the degrees versus RPM within the curve. Then there is the vacuum advance, with similar curve modification possibilities. Lots of flexibility there. Speaking of vacuum, I understand that the fuel pressure regulator is referenced to atmosphere, and at one time the intention was to connect that to the vacuum port on the throttle body. The purpose was to increase fuel pressure when the throttle was opened wide to accelerate, and consequently temporarily add more fuel until the RPM caught up, and vacuum increased again, similar to an accelerator pump. I recall reading one post offering the opinion that it's better not to connect it because the resulting exercising of the regulator every time the throttle was moved would result in earlier failure of the regulator. To review, one of the reasons accelerator pumps are used is that with sudden throttle opening, some fuel can condense as a result of the sudden increase in absolute pressure in the intake passage. The pump makes up for the temporary lean condition. My bike seems to have no such hesitation, so I imagine the mapping must be deliberately over rich to compensate. It seems to me that if I simply connect it to the vacuum port, it will lean out the cruise mixture, while leaving the WOT mixture where it is. Viola! Longer range, same full throttle mixture. I'd have to be alert for pinging, and change timing if ncecessary.

Since mapping of the midrange and and top end are independent, I do not see any cause for a tradeoff between them or a need to choose. I suspect that by "tuning" Kevin is including inlet, outlet, valve opening, valve timing, as examples of variables which could create a such a trade off. Of course, Kevin will no doubt speak up on what he means.

It was a four cylinder crotch rocket of some form. Tricked out, stroked, bored, and a $5,000 exhaust system. Definitely not a Guzzi!

Why is the AFR so flat? All I can say is that shortly before the run, the valves, TPS, and synch were done carefully. The rest of the credit goes to factory mapping and whatever contribution the mod's may have made. Should I be concerned about heat? Not according to John T., under these tuning conditions. The cruise AFR never got above 14.5. I think I'm OK. I posted the chart as you suggested in the dyno gallery. I'm looking forward to Sunday's ride with my buddies in the Polar Bear Club. Weather looks good for the middle of winter. We've had a good rainfall to wash off the salt, and looks like it will be dry through Sunday night.

Looks great. Do you have any AFR plots to go with it? Was it corrected for temperature, barometric pressure and humidity?

John mentioned a bike he owned, but to be honest, he showed me so many dyno runs, I don't recall which was his. Based on his comments and selection of the SAE correction factor, which is more conservative than other options used by other dyno facilities, I believe it is pretty accurate. It deducted 1% from the actual output of 76.8 HP. The AFR graph is a little hard to read on the post, so here are some data points: The red dotted line is at 13:1. The peaks are 13.9 at 2600 RPM, 13.8 at 3900, 13.85 at 6300 RPM, 13.5 at peak power 7300 RPM My guidance to John was that I was interested in increased range (MPG), that more power is always welcome at WOT but I was quite happy with the bike's output as it was. Max HP was not the goal. The AFR was higher at throttle openings in the cruise range. Generally from 13.9 to 14.4, except during decels, when it jumped way up briefly. Given my objectives and the results, John honestly indicated that investing in a PCIII would not be worthwhile in my case. He could have easily taken advantage of me, as I'm a pushover for technology. Next time I feel compelled to tinker, or make some major change, I'll be back to him to make a purchase. While I was there, he installed a PCIII on another bike along with a shift lever sensor. The PCIII momentarily interrupts the spark as soon as it detects motion on the shift lever. The duration is programmable. While on the dyno, he showed the customer how incredibly fast the bike could be upshifted at WOT. Instantaneous (less than 65 milliseconds) upshift as fast as one hit the shift lever. It worked like the best drag bikes-way cool! Warnings were given to the customer to avoid doing this in lower gears. (this bike dyno'd at 173 HP at the wheel! It would probably do backflips power shifting up to 2nd or 3rd.

I just had my bike dynoed by John Tavolacci at Cliff's. The chart is below. The mapping is stock and the bike has about 5,000 miles on it. It has Staintune mufflers without the baffles, and standard filter with no airbox cover, clamp supplied courtesy of Ratchethack. Evidently the stock mapping was rich enough that the usual leaning effect by improving breathing resulted in near optimum AFR for my purposes. The compensation for the ambient conditions was per the SAE, so actual output was 1% higher than the chart indicates. I'm delighted to be so lucky, and love the sound and performance of the mod's. John did a great job of comparing my bike to several other Guzzi's he had done in the past with various options, and checking the AFR in all of the major operating conditions for me.

The $58 probe looks like a bargain, and ought to bolt on. The compression fittings normally are supplied loose, so they can be tightened at the desired penetration. Although the "fast response" is not spec'd, since it uses an open junction thermocouple, it should be suitable. The pitch of 27 tpi works out to a pitch of 0.94mm, close enough for this purpose. A dab of never sieze would be a good idea to get it back out. I hope you do it!

Is that the new you, Rathethack?! I'm glad to hear you have reformed.

If you go to the Nanmac website, they offer a thermocouple designed for gas temperature measurement with microsecond response time including 1/8 NPT fitting and electrical connector. Look up: PENCIL PROBE "ERODING" THERMOCOUPLE - E12 Series

Thanks for the tips, Kevin, and fantastic pictures.

Since you are looking for a relative but fast measurement, the location is fine where it is, in my opinion. I would be looking for an open thermocouple bead positioned in the middle of the exhaust stream. For what it's worth, the 1/8 NPT tapered thread is 27 to the inch, not too far from 1 mm pitch, and it's maximum diameter is about 0.400", so its tapered leading end might fit into the 10 mm bung. A brass compression fitting would probably make a tight enough seal for temporary use. Just don't get carried away and jam it in too far.

Without commenting on the metallurgical aspects, I would like to address what I know of high volume production operations. Quenching has the obvious advantage of reducing the time to bring the temperature down faster in preparation for the next operation, for example, machining of some form. That means less parts in the pipeline between casting and subsequent operations. Some machining operations are critical enough that part temperature can be a factor in controlling precision. Quenching has the advantage of rapidly bringing the part to the temperature of the quenching liquid, which can be accurately measured and maintained. It's not a costly process, either.

So do you see any problem with simply using Schnorr washers? I have had good luck with them, a lot quicker procedure and you don't have to deal with the friction all the way out when removing.

Hi Kevin, Elite Tours was at the NY MC show last weekend, touting their guided tours of the Moab region. KTM's provided, but pretty pricey. Do you have any comment on whether it make sense to book a tour with them, or are there bike rentals available?