Ryland3210

I never defined "quite some time", but I'm thinking seconds here. That's all it takes even at idle speed for oil pressure to build, unless something is wrong. What percentage of filters that are changed do you imagine are prefilled? I venture to say hardly any dealers, and none of the quick oil change outfits do. There is no question the vast majority of filters are installed dry repeatedly throughout the life of the engine. By what percentage of engine life do you think this widespread practice is reduced?

It's a windage tray to prevent oil pump starvation on fast acceleration. For details, look at the Sloppage Sheet Prototype thread.

At 75 psi, the force on the filter's projected area is about 350 pounds. The rubber would have to be pretty stiff to do any good. A stronger material might help, but I'm not sure the cover could stand the strain without deforming anyway. I not sure all filters are designed the same, but on the Purolator I'm thinking of using, the gasket is 0.250" thick and protrudes above the rim of the steel housing by 0.067". The thread is 3/4-16, so each turn tightens the filter by 0.0625" If it is tightened by just over one turn after contact, the gasket will be compressed such that the rim of the housing contacts the block, and there is no gap for the gasket to extrude out of. That's probably why the filter makers specify generally 3/4 to 1-1/4 turns. As the filter is tightened, the torque will suddenly increase as the rim contacts the block, which is exactly what happens in my experience. I feel much more secure using this method instead of the torque method. If the torque method is used, and too much of the outside of the gasket is unsupported by the steel housing, oil might bypass the gasket under pressure, eliminating at least some of the benefit of the filter, and reducing oil delivery to the engine. It could well be (and this is a theory), that once this happens, the friction between gasket and block preventing the filter from unscrewing is replaced by a oil film with zero friction. This could account for filters coming loose.

Of course the bearings, etc., will still have oil in them, so the engine would have to run without oil quite some time before the bearings run dry. However, your belts and suspenders approach can only help. Your adding about the same as I am, about 3.5 liters, or 3 quarts 11 ounces. Where does the oil come up to on your dipstick?

I've taken the time to make careful measurements, and here is what I found on my '04 Cafe Sport: Dipstick calibration results: With a filter change, thorough draining of the sump, then adding 3.5 liters per the manual and running the engine long enough to fill the filter, the oil level reached 2.09" from the end of the dipstick. That's 0.69 higher than its full mark, but still 0.33 lower than the gasket along the dipstick, or 0.23" viertically. This suggests that the dipstick calibration as supplied with the machine is incorrect. In another post, I recall it said the correct method is to measure with the dipstick not threaded in, opposite to the manual's instructions. That's about 0.5 inches higher, but still significantly lower than the 0.69 I measured. However, it's difficult to ensure the dipstick is parallel with the thread to get the right reading. I prefer the screwed in method, and plan to put two new marks on the dipstick: One for when the bike is perpendicular, and another when it is on the sidestand. With a difference of 0.69 from the dipstick full mark to the measured oil level, I have to assume a flashing oil warning light could well indicate oil starvation under acceleration, especially if the oil level is near the lower mark, and since the pickup is towards the front of the motor. Unless someone comes up with a theory to discount this, I plan to proceed on the assumption the 3.5 liter specification is correct.

Dipstick calibration results: With a filter change, thorough draining of the sump, then adding 3.5 liters per the manual and running the engine long enough to fill the filter, the oil level reached 2.09" from the end of the dipstick. That's 0.69 higher than its full mark, but still 0.33 lower than the gasket along the dipstick, or 0.23" viertically. This suggests that the dipstick calibration as supplied with the machine is incorrect. In another post, I recall it said the correct method is to measure with the dipstick not threaded in, opposite to the manual's instructions. That's about 0.5 inches higher, but still significantly lower than the 0.69 I measured. However, it's difficult to ensure the dipstick is parallel with the thread to get the right reading. I prefer the screwed in method, and plan to put two new marks on the dipstick: One for when the bike is perpendicular, and another when it is on the sidestand.

FWIW, Yamaha recommends using a standard mineral oil without friction modifiers in my wet clutch Venture. According to Venture forum members, there have been clutch problems with friction modified "energy saving" oils. Below is an excerpt from a rather long file I have on the subject. If anyone is interested, I can email the entire file.: Expert Comments by Mike Guillory: Last update: 06:08 PM Sunday, September 26, 2004: " Addendum In the past several years, various reports went around regarding independent studies that showed "automotive" oils that are not energy-conserving (EC) work just as well as motorcycle-specific oil and in many cases better. In former revisions to this article I listed the oils I found locally (Houston, Tx) that were 10w40 and heavier and not energy-conserving. I've discontinued that as it adds little value. All one needs to do is look at the back of the oil container where the lower half of the identification circle will have the words "energy conserving" if it is. Don't use those in wet clutch motorcycle applications, as they may cause clutch slippage. If the lower half of that circle is blank, as all 10w40 and heavier oils should, that means it is NOT energy conserving and should be fine in wet clutch applications. Heavy-Duty Oils My favorite oils and the ones I most mostly recommend for motorcycle use, are the "heavy-duty" oils. They are commonly misunderstood, and often referred to as "diesel oils." They are NOT energy conserving, have higher zinc levels, as high as 0.16%, and by virtue of their multi-duty have a better engine protection package than an oil that is only rated "SL". These heavy-duty oils are rated SJ or SL, plus CH-4. They are currently closer in formulation to the motorcycle specific oils and to the "SG" oils that many motorcycle makers recommend. Following are some examples of these oils, generally 15w40 oils by industry convention. There may be several other 15w40 oils that I am not familiar with. 1. Castrol RX Super 15w40 2. Chevron Delo 400 15w40 3. Mobil Delvac 1300 Super 15w40 4. Pennzoil Long-Life 15w40 5. Quaker State 4X4 Synthetic Blend 15w40 6. Shell Rotella-T 15w40 (my personal favorite) 7. SuperTech 2000 (WalMart) 15w40 8. Valvoline All Fleet 15w40 9. Castrol Syntec Blend Truck and 4X4 15w40 Full Synthetics - for Maximum Protection For years Mobil One 15w50 has been a favorite of motorcyclists. In recent years it has gone from its original formulation to an improved SJ "TriSynthetic", and more recently as SL "SuperSyn." several of us have received conflicting information on this new "flavor" of Mobil One, but the consensus appears to be that the new SuperSyn has additional friction modifiers and may no longer be a good choice for motorcycles. However, I have heard from several VFR owners still using it with favorable results. Therefore, YMMV. Mobil naturally recommends their motorcycle Mobil One. "

I need your help, Greg. I'm frustrated by the fact that I cannot get warrantee service if it involves parts coming from Guzzi, and my dealer is not enthusiastic about doing the work out of fear of not getting reimbursed by Piaggio/Guzzi, so I'm left with DIY stuff, if I want anything done. I've got days invested in trial and error speedo cable replacements, the reserve light stopped working with the second tankful, and my tank is under major vacuum after riding for a while. I need some more details on where the tipover valve is, etc., so I can route it as you suggest. Or will it be obvious if I take the tank off. In your picture, I cannot see clearly what you describe, and what is the open ended hose at the bottom? Thanks in advance.

Ouch! It must have hurt to lose an old friend like that engine. My complements, Greg, on a beautiful piece of machining artistry.

I'm surprised at your comment on Purolater. They have a good long term reputation for reliability and knowing what they are doing. The part number given by Purolator was specified by them specifically for Moto Guzzi. I have used their filters for decades with no problem. On some of my high performance muscle cars, I used to put spacers behind the oil pump relief piston spring to jack up the pressure to 90 psi, with no problem with any of the approximately 20 filters I put in over the years. In the 60's and 70's, I ran straight 40 weight year round and the engine thermostat at 160 degrees, so the pressure was always right up there. No, I don't own stock in Purolator or any other filter company. A concern I still have, is that if one tightens up the filter as usual, is that if the gasket is not compressed enough, it may not be able to withstand the 75 psi you speak of. I still prefer the number of turns approach as a more consistent approach. 10 N-m is only 7.4 foot pounds. That's pretty loose, in my book. I'm not surprised to hear of filters coming loose at that level. When I removed the filter that came with the bike, I was surprised that it came loose at 1/4 turn!

I found a useful tool for removing the oil filter access cover with a 1-1/16 socket at Home Depot in the plumbing section at $2.59 U.S. It the Watts 5/8" Short Forged Flare Nut. I used a piece of masking tape inside the socket to prevent the nut from falling all the way in. The tape is put in like a saddle to set the amount the nut protrudes to just what it needed to engage the filter access cover. Because of the limited engagement in the cover (any any other job where this is an issue), I used a 2 foot length of plastic plumbing pipe as a ratchet arm extension to reduce the tendency to twist out of the cover. I also found a Purolater replacement filter on their website, specifically for replacing the UFI 2328700: ML 16819. The UFI version specifies 10-12 N-m torque for installing the filter. I'm used to the U.S. filter suppliers specifying how many turns past gasket contact. My view is that the latter is a more accurate way of setting the amount of compression on the gasket. Any comments?

You might consider the Dow Corning Molykote M additive. Prices are given on their website. Dow recommends 5-10% by volume. My Cafe Sport manual's ratio is 5.5%. A quart of the M will result in about 18 quarts of gear oil when mixed. That will last me a very long time. I mix it up as needed. Keep in mind that M is mineral oil based. I use Valvoline gear oil, so I have not looked into Dow's products to see if they make a synthetic oil based product, nor can do I know whether or not M would be compatible with synthetic oils. The next time I change my trans oil, I'll use the M additive. I was interested to find one of the websites recommending their "proprietary" moly additive for engine oil. In my mind, the only important factor (aside from obviously purity of the compound) is particle size. It should be small enough to pass through filters and tight clearanced mating moving parts, but large enough to do its job. In another of the websites a range of size in the under 1 micron range is offered. One could call Dow's technical people to find out, if curious.

Very interesting. Here is the link for the Dow Corning M gear oil additive I use: www.dowcorning.com/applications/search/default.aspx?R=28EN

OK, I can buy that. Having molybdenum as one element in a synthetic "designer" organic compound can account for the color. That's clearly different from the inorganic MoS2 compound. Thanks much for the thorough report.

That would be enough to drop Redline's credibility to near zero, unless they have invented cold fusion, or are making the element with their in-house particle accelerator and then "burning" it with Sulphur in an otherwise inert atmosphere.

None of the above. My reference point was the machined surface of the sump casting which forms the mating surface for the access cover under the oil filter. It's the cover which requires a 1-1/16 inch hex to unscrew to get to the disposable oil filter. The gasket I spoke of is not the one directly on top of the sump casting I refer to, but the gasket surface above that on the block. I'm assuming the upper gasket is the one where your stoppage sheet is intended to go, and that's the basis for my understanding for the ideal oil level: just under it. Please correct me if I'm wrong. With the dipstick screwed in, 3 quarts already reaches 3/8 above the high mark.

The Moly Di Sulphide additive I obtained from Dow was a suspension of dark gray particle in gear oil. I do not believe that compound comes in pink. It looks like graphite.

Well, I have my 10 W 30 oil for break in, and decided to measure the dipstick relationship to the oil level versus gasket. I drained sump and filter completely and took some measurements. I'm sure this has been done before, but I was surprised by my measurements because they indicated a much higher level than just the full mark with the dipstick not threaded in. From the sump filter cover mounting surface to block gasket: 3.02" From the sump filter cover mounting surface to bottom extreme of dipstick while screwed in: 1.13 The dipstick is at a 45 degree angle. My calculations indicate that the oil would be 2.54" from the end of the dipstick when it is at the level of the gasket. That's 1.14 inches higher than the stock full mark! I put in 3 quarts of oil, and ran the engine to fill the filter, then check the oil level with the dipstick screwed in: it came to 0.4 inches above the full mark! My manual calls for 3.5 liters, and 3 quarts is only 2.84 liters. Perhaps Guzzi includes oil in the cooler, etc., so the 3.5 liters is for a totaly engine. I'm AMAZED by the BIG descrepanies between dipstick mark vs. manual vs. more oil required to reach the gasket level. What's the deal here? Shall I just put in 3.5 liters and use its mark on the dipstick? Or use my calculated mark to raise it to the block gasket? HELP!

I can't help you on Motul product. However, my Cafe Sport manual specifies a mixture of a Moly additive and conventional Agip petroleum based gear oil. I tried in vain to locate the Agip additive, so I researched the various Moly additives and got a sample from Dow. It's an industrial product sold in bulk, and relatively expensive. I used that in the ratio called for by Guzzi, which coincided with the range recommended by Dow. It is used primarily in hypoid gears where there are high degrees of shear. I have considered using it in the gearbox as well, but do not recommend it for the engine, only because I do not have enough information on using it there. If you are interested, I can look up the Dow spec when I get home later this week.

Yes, that is the link I referred to. I'm a believer in magnetic plugs, having used them since I learned about them in the 60's. The '98 Z28 I purchased came new with one. I changed the oil at 50 miles, and there was a beard of particles on the magnet. Changed oil again at 500, and found about 1/4 as much, so I changed it again at 1,000-almost nothing. At every 3,000 mile oil change thereafter, only a fine coating of extremely fine particles that wiped off like graphite. Given the agressive break in recommended by the link, I imagine at 20 miles and again at 100, 500, etc., I would expect to find plenty, although the nickel silicate alloy mentioned may not be magnetic. That still leaves the possibility of capturing particles from the rings and other ferrous parts. Of course, if one sees particles accumulating at an accelerated rate later in the motor's life, that's an indication of something seriously wearing out.

Thanks much. That's an elegant solution. Do you know if the Cafe Sport's drain plug is magnetic? If not, can you tell me what its thread diameter and pitch is? To find the ideal sump full point, as I understand it is just below the block/sump gasket, I'm thinking of temporarily disconnecting the condenser return hose while filling. I might even attach a clear plastic extension on it so I can see exactly where the level is as I fill it up. Then I'll know exactly how much oil to put in each change thereafter. I really enjoyed the break in link. I noticed the implication that the rings were softer than the cylinder walls. In my technical field, high velocity hydraulic cylinder piston rings are cast iron, a good deal softer than the tool steel cylinder barrels. Surface finish is deliberately less than mirror smooth in order to prevent oil from being totally wiped off by the rings, to avoid metal to metal contact. This is not to seat the rings, but to extend long term life. The seal is virtually gas tight from the beginning. I have seen that oil control rings are often chrome plated and blocks are generally cast iron on engines. I'm not sure about the composition of the compression rings, but I am left wondering about whether the rings are actually worn to fit by the cross hatch pattern on the cast iron cylinder walls as the link claims. Any comment? Ah, yes, but the devil is in the details. I'm sorry to say I have found myself re-inventing the wheel more than once. I hope I'm not boring too many. I'm addicted to seeking knowledge and perfection. That's where the fun is for me.

I agree. I like the idea of avoiding the thermal expansion issue and the gold anodize. Another one is buckling. It's hard to imagine with 2mm stainless steel, but if the screws on the periphery were really tight and the sheet thin enough, it could buckle. A 0.004" change over, say, a 10 inch wide sheet, would result in about a 0.14" "bubble" in the middle of the sheet if unsupported except for the periphery. According to my calculations, assuming a 0.004" expansion over a ten inch length, if it didn't buckle, stainless would develop about 12,000 psi in compression stress if physically constrained by the aluminum block fastening screws. This translates into a force of 960 pounds for each inch along the edge of a 2mm sheet. What is more likely, is that the aluminum casting will take most of the deformation. That leaves the question of whether that would cause enough stress to cause a fracture. Therefore, in my opinion, if stainless is used, the expansion issue argues for avoiding gasket sealing compounds which can develop shear strength, and mounting hole diameters should provide clearance for the screws. During installation, I would want to make sure the sheet has adequate screw clearance, and use grease on the gaskets. I'm new to Moto Guzzi's so please excuse my ignorance. Can you tell me what the hose port on the rear of the sump is for? It appears to be connected to a frame member over the engine on my '04 Cafe Sport. Thanks, John

I have been replacing the internal cable with universal types from NAPA for $7, at the suggestion of the local MG dealer, who can't get parts here in the U.S. So far, I have learned that: 1. The original cable came with a brass bushing which had an O.D. within +/- 0.001" of the I.D. of the housing. Unnecessarily tight. This could have caused it to fail after just under 500 miles. 2. The universal cable's crimp on ferrule had to have its largest diameter ground down to under 0.220" to clear the inside of the cable housing. 3. The original washer inside the cable housing should be used to keep it from slipping down. 4. The original internal cable was about 3/8" too long, causing it to jam inside the housing. 5. Liquid graphite lubricant helps. Grease is too viscous and caused too much drag. So far, I have only 100 miles on this, so it's too early to tell if I have fixed the problem. The tight radius bends combined with thin tubing used at both ends still are too tight for my taste, but time will tell. Motomecca Spares seems to know something about the high failure rate of these cables, and thinks MG finally acknowledge the problem and has come out with a better replacement. Below is their link, and my most recent message from them. Good Luck. "I have just heard back from our supplier and he says that the 1 at the end of 01760481 indicates an update from 01760480. So in theory we should get the updated part if we order under that number. Best regards, Kerry" -- Motomecca Spares - UK Moto Guzzi & Brembo Specialist _________________________________________________ Internet: www.motomeccaspares.com

Hi Pete, Not sure you received my earlier email message. Please include one for me, and advise shipping cost and method of payment, to Tymac Controls Corp., 127 Main Street, Franklin, New Jersey 07416. You can email me the info. at johnm@tymac.com Of course, if you are traveling to my area, perhaps on your way to beautiful British Columbia, I would be happy to meet you over here. I'm fairly close to the New York airports, and would be glad to meet you there as well. Thanks and regards, John

I'm interested in one as well, Pete. Any idea what the shipping cost would be to Franklin, New Jersey, USA? John