dlaing

Perhaps you need to be more specific as my telepathy is hit or miss, but I'll try to cover everything: What SHOULD happen is that everyone should agree with me, and have a dream of a more powerful and reliable and durable Guzzi. What SHOULD happen is that Guzzi should build such a bike. What SHOULD happen is that Polebridge should go for the FBF or Mike Rich treatment! What DOES happen is that people get a mis-direction of where to head. Points that you guys have made like that you can over do it, or mis-prioritize your improvements are valid. Points that you guys have made that you can't get ten more HP out reliably are unfounded. What DOES happen is that Guzzi is building a less powerful bike with the Breva and Griso, and when people shop for Guzzis, they get turned off by the bike being slower than the BMWs, Ducati, Aprillia, Japanese twins and Buell....although the Breva and Griso are more powerful than the Californias, so that may encourage some faithful to UPGRADE. Yes it is upgrading the power for some Guzzi owners, and I think we see more enthusiasm for the new bikes from California owners. What DOES happen is that people who have upgraded with the FBF and Mike Rich treatments get big grins. at the expense of their wallets But come to think of it, JediOne says he got less power from higher compression pistons...I don't know his source for the pistons. And Al R. got less than spectacular dyno results, but with no baseline for comparison. And Ratchet's buddy would be happier with a stock engine, but with all the other popular mods(muffler, intake, and PCIII) And Pierre is still waiting for Mike Rich.... If Polebridge has any doubts, I will agree that the high compression piston option is the most dubious, but that the new valve, porting and ECU treatments, will actually make the bike more reliable and durable.

You do understand and agree that there is a difference between understanding and agreeing. I understand that there can be trade offs. I have outlined how I believe more power can be extracted while minimizing the impact to durability on one of the world's most durable motors. Weak links to our drive train are: cam chains that need replacement more frequently than desirable soft valve stems exploding clutches on some models and that is about it. Our engines have a very solid bottom end. The top end could burn cleaner, and from what Mike Rich indicated, his pistons are not only higher compression, but also improve squish and burn. The valves he puts in, improve reliability. The porting he does brings in more air and thus more power which does put more strain on the drive train, but IT IS A ROBUST DRIVE TRAIN. YES there are limits, and maybe dynotec's 108PS has exceeded what some of us consider acceptible, but the Mike Rich and FBF mods that we are discussing should result in pretty minimal decreases in durability, and in the case of the valves, durability should increase. Is there anyone reading this who does not understand and agree with this? FWIW, if you are worried about stress on the drive train, you should be more concerned about peak Torque, rather than peak HP. Save that OEM crossover!!!! And if you are worried about valve train wear, lower your rev limiter to 8000 RPM. The life you save may be your valve trains. I'd love to see someone offer a roller valve kit...perhaps that would minimize valve stem wear. Also the proper use of a PCIII or better, should actually improve engine life by lowering operating temperature and optimizing burn timing to eliminate harmful behavior like pinging. Is there anyone reading this who does not understand and agree with this? Perhaps we will reach a consensus.

...and many of us are happy at 0.15mm inlet and 0.20mm exhaust.

It is probably a good habit also because it never fails to surprise me when you go to start it after leaving it parked near a grade school, and some smart assed kid left it in fourth gear. The kid probably made two stroke motor sounds while shifting it, whiiiiinnnngggg, whiiiiinnnng, whinnnnngggg, whieinnnnnngggahgha. hhhmmmmm??? But I just had a thought. Inside the gear box, I believe there is a spring that drops the bike into neutral. The spring is in a more relaxed position when in neutral. Perhaps it may fatigue if left in gear for twenty years??????

You just prompted me to learn some new words from a gooogle search. (apparently not Jim's gig) and which could possibly be combined with other words.

With greater than 99% certainty, if the engine runs in gear, with the sidestand down, it is NOT working properly.

Good Grief, do I have to explain everything? Nogbad's logic is perfectly accurate, but we can determine from the evidence to go straight to the relay. IMHO the sidestand relay should really be called the neutral safety relay. It is triggered by the neutral switch and not the side stand switch. If the neutral light is working, than the switch is fine. That only leaves the relay as a possible culprit, other than a bad connection. It is much easier to swap than to trace down a bad connection. And for what it is worth, from what I can tell, the only place you are likely to find a bad connection, given that the neutral light works, is at the relay....of course, I could be wrong, but in this case it is with great certainty that I implore you to check the relay and waste no time elsewhere.

Glad to see you are getting in touch with your inner relativist!

...and I still missed it

Where to, Darwin? (double innuendo implied)

I am with Gthyni and Ratchet on this one. I want 100HP and don't need even one pony more.

And if you like the sponge video, check out the BenMotoGuzzi or BelMont Guzzi or is it Bavarian Moto Guzzi video? http://www.stopglobalwarming.org/features/?bmg

Oh gawd! Tell me it is not TRUE!!! http://www.stopglobalwarming.org/features/?sponge

What in the heck is Ratz Hatczheck doing wearing a SpongeBob hat!?!?!

Yah! Lets go "chasing some Quixotic fantasy"!!! I have already got the bearing spacer made of space shuttle

With 99 percent certainty I would say it is the sidestand relay or the wires connected to it that are failing.

Slowpoke, and any other So-Cal folk, Weather permitting, I'll be meeting with buddies Sunday 3/26/06 9AM at: The Blue Mug 122 S. Kalmia Escondido, CA My ECU is about half way to being completely sorted out with TuneBoy, and it begs for you to try it. Don't give up the Goose! (but if you do, I'll forgive you and still ride with you)

Would roller rockers help in a situation like this? FWIW the MegaCycle 620 x 9 would probably be closer to what Guzzi should use to make a sportier engine, assuming it does not mess up emissions too much. Really!?! Thanks for your feedback on that. I had been mislead about Carillos being lighter AND more durable. I guess I can stop saving up for them That I'll agree with. Careful now, some folks take your personal opinion to be holy gospel. In fact I caught Ratchet at the San Diego Travel agency booking a Yak hunting trip, so he could render some Yak Fat®. Personally, I have a little more faith in Mike Rich then in FBF, but I believe FBF will have similar work done in one fifth of the time, and for a little less money, if I recall the Mike Rich rates correctly. But I'll bet FBF does not show you the flow bench data, assuming they even have a flow bench. One of the issues that I believe has nudged people to go for porting is that our valves have notoriously soft stems, and it is considered preventive maintenance to have the seats K-lined and valves to be replaced with more durable valves. And of course it only makes sense to port at the same time. The porting seems to be good for a few HP with people not claiming any reduction in driveability. Ratchet's buddy being the exception, unless he uses race fuel or octane booster, or whatever Ratchet said.

Just to be clear. I am all for being reasonable about HP gain recommendations. I just find it hard to believe that anyone finds the FBF or Mike Rich method to be unreasonable for those that have the time and money. (that is what Ratchet and Pete are implying, right? and are people agreeing with them??? Sorry, it just boggles my mind) I think that 80RWHP is a reasonable goal for most of us. 90RWHP is a reasonable goal for the more maniacal of us, who are fans of Eraldo Ferracci or Mike Rich. 108PS whatever that is, is good for those of us with the money to send it to dynotec. I think Guzzi can add 10 claimed HP to the V11 Case while keeping it two valved and air cooled, but with no other legal limitations. For example hotter cam, more compression, better ECU mapping, more sensors like MAF and WBO2, catalytic convertor, ceramics, roller rockers, carillo rods, bigger bore, better quality valves, higher revs, etc. Remember, the V11 is 91 claimed HP...add 9 more claimed HP and you reach the magical marketing number, that would help sell an MGS01 in street clothes. Durability and emissions would not even have to be compromised. The technology is there, and yes it will raise the price.

I love dynotec's conversion, 108HP! (if I read the translation correctly): http://www.dynotec.de/presse.php?id=3 not to mention the 158HP four valve http://www.dynotec.de/presse.php?id=9

You mean like using K&N filters? I think I am generally very open minded to what others want and I feel that I keep butting heads with you for you not being fair and balanced about options for others. I just think this is one particular case where it would be a sad, wasteful mistake to swap back to stock pistons. I fully support his right to make that mistake. I also fully support the right to be dead on the side of the road for not using GEI relays, for using Hawker Genesis batteries, for using Cheng Shin tires, for not changing you 10W30 dino oil for 60,000 miles, and for shredding up your body riding in flip flops and speedos. I think it is you, that is trapped in your own rigid philosophy, that cannot see that it would be more simple to make the FBF pistons work.

If they keep dropping HP, they'll only end up attracting Ural owners. I think it is possible to get ten more ponies out of the existing case with a deeper sump(for breathing room),hotter cam and slightly bigger jugs. They would probably have to compromise some bottom end power much like they did with the peakier Daytona. Put the peaky 100HP at piston rings, 1200cc engine in a street legal MGS01 and you have got sales. Use the Centauro engine and we have more potential, but allegedly it is expensive to build. Build a bigger case and compromises would not be necessary. How hard (expensive) would it really be to build a new case? I don't think it would bankrupt them. But heck I sure could be wrong. And if they did bother to go with a new case, water-cooling is the easiest way for them to reach their goals, but I think many of us would regret if they went to water-cooling. So, you may have made a good point about a new air cooled case being too expensive...but I am not sure.

The original should have been a Spark 500. (Probably a Hawker Genesis in disguise) The Hawker Odyssey (the orange one that Jim mentions) is superior. Yuasa also makes a good sealed battery for our bikes.