dlaing

13.41V is too low. Check/Clean the connections close to the regulator. Could be your regulator is toast. My guess is that the battery is fine, but needs a good charging (IMHO with a charger that does not exceed 15V) Once again, I'll suggest GEI failure was related to a charging problem.

Also, if you could ask him if he uses different numbers for the Ti ECU bikes, and the variations with or without front cross over bikes, that would be appreciated.

What? No power commander?!? Then you will likely benefit from increased TPS millivolts. The 150mV reading is done with engine not running. (technically debatable, but it is too tricky to run the engine on one cylinder) The 521mV reading is done with engine running (because it can be done easily and reflects real running conditions better) I am unclear, too. Micha has probably tuned more V11s than anyone on Earth save a few factory assembly guys, so there is little doubt he knows how to get it right. But I don't believe that it is right to throw away the 150mV setting, except for a little fudging room. Your mufflers combined presumably with no PCIII will want some fudging, and clearly Micha's method will work better for you, so unless you get a PCIII, I would go with his method. One thing that both of the methods don't take into consideration, is what has been done to the trim level in the ECU using the Axeone or VDSTS. The factory sets the trim to pass emissions. Many shops set the trim richer. My mechanic set mine richer, then I had him set it back (not sure if that was zero) when I went for dyno mapping so that it would be a more useful base map for repeatable results. I suspect that the trim level is messing up quite a few bikes. Also we generally find the bike runs better with a higher TPS number because the factory mapping isn't perfect and is generally too lean. I forget what Mr. Bean's details are. Was the bike completely stock?

What would Hitler ride? More like a VFR owner bashing to the nth degree. Can we get footage of Mussolini bashing Moto Guzzi, and Churchill bashing BSA, and Roosevelt bashing HD? Hirohito bashing Honda???? What would he say? I don't want a stinkin' VFR, Get me a Big Bore MGS01!!!! Or maybe an Aprilia Shiver

As one of the authors of the method posted here: http://www.v11lemans.com/forums/index.php?showtopic=12204 I have agreed with Raz to keep the base 150mV reading, but it seems like many people are getting too high of an idle when they set it to the 521mV that we recommended. 3.6° is supposed to correspond to 525mV according to MPH's chart, so you could use 3.6° as it is certainly close enough. But the fact that people that set to 150mV and then 521mV are getting too high of an idle seems to indicate one of two likely possibilities. The first and in my opinion, most likely possibility, is that they are not backing the butterfly valve off all the the way. Perhaps it is getting hung on the "choke". Or perhaps it is getting hung on carbon build up???? The second most likely possibility as that our bikes differ greatly from one another, and that the idle TPS setting is more important. If that is the case it will invalidate the instructions we wrote. Logically it makes sense that the throttle bodies are precisely bored and that the baseline should be made at the more absolute fully closed position rather than a vague point determined at idle subject to variations of flow, etc. Using the inaccurate Guzzi Tach and that method throws accuracy further to the fate of luck.. But the ECU is looking for its baseline at idle, so there is some basis for Micha's method that seems to value the idle reading above the base reading. In any case if you do what Mr. Bean and Micha suggest, you will run richer, which will generally be smoother and more forgiving. So, apparent success from the method may still not be ideal, as you may now be too rich, or maybe not???? If you give Micha's method a try, which at this point I recommend unless you feel like giving the base TPS setting a second attempt, would you please note and report the before and after Wide Open Throttle TPS Voltage reading? Thanks in advance My suspicion is that you will probably get a current reading below 4.80V and then after the Micha method it will be 4.85V or higher. If I am not correct and you jump from say 4.86 to above 4.9 something, then I suspect something much more complex than I understand is happening. Like maybe your bike just breathes really well, and needs a higher TPS to ensure proper fuel mixture. But then again, volt meter accuracy at that voltage could render my recommended test useless.... Sorry for the long speculative post that may not be clear as I am tired. Maybe Ryland can straighten out my errors and add clearer insight. It would be good to get to the bottom of why the posted method did not work for Mr. Bean, or you. The Ti muffler owners have another challenge, but understanding this may help understand the Ti muffler setup. Best of luck!

http://www.motorcycle-superstore.com/Produ...06950g18579.jpg Pro-Grip 714 I am using the 737 series now, but they flex more than the 714.

Good to see BMW finish 16th place, ahead of many bikes with 30-40% more HP! I guess they do have an open class advantage, for whatever that is worth. From what I could understand, Ducati did not do well. And most sadly, we're not likely to see a team MGS01 competing. It would take a lot of money or luck to beat BMW at LeMans.

The difference is Skeeve used intelligence, while I relied completely on dumb luck. Also, everyone will want the result of Skeeve's eureka, and reliability is not compromised. My eureka is not desired by everybody and it still needs a little work to guarantee reliability They say necessity is the mother of invention, but sometimes it is just random luck, as we simply stumble on the invention. If I were to do it again, I'd use a pair of flange bearings rather than the sleeve and two cored disks. I found some flange bearings that were perfect at the inner diameter(that bolt goes through), the small outer diameter(that goes into stand), but it was too small at the large outer diameter. One inch or 25mm would have been ideal, as the two cored disks were one inch and matched up against the face of the kickstand perfectly. If you have a lathe you could get a more precise fit. And I'd use an allen bolt. A custom shaped "bone" will bring greater reliability.

Now that I think about it, my other concern is that the friction where the bone meets the spring. An eye bearing of some sort is the obvious solution. Combined with an "L" shaped bone, and I think I'll be set. ...more to procrastinate on.

That is why I rely on your wiring schematic for repairs. Do you have wiring schematic for a '64 human?

Thank you A longer spring with a shorter "bone" would be ideal. Or if the bone bent down in a sort of backwards "L" Why do they use two springs? Safety? Easier to stretch one at a time?

Just a little rust at the contacting face of the nut. I think the rust mostly occurred after I cleaned it, but it certainly shows rust more at the edge, which indicates an earlier fracture. My guess is that it started to fracture during the vibration from the 500 miles of riding last weekend, on the relay to to the rally. If it was a fracture from the accident years ago, I'd think I would have seen the rust yesterday. The dirty dry grease must of prevented some oxidation, but was it protected for years, or just a few days? I am inclined to believe the fracture started over last weekends long ride. Here is another photo, sorry about the bad focus. EDIT here are some with better focus

The blessed side effect of this small tragedy is that it may have saved my life. Maybe not, but you never know where fate and stupidity will take you. When I crashed a few years back it damaged the sidestand safety switch. It still worked, but rather than risk being stranded by dubious electrics, I removed the switch, and practiced due diligence by manually retracting stand before taking off. I dreamt of two options: One: hook the switch up so that the horn blares when bike goes out of neutral with stand down. Two: Convert to "suicide" style self retracting stand. But I procrastinated and never got around to doing the right thing. Then this happens and I have to Bodge it back together and accidentally stumble on the solution! I go to Marshall's, the awesome hardware store that has almost everything a man who is touch with their inner child could ever want. The following numbers are from memory. Please verify before ordering. I get a 10.3 rated 10mm bolt with 1.25 thread, a bronze bushing 3/8"x5/8"x1", two 14 gauge washer type steel bushings that fit perfectly around the 5/8" bushing as it peaks out of each side of the stand, and a few assorted washers and a new nut. Note the 3/8" washers fit better around the 10mm bolt than do the 10mm washers...go figure... I don't even think about the spring assembly needing to clear the pivot bolt, so when I assemble it I curse because the bolt interferes, but then I realize that I just created the self retracting stand that I always wanted!!!! Idiot-Savant? More likely just the dumb luck of a bumbling bodger. My only concern is that there may now be too much stretch on the springs. Time will tell Here is the result:

I did crash on that side about 30,000 miles ago. But I do think that it loosened, which allowed more flex and thus more stress. In this photo it looks a little brownish, like oxidation. I looked for rust yesterday and did not see any. In any case, I doubt it was one clean snap, but the wiggling back and forth that done it in. http://img132.imageshack.us/img132/1391/snapne3.jpg

Cool formula! Thanks, gents. In case anyone cares, here are some more numbers: Assuming tire size is really as advertised, the V11 Sport with popular undersize 160/60-17 tire would result in: [17" wheel w/ low profile and narrow tire]: (12.28*8000)/(168*4.1737)= 140.1 MPH And the V11 Sport with OEM 170/60-17 tire would result in: (12.52*8000)/(168*4.1737)= 142.8 MPH

Thanks for the good idea. I miss having a center stand and they are essential for emergency on the road wheel removal. Guessing that it will take months to get the bolt from Guzzi, I'll have to use an over the counter bolt and somehow fabricate a bushing, or better yet, pay a machinist to rip one off on a lathe. I think my Guzzi dealer can make one. As for the damage, it wasn't too bad. Minor bending of passenger peg/muffler hanger and cosmetic damage to front fender. I hope the handlebar did not bend. The Buell foot looks OK but I should check closely for damage. The Buell rubber mounted turn signals' rubber mounts did their job Worth the aesthetic price of droopage.

I rode home from work, pulled into the garage, put the sidestand down, lean the bike into parked position, and as I am hoping off, down goes the bike. Aw, crud! At first I thought that I must have failed to put the kickstand down properly, but lo and behold the pivot bolt had snapped. The good news is that it happened in my Garage and not into the CB650F that I was parked next to all day, which may have dominoed into the car next to him. Speculations as to the cause are welcome: Defective bolt? Lack of grease at the pivot point? It is inevitable and you are all doomed? Bad Karma from arguing with God? (need new karma bells) Too loose? lautrec... That is my guess. Maybe it needed tightening. The bolt screws into the mount and a bolt behind locks it into position. With wear, it probably got looser and looser, increasing the lean of the bike and twisting on the bolt. Might be worth lubing and tightening the next time your bike is jacked up.

I have little doubt that it does make that kind of power. But I guess we will never know for sure. Yah the service requirements makes me shudder too. I would definitely go with the lower power options on the Big Bore kit. And the way I ride the service interval might not be too bad.

Last time I saw some Angel's was at The Rockstore. Damn I felt like a poseur compared to them. My only outlaw activity consists breaking traffic laws. No doubt they are the real deal. These guys, unlike most Harley owners must actually ride, as evidenced by their full face helmets. Speaking of Outlaws, those in the South Western US might wanna join this upcoming Outlaw ride http://www.socal-guzzi.com/PHPBB/viewtopic.php?t=1556 April 28-29th 2008 Now if we could just convince the Angels to switch to Guzzis...

Smart move! The plastic adapter broke on me under what was probably less than 5 foot pounds of torque.

Close, but again misleading. When you said that a V11 can't built up so that it can keep up with hyperbikes, I said that it could keep up if the V11 can get a 120-165HP Big Bore Engine kit, carbon fiber wheels, ceramic brake rotor, Ohlins SuperBike suspension, a lightened monoposto rear subframe, and the best DOT approved tires money can buy. What does "keeping up with" mean? Almost all the V11s on this forum have kept up with hyperbikes!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! Heck I have even passed a couple!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! The above Guzzi setup could keep up with a STOCK 2007 or earlier completely stock Hayabusa on many roads, with equal riders, even of extraordinary talent. Riders of my talent can't benefit by all that the quickest bikes can offer. By stock, I mean off the show room floor. OEM tires. OEM springs. etc. Heavier riders will suffer even more on the stock Hayabusa springs. Here is a quote from a forum member at Hayabusa.org If you think that my fantasy Guzzi can't keep up with a bike with suspension like that you are definitely "somewhere over the rainbow" There is nothing untrue about what I have said but you rant on as if the words were untrue, and I keep having to defend my statements. I have no disagreement that there is evidence that it would be unwise to spend 50 or 100 thousand dollars building up the bike, nor do I disagree that building up the bike could decrease the durability. Also, I believe that a well modified Hayabusa, could be designed to be faster AND OR quicker than Guareschi's MGS01 on most roads. When I win the Lotto I'll prove it all to you, but you will still be in denial of the obvious truth.

So, you'd be cowering behind a steel drum while standing in the pits as Guareschi revs his 165HP MGS01? Somehow I imagine you are more daring than that.

I am just sticking to the facts, while Ratchet misleading people with untrue statements. I could let it slide, but it ain't my nature. Not Ratchet. What is so different about the V11 that it can make 5-10 more horsepower with the big end shells lasting so much longer? That is where my money has gone, to Ratchet's protests..... Tractability is nice, but when I say I want more power, I mean I want more power. I am sure Ratchet understands exactly what you mean by quicker rather than faster. Good Grief! Redefining reality seems to be a favorite past time for some around here. I rarely give a damn how quick or how fast I get from point A to point B. Power and speed are about exhilaration, not about ending the ride sooner. I am racing nobody. Quicker is better than faster.Quicker is better than faster.Quicker is better than faster.Quicker is better than faster.Quicker is better than faster.Quicker is better than faster.Quicker is better than faster.Quicker is better than faster.Quicker is better than faster.Quicker is better than faster.Quicker is better than faster.Quicker is better than faster.Quicker is better than faster.Quicker is better than faster.Quicker is better than faster.Quicker is better than faster.Quicker is better than faster.Quicker is better than faster.Quicker is better than faster.Quicker is better than faster.Quicker is better than faster.Quicker is better than faster.Quicker is better than faster.Quicker is better than faster.Quicker is better than faster.Quicker is better than faster.Quicker is better than faster.Quicker is better than faster.Quicker is better than faster.Quicker is better than faster.Quicker is better than faster.Quicker is better than faster.Quicker is better than faster.Quicker is better than faster.Quicker is better than faster.Quicker is better than faster.Quicker is better than faster.Quicker is better than faster.Quicker is better than faster.Quicker is better than faster.Quicker is better than faster.Quicker is better than faster.Quicker is better than faster.Quicker is better than faster.Quicker is better than faster. Keep repeating it and you will believe it. So, let's recap: When people say they want more power, it is because they want tractability, not to be faster, but to be quicker, and the best way to make all this happen is to keep both wheels on the ground ALL the time, and if you keep the rubber side down, you won't want any more power. How boring. ZZZZZZZzzzzzzzzzz. But I suppose there is something ZZZzzzzen about the approach. No argument here, accept I would bump that up to being the first thing one should do for more power, since I have no plans to keep both wheels on the ground ALL the time, especially during tire changes. Damn! that seems pretty fancy to me!!! You ol' closet hot rodder!!!! Are you sure you don't lift that front wheel every now and then????? Not sure doing it in the listed steps is necessary. You can certainly save money modding first and mapping later. You can't be serious!!!! I'd far sooner spend the time and money on my Guzzi, thank you very much for the ridiculous advice Thankfully you are merely cowardice and not narrow minded, as Ratchet implied.

I want to show ---oooofffff, but those instructions have my head spinning. Almost every step of those instructions must have errors in it!!!! They say, "Tune (on right throttle body) the throttle potentiometer till you reach" their recommended voltage. Doing so will completely randomize results. Unless of course they mean to use 550mV or 465mV instead of 150mV!!!! Is this possible? Maybe?!? But all the other steps have holes in the theory!!! Obviously the instructions are a cruel joke. Looking at the Ti Map they seem to be expecting a lower idle TPS voltage rather than a higher Voltage, so 465mV at idle makes a lot more sense than as the base disconnected voltage reading. I would still go with the 150mV base disconnected TPS reading, and then simply follow our instructions. But even this seems like it will result in a low, lean idle with bypass screws open too much in an effort to keep idle high enough. Or maybe there is more fuel added by the map and it is fine. But you tried our instructions at both 465mV and 521mV and it neither worked well, right? If that is the case and you were error free, I say try a base TPS other than 150mV. The idle TPS of 465mV could very well work, but not likely with a base TPS of 150mV. Maybe it should be set to 100mV or even 0mV!!!! But setting base to 0mV and idle to 465mV would probably result in a very high idle. The other possibility is that this was written by hacks who assume that you are taking a perfectly tuned stock bike and converting to the Ti kit. If that is the case the idle was already set correctly and the Stock TPS should be set to 525mV. So, they are suggesting lowering it at the potentiometer to 465mV which is in effect like lowering the base TPS to 90mV. Again, I think a base TPS setting of 100mV may be the ticket. They probably fired the engineer who used 100mV instead of 150mV and then nobody knew how to write instructions, so they came up with the crappy instructions. If it gets worse at 100mV, try 200mV. or better yet, try baby steps. Try 130mV if better than 150mV try 110mV. If 130mV is worse than 150mV try 170mV. ETC. etc. and so forth till you get it right, and then let us know!!!! Of course I could load the Ti map with my Tuneboy and give it a try, too.

I think some of the pre-1999 spines had 160/60 on 18inch wheels. Converting to those might should make some difference, especially with higher profile tires, but you would have to calculate the diameter at the tire not the wheel. The skinny tire might improve the handling, too! Watch for fender clearance!