dlaing

Bollocks! In all my years sitting here in this wired cage one mile underground where 'the man' can't touch, I have NEVER had my tinfoil hat fall off. But for those of you that can actually bend over far enough touch your toes, and are total spasms or spazzes or whatever the word is, MAYBE it is a problem and you need to chain it to your ugly nose ring.

Bollocks! Ding Dongs are too sweet. But I'll gladly have a beer with you as long as you don't keep refering to it as Yak piss. I am sure you and Kevin could enjoy a kettle of tea, while arguing about what order to put the milk in, etc. No doubt the amount of money that you have made in shloppage shleets is probably not enough to pay you US minimum wage for the time you put into designing, outsourcing, QCing, packing and shipping the sheeets. "-Remember that tea is to be sipped, not slurped and not used to wash down a large bite of food. Swallow your food before you sip your tea. One should always try a little of each course and while doing so avoid talking with his/her mouth full. That is why it is important to take dainty bites." http://www.seedsofknowledge.com/tea-etiquette.html

Now your talkin'

So, calling Kevin's statements "bollocks" is not pointless? Care to enlighten us as to why we should be so rude to one another? How can you defend such behavior? Just because Pete is the most brilliant Guzzi wrench on the planet does not mean he is infallible, nor does it mean his rude behavior should be encouraged.

What a smart way not to get into an argument! Daft! Pummel the seals with a bat, just for sport! Bollocks! I don't want to start an argument either, but I think the boxing would be more enjoyable if you keep the 16 ounce gloves on instead of turning it into an Ultimate Fighting Championship Bout. Here is a good read about lockring failures http://www.kb-silvolite.com/feature.php?F_...amp;action=read Unfortunately it does not mention how long it takes for lock ring troubles to erode into noticeable damage. I can only imagine the number of scenario varies greatly. I rode my V65 for many miles, watching the fuel efficiency drop from 50MPG to 45 and then to 40 and then 35MPG. I did a compression test with bad results, so I pulled the cylinder head off there was a chip out of one of the exhaust valves, and what appeared to be well polished scoring of the cylinder walls. Previously I had dropped a valve and it was covered under warrranty....sort of I figured scoring of the walls could have been from the earlier dropped valve or from the chip of the exhaust valve that probably got expelled into the exhaust. Anyway the point is the bike ran in a pretty bad state for hundreds of miles before I thought something was wrong. Yes, I was younger and more ignorant then. Now, if my fuel mileage dropped 2MPG I would pull out the compression tester!!!!

DRAT! I suppose a custom line is easy enough. If anyone gets the measurement for the clutch line, please share! I am pretty happy at the current height, so I am not in the market, but others might be need to know.

Here are photos of my convertibar setup Right bar http://img340.imageshack.us/img340/2443/co...barrightqf2.jpg Left bar http://img340.imageshack.us/img340/37/convertibarleftik4.jpg Riders view http://img340.imageshack.us/img340/7736/co...iderseyeil3.jpg Front view http://img340.imageshack.us/img340/2454/convertibarpd6.jpg EDIT and for comparison, Docc's photo of stock V11 bars http://i28.photobucket.com/albums/c215/doc...es/IMG_4385.jpg I have Ohlins forks, which are longer, so the setup option is different than what you should do with the Marzocchi. I lowered the triple clamps down the Ohlins forks leaving enough room to clamp the convertibars on top of the upper triple clamp. Because I upgraded to four pad calipers I was able to use Suzuki SV650 brake lines made by "Braking", that I recall are about two inches longer than stock. Clutch and throttle are stock and just needed careful attention to routing, but otherwise worked fine. To go higher I would need longer everthing. The quality of build on the Convertibars is very nice. Tubes are stainless and clamps are designed for quick easy adjustment. I noticed a mild increase in vibration over the stock bars. I am sure most people would not notice the slight increase in vibes, but bar end mirrors or weights are probably a good idea. To get an idea of how high you can go up if you change the brake lines, compare my left bar photo with Motoguzznix's frontal shot. http://www.v11lemans.com/forums/index.php?...ost&id=7663 I might be able to go another half inch up, but it would be pushing the limits of the throttle and clutch lines. I never thought of getting Centauro throttle lines. I'll have to keep that in mind. I'll bet a Centauro clutch line might be longer, too.

Generally retarding the timing has a similar result to enrichening the AFR. You can get more power by retarding for more reasons than a pre-existing lean condition. For Motoguzznix, retarding ignition could have helped because it was too lean to begin with, or it could have helped because the timing was simply wrong. I got the impression that Motoguzznix optimized fuel before determining that retarding would produce more power. I am not sure if he re-optimized fuel after retarding timing, but it would have made sense to do so, if he could afford enough dyno time.

I'd agree with that. If the neutral light is working than it should start. Could even be a few problems combined. A marginal relay and an intermittent side stand switch, aggravated by a weak battery caused by a lame charging system.... The work-around will eventually start to fail as the problem progresses. The good news is that it will be easier to diagnose when the problem happens every time!

Here is the link to the jiggly graphic http://img.villagephotos.com/p/2004-6/738105/96557539-L.gif You can right click to download

So, are going to just keep jiggling it like Orange Okies animated graphic?

I get a gas line leak if I don't replace all the high pressure fuel lines every two years or so. The line going from tank to pump seems to last longer. The first time I changed the fuel filter I only replaced the lines between pump and filter, since it is under the most pressure. But I got leaks where the lines connected to the fuel injectors. So, I replaced all the lines. The next time I changed the fuel filter the hoses looked fine so I only replaced the ones that were easy to access. A few months later, the one I did not replace leaked. I made the mistake of getting under rated fuel line, which could be the reason I was getting leaks after only a year or two. Now I make sure I get the hose of the proper rating. I am not sure if it is making a difference yet.... SAE 30R7 is under rated except for between petcock and pump. SAE 30R9 is the proper rating for un-submerged fuel lines. SAE 30R10 is the proper rating for submerged fuel lines. As for stainless steel braiding, I think what came with the bike is mostly cosmetic, and I don't think it will help unless your hose rests against a hot part of the engine. But you may find fuel line with steel braiding that will increase the pressure rating. That might not be a bad idea.

Is that in the maintenance schedule? I never noticed it. For the early V11s the petcock filter is a screen attached to the petcock. Here is an image of a typical petcock and its filter: http://www.mgcycle.com/01105460.JPG http://www.mgcycle.com/fuel.html To clean drain fuel and remove petcock. Beware of reverse threads. There is also a large fuel filter that needs periodic changing. The schedule for its replacement is debateble. Hoses do dry out and need regular replacement. If needed, be sure to replace with proper rated fuel lines.

It would be very different. The swan neck bars from the Centauro are probably the right size. Are the Centauro the same as Verlicchi? http://www.mgcycle.com/bars.html "300017038 Touring 54mm fork tube $349.95 pair (Centauro/V11Sport/etc) "Sport" (2 inch rise) or "America" (7 inch rise) are available by special order. " Convertibars are similar, and are available in different angles. I like how I can change width by moving forward or back.

What the British call chips, we yanks call french fries. But seriously, a starting point might be determining if the chips are aluminum or steel. Pete or Luhbo might then have a better idea what it might mean. How big are the chips? How many are there? Two? ten? hundreds? sludge?

Just look at the image in orangeokie's signature. That type of jiggling will fix most start up problems *Clutch Switch -- Could be. Try holding in starter button and repeatedly activating clutch *Side Stand -- No, but maybe the side stand switch. *Neutral Light -- No, but could be the Neutral switch, but only assuming the light does not come on when in neutral. More likely the relay that the switch activates, which is called the side stand relay, even though it is activated by the neutral switch. If side stand is up and bike is in neutral, with neutral light on, and it won't start, it is not the problem. (unless you have more than one problem) *Starter Button -- Possible, but these are very reliable. *Terminations under the tank -- That is what I voted for. Try turning handlebars when starting. A common problem is connections under tank influenced by steering. But it just as easily could be a relay or battery. Replacing relays is cheap. Testing a battery is pretty easy. Let battery sit uncharged overnight, test voltage, note temperature, and note model of battery, tell us and we can give you an idea of its state of charge. Anything less than 80% charged could cause starting problems. A battery charger is one of our most important tools. I recommend getting one recommended by Hawker, but other people get by fine with many other chargers.

Motoguzzinix got more power by decreasing timing. So our bikes seem to be an exception to the generalization. How would mapping for midrange compromise top end power? There are other, perhaps better, ways to cure the midrange dip then enrichening. The most popular way is adding an aftermarket crossover, and then remapping with a PCIII. I suspect the dip may be a good place to lean it out or modify timing. According to Motoguzznix's research the A:F ratio is balanced across the cylinders at the dip. This gives it more room for making it run hotter there to get more power. Leaner may actually improve it there. Many dyno tuners have enriched there without much benefit. Finding the ideal timing for the dip could be key.

That is the flattest stock lambda curve that I have seen. While a little lean compared to what most tune to to get maximum power, it is probably a good compromise for maximizing fuel efficiency. Should you be concerned about heat? Compare it the curves in the forum's dyno gallery http://www.v11lemans.com/forums/index.php?showtopic=8556 Please consider adding your dyno there.

No, you are all wrong! Sometimes they make maximum power at 13:1, sometimes richer and sometimes leaner.

That AFR looks better than what most I have seen look like AFTER mapping! EDIT Sorry, I did not write the above correctly. The resulting AFR is almost always better after mapping. I was just impressed with how flat that curve was. Flat looks good, is not always good. Many are not that flat after mapping, but power is maximized.

Maybe these ±.001" measurements are the infamous "U.S. Spec"?!? You are correct that the Guzzi Manual does not spec a range. In fact they don't spec in inches! They spec in glorious millimeters down to two digits before the decimal point, although they use a comma Regardless of it being a comma, without a range being specified, following a machinist accuracy standard I think it could be assumed that accuracy should be to within ±.005mm!!!! But I am not a machinist and it really is not that necessary to be that accurate. But I do strive to get the left and right cylinder dialed in to that level of accuracy against my own measurement, not against the golden dial gauge. I am pretty sure that if you verified my measurements against a dial gauge, I can get the left and right to within .0005" of one another. This would mean my left intake could be set to .0061 and my right intake to .0066, so if you round it out, my left is set to 6 thou and right to 7 thou(out of US spec by .0001"), but I am still accurate to within .0005" and it is good enough. If you translate that into metric, the target is .15mm, and my claimed accuracy of .0005" is about 0.013mm so the left intake I might get lucky and set to .151mm and the right to .012mm more, (since I am so unbelievably accurate) and end up with the right set to .163mm. If following the manual to the machinist's rule, I believe I am out of spec, but I am not THAT anal, so I leave it tightened down, give the same treatment to the exhaust valves, but targeting .20mm, bolt it all up, and then I am happy!!!! I am pretty darn sure I am accurate to within .012mm of my own measurement, but no, I have never verified against a dial gauge.

No my Guzzi Brother, the argument started over my stating: Skeeve and Ratchet challenged the statement. For the statement not to be true, both man's (or woman's) 6 thou would have to .0060" ± .0005". I am simply saying that if you took the more accurate half of forum members that do there own tappet adjustments, that not all of them would be in that range, while Ratchet and Skeeve are saying the contrary. But it appears that Kevin is spot on when he somewhat humorously says, This was a reply to Ratchet saying, Where he seems to be backing out of the claimed accuracy necessary to make my original statement untrue. A forgivable mistake...a mea culpa from Ratchet and Skeeve is anticipated. So, Kevin's statement was spot on!

Yes, I can feel to that difference. For example if you set two tappets to two measurements with a dial gauge to .0060 and 0065 I could tell the difference and if I sit there battling the lock nut for an hour, I could adjust it so that they are closer. How much closer, I don't know, but closer. Ratchet on the other hand and the 50 other half decent shade tree mechanics on the forum, can start with a pair of tappets at .005" and reset it so that they are all between .0055 and .0065". I can't guarantee that I am one of those 50, but Ratchet and Skeeve are that good and expect most of the forum to be that good, right? Of course my claimed margin of error is twice as good as their claimed margin, but I am measuring against myself, not the golden dial gauge. If I were to try to reach .0060" I might end up with .0054 against the dial gauge, but not Ratchet and Skeeve.

Thanks for pointing out the Marvic wheels http://www.yoyodyneti.com/category.aspx?categoryID=2961 has them Guzzi V11 600x17 Piuma Black $1,550.00 Guzzi V11 600x17 Piuma Black Guzzi V11 Piuma Black $862.00 Guzzi V11 Piuma Black And just for comparison 900ss 5.75x17 Piuma Black $1,237.00 900ss 5.75x17 Piuma Black note it is 0.25 narrower, but still they should throw in a cush drive considering the Guzzi price, with polyurethane bushings

Even if I could match Ratchet's feeler gauge accuracy by using a dial indicator, I don't see why I would bother. I think I am accurate to within about .0005" of my own settings, and that is accurate enough since we can't even agree on using .004"/.006", .008"/.010, or somewhere in between. But if Marty set to a rounded out .003"/.005" (.0034"/.0054" by dial gauge) thinking it was .004"/.006" I see a potential problem. But I even see a potential problem at .004"/.006". Of course not as bad as setting it to .002"/.004" as some have thought to be US spec, but I doubt that happened.