dlaing

Sorry about your event. Just my humble opinion, but Pirelli Stradas feel like the best wet and cold weather tire that I have ever tried. I am pretty sure some others well second that. Don't beat yourself up over messing up. I am sure more than a few of us have lost it because of cold tires. Last Winter I followed a buddy who is an excellent rider and watched him go down right in front of me because of cold tires. Unless you have actually seen how easy it is to crash on cold tires you will never know it can happen so easily. For what it is worth, he was using a fine brand Sport tire, suitable for track days, while I was matching his speed with the Strada sport touring tires, and that is clearly what made the difference between him crashing and not me. He is a far better rider than I, but it was the tires that made the difference. Probably 5mph faster through that turn and I would have crashed too. Have fun out there, but remember the tires have limits and road surfaces are not always predictable.

I suppose the four cells with fuel value 53 could be considered the infamous idle flag But ignition timing dances a different song. Top ignition map is Titanium 'race' ECU, bottom is standard ECU EDIT sorry, Bottom is Ti, top is standard.

The aluminum Mistrals are inexpensive, light weight, power increasing and sound great.

5 US quarts is about 1.041 Imperial gallon and one imperial gallon is four imperial quarts. 1 Imperial quart is about 1.201 US quarts and 1 imperial gallon is about 1.201 US gallon 3.33 X 1.201 = ~4

US MPG Imperial MPG l/100km km/l miles per liter 30 36.03 7.84 12.75 7.92 30.58 36.72 7.69 13 32.93 39.55 14 33.31 40.00 7.06 14.16 35.28 42.37 15 9.31 37.63 45.2 16 40 48.04 5.88 17.01 10.56 41.63 50.00 5.65 17.7 42.34 50.85 18 44.69 53.67 19 45 54.04 5.23 19.13 11.88 50 60.05 4.70 21.26 13.2 Feel free to fill in the blanks...

DARN! Thanks. I pulled up a conversion tool and ran the three options that they offered and then manually calculated in the miles per liter as some seem to use that. I'll fix it.

One of Pete's great posts: This is a great thread, and probably worth somebody bumping so that Pete can enlighten us a little more. http://www.v11lemans.com/forums/index.php?...466&hl=suck

Bull shit! It is a true reduction.

I get anywhere from 30 to 37 MPG. 30 on short fifteen minute commutes. 35 riding through canyons. (most of my riding) 37 on freeway. Here are some conversions so that some of you might understand what we yanks are babbling about, and vice versa: US MPG Imperial MPG km/l miles per liter 30 36.03 12.75 7.92 30.58 36.72 13 32.93 39.55 14 33.31 40.00 14.16 35.28 42.37 15 9.31 37.63 45.2 16 40 48.04 17.01 10.56 41.63 50.00 17.7 42.34 50.85 18 44.69 53.67 19 45 54.04 19.13 11.88 50 60.05 21.26 13.2

My money is on case two. My Tuneboy software shows fuel and ignition cells with numerical entries of fuel pulse time, based on throttle opening and RPM. I believe it obeys the cells and not a flag. Tuneboy does not show an idle flag. Perhaps the VDSTS or Axeone software recognize an idle flag??????? It could be that the trim modifies only the fueling under the flag??????? What else would the flag be used for??? Simply a notation???? maybe like a graffiti tag???

From the link RH posted: http://www.mgnoc.com/_overlay/Archives/oil_filters.htm I tried to find out why there is variance in this parameter. What value is having a 27 psi internal relief valve setting compared to 12 psi? Consider the problem from a comparison of probable situations. For example, if a vehicle is being driven with cold oil in it, the filter with the higher internal lift-off pressure will more strongly resist bypassing the filter element (a good thing), but the increased pressure drop will mean less pressure at the filter

Guzzi filters do bypass!!!!!!! The difference between a 10PSI and a 30PSI bypass is lost oil pressure when you need it!!!!!!!!! Even a 10PSI bypass valve might fail to bypass enough to prevent healthy oil pressure in cold conditions. But a 30 PSI bypass valve will greatly increase oil pressure depravation in cold start situations. I believe anyone who would choose a 30PSI filter over a 10PSI filter and startup and ride the bike with the manual's recommended 15W50 below freezing is an idiot or ignorant. Or maybe I am the idiot for selecting the lower bypass pressure, letting all that dirty oil get by???? There is no quantified data on this that I could find, but my common sense tells me to go with a filter of about the same bypass rating as the OEM filter. Guzzi presumably specs the oil viscosity and oil filter to work together at a specific temperature range. A 30 PSI filter may be fine for Ratchet and me in SoCal, but for sub-zero temperatures with the manual's recommended oil viscosities, I would rather have the correct bypass pressure rated filter. If you want to agree with Ratchet and presumably Dan that the bypass pressure does not matter, good luck!!!!!!

I disagree. I think there is wide cold temperature range where cold oil will flow, but not through the paper. Bypasses are good, they are there for a reason. Since you are calling people idiots, smarty pants, what temperature should I not ride at with 10W-50 synthetic? How about the 20W50 that some are fond of? We enquiring idiots need to know

Here is a good write up on the SuperTech http://www.rightspin.com/motorcycles/misc/.../oilfilter.html Maybe we should spend the money on BMW filters!!! But looking at the Champion filter image that Ratchet posted, they sure do look different. Perhaps the post above is an older version of the filter??? Regarding bypass: If you startup a Guzzi cold and the oil filter never bypasses, then it must have too high of a bypass pressure. Bypassing is good. It keeps the oil pressure up. This could be important if the filter became clogged, which is not likely on our bikes with filters replaced every 2-6000 miles. But, pressure build up and lack of flow also occurs when the oil is cold and thick. Combine the Guzzi's weak at idle oil pump, 0

I think the idle flag is an urban legend I am positive that the scenario you portray would result in a richer mixture. And so would lowering the butterflies to get 1000 RPM and then adjusting the TPS back to 3.7 degrees. What perplexes me is how the engine would run comparatively between the two 1000 RPM/ 3.7 degree scenarios. I don't like the idea of messing with such unknowns. It makes sense to me to start with factory tuning specs and then adjust the map as needed. Yes one can tweak with TPS and air screws, but results across the map are not always what one might predict. In general a higher TPS number makes the bike run richer, but timing also changes, and if the TPS number is too high, the resulting mapped cells overlap designed map cells, which in some places in the map can cause problems. I don't know exactly what the "trim" control does in the VDSTS software. Although it is a weak substitute for re-mapping, to me it would make more sense to adjust trim rather than put the TPS off-spec to make the bike run rich enough. just my two cents...

I disagree. Stock is bad, even if better than previous fuel injected Guzzis, and better than many other fuel injected motorcycles. It is too rich in a few places and too lean in many others. I would be very surprised that if you hooked up a wide band oxygen sensor you saw good consistent lambda with nothing above a lean 14:1 air to fuel ratio at Wide Open Throttle. Add an aftermarket muffler and remove the airbox lid and the situation becomes worse. I saw 17:1 on my bike, after it was for the most part tuned to spec. Although I did not have software to adjust the trim to the proper idle CO, but my dealer had done that about a year or two before that, so the CO should have been roughly correct, and the trim would have had little effect above idle. To get access to the trim requires the use of $200+ software. To try and use the TPS to modify mixture enough to compensate for exhaust and intake modifications is a bad idea. The air bypass screws do little to change mixture. Some have adjusted the fuel pressure regulator, with out much success as it is simply a broad brush approach. Running the engine with a 17:1 air:fuel ratio in one place was not good for it. I had it mapped on a dyno and it ran much better. If the dyno operator was honest, I picked up as much as 6 horse power. But more importantly the throttle response was smoother and more consistent. They did make it run too lean in one place where it tended to ping, and so the pinging got worse. I added more fuel there and it ran better than ever. This aspect of the experience made me somewhat of a sceptic of Wide Band Oxygen Sensor tuning. In "the ECU" thread Derrick Capito does an excellent job explaining why tuning by oxygen output is not ideal. But I still believe it will often yield excellent results most of the time, and it costs far less than paying for 4 hours of dyno time, tuning for power, with a 4 gas analysis. I suspect my experience was more of an anomaly due to my having a Quat-D exhaust. The oxygen sensor had to read two cylinders at once, and the probe could not go very deep. Where it leaned it out, one cylinder was probably running rich and the other lean. The meter saw oxygen and leaned it out. This also could have been a result of the probe not being in deep enough. That was with an older serial PCIII. the newer USB PCIIIs can adjust the cylinders individually, but you might need to weld in some bungs to host the sensor if you had a 2 into 1 system like the Quat-D. Standard aftermarket mufflers should do fine with the standard probe up deep in the baffle. The testimonials of people who are happy with the PCIIIs far out weighs the negative experiences. The first power commander, PCI?, was known to be far inferior to the third generation PCIII. Perhaps your opinion has been shaped by experiences with it. Why do you think the PCIII does not make the bike run better? Please pretend to be a graduate trained life scientist when you answer

I recently added some silver conductive goop and have noticed no change in MPG or drivability. Maybe I need to add more?

Thanks Ratchet. I suspect your numbers are at 20 microns while the ones I have been posting since Tracy Martin enlightened me, may have been for an old version of the filter or for a rating at 15 microns. You should head over to Walmart and see what the price is after Tax. I am pretty sure I paid closer to $3 than $2, but that may have been after tax. But then again your filters measure different than mine, so we must have bought at different times.

Here is a list: The OEM filter is the UFI 2328700 Fram PH3614 will fit but construction is questioable. WalMart sells the SuperTech ST3614 for around $3-$4 (vs $15 for the Guzzi UFI filter). This filter is made by Champion labs, is better constructed than a Fram, and has a 94% multiple pass efficiency rating. Just be sure to clean it and remove the decal on the filter before you install it. (Tip from Tracy Martin, off of the Wildguzzi.com site) Some more expensive options are Amsoil EAOM132 and K&N KN-163 My current first choice, due to a good gasket design and other excellent ratings, is the Purolator L10241 (as recommended by Ryland)

If I had Paul's bike I would be MORE happy!!! Slowly it might get there. I just need to find machinists that will work for beer.

Is that what happens when you reach level 13 of that shoot'em up video game? Well one minute left on Veteran's day. Thank You all you vets for serving your nations

I made an error(or the price changed on the web site for the Direct Link) The VDSTS is $195 US but the Direct Link is $298, not about $200 as I had said. Techno Research products work with the Stock ECU, I doubt they work with Cliff's. I posted about them because they are an alternative to PCIII and MY15M. Instead of paying $650 AUD for MY15M ECU plus free software, you pay only $500 US for the hardware to unlock the software and connect to the ECU that most of us already have. I'll let you do the math, as it varies every day. The biggest advantage I know of the MY15M is the optimizer. I am sure Cliff can list some other advantages. I just wrote a letter to Wayne at TuneBoy and got a quick reply that he is finally getting back to work on the diagnostic application. I am guessing price will be about $530 AUD. TuneBoy will have no "optimizer", so if you get one, you might also consider a WBO2 sensor/logger, but Tuneboy should be able to interpret PCIII maps, so there are many maps available for free. Without diagnostic application, I am guessing price will be $399 AUD if it follows the pattern of the other models. So, IMHO the TuneBoy is the best deal, if it ever becomes formally available. But, feel free to write Wayne and ask what his price is for it now, without the diagnostic. Of course, YMMV and it is your choice. PCIII $339 US, street price may be better. Great dyno interface but lacks mapping of timing and some other ECU parameters. TECHNO RESEARCH Direct Link $298 US, mapping software and connectivity cable VDSTS $195 US, diagnostic software and connectivity cable TuneBoy $529 AUD (map editor only 399, diagnostic only 359(if ever available)) Probably all the features of the combined Techno Research applications, plus PCIII map interpretation. (but in the version I have it only interprets PCIII serial maps, and the diagnostic is not ready, yet) MY15 $650 AUD or $270 AUD in do it yourself kit Probably all the features of the combined Techno Research applications, plus Optimizer. Optimizer is a great innovation for road tuning! Other advantages is that the wiring of the hardware is non-propietary and the software is free and probably open source??? Optimizer cost $270 AUD or $140 AUD in do it yourself kit.

I suppose I fall into the grass is always greener on the other side category and I keep dreaming but not implementing ways to have a better bike. A lot of bikes offer more this and more that, but the V11 offers more of what I want. Still it is overweight, under-powered, burns too much fuel, and the ergonomics are less than ideal. The new Quatro Valvole models are promising, but the Stelvio and Griso don't move me like the Sport does. I really want to see Guzzi produce something that looks long thin and classic, like a Tonti "Sport". A 100RWHP bike with 50MPG US (so it can get by on a 4 gallon tank) Alpina wheels, Ohlins suspension, longer, lower, and lighter than what I have got. A custom bike would bring me the greatest happiness, some day....

Here is a video of them on a Griso http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=tH4F3ksTcZs