dlaing

He writes as all the Ohlins equipt owners read, smiling silently (except me ) to themselves... But seriously, I wonder what makes the Griso suspension work. Sitting on a Griso and sitting on a Breva, it is obvious that they got the spring rate right on the Griso for riders in the middle heavy weight range, while the Breva is better suited for measuring the superslab in a straight line. There is more travel in the rear on the Griso than on the V11 Spine, so I suspect that makes a difference, but still it seems from what you say that they got something else right, like maybe the high speed damping. I wonder how your front sag numbers match up? Perhaps the sag could be a clue that Traxxion sent you the "wrong" weight springs, or maybe the fluid level is set wrong in the LeMans?????

I think a damper can help save when the unexpected happens, like maybe rounding a highspeed sweeper and then the texture of the road throws you into a wobble. Could that wobble turn into a tank slapper? I don't know and I don't want to find out the hard way The closest I came to a tank slapper was when a dip in the road launched me into atleast a full one mississippi, possibly two mississippis of hang time, (it is unnerving what the engine torque does to the position of the bike in mid air) landing first on rear tire, but when the front tire came down, the fight began, and somehow I hung on. I wonder if I would be alive today if I did not have that fine damper. Still, if mine ever wears out (maybe sooner) I'll probably get a HyperPro RSC (Reactive Safety Control) damper, or similar. Current HyperPro price is $299.95 US, listed as Sport '99+ http://www.hyperprousa.com/catalog.php?cat...ke=Moto%20Guzzi I think there are some threads that cover fitting Ohlins dampers.

I am up for it if we make it a mixed doubles tag team Jello® match But last time I offered someone on this forum such a hot opportunity they turned her down

I probably should not have called him a liar But how else can one explain him saying that there was no evidence???? He really is not that stupid, is he??????

That last photo is HOT! Too hot! Someone call a moderator!!! But seriously, good idea adding the bracket to the FBF crossover. Also, you might try PM'ing and emailing Ragin' Pitbull aka Victor. He either works for or worked for FBF, and would probably have access to maps done by Ferracci, although make sure he knows it is the X-over and not the earlier H-crossover that they made. But he may not have checked in here in quite a while. Last I remember, he was selling his LeMans. You could also try contacting FBF, but they might not be generous enough to email you a map, but if you mention you have their open airbox and x-over....

It is the axle flexing that I would be worried about. This is especially true if the air gap is small enough that the fluid becomes the bottoming point. It just seems like a really bad idea to bottom on one fork before the other, but who knows, maybe it is well within the range of axle strength. I just would not trust that without knowing for sure. Presumably FuelCooler's axle is still straight

I am of the belief that fork forces should ideally be balanced. I am not a big fan of this RF/CF design, although it has some advantages for tuning options. It may make no apparent difference to how the forks ride and wear, but I believe that adding a slightly stiffer spring or more preload to the rebound side is a good idea to help balance the forces. I think your previous Air Gap spread of 128/114 was throwing things further out of balance and could have been causing instability when nearing bottoming conditions. But I also suspect that the 102mm air gap that you chose maybe too high because it may prohibit full travel:huh2: ....but I don't know for sure. Perhaps a little prohibition is a good thing

You got a good permanent result so one might not think it qualifies as bodgery, but I think you should be elligible for a bodge point for your methodology. Getting an elephant through a keyhole should merit a bodge point. Nice work. I nominate you for a Bodge Point Why MUST one use pure nitrogen rather than atomospheric air? There have been discussions on nitrogen in tires and the general consensus was that it is not worth upgrading motorcycle tire to nitrogen. Of course for a tire, you probably won't be able to increase the nitrogen content above maybe 90% without multiple refills, but with the shock, there is higher ratio of nitrogen to air in one fill, because of the higher pressurue, and MAYBE you can squeeze out much of the air in the shock by compressing it???

Optimum timing is what you want for both power and efficiency. If the engine runs rough above 13.5 AFR it could be because the timing is too advanced. I am not sure, but retarding the timing and leaning the fuel may give the desired result or enrichening the fuel and advancing the timing. I think the only way to find out is to try, but certain symptoms can give you a clue. Popping and surging usually indicate lean while pinging usually indicates too much advance. The Guzzi has a primitive temperature regulation system, so it is difficult to keep the timing point at the opimum. In the infamous ECU thread, we discussed the accuracy, or the lack there of, of the WBO2 wide band oxygen sensor. In the rich mixture ranges that the Guzzi uses, the sensor is PROBABLY measuring CO. If the mixture is lean there is no measurable CO. If it rich, CO increases, but optimal burning also reduces CO as sub-optimal burning can increase CO, so it is not a perfect indicator of mixture. The WBO2 reads CO, so if the timing is advanced beyond optimum, the burn is more complete and the meter reads low CO or lean. If the timing is retarded from optimum, the burn is less complete and the meter reads high CO or rich. Those are generalizations, and there is more to it than that. At some points the WBO is measuring Oxygen, which correlates very differently to the AFR then does CO. If we were just measuring residual oxygen incomplete burning and lean conditions could both indicate lean. If the WBO2 sensor is reading O2 then timing's effect on AFR reverses from what we observe measuring CO. Going to the retarded side of optimum could result in unburned O2 and a lean reading. If the timing is advanced from optimum burn is more complete and the O2 is consumed giving Rich reading. Whether the WBO2 is relying on O2 or CO to determine AFR depends on how much O2 there is in the exhaust. So, it is easier to find optimal fuelling and timing at richer mixtures. When we start trying to make it economical the WBO2 readings become less accurate. For that reason it may be good to start rich, with more advance and then work your way slowly to your goal. Interestingly WBO2 makers often claim things like 0.1% accuraccy, and yadda yadda yadda, but independent testing show great desparities between sensor units, even when using the same sensor. This is not to say the tools are useless, but they should be treated as imperfect, much like a wood meter stick that varies with temperature, humidity, parallax, and presbyopia Using multi-gas analysis, of course, will provide a more accurate analysis of the mixture. Also, I think an Exhaust Gas Temperature sensor could be as useful as the WBO2.

Is it pedophillia if you only watch? What if you are stuck in a stall, and they barge into the Men's room, do you have to close your eyes?

Not sure about the replacement pump. I know the problem looks to be electrical, but before buying a pump, I would rule out shorted wires as the cause of problem, and perhaps a clogged fuel filter might cause the fuse to blow?

That is kind of surprising results. But probably better than before. Some benefits of the new over the old are that your front ride height can be lower. The progressives should balance the forks better and give more control when breaking, and should be less prone to bottoming out. And you are obviously not over-sprung, you should get a softer, more comfortable ride

In 2003 they introduced a jet to spray oil on the pistons. Perhaps they determined the oil had to be thinner for that to work. For my 2000 Guzzi, I like 5W-50, but often use 20W-50 in Summer. But then again, I burn oil and probably need a new top end, so whatever I am doing may be wrong....but it could have just been the slow break-in

The evidence is there. You can ignore it or not. I have no doubt in my mind that the evidence presented here has shown which filter of three will resist spin off best. You are welcome to disagree, but to lie and say there is no evidence and mock me is down right rude. On one hand you are thanking Ryland for the evidence and then on the other you are slamming me as if Ryland never presented any evidence. What changed your tone to ignore it, Ratchet? Feel an uncontrollable need to personally attack me with your Remulac crap? Grow up.

So what are the measurements on your eyelets?

I don't have the answer, but my Penske arrived last Friday, but with the wrong eyelet size The eyelets measured 0.5" but came with fittings for a 10mm bolt, but the bolts are 12mm. After several exchanges of email, the dealer recommended I go directly through Penske, so I won't have to mail the shock to dealer who mails to penske who mails to dealer who mails to me. I hope they can simply send me some 12mm X 22 mm fittings. Did you have better luck with the eyelets? As for the Penske cable, I am a little concerned I'll have to change the direction the hose fitting points....I hope it does not result in a leak if I turn it I'll see if I can take a photo of cable routing. Camera battery is dead

Fascinating! More reading at the obvious site: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ducati_Desmosedici http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Yamaha_YZR-M1 http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Honda_RC212V http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Suzuki_GSV-R800 http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kawasaki_Ninja_ZX-RR One thing about the engines that I would like to know more about is the reverse spinning engines (reverse direction of wheel spin to make the bike feel lighter at high speed (very critical at motogp speeds!!!)) I suspect Yamahas efforts in this design have helped Rossi becoming the living legend that he is, not that he is not still the best today, or even EVER, but I suspect going to Yamaha was not the handicap that it was billed as. In the few videos of him racing that I have seen, nobody had engines that could walk past him, but he could slide past peopl in turns almost incredibly. Also, FWIW neither Rossi nor Colin Edwards were hindered going from Honda to Yamaha. Is this proof? Heck, I don't know, but I would love to take some of the character out of my Guzzi with reverse rotational inertia in the right place. I was thinking if the rear disk was taken off the wheel and hung on a reverse rotational bevel box, just ahead of the swing arm, ala bacon slicer, but rotating at 4 or 5 times the speed of the rear wheel! Add a propeller blade that changed directional pitch depending on turing right or left, and watch out Rossi, here comes Guaro!!!! (Maybe we'll need a few more cylinders)

Yes, I think it is an adequate proof. I have no doubt based on the technical research, mostly done by Ryland, that led me to say, "So far the Purolator's design is the best in it's resistance to loosening as proven from our anal-ysis." You don't seem to get my anal-o-jeezes, so I'll entertain you with another: Take three polyhedrons: We'll name the first UFO, a rhombic triacontahedron. 30 sided polyhedron http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Triacontahedron The second STKid, an icosahedron 20 sided polyhedonist http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Icosahedron And the last and proven most baddast, the infamous, PUOffLatorGator, a dodecahedron, 12 sided polyhedron http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dodecahedron and We place them on a lubed vibrating slope, perhaps on the slippery slopes of the money makers of a silicone endowed professional in the missionary position on a vibrating bed. Assuming all obvious being roughly equal, ie. construction, mass and balance are roughly equal, some of us can except that it is proven that the dodecahedron is the best in design to stay up longer Others won't accept it a proven until they turn the vibrating bed up to 10 on the richter scale I volunteer EDIT myself for proving this through practice rather than theory

Now you are talking! And when we are done we can stomp on the cans then wedge them between the trap door and filter and see if the filter will unscrew itself

I suspect any hollow axle Guzzi crosslist with Ducati 748, 996, etc.? It should be just a matter of matching up the Inner diameter of the axle. As for solid axles, I think it would tricky to make a similar protector. As Jim said, they would be easy to make. Take a couple of skateboard wheels and string them across the hollow axle with a thin axle or even a wire strand cable.

It is easy to check to see if you have the problem. Drain the gear oil. Pull the starter. Remove gear box side cover. Inspect boss and spring relationship. If spring tightens firmly around boss, then you have the problem. If there is freeplay and no binding, you got lucky and do not need to replace.

I usually torque it just enough to take up the freeplay. Probably less than 5 foot pounds. It seems to work for me. Maybe Ratchet knows better, but it seems to me that 20 foot pounds is too much, but if the veterans on this forum set it to 20 or even 25, so be it, I will have learned something new again, which keeps happening on this great forum

Pierre, are you trying to say, "Take off hoser, that is a pretty broad brush, eh?"? Or, "As if! Ryan dude, you like totally got us pegged. Fer sure, as if all us Californians speak like we grew up in the valley like you know there is a lot more to us than 365 days of motorcyling, surfing and skiing dude, so like sometimes we go to jobs, and sometimes even read books, you know."?

Ratchet, since we're uh, you know...friends, I know you know there's no malice aforethought intended in the following chop busting. He did NOT say the testing would be completed this week.... But otherwise, excellent question

Thanks! That makes perfect sense.