Baldini

Steve, Breva looks better in the flesh than on photos. Styling gimmicks aren't so in yer face as they look. "sports" style with old fashioned tank, light, clip ons & w/o them huge great footrestr hangers/sideplates etc,etc would be good. Like Paul said - ditch the bodywork & you've still got a classic Guzzi shape - let's see the frame - I saw a drawing once looked pretty simple & sturdy. Guzzi have sorted a lot of things that needed sorting. New sump - they say ensures oil pick up under accel/braking, FI, gearbox (unbelievably slick) & that s/a/shaft works great, Weight distribution - motor is where it should be - further forward - but love the way brochures talk about innovation & revolution...heh! alternator's just gone back to where it used to be! Good on ya Chris for putting down your money Looks to me like the thought, care, design & engineering on the Breva is a good way forward for Guzzi. One thing - how do you get that oil filter out if it's overtight? KB

VALENTINO ROSSI yesterday was something else - like Guzzirider said - masterclass. He seems to have such exquisite feel for what the bike's doing, the throttle, grip....& he's such a good racer, the others just look bemused...it's like he says "show us your best" - then "well - see ya"... I don't think you can say anyone is the best of all time cos things are not comparable but for now he's in a class of one. KB

For me the longer the shock the better (within limits of shaft/uj angles etc), get more weight onto front. I have Scura w/Ohlins, they work but dunno if you could go longer (Scura Ohlins probably only that length cos Aprilia had a bunch around!)? Would like still more weight forward. See Guzzi have redesigned Breva to put alt up between V so's they can mount motor further up forward. KB

bmk, well coulda been worse! Was engine opened before? When repainted? Do you know anything about the "gearbox recall" you mention? What was the problem? I don't think there was any recall on 03 boxes. It's pos your bike had a specific problem sorted under warranty? Was engine stripped then? KB

I may have misunderstood but is Fly4Hire talking about the top cylinder stud which has a socket head column nut. Large socket head screw in head allows access to that & it's there to keep the oil in. KB

Pete - what's the +0.25mm for - to allow for compression in the spacer???? KB

Oh no! HE's heard us know we'll cop it.....

Yeh...I did....I see your point. Would've hammered the outer home & misaligned the inner. But I still think it's important to get spacer right length & have outer races against their housings otherwise your gonna run into trouble w/clearance somewhere else - other spacer, caliper brkt etc. There's a set distance between s/a sides & if you set w/bearings wider something else isn't gonna fit. KB

I still don't understand why too long is better than short? When I fitted long spacer brngs locked solid. Are you saying that outer race would move out from fully home to align with inner in use? If C3 brng had 0.3mm freeplay I think you'd feel it, it's gotta be less than that. I really need to make a new longer spacer. Who said ignorance is bliss? KB

Wow! - it never had that effect on me ......

??? ..wonder who he means....???

I have Diablos, mostly ride twisties too, they're very good. Handling, esp turn in, much better, more grip than BT 020's - wear a little quicker. At edges Diablos are very consistent & predictable & have good feel. You might want try Diablo Corsas - even more grip but more wear. Then Super Corsas more of both.... I tried a 170 Diablo. Turn in is better & no downside in riding. Only problem for me was theoretical - figured cos profile was spread more than 180 on 5.5" rim tyre would run off tread earlier at max lean. So I went back to 180. There are long discussions on this somewhere back there.... KB

I also am no engineer..... It may be too long is better than too short. If spacer is way too short & inner races arn't clamped up then inner races spin on axle causing heat. (Brian R's inside brng welded itself to the axle didn't it?). But inner race is going to be out of line w/outer either way. Are you suggesting some compression of spacer when axle nut is tightened? This would surely be negligable w/ a heavy steel tube? In my case I'm hoping the extra clearance in C3 brngs will go some way to allow for est 0.25mm too short spacer. But I will make another spacer & this time measure it more accurately. It has to go in a four jaw chuck & it's a pain to centre it every time I take it out to measure. I still don't understand why some bikes have this problem & some don't. It does seem there's a lot of L side brngs breaking. Are all the affected bikes same dimensions? Will one spacer fit all? Or is there a variation in housing widths? Do some wheels have smaller centres, pressing on steel inserts more? There was plenty grease in my failed brngs. One failed after less than 1 mile. They slide into housings pretty easy. I do think it is lateral pressure that is the problem, suggesting spacer length. I used some old steel tube I had for spacer. Measures 2.5mm wall thickness, 20.8mm ID, 25.4 OD, not sure what that is in inches but it may be available as stock size? KB

I made a spacer out of steel tube on a lathe to fit the space betweeen bearing housings. I made it still a little too loose a fit, but as it was better than std I used it anyhow. L side brng (not C3) lasted about 8k miles before getting notchy. I had a replacement spacer supplied on warranty (113.4mm). I trial fitted this with old brng & it locked up brngs solid. So I machined this down. At 113mm it was still slightly proud of bearing housing. I reckon 112.8mmm would be bang on (I guess how long you make it depends also on how compressable the material is you use, personally I am happier using steel than Alu) but unfortunately my old lathe doesn't give me a depth of cut reading & being too lazy to keep taking it out to measure I still managed to make it slightly too short (112.55mm). It's a loose interference fit now. We'll see how it goes, but I'll prob prepare another spacer .... I think C3 bearings are key to longevity whatever. Re: locating plates - these are a press fit on std spacer & can easily be removed/fitted. I left them off as it makes bearing removal much easier ! . Fitting axle is slightly more fiddly (you have to centre spacer from opposite side with a rod) but no great problem. ID of spacer I made was 20.75mm, OD 25.5mm. The only sure way you're gonna get a spacer to fit your bike is by measuring - dunno how much variation there is. If you're making spacers up - don't neglect to bevel the edges for location of axle, esp if you leave off locating plates. KB

I use a bit of tube or similar thru the hub, can just get a purchase on one side of inner race, wedge tube in place with a bit of wood so's it doesn't slip & whack it on end. Move around to avoid twisting bearing & damage to housing. As I remember it Mike Stewart* has a slotted tube inserted into bearing inner race bore, whacks a drift placed on tube, splaying tube & carrying out the bearing, or something like that.... Which bearing is it gone? It's worth checking bearing spacer as some are incorrect length. Search for threads on this. Also make sure you refit correct (as I understand it) C3 type bearings (see current thread "rear wheel woes" or something). On refitting bearings if you wrap them & leave them in freezer til cold - usually drop in easy. While you've got wheel out, check roller bearing on outside of drive hub (next s/a) is ok for grease. KB *Edit: No - it was Brian Robson....

Confused??? You bet!!! Dan, my understanding is that the correct spec pawl arms carry same, original part no as wrong spec ones: 04 23 51 01 KB

heavy engine knock sounds like bearings...big end or mains. Or top end...would be lighter rattle. Is knock at engine speed? How's the oil level? Sure it's from engine - not gbox, clutch or drive? If it's under warranty I suggest you go straight to the dealer. what you describe is not a regular occurence. Sounds like something gone wrong in engine/box rebuild. I didn't think 2003 models had any gbox recall??? Sorry to hear of the problem. KB

Aftermarket cans make more noise, weigh less, can give more ground clearance. Cans alone won't give much more power/torque to bike, & can give less if FI not set up for them. If bike is otherwise stock I don't think you'd lose much (if anything) by going back to stock cans. Bike can be made to run very good as stock & it'd be quieter. Key to good running is having the FI set up well, can make a huge difference to rideability. KB

Dan, just cos it's a replacement part doesn't mean it's the correct replacement part! like Ratchethacks asks....what size is that? Guzzi have a service bulletin out about these breakages acknowledging incorrect sized boss - says replace spring & pawl arm. Measure it first tho! KB

Welcome Dr Gil!

I have an SKF 6204 RSH/C3 fitted R side rear. I just had another L side brng go bad (it lasted 10k miles this time). I noticed brng wasn't marked w/C3 spec. Spoke w/ brng factor - C3 indicates extra clearance between balls/races (to accomodate heat expansion). Are std Guzzi brngs C3 - anyone got std bearings can check ? If they are spec'd - is it to allow for heat or poor manufacturing tolerances on related parts? Anyhow - I'm putting a C3 bearing in & see how it goes. (I already made spacer to be light interference fit w/ brngs). KB